Talk:Nahum Shahaf

Review of new material

Jaakobou desired additions

1) I reviewed the date of birth - was 1946 - by checking the Israeli Census (easily accessible to Israelis) and seeing his date of birth was June 1946. Is there a reason to believe this information is incorrect? I don't believe so.
2) Shahaf received, along with fellow scientist Meir Danino, an 1997 Israeli Ministry of Science Fellowship and an award for creativity in for their work on compressed digital video transmission.[7]
2.1) Why is this being removed -- I'm not sure.
3) Shahaf served as an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) paratrooper from 1964 to 1966. He attended Bar-Ilan University from 1970 to 1977, where he completed his Bachelor and Master of Science degrees in Physics with honors. After graduating, he spent two years as a member of the computerized tomography development team at Elscint and was in charge of incorporating the CT technology into Radiation Treatment Planning.[6]
3.1) Sources outside his CV include Amnon Lord and James Fallows his CV on his personal site adds some extra notes with no exceptional claim (i.e. that a Physicist graduated with honours from Bar-Ilan and that his CT work was at Elscint):
3.2) From 1981 to 1988, he worked at Tadiran on unmanned aerial vehicles and video instrumentation for the IDF and was among the field's leading developers.[6][7][3]

Notes about desires of other editors:

• [ChrisO/RomaC] Ed O'loughlin is known as a Hamas supporter so I'm not following what makes his assertions here accurate. This is a BLP and O'loughlin doesn't quite fit as the best source for testimonials about Israelis. What other sources describe this as a desire to make Amir look innocent?
• [ChrisO/RomaC] I'm not sure Haaretz, and Levy especially fit for "facts". They are being sued by Shahaf (still ongoing) and that's just one issue with the changes here.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaakobou (talk • contribs)

Comments by George

Hi Jaakobou. I've deleted a couple of things you wrote that looked like they were attributed to me, but weren't things I said, as far as I can remember. I'll handle writing my own views if that's okay.

Regarding your additions:

1. The Israeli census was found to not be a reliable source by uninvolved editors over at RSN. Something that is unpublished, and can only be verified by Israelis, or people who live in Israel, does not meet the demands of verifiability. I have about as much reason to believe that the information is correct as I do to suspect that it is incorrect.
2. Where did you get the name Meir Danino from? I looked at the source cited for the sentence (Fallows), and it doesn't mention him anywhere. Please provide a link to the source that mentions him, as well as the exact quote from that source in which he is mentioned. It's being removed because you might as well have written your name, or anyone else's name in there, because his name isn't in the source.
3. You'll remember that I (re-)wrote most of that background section, based on his curriculum vitae (CV). However, RSN found his CV unreliable. If you have other reliable sources that can be cited for the information, we can include it, but you haven't provided any. Where does either Lord or Fallows mention Bar-Ilan? They don't. Where does either Lord or Fallows mention CT technology? They don't. Where does either Lord or Fallows mention Elscint? They don't. Where does either Lord or Fallows mention Shahaf's paratroop experience, or working for Tadiran? They don't.

I do appreciate your taking the time to actually discuss these matters. But again, my position is pretty simple: follow Wikipedia guidelines, provide reliable, verifiable sources for the material you're adding, and I'll gladly support its inclusion. If you can't or won't do that, I'll oppose its inclusion, especially in the case of a living person's biography. ← George ^talk 21:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Let's not forget what the opening section of WP:BLP requires: that material about living persons that is "unsourced or poorly sourced — whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." If Jaakobou can't source it, it shouldn't be in the article - simple as that. Conversely, if it can be sourced and is relevant, I have no objection to its inclusion. As you say, George, this is a really basic BLP compliance issue. -- ChrisO (talk) 14:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

ChrisO/RomaC desired additions

1) "campaign to prove the innocence of Yigal Amir"
2) "Shahaf, however, pursued the case and devoted years to the matter," - Gideon Levy

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaakobou (talk • contribs)

Rabin assassination

Okay, since other editors aren't following dispute resolution, I'll try to help out. The following is a section of the article related the Shahaf's theories on the Rabin assassination:

During the late 1990s, Shahaf participated in a campaign to prove the innocence of Yigal Amir, the assassin of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995. Although Amir had been arrested on the spot and had confessed to the killing, Shahaf asserted that he had photographic evidence that the wrong man was being held for the assassination. He blamed the assassination on a conspiracy headed by Shimon Peres, who took over from Rabin as Prime Minister and later became the President of Israel.

Why do editors think this should not be included? Which of the statements is not sufficiently supported by its sources, and which sources are not reliable? ← George ^talk 20:38, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

There are multiple reliable sources for this:

• Cygielman, Anat (2000). "IDF keeps shooting itself in the foot", Haaretz, November 7, 2000.

[Shahaf and Duriel] were acquainted - they met when they jointly reviewed Shahaf's findings on an altogether different matter, the Rabin assassination. Shahaf claims to have in his possession "dramatic photographs which change the picture with respect to Yigal Amir's involvement in the murder." Shahaf and Duriel discussed ways of disseminating these Rabin assassination materials.

• Authorizing Appropriation for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 for the Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and for Other Purposes: Hearings and Markup Before the Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives and the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, One Hundred Seventh Congress, First Session, February 14, February 28, March 1, and March 7, 2001 and Markup of H.R. 1646 on May 2, 2001, p. 192

One of the civilian investigators, Nahum Shahaf, also claims to have photographic evidence that the wrong man is being held for killing Yitzhak Rabin.

• Lema, Luis (2003). Couvrir le désastre: Un regard sur l'Intifada, p. 30.

C'est après l'assassinat de Yitzhak Rabin que les deux hommes se sont connus. A l'époque, Nahum Shahaf, le physicien, assure détenir des photos « qui changent de fond en comble la perception sur la responsabilité de Yigal Amir »

• Levy, Gideon (2007). "Mohammed al-Dura lives on", Haaretz, July 10, 2007.

In an eccentric obsession, Shahaf has devoted the past years to this affair, after previously having also obtained "amazing material" on the murder of Yitzhak Rabin.

• O'Loughlin, Ed (2007). "Truth is sometimes caught in crossfire", Sydney Morning Herald, October 6, 2007.

[Shahaf and Duriel] originally met through their roles in a campaign to prove the innocence of the far-right Jewish settler who was arrested on the spot for the 1995 shooting of the prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, and who readily confessed to the killing. They blamed a conspiracy headed by Shimon Peres, the Nobel Peace Prize-winner who is now Israel's president.

• Schwartz, Adi (2007). "In the footsteps of the al-Dura controversy", Haaretz, November 08, 2007

The appointment of Shahaf, who held no official military or police position at the time, aroused criticism because of the doubts he had raised in the past regarding the identity of prime minister Yitzhak Rabin's murderer.

• Derfner, Larry (2008). "Get real about Muhammad al-Dura", Jerusalem Post, June 20, 2008.

Physicist Nahum Shahaf, who pioneered the field of al-Dura conspiracy theory after cutting his teeth on the Rabin assassination, explains the blood stain as a "red cloth" that was concealed in the boy’s shirt and fell out on cue, giving the appearance on camera of blood.

If anything, there's more material that could be included than what you just quoted above. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:55, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm mostly opening this as a way to help Jaakobou voice his concerns about the content without edit warring over it. If he decides not to answer, or explain his concerns, then I'll put the material back in in a couple days. ← George ^talk 23:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, as nearly as I can tell, there is no single source that is as long as the paragraph in question. Every source gives this but a passing mention, and we should feel free to do the same. IronDuke 23:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't think Shahaf's Rabin assassination theories involvement warrants its own section, but I think it is certainly notable that Al-Durrah was not Shahaf's first foray into the investigation of such media-magnet shootings. I suggest leading into the Al-Durrah content, something like "In the late 1990s, Shahaf formulated and advanced conspiracy theories concerning the killing of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin questioning the involvement of Yigal Amir and Israeli government officials."

We could then add mention that he worked with Doriel, and lead into the pair approaching General Samia and the Al-Durrah content that way. Or, actually the way it appears in the article right now is not bad, a bit bloated with the Samia approached, accepted, date they started the investigation, and the film crew, etc. info, which is not really about Shahaf. Later, though, believe it should be mentioned that although Samia gave a press conference, the Israeli government did not release/publish the report. This could be significant, also the media response, which was generally negative, has to be noted. Well, see what do other editors think? Respectfully, RomaC (talk) 02:07, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I think a couple of points need to be made in the article. First, Shahaf's involvement in Samia's investigation was controversial because of his previous involvement in Rabin assassination conspiracy theories. Second, a mention of the substance of what Shahaf did in relation to those conspiracy theories is needed, otherwise it's left as an unsatisfactory open question. I don't think "questioning the involvement of Yigal Amir and Israeli government officials" really describes it sufficiently accurately. We know from the sources that (1) he claims to have photos that overturn the accepted version of events (Cygielman, Lema, O'Loughlin, Schwartz); (2) he has sought to prove Amir's innocence and blames Shimon Peres (O'Loughlin); (3) he has actively promoted these views (Cygielman, O'Loughlin). The combination of these factors is what made his involvement in the al-Durrah case controversial from the start. Somehow we need to reflect these three factors. -- ChrisO (talk) 09:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Just one more important point—the claim that he was involved in a campaign to free Yigal Amir, for which there's no evidence outside one mention in passing in one article, is a clear WP:REDFLAG claim. We cannot use the information at all without finding more about it. In any case, if it were true, you'd have dozens of Hebrew-language articles about it specifically, but so far I haven't been able to find even one. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 10:22, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Agree with Ynhockey that we should not say he "was involved in a campaign to free Yigal Amir", as I understand the main thrust of the campaign was to get Amir a retrial. The blockquote we're discussing, by the way, does not say anything about freeing Amir. Anyway, if it is reworked, agree we avoid "free Amir" and have something like "asserted/argued Yigal Amir was innocent/not the assassin", which is supported by sources. Respectfully, RomaC (talk) 13:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

References

Where to now with this biography

Looking at the RSN and comments by external parties, there is a consensus that the CV was indeed written by Shahaf and that it can be used for positive non-controversial material. I'm also very concerned with the current framing of the Rabin story in such a manner that is beyond undue (e.g. a single wikilink for 11 words). Also, there's no mention in the lead for his fairly prestigious award from the media criticism society. There's also some really weird phrasings that were reverted again and again into the article such as the "Samia presented his findings.." text that doesn't even say what these findings were. I hope we can continue work on this article without the regular wikilawyering that this guy should be presented in bad light without anyone being able to review anything past a couple of articles that make a passing mention of things, or articles by sources that Shahaf is suing for libel. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 13:17, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

1. It looks like editors believed his CV to be real, and so I added information from it to the article: his degree, college, and graduation, his UAV work on tracking systems, and his later work on missile systems. I tried to weave this in with the existing text so as to not make this just a list of jobs (lest we forget that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a list or resume). Is there anything from his CV you felt should be included that wasn't?
2. I cut that wikilink down to 7 words. I wouldn't say it's given undue weight, given the coverage of it identified in the section above. Now that the separate section on the Rabin assassination has been removed, it warrants at least a mention in the al-Durrah section.
3. I'm not sure if the award is prestigious or not. Can you link the source for it to review?
4. Not sure what you find weird about that phrasing, but I trimmed down the sentence to just be a straight statement about what the investigators concluded.
5. I don't think that anyone has argued that "this guy should be presented in bad light." I'm also fairly certain that Shahaf's lawsuits have nothing to do with Wikipedia's reliability guidelines. If you disagree, you should probably pose the question at WP:RSN. ← George ^talk 08:08, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Nahum Shahaf. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080215034538/http://archives.cnn.com:80/2000/WORLD/meast/11/27/israel.boys.death.ap/ to http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/11/27/israel.boys.death.ap/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:32, 24 January 2016 (UTC)