Your submission at Articles for creation
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Bir Zeit. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. ElComandanteChe (talk) 10:16, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
I do not agree with you, as it's not my own personal analysis, as the link "Israel Occupation Forces" already exists! Looking forward for your explanation?--220.127.116.11 (talk) 12:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- The fact that [this redirect] exists in Wikipedia says nothing about it. The term "Israel Occupation Forces" is clearly not neutral, for a simple reason: it can not be found in reliable sources, and it can be found in biased sources and in propaganda. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 13:38, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Totally disagree with you, it's all over the net and from well known and respected and objective sites as well!
You have to be neutral, and when a foreign forces are illegally working in a different country, and without their permission and against their well, it is called occupation and not defense!--18.104.22.168 (talk) 14:44, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Also, it's a well known fact that israel is occupying the west bank, so it's forces in the west bank is occupation forces and not defense.... you know, it's called common sense!--22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:44, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- The links above show my point exactly. In addition, military bodies are not called by their functions, but by official and/or widely recognized names. You are messing two different things here: description and name. Occupation of OPT by IDF has nothing to do with IDF name. For example, despite the fact that Israeli service men are eating at least 3 times a day, we do not call them IEF, Israeli Eating Force. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 15:29, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
The links above are objective and academic sources and are well respected. The name of IDF came from that these forces are defensive forces and all what they do is to defend israel; thats's their point of view. but when these "forces" operate in a different country, they are not defensive, they are attackers! therefore, their name is occupation forces when they operate outside of israel and IDF when they operate inside israel!
Furthermore, they are also recognized as IOF by many countries, including the Palestinians! and you have to show some respect to the Palestinians and name that forces that are occupying their land and making their lives like hell, by their real name, especially when you are talking about them!--126.96.36.199 (talk) 07:05, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- So a source uses non-neutral wording and we happen to have a redirect that uses that same non-neutral wording to help readers learn about it (WP:RNEUTRAL). However, our writings on WP are required to use less inflammatory wording when reasonably possible (WP:NPOV). DMacks (talk) 07:30, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
It's not neutral when you name it as IDF when it operates in the OPT. You can call it IDF when it operate inside Israel, but not in Occupied territories either in Palestine or the Syrian Golan Heights or the Lebanese Shab'a Farms. You have to show respect to there people, their perspective and their rights as well.
- That's a description, not a name. If someone named John broke into my house while wearing a mask of someone named Richard, I would still say "John broke into my house" no matter how many witnesses say they saw Richard break into my house. Even if Richard were a well-known thief and the word "Richard" were commonly used to refer to someone who is a thief, the name of the person breaking in is John. The question isn't whether the force is occupying, but whether the force is named that (and the sources do not even all use this as the name of the force). DMacks (talk) 08:20, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Some people name it IDF but others name it IOF. That's how they referee to it, it's not a description. Furthermore, by naming it as IDF while operating outside of Israel, is very misleading and gives a hint that these forces/military are defending and not occupying. we have to be very clear with our readers, and to use terms that are not misleading and giving some hints that are not true. Isn't that what wikipedia is all about? being neutral, objective and reporting the truth and not taking sides?--188.8.131.52 (talk) 08:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Palestinian Christians. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Please use the talk page to discuss your changes. NeilN talk to me 14:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)