Revision as of 19:04, 18 February 2012 editTiamut (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,614 edits →Neutrality issues: ce← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:06, 18 February 2012 edit undoTiamut (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,614 edits →Carlos Latuff cartoons: copying commentNext edit → | ||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
Using the cartoons of Carlos Latuff, a known hyper-partisan that has adopted anti-Semitic imagery in his cartoons, is clearly a violation of ]. Please remove and find something more appropriate. ] (]) 18:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC) | Using the cartoons of Carlos Latuff, a known hyper-partisan that has adopted anti-Semitic imagery in his cartoons, is clearly a violation of ]. Please remove and find something more appropriate. ] (]) 18:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC) | ||
:There is nothing anti-Semitic about the cartoon on Adnan by ], so please refrain from throwing around mud in the hope it will stick, and stick to put policies and guidlines please, instead of ]ing things up. ]<sup>]</sup> 19:02, 18 February 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:06, 18 February 2012
Biography Start‑class | |||||||
|
Palestine Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it does contain a credible assertion of notability and an external link. — PatGallacher (talk) 20:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Islamic Jihad role
I'm not sure how to deal with Adnan's alleged membership with the Islamic Jihad. Most sources I used in the article say he was a leader of some sort, but are not sure if he is involved with PIJ activities. The MSNBC article said he was a spokesman. His wife fiercely denies his membership with the PIJ, but the group's leadership has been very vocal in its support for Adnan. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:06, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- What abokut attributing any stated PIJ affiliation to the source? thought his being a spokesman was an uncontroversial fact myself - its a non military role and his lawyers argued he is punished for his plitical affiliations, no? I didn't see his wife's denial though. So perhaps attributing all statements to their speakers is best?
- And by the way, excellent job on developing the article Al Ameer. I don't have the time for that kind of sustained work. My brain jumps from one topic to the next thesedays, so I'm really impressed with your dedication and commitment. I only added the article to spur others on because I've been following his story for a couple of months now and want others to be are of his enormous sacrifice. Tiamut 19:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- There is one other thing ... i remember reading somewhere that he was undertaking this strike for all Palestinians who are subject to these middle of the night arrests and arbitary detention without charges. Did you include that reasoning in the article (did I miss it?) Tiamut 19:40, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- I attributed each claim to the respective source(s) in the "Life" section. His wife's denial and contention that he is a part of the Palestinian reconciliation committee could be found here. The article could use some better organization. I started a draft page on the subject about a week ago in my user space, but I saw our old friend PatGallacher created the article a few days ago. I moved my draft here in a rush so that we could post it for DYK. Just nominated it yesterday. And wallah it's refreshing seeing you around here Tiamut even if you're not working at full capacity. I've been keeping up with the hunger strike for about the same time and I'm amazed at the man's commitment. Hopefully he will survive through it all. I'm also impressed by the level of public support in Palestine. I'll find that reasoning you're talking about and add it to the article if no one else does. Pretty sure it's in one of the sources currently being used. Cheers --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- Happy to see you around too. I found an excerpt from the letter he sent via his lawyers in an article at alJazeera who finally decided to give the issue some serious coverage. It says: "The Israeli occupation has gone to extremes against our people, especially prisoners. I have been humiliated, beaten, and harassed by interrogators for no reason, and thus I swore to God I would fight the policy of administrative detention to which I and hundreds of my fellow prisoners fell prey. Here I am in a hospital bed surrounded with prison wardens, handcuffed, and my foot tied to the bed ... The only thing I can do is offer my soul to God, as I believe righteousness and justice will eventually triumph over tyranny and oppression." Should we include the quote in full? Tiamut 21:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- I would agree we do but would not be surprised if someone claimed WP:UNDUE. I'll add it in full and if anyone has a viable concern, we'll reduce it to The Israeli occupation has gone to extremes against our people, especially prisoners. I have been humiliated, beaten, and harassed by interrogators for no reason, and thus I swore to God I would fight the policy of administrative detention to which I and hundreds of my fellow prisoners fell prey. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:55, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Happy to see you around too. I found an excerpt from the letter he sent via his lawyers in an article at alJazeera who finally decided to give the issue some serious coverage. It says: "The Israeli occupation has gone to extremes against our people, especially prisoners. I have been humiliated, beaten, and harassed by interrogators for no reason, and thus I swore to God I would fight the policy of administrative detention to which I and hundreds of my fellow prisoners fell prey. Here I am in a hospital bed surrounded with prison wardens, handcuffed, and my foot tied to the bed ... The only thing I can do is offer my soul to God, as I believe righteousness and justice will eventually triumph over tyranny and oppression." Should we include the quote in full? Tiamut 21:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- I attributed each claim to the respective source(s) in the "Life" section. His wife's denial and contention that he is a part of the Palestinian reconciliation committee could be found here. The article could use some better organization. I started a draft page on the subject about a week ago in my user space, but I saw our old friend PatGallacher created the article a few days ago. I moved my draft here in a rush so that we could post it for DYK. Just nominated it yesterday. And wallah it's refreshing seeing you around here Tiamut even if you're not working at full capacity. I've been keeping up with the hunger strike for about the same time and I'm amazed at the man's commitment. Hopefully he will survive through it all. I'm also impressed by the level of public support in Palestine. I'll find that reasoning you're talking about and add it to the article if no one else does. Pretty sure it's in one of the sources currently being used. Cheers --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
See also link to Bobby Sands
See also links are always a bone of contention because its more based on editorial discretion than actual sourcing. I suppose once we are going to go down the path of comparing him to other people, we should fairly include links to articles of spokespersons of other terrorist groups, like Ehsanullah Ehsan (Taliban spokesman) for one.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 21:46, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- I added Bobby Sands (who I had never heard of until today) because The Guardian mentioned it in relation to Adnan's case which was quite similar. Both Sands and Adnan were members of militant groups who went on hunger strikes while incarcerated to protest for a national cause. I did not see any articles comparing Adnan to other spokesmen of militant groups so I don't really understand your argument. We wouldn't include a list of all the American presidents in the article on Abe Lincoln. However, we could include List of spokespersons of Palestinian Islamic Jihad or something of that nature. That article doesn't exist so you could create it if you feel it necessary. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- Then source it to the author from the Guardian - not to Misplaced Pages. Pilusi3 (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- (ec) Everyone knows we don't make biographies over one event. So assuming this biography meets our notability standards it is more because he is notable as a spokesperson for a terrorist organization than for his recent fasting situation. Therefore it would only make more sense to compare him to other people who share the same general characteristics, namely as spokespersons of terrorist organizations. The "see also" section does not require sourcing and it is really up to editorial discretion. The fact that he is "compared" to another person in one article does not mean that the compared person must be included in the see also section and it surely does not mean that others who are not explicitly "compared" in articles cannot be included.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- I would actually argue that the hunger strike is way more notable than what sources say was his one-time role as local spokesman for the PIJ which isn't that notable but enough to warrant an article. Again, I wouldn't be against including a "List of spokemen of such and such" or better yet List of members of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad in addition to Bobby Sands as both are relevant. We don't need to use the Guardian's mention as reasoning for Sands' inclusion but it does serve as an additional support. As for Pilusi's concern, I hope Brewcrewer has made it clear that we don't use sources for See also. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:53, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- If reliable sources have made a link between Adnan and Sands, I don't see any reason why we cannot include Sands in the see also section. Tiamut 21:02, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- A little thing called "undue weight", I would wager. I hardly think a British newspaper's reference to a notable UK hunger striker in anyway represents a worldwide view of the issue. It's drawing a very long bow. Maybe if a series of non-UK and non-Irish sources mention Bobby Sands, then we can talk about adding it. The goals and ideology of Sinn Fein and Islamic Jihad are scarcely congruent - indeed, just the opposite. One is a left-wing, secular, socialist and the other is a far right, religious jihadist. Pilusi3 (talk) 21:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- If reliable sources have made a link between Adnan and Sands, I don't see any reason why we cannot include Sands in the see also section. Tiamut 21:02, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- I would actually argue that the hunger strike is way more notable than what sources say was his one-time role as local spokesman for the PIJ which isn't that notable but enough to warrant an article. Again, I wouldn't be against including a "List of spokemen of such and such" or better yet List of members of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad in addition to Bobby Sands as both are relevant. We don't need to use the Guardian's mention as reasoning for Sands' inclusion but it does serve as an additional support. As for Pilusi's concern, I hope Brewcrewer has made it clear that we don't use sources for See also. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:53, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- (ec) Everyone knows we don't make biographies over one event. So assuming this biography meets our notability standards it is more because he is notable as a spokesperson for a terrorist organization than for his recent fasting situation. Therefore it would only make more sense to compare him to other people who share the same general characteristics, namely as spokespersons of terrorist organizations. The "see also" section does not require sourcing and it is really up to editorial discretion. The fact that he is "compared" to another person in one article does not mean that the compared person must be included in the see also section and it surely does not mean that others who are not explicitly "compared" in articles cannot be included.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
you want more sources? I'll start listing them here:
- Khader Adnan: The West Bank's Bobby Sands, Donald MacIntyre, The Independent Tiamut 21:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Khader Adnan: No food without freedom, Matthew Cassel, AlJazeera.
- "One of the stories commonly told among Palestinians inside Israeli prisons is of the ten republican prisoners in Northern Ireland who died as a result of their hunger strike in 1981. Most famous among them was 27-year-old Provisional IRA member Bobby Sands, who was elected to the British parliament during his fast, and died after 66 days of refusing to eat. This, and other hunger strikes and organised actions, were believed to have improved prisoners' conditions and made gains for their nationalist cause. Since the rise of a Palestinian nationalist movement in the late 1960s and 1970s to combat Israeli occupation, hunger striking has been a common tactic among Palestinian prisoners that, according to Addameer's Francis, has frequenty succeeded in improving the conditions of their incarceration. Stories such as Sands', Abu Maria said, "made us think that hunger strike is the only way a prisoner can resist"."Tiamut 21:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, that's exactly what I want. I think the comparisons are absurd - and shows to what depths extremists will sink to to try and seek legitimacy for the hate-filled genocidal goals - but if that's a reflection of their desired narrative, then I suppose it's Misplaced Pages's place to mention it. Although "See Also" is still inappropriate, as it implies lending Misplaced Pages's neutral voice to a certain fringe opinion of analogy. Pilusi3 (talk) 21:38, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Here's another source: Huffington Post. Also, there's honestly no viable argument against including Sands in the See also section (certainly not an absurd comparison, just because they don't share the same ideology is not a reason to not include him, they're both protesting using hunger strikes for nationalist causes) and I'm going to restore it. We have provided at least 4 sources drawing comparisons when we did not have to. The one I just listed explicitly says has drawn comparisons to celebrated Irish hunger striker Bobby Sands. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
baker ?
Um, why would a baker (how he is making his living) be the second mentioned piece of information about the guy after being a spokesman of PIJ? given that the guy has a masters degree in economics ?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.43.62.168 (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Article needs organization, your last edit in this regard is an improvement. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:44, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Neutrality issues
At no point does this article reasonably articulate the Israeli position/reaction toward Adnan, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (designated a terrorist group by Israel and many others) or Adnan's hunger strike. Putting up a POV/neutrality tag until these issues are addressed. Plot Spoiler (talk) 19:50, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- No need to slap a POV tag on the article, just add more about the Israeli position. So far we have mentioned Israel's reasoning for the arrest: "threat to regional security" and membership of the PIJ (although to my knowledge Israeli authorities have not stated he was a leader of any kind or that he was involved in attacks/operations). What is missing and could be easily added is that Israel considers the PIJ to be a terrorist group. Since he was placed in administrative detention, no charges have been brought against Adnan so that explains why there isn't much about Israel's position in the article. As far as articulation, like I said twice above, the article needs to be better organized. I'm not aware of any official Israeli reactions to Adnan's arrest, only from Israeli human rights groups (B'tselem and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel) which is already mentioned in the article. I'll add the bit about Israel's official view on the PIJ and will remove the tag after, seeing as this would address concerns regarding NPOV. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- I added the bit and removed the tag. However, I forgot to ask why you removed the Abunimah source about the protests in NY, DC and Chicago? Has Abunimah has been declared unreliable by the RS board? After all we're talking about anything controversial, just solidarity protests in the US. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Abunimah can certainly be used as a source for info on solidarity demos. Is there any doubt they took place?Tiamut 21:03, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
- Is there any good argument against using Abunimah as a source for the US demos? I need to restore the ref for DYK purposes? --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:23, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- This is not an RS but just visual proof that solidarity protests did occur in Chicago and DC Pictures and videos --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:26, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Al Ameer, you should restore the source. There is no justification fir its removal. Tiamut 06:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- There is justification for its removal. If the information you want to include is not controversial, why use a controversial hyper-partisan source that is minimally reliable as an opinion piece? And I also question the POV use of Carlos Latuff's drawings as another hyper-partisan that has often borrow anti-Semitic imagery in his cartoons. Plot Spoiler (talk) 18:55, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Your objection doesn't make any sense. Per NPOV, its perfectly valid for us to use partisan sources. Ali Abunimah is an expert in the field and his piece was published in a Mainstream newspaper. Are you denying these rallies took place? Please provide a source that would indicate that he lied about it.
- There is nothing anti-Semitic about the cartoon on Adnan by Carlos Latuff, so please refrain from throwing around mud in the hope it will stick, and stick to put policies and guidlines please, instead of WP:SOAPing things up. Tiamut 19:02, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- And the one throw-away line that Al Ameer added on "terrorism" did not adequately address the POV issues I related, and therefore was not an adequate reason to remove the tag. For the sake of expediting your DYK, you seem to be ignoring basic Misplaced Pages processes. Plot Spoiler (talk) 18:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Can you please indicate which information is being omitted that you would like to see included? Israel hasn't said much about Adnan's case, as noted in multiple news reports included here. How can we include more of something that does not exist? Tiamut 19:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- There is justification for its removal. If the information you want to include is not controversial, why use a controversial hyper-partisan source that is minimally reliable as an opinion piece? And I also question the POV use of Carlos Latuff's drawings as another hyper-partisan that has often borrow anti-Semitic imagery in his cartoons. Plot Spoiler (talk) 18:55, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Al Ameer, you should restore the source. There is no justification fir its removal. Tiamut 06:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Abunimah can certainly be used as a source for info on solidarity demos. Is there any doubt they took place?Tiamut 21:03, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Carlos Latuff cartoons
Using the cartoons of Carlos Latuff, a known hyper-partisan that has adopted anti-Semitic imagery in his cartoons, is clearly a violation of WP:NPOV. Please remove and find something more appropriate. Plot Spoiler (talk) 18:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- There is nothing anti-Semitic about the cartoon on Adnan by Carlos Latuff, so please refrain from throwing around mud in the hope it will stick, and stick to put policies and guidlines please, instead of WP:SOAPing things up. Tiamut 19:02, 18 February 2012 (UTC)