Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:17, 27 May 2006

Israel News Agency

I have re-nominated this article as per the decision at its deletion review. Please do not count my nomination as a voice for or against the article's deletion. I am currently neutral on this issue. To understand the article's history, please refer to the discussions at its first AfD nomination, and its deletion review. Ashenai 21:29, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

• Being listed on Google News is not very difficult and probably not enough to make something "notable" by our standards. The Alexa ranking is low and there are few unique Google hits. No reliable sources are presented for the information in the article. Currently it seems to me that the article doesn't qualify for inclusion, but I'm willing to be convinced if evidence to the contrary is presented. Haukur 21:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

• How is notability being measured in this case? Are we applying WP:WEB, or another standard? Þorgeirsson states that getting listed on Google News is a rather trivial task; how does one accomplish this? For the moment, I am leaning toward keep due to its frequent citation by the press, but am open to discussion. Silensor 00:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, while it would have been better for another user to have been the initial author, that is not a requirement. Notability and NPOV are requirements. WP:WEB includes as criteria #3 "The content is distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster." Google news is certainly well known and independent of the creator. I didn't find in my review proof that they were picked up by Google News, but this search for articles from them shows that they are picked up. 02:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GRBerry (talk • contribs)
• Comment. Just for the record, with regard to issues discussed in the previous AfD, the Israel News Agency is not a government-controlled press agency in Israel, just a private entity, and it is not even the leading press agency in Israel -- that would be Itim which Misplaced Pages doesn't yet have an article about. The Israel News Agency appears to be a relatively small operation although the Google News connection should be considered a point in its favor. --Metropolitan90 04:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Haukur. —Nightstallion (?) 23:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep If we are to judge notability by deeds, being the first Israeli government accredited source of online news in 1995 speaks volumes. To judge by association the hundreds of international media organizations and blogs using the Israel News Agencys materials is substantial. To judge by impact using Alexa.com and Google web / Google news reaching millions world wide the INA appears more than notable on all three accounts.Karnei 06:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Comment:This is user's 6th edit to Misplaced Pages
• Keep as per above Bronxgirl 09:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC) Comment:This is user's first edit to Misplaced Pages
• Strong Keep Just performed a search for "Israel Gaza Terrorism", the INA comes up ranked number one Also comes up in top ten places for other Israeli related news items. May be a small operation but highly potent with a wide global audience. Potterseesall 11:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Comment:This is user's 11th edit to Misplaced Pages
• Comment. The fact that Israel News Agency comes up ranked highly in Google searches might be more significant if its publisher were not a professional search engine optimizer. Also, I don't know whether Alexa.com is evidence of INA having significant impact, given that INA's Alexa rank is 251,401. --Metropolitan90 13:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep From what I know about the Internet and Alexa.com "link density" that is the number of links linked to a site boosts its ranking. This translates into that the INA being a "popular" site. One can count the number of links to the INA and the quality of those sites which link to it, i.e. - CNN, Israel Min. Foreign Affairs Bonnieisrael 17:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC) All of user's edits are on Joel Leyden related issues. (Comment: I feel this is yet another sockpuppet - he appeared in tandem with Leyden's other accounts. Pavel Vozenilek 20:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC))
• Delete per Haukurth's analysis of comparative Alexa rankings on Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Israel News Agency. (I also draw people's attention to the following page: Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Israelbeach.) --BillC 17:50, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per my previous comment on the subject. This article was created by a publicity hound as a self-advertisement. Raul654 18:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I draw people's attention to all pages which refer to Joel Leyden where BillC at every twist and turn attempts to discredit Leyden, following in the footsteps of user Woggly. We can also conclude that BillC is a sockpuppet of Woggly and or Danny Wool. Bonnieisrael is transparent. She has revealed her personal details both here in Misplaced Pages and on Goggle News. Furthermore, she has made direct contact with Danny Wool after being blocked and unblocked by Danny after personal contact. We can suspect anyone of anything. What we must do is deal in fact. Is the Israel News Agency "notable"? One vote was already taken a few months ago with the community saying Keep. I would simply rely on this one page to decide — Preceding unsigned comment added by Potterseesall (talk • contribs)
• keep please this news agency looks notable we should include it Yuckfoo 19:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Haukur. SlimVirgin 20:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and correct. Remove Promotional content. Ensure WP:NPOV. Confirm provided references and sources --roy<sac> .oOo. 21:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Cumbrowski - Most of the people arguing for deletion are simply making ad hominem personal attacks, as whether he was banned from Misplaced Pages (for criticising it on his site) or not is irrelevant to the actual article about the company he works for. This company is at the very least more notable than Daniel Brandt, it's not a one man show, it's got a sizable staff, it's been cited or mentioned in many other newspapers too, it definitely meets all Misplaced Pages Notability requirements. The big question is whether it will survive against the tide of people that simply want it deleted because "they said bad things about Misplaced Pages", even though it clearly is notable. --Xsease 21:38, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete the agency is not clearly notable, but what is clear is that this person, Joel Leyden, is trying to SPAM Misplaced Pages. Israelipro 00:31, 26 May 2006 (UTC) Comment:This is user's first edit to Misplaced Pages
• Keep, as this is a verifiably notable news agency, sockpuppetry notwithstanding. Any issues with non-neutral point of view should be worked out through the editing process, not deletion. The placement of {{inuse}} also seems premature at this juncture; this renomination was made just two days ago. Yamaguchi先生
  • An early close may be made at adminstrator's discretion. In this case, there are strong conerns regarding this content being mirrored, as well as Google search optimization problems. I am however always happy to defer an adminstrative action when requested to do so. However, per the notice it next time please do contact the person who placed the tag.
    brenneman 01:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
    • That is fine, but whether one of the people affiliated with Israel News Agency is employing search optimization is neither here nor there; WP:NOT a vehicle for self promotion, meaning that if there is anything of a promotional or non-neutral tone within the article, it should be corrected by way of editing and not deletion, should the community at large decide the subject is notable enough for inclusion. Yamaguchi先生 01:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep verifiably notable (per Google News), if anything this needs NPOVing not deletion. Keep it, clean it, and get on with life.  ALKIVAR™ 02:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: All I have to say is that the first paragraph clearly indicates notability to me. Is it inaccurate? All that stuff sounds quite impressive. Everyking 09:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

  I've been unable to find any verification. In fact it's almost impossible to find any 3rd party information on this operation. But I agree that if the content of the current article can be verified this might well be a keeper. Haukur 10:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep I just found the Israel News Agency's accreditation (please see GPO issued press cards) by the Israel Government Press Office Perupalm 15:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC) (Comment: 3rd edit of the user. Pavel Vozenilek 20:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC))
• Delete. Most likely all the interest in this organization is generated by army of Joel Leyden sockpuppets. Even more than the agency articles on his coworkers, so generously added by Leyden, should be examined for notability. Pavel Vozenilek 20:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep This organization seems to meet notability requirements. However this article could use a bit of work with its POV, not a reason to delete.--RWR8189 23:11, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Alkivar. I supported this in the other AfD and my opinion is unchanged. It is important to be inclusive for news sources and this qualifies. -- JJay 23:26, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep but clean up and include coverage of criticisms. The article has generated a great deal of attention but most of the negative comments reinforce my inclination to keep it. It appears to meet minimum standards for inclusion. The article could use some good coverage about disputes regarding the agency's origins, affiliations, reliability, etc.. I would hope that the WP community is able to include such criticism without it turning into mere rants or name-calling. Perhaps that's hoping for too much! Ande B 23:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and assure that the article is up to Misplaced Pages standards. I've followed this entity for some time for news from Israel, and while they may be just as bad as the rest of the media, they do exist. The level at which they exist should be in the article. Folks, we're discussing online media. It's still new, but even as a historical record, it's important to keep these things.--TaranRampersad 01:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Online media that is indistinguishable from a blog or a commentary section of a newspaper should be considered as a blog. Any yahoo can register an official-sounding domain name and tell the world their opinions. That doesn't make it worth having an encyclopedia article about it. --Improv 04:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

For any readers of this debate, please be aware that the opinions of anonymous users and users with very little edits during deletion debates are almost always disregarded unless a very valid point is made. This policy exists for two very valid reasons.

First of all, participants of a deletion debate think it is a vote and so try to gather all of their friends and aquaintences in order to try to influence the debate's result. The outcome of a deletion debate is determined by the opinions of whoever shows up, and so whoever engaged in this practice would be negatively affecting the practice. Secondly, users with very few edits may be accounts of users that have already had their say, trying to make their opinion sound more prevalent than it really is.

For this reason, the opinion of 71.102.46.200 will most certainly be disregarded. It is likely that user is "trolling," trying to evoke reactions and emotions among those that are sensitive to certain issues, and revelling in the chaos that results. Please do not see the actions of one anonymous user as being equivocal of the sentiment of the entire Wikipedian community.

The ban on legal threats on Misplaced Pages exists for a very good reason as well. During a deletion debate on a famed potter, and an author of scholarly research on Herman Melville, the grandson of the subject of the article up for deletion came and reported that he would sue another user for libel, for saying that his grandfather "wasn't notable enough to be in Misplaced Pages." Lawsuits used as threats in these situations may make other users feel uneasy and inhibit honest, open debate.

As a result of the ban of Israelbeach, assumedly for legal threats, it seems that the user tried to evade the ban and post as another user, in order to still have a voice. While I can see reason behind this, it is still a violation of official Misplaced Pages policy. Please try to understand actions of administrators blocked you, Israelbeach, if for that reason. I have limited knowledge of discussion that led to the ban, because it appears to me that the user page and the user talk page of their content.

The people that want this article to be deleted aren't anti-Semitic or anti-Israel. They are using Alexa as the standard for a website's notability, but this may be inaccurate because the rating of a site on Alexa is entirely dependant on how many people viewing that website have downloaded an Alexa toolbar, which may have less prevalence in Israel. Maybe the website has a higher viewership in its Hebrew edition. If I wanted to speak my mind with a user account---I really don't feel like getting involved in "wikipolitics"---I'd vote to keep this article, and the article on Joel Leyden.

As for WP:OFFICE, and an example of United States censorship that may be affecting Misplaced Pages, if one article had information about two author publishing untrue allegations against a subject, this may be considered republishing libel in California and Europe, and so Misplaced Pages would have to take that article and its entire edit history down to prevent legal action, even if the information that those allegations were made was in itself true.

No matter where Misplaced Pages's servers are, there may be statutes prohibiting its free expression. If they were based in Canada, Wikimedia could not legally publish election results before elections are over. Canadians were advised when reading the article on their parliamentary elections that reading this article may not be legal in their country. You may have heard that Wikimedia was sued in Germany for containing the first and last name of a child inventor and hacker that had developed a voice-encrypted public phone. Luckily it had won that lawsuit.

It may surprise you to learn that the Japanese Misplaced Pages complies with both statutes in the United States of America, where the servers are hosted, and in Japan, where most of their userbase is. They cannot publish personal information about certain figures in the national media that would be considered public figures in the United States. A Japanese teenager decided to go to Iraq---to see "what was happening over there"---and he was beheaded in a video released by his kidnappers. The English Misplaced Pages on him has his first and last name. The Japanese Misplaced Pages article's title, as I remember it, translated as something like "17 year old Japanese death in Iraq." That could be censorship right there, and in all of these cases, it is not Misplaced Pages's fault. I hope Joel Leyden can come to an understand the position of the management of Misplaced Pages and their viewpoint. 65.244.171.35 02:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Please also take note of Misplaced Pages's policy on original research and autobiographies. When someone creates an article on himself or something he is personally affiliated with, bias may unconsciously seep into the article's content. If not, unconfirmed knowledge may slip into the article's content, such as the subject's birth year. Because the subject's birth year was only known to the author of the subject before it was put into the Misplaced Pages article, it can't be cross-checked against any other independent media publication. Because of tendencies such as these, Misplaced Pages takes a special approach to pages where editors may be personally involved. Also, sometimes subjects may overestimate their notability---not at all that I think that's the case here. Regardless, it may lead to dispute, controversy, accusations of creating a "vanity page," and all-out nuclear edit war. Please understand that sometimes it is better to let things on Misplaced Pages arise as they naturally do, and let them be created on their own. 65.244.171.35 02:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

This quote came from an Israel News Agency article by Joel Leyden: "So now I was intrigued to see how Misplaced Pages would respond to a page on the Israel News Agency and on myself. I expected trouble. And I was dead right. Why would an open public miss a chance to throw a stone at an Israeli let alone a news site coming from Israel." Your attitude was unnecessarily pessimistic, and the problems that came after you first created this article, Israelbeach, might have been prevented if you had come across Misplaced Pages:No original research and Misplaced Pages:Autobiography earlier. Thanks for trying, anyway, hope this long droning message has softened up any hard feelings, and so long. 65.244.171.35 03:19, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete despite the protests of Israel News Agency, we are not censoring anything. I say delete from Misplaced Pages as it's hardly notable (I don't in particular find that the INA's "news reports directly from the scenes of the Passover Massacre in Netanya, Israel, the Tel Aviv terror attack on the Dolphanarium, and the 9/11 terror attack in New York" are exclusive to only the INA). It's more a blog than a credible news source. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:19, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Appears to be a blog, and not a particularly noteworthy one at that. --Improv 04:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete -- indeed, a blog. And no, bad-mouthing wikipedia does not make you notable enough for the article to be kept. bogdan 07:49, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Blogs do not qualify for Google News alerts . Danny Wool was the first to label the Israel News Agency as a "blog." Interesting to see if Misplaced Pages can withstand criticism without censoring the messenger. Potterseesall 08:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Slashdot is a blog and it qualifies for Google News... bogdan 09:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

if you want, I can find you more blogs on google news, like http://hammeroftruth.com/ http://www.dcist.com/ etc bogdan 09:39, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete -- certainly doesn't look like a News agency to me. Checking recent editorials yields some undated articles, some critics of Misplaced Pages, and other articles with no added value as "news". Pathetic self promotion of a blog-like site by its owner and a whole bunch of his suspected puppets. Noon 10:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep My family and I are proud to make our second edit at Misplaced Pages in support of a GPO certified Israeli news organization which has served Israel and democracy for over 11 years Maayanbaruch 11:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)