Talk:Hafrada: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 22:51, 12 June 2006 edit6SJ7 (talk \| contribs)4,258 edits →New merge tag ← Previous edit		Revision as of 03:14, 6 July 2006 edit undoVanished user 19794758563875 (talk \| contribs)17,339 edits RfMNext edit →
Line 113:		Line 113:

	] 07:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)		] 07:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

			== RfM ==

			{{RFMF}}-- ] <sup>]</sup> 03:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:14, 6 July 2006

Template:User article ban

Unless someone can explain

Since the edit summary does not make any sense I am going to revert the poor tramslation of this word unless someone can explain why DNE4Sale is reverting all the times. Zeq 13:00, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

"Even among Israelis, the term “Hafrada” – separation or apartheid in Hebrew – has entered the mainstream lexicon, despite strident denials by the Jewish state that it is engaged in any such process."

See also:

You're welcome. Article19 23:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

One translation of the word/slogan/term הפרדה (hafrada) is "segregation", according to Webster’s. Article20 02:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

And the other translations are 'demarcation, division, parting, partition, resolution, segregation, separation, severance.' Surprisngly, "Apartheid" is not one of the translations. Thank you for showing so succintly the folly of using a dictionary definition, out of context, to push a POV Isarig 04:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

It was to establish correspondences between the terms. Regarding POV pushing; some people go to extraordiaire measures to suppress any notions that Israeli laws/actions which discriminates against Palestinians could by some be construed as being reminiscent/similar to the Apartheid system of South Africa. I think that to argue against the inclusion of something doesn't necessarily mean you're not pushing a POV (my personal POV is that Israel isn't an apartheid state, but do unfortunately share some of the characteristics). Article20 14:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

No one claimed that Hafrada can't be used to mean segregation - the claim was that it doesn't mean Aparthied - and your work established that, and I thank you agian for it. Some people go to extraordiaire measures to invent contrived interpretations of the most common and palin words, so as to create an impression that they are Apartheid. That is what some of the editors here are doing. Isarig 15:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Hafrada (Hebrew) = separation/segregation. Apartheid (Afrikaans) = separation/segregation. What I'm interested in is something that delimits or describes the meaning of hafrada by stating the essential properties of the entities or objects denoted by that term. A good extensional definition would be nice. Article20 17:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Hafrada (Hebrew) = separation/segregation/demarcation/division/parting/partition/resolution/segregation/separation/severance. while I am not fluent in Afrikaans, I am sure a simialr long list can be provided for "Apartheid". But this is not what this is really about. "Apartheid" in English, not Afrikaans, has come to mean sosmething very specific, which Hafrada does not mean. If you are truly interested in "something that delimits or describes the meaning of hafrada - you need look no further than the first paragraph of this article: What it means is unilateral seperation of Israelis and Palestinians, using seperation barriers and unilateral withdrawls . Nothing more. Isarig 05:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

What about the Law of Return? Or the legality of mixed marriages in Israel? Article20 05:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

what about them? No one refers to them in the context of "Hafarda" Isarig 05:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

The amount of BS in this article

There is no such thing as "Hafrada wall" in Hebrew. Much of this article is BS and as someone who is aware of how this sentnce is used in Hebrew this article is pure lies propaganted by at least two sockpuupets (article 18 and article 19) Zeq 14:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The term has been used in English as per the citation.

Zeq, what does geder ha'hafrada mean?Homey 14:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Separtion fence Zeq 14:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Fence, wall, same difference. The term "Hafrada wall" does return hits on google, there are no hits for "hafrada fence". Homey 14:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

No, A wall is not the same thing as a fence, and this distinction is the subject of several sentences in the Israeli West Bank barrier article. 'Hafrada Wall', besides being a clumsy concatenation of words from two different languages, returns all of 49 hits on Google, half of them from a single source - Sabeel - a controversial group that has been accused of anti-semitism. Isarig 14:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

on top of the above I will bring sources that show how "hafrda" is used in Hebrew - as a mean fro creating a border between two states. not all the aparhteid BS that has been propagated so far. Zeq 15:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Sources used for this article

If I 'll feel like wasting time on this ridiculus article I will start collecting the only possible sources for it: Sources in Hebrew. So this is a notice to anyone who wants to edit this article: Start learning Hebrew. Zeq 14:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I am not going to edit war on this

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hafrada&diff=57006482&oldid=57005746 is pure and simple an edit war - a disruptive behaviour that makes it impossibl to coloboratly edit wikipedia.

Homey: A friendly suggestion:

Self revert and try to convince us in the merits of this edit.

Zeq 15:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Zeq are you trying to get yourself banned from this article only or from Misplaced Pages as a whole? You are on probation for having removed sourced material from an article yet here you've just done it again.

The material is sourced, in fact it has three sources, that is its merit. If you haven't learned that yet, after being banned from other articles and put on probation, one has to wonder.Homey 15:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The matrial is not sources as it has nothing to do with the article itself. You can not inject this "apartheid" BS to any article you want. You have also violated the collective wisdom of this comunity by adding here material about "aprtheid wall" which was decided to be deleted. In fact almost any edit of yours is a policy violation. Zeq 15:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew?

Maybe I am a little slow, and I am not trying to be a language-ist here, but why does a Hebrew word that has not become part of the English language get an article on English Misplaced Pages at all? If there is a legitimate debate over what Hebrew-speakers call the WB barrier in Hebrew, I can see that being a proper subject for inclusion in the WB barrier article, but how can it have its own article? And besides, Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary, and en.wikipedia is certainly not a Hebrew dictionary!

On a related note, and this is the first time I am seeing this article, I just have to ask the assembled multitudes: Is there no end to this madness? Are we going to let Misplaced Pages become the encyclopedia of name-calling? Is every insult against Israel going to have its own separate article? Where does it all end? And, doesn't WP:POINT kick in at some point, around now? 6SJ7 19:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree this article should be deleted Zeq 20:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

It's entering the English language (much like apartheid did in the 1980s). Homey 20:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so. I looked at a few of those articles and they refer to "Hafrada" as a Hebrew word. Just because it is translated into English (as any non-English word can be) doesn't make it an English word. And besides, if it really is "entering" our language (which I doubt), maybe we should wait until it has finished "entering" and has actually "entered" before we use it as an article name. And I know there has to be a rule, or a policy, or a guideline, or a Strong Suggestion, or something, on WP, about when a word can be considered part of the English language. I am sure you know what, and where, that something is. I can't imagine that this makes the cut. Do we really have to have another AfD? Or maybe some administrator can just take care of this, since it is not and English word! 6SJ7 20:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

If you think the article shouldn't exist start an AFD. 02:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't have to if I don't want to. Besides, I was thinking about it until I read a comment that was actually helpful, below, and see my reply. By the way, you forgot to sign your comment. 6SJ7 03:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Do not delete these non-English words just because they're non-English. It's just not civil! Article20 02:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have to admit that I did not know all of these Hebrew words had their own articles. In looking at the list I cannot imagine why most of these articles are in an English-language encyclopedia, as opposed to a Hebrew dictionary. There are obvious exceptions such as matzoh, which I think has succeeded in entering the language; El Al, which is not about a word but about a company; Mossad, which is about an agency; Shekel, about a unit of currency, and so on. All of these are commonly used and heard by speakers of English. Most of the others, I don't get it. But I guess I am not going to do an AfD on the basis of language. I may do a merge request though, to put it in whichever non-South-African apartheid article remains standing. This should not be its own article. 6SJ7 03:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I do not support a merge. I think the article can stand on its own. I recommend if you feel strongly to take it to an AfD. I feel it is notable though. --Ben Houston 17:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Obviously oppose a merge. User:6SJ7, should Hasbara be merged into Propaganda or Public relations? Should Manhigut Yehudit be merged into Orthodox Judaism or Jewish philosophy? What should Negiah be merged into? What about Payot? Remember that Misplaced Pages is not a paper encyclopedia. Article20 04:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea, "Article 20." Since those sound like Hebrew words, I guess you should ask someone who knows Hebrew. I do recognize one of them, it is the name of a faction within Likud, so no it shouln't be merged, it's the name of a notable organization. "Hafrada" is just a word. Since you (it is you, isn't it?) are using it as part of your argument that Israel practices "apartheid," it belongs somewhere in the Israel section of the article on Apartheid (political epithet) -- that is, once all the appropriate merges have taken place. 6SJ7 06:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you can call me "you", I don't care much for honorifics. My personal POV on this matter is that "Israel isn't an apartheid state, but do unfortunately share some of the characteristics". "Hafrada" is just a word. "Apartheid" is just a word. If Hafrada is something people (Israeli and non-Israeli) speak about when they speak about the politics of separation - shouldn't an encyclopedia be a place where people not familiar with the term could find out what it means/refers to. And if it is controversial, why it is controversial. Article20 07:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

New merge tag

Homey has now placed a new merge tag on this article, to "Israeli apartheid," saying (in the edit summary) that such a merge would make more sense than a merge to "Apartheid outside of South Africa." Of course, "Israeli apartheid" itself has a merge tag to "Apartheid outside of South Africa," which I favor as I have stated several times. So, it is a just a question of accomplishing the same end directly or indirectly. I prefer the direct route, but that is not critical. And then I also believe that "Apartheid outside of South Africa" should either be renamed or have a qualifier, but that is being discussed elsewhere, I think. 6SJ7 15:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

"Of course, "Israeli apartheid" itself has a merge tag to "Apartheid outside of South Africa," which I favor as I have stated several times."

Yes, but there's no consensus to merge Israeli apartheid with "Apartheid oustide of South Africa", is there?Homey 16:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, is there? Who is keeping score? The rules of the game seem to keep changing, and the playing field keeps moving. 6SJ7 22:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Reverts of this article by Homey

While not a 3Rr violation the clear pattern of edit war by homey emrge in this article is well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hafrada&diff=57132353&oldid=57006482

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hafrada&diff=57006482&oldid=57002546

Zeq 07:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

RfM

Template:RFMF-- Kim van der Linde 03:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)