Misplaced Pages

Talk:Altalena Affair

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gilabrand (talk | contribs) at 15:51, 29 January 2019 (wp). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:51, 29 January 2019 by Gilabrand (talk | contribs) (wp)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

  • You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
  • You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
  1. Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
  2. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

  • Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
  • Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!


WikiProject iconIsrael C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

NPOV dispute

One sided, pro-Irgun account. Needs to be rewritten to take out POV. Sonofzion 01:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

You have to make specific suggestions for change that are actionable within the policies for the tag to be used correctly. SlimVirgin 21:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Use more than one source? Writing an article with only book by Begin as a source is biased. Also see paragraph about ultimatum. Sonofzion 21:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

there are more sources, including Ben Gurion's diary. in the article itself it's all mentioned. Simply the book was also mentioned in the end. I'm removing the NPOV tag since you didn't seem to move forward with specific WP:RS to contradict something. It's actually pretty balanced as one can see in the aftermath section with mapai opinions stated first. Amoruso 07:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

There is clearly a violation of NPOV here. Don't know enough about the affair to fix it, but there are claims here that presuppose being inside Menachem Begin's mind and being factually certain of his benign intentions. Clearly a NPOV violation. And no point in just fixing the wording there to read "Menachem Begin claims that he sailed to Tel Aviv on the Altalena which still contained part of the weapons shipment only to..." more overall revamping is necessary, bringing in other perspectives on the affair. Will someone please help?

Sorry, if you don't know enough about the affair to fix your allegation, don't make your allegation. Counterboint 03:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The Socialists led by Ben-Gurion and the Nationalists led by Begin where in competition for control of Israel. By sinking the ship, Ben-Gurion assured his success at the risk of losing to the Arabs. We cannot know what Begin would have done if he gained the upper hand , but I do not recall that Irgun ever killed Hagana members. Saltysailor (talk) 14:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

This article is less factual than when I commented in 2008. The socialists tried to erase what the Irgun did. I rely on eyewitness accounts. The bottom line is that Ben-Gurion was willing to kill Jews to assure his control of Israel (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.230.101 (talk) 04:59, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

The article needs to be improved, needs more sources. A few newspapers are now re-covering what happened. But need more scholarly sources from both sides. It seems the article is largely pro-Irgun (which may I remind you is legally a terrorist organization as said by the State of Israel itself).Petrous Fire (talk) 08:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Altalena

In case anyone cares, "Altalena" is "Swing" in italian, as in that thing where children play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.178.66.170 (talk) 20:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

edit sorry noticed now that it's under Jabotinsky's article, just ignore me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.178.66.170 (talk) 20:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Casualties

I have added the to the summary of casualties because I have come across a wildly different total: Benjamin Netanyahu (A place among the nations - Israel and the world page 444) has "eighty-two members of the Irgun were killed". Padres Hana (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Netanyahu is confused, unless you are misreading. 82 is a common figure for the number of people killed in the King David Hotel bombing. As for the Altalena: Morris, 1948, p272: "Altogether eighteen mean died in the clashes, most of them IZL". Katz, Days of FIre (an Irgun memoir), p247: 16 Irgun, 2 Hagana. Perliger, Jewish Terrorism in Israel, p27: 16 Irgun and 2 Hagana. I did see the number of Hagana dead given as 3 in one place, maybe someone died later on. Zero 13:49, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Altalena Affair. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:51, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Categories: