Misplaced Pages

Talk:United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict

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 GregKaye (talk | contribs) at 09:30, 18 August 2014 (→Requested move). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 09:30, 18 August 2014 by GregKaye (talk | contribs) (→Requested move)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
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!
This article and its editors are subject to Misplaced Pages general sanctions. Discretionary sanctions: Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Palestine-Israel_articles#Discretionary_sanctions
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconInternational relations: United Nations Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconHuman rights Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPalestine Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Misplaced Pages. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIsrael Mid‑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
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Error: Target page was not specified with to.
In the newsA news item involving United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 16 October 2009.
Misplaced Pages
Misplaced Pages
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months 

goldstone recantation section

can someone clarify the use of mondoweiss - looks like a blog, with no editorial oversight - and the use of middleeastmonitor - looks like many of the other 'monitors' out there, which require (as i have learned) a secondary reliable source to make it wiki ready. Soosim (talk) 13:11, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I've replaced these two sources with better ones. --Dailycare (talk) 20:27, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I added comments from a UN spokesman.Owain the 1st (talk) 23:32, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

thank you both! Soosim (talk) 03:59, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Section name for Goldstone's April 2011 announcement

Hi, all. I saw the news today about Goldstone's April 1, 2011, announcement, and came here to add that to this article. I was surprised and impressed to find it had been added almost immediately. It's my impression that the section is really well written; all of you who worked on it should be proud of your contributions. I do have one quibble, though: The section was named "Goldstone reappraisal" but was changed to "Goldstone recantation" in this edit. But I don't think "recantation" was the best choice. The meanings listed for the word "recant", from the Oxford English Dictionary, are given below, with emphasis added:

  • To withdraw, retract, renounce, or disavow (a former statement, opinion, belief, action, etc.) as erroneous or heretical, esp. formally or publicly.
  • To renounce or abjure ( a course of life or conduct ) as wrong or mistaken. Obs.
  • To withdraw or retract ( a promise, vow, undertaking, etc.); to go back on ( one's word ). Now rare.
  • To go back on an agreement; to renege. Now rare.
  • To renounce, give up (an intention or purpose).

As you can see, the word "recant" has a strong shared meaning element with a notion of morality and religious beliefs. I know many people here probably feel strongly that Goldstone should recant in this moral sense, but it's not really the best choice of a word for what he actually did do. I've revised the section heading to read, "Goldstone's retraction of civilian targeting claim", which avoids the use of the use of "recantation" and accurately summarizes the section's content, as well. I also added an "anchor" for the former section name, of course, so any links to it won't break. Best,  – OhioStandard (talk) 07:51, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree with OhioStandard in that this is a better section title taking into account the scope of the "reivsal". Cheers, --Dailycare (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Goldstone report: Statement issued by members of UN mission on Gaza war

I have put in a new section covering the statement from the other co authors of the report and also adjusted the lead to reflect this.I have basically quoted most of what their statement was.Discuss Owain the 1st (talk) 15:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Agree it should be featured in the article, good work. I formatted the ref to make it easier to locate in case the url goes dead. --Dailycare (talk) 21:15, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

The alleged bias

My edit was removed, which is weird. The claim is stated twice (two paragraphs down). Furthermore, the first sentence (the one I removed) present the alleged bias as a fact. This is totally wrong. --IRISZOOM (talk) 21:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

It has been proposed in this section that United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict be renamed and moved to United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza War (2008-09).

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict → United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza War (2008-09) – I feel not that they are doing a fact finding mission on the new conflict this could be very confusing. The name would be consistent with the main article page as well. Galatz (talk) 14:12, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Oppose there are hatnotes at the top of each article to avoid confusion, the names are similar but not identical. "Conflict", not "War", is used in the official name. Peter James (talk) 16:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC) The article names are not identical - one is "Israel–Gaza", the other is "Gaza" - but has an official name been given to the 2014 commission? Peter James (talk) 17:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes I agree that we have those, however even still the Gaza War article was moved to Gaza War (2008-09) despite the others not being called Gaza War and the distinguish tab being at the top. I have not seen an official commission name no. - Galatz (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
"Commission of Inquiry" is often used to describe the new commission, and is likely to be part of its name; the UN site mentions "Gaza Commission of Inquiry" but that may still be only a description. The actual name will probably appear in documents published by the team but I don't know if any exist yet. Names of the conflict are proper nouns but are not official names in the same way as commissions so unless the names are identical (or only differ in capitalisation or punctuation) I don't think this title needs a disambiguator. The new article could probably be renamed, its current title appears to be influenced more by this one than by the sources used there. Peter James (talk) 21:07, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Categories: