Talk:International Fact-Finding Mission on Israeli Settlements

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 Wikipedia, 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:

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.
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 Wikipedia, 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 is the talk page for discussing improvements to the International Fact-Finding Mission on Israeli Settlements article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

International relations: United Nations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations.

Palestine Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal This 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 Wikipedia. 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Israel Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. 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

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Project Israel To Do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles.
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page.
Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration.
Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005
Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel.
Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah
See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia.
Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data.
Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes.
Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention.
Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel.
NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries
Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel.
Stubs : See Israel stubs.
Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People
Other :
- Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary.

Neutrality

I am removing the indicator that contributors have a close connection. I see nothing in the article that implies that.Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 18:01, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bias?

50% of the article length is devoted to the reaction defending Israel, whilst the views of the majority of governments and organisations that supported the report have very little place. This is quite a substantial WP:BIAS. I would love someone to bring more balance to the article by including voices "for" and "against" in equal proportions at the very least. kashmiri 16:28, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CN

I have removed a citation needed tag on the reports section, as the information is in the report, which is linked at the bottom. If this is considered an inappropriate removal, please let me know.Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 21:53, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Defamation League

Hello, I just wanted to clarify why I reverted the removal of the reaction of the ADL from the page. I feel as though the ADL is a notable source, so why is it that, with a citation, we can't include their reaction in the reactions section?

I understand that the ADL is notable for fighting bigotry, but how does that invalidate their opinion? Is the argument that the ADL's reaction should be excluded because there is no coverage of their coverage? If so, I don't see how that makes sense.Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 20:37, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, here I concur with Dlv999. Because of Wikipedia's insistence on WP:secondary sources, ADL's views on the Mission should normally be learned through a third-party source (that would also clarify, ideally, why ADL's view matters here at all). Otherwise we could end up with a long list of statements and press releases by all organisations that ever decided to make a comment on the Mission's report. Personally, I don't really see why, our of hundreds organisations involved in the Mission, it is ADL's comments that would have any special significance - but then, since someone had put them in, I decided to keep them in order not to be accused of anti-semitism. Regards, kashmiri ^TALK 21:21, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input. I'm just confused as to what constitutes a secondary source. The link you provided says that a secondary source "provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event," whereas a primary source is "An account of a traffic accident written by a witness," or "a scientific paper documenting a new experiment".

If the ADL is notable and considered a reliable source for opinion, then wouldn't an in-text attribution be acceptable (like in the example from the same link, "According to the opinion columnist Maureen Dowd...")? I understand that a line has to be drawn, but, at least from my perspective, the ADL qualifies.Comatmebro ^{~Come at me~} 08:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, ADL is a reliable source but is also a primary source, i.e., ADL says just what ADL thinks on the Mission. A secondary source would for instance consist of an analysis of various reactions to the Mission, and include ADL's reaction among them. That also ensures that ADL's view is WP:NOTABLE, i.e., mentioned by another source and not just by itself. kashmiri ^TALK 11:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]