Talk:International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Israeli leaders
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Israeli leaders 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 |
![]() | On 27 November 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Israeli figures to International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. The result of the discussion was moved. |
![]() | Stop: You may only use this page to create an edit request This page is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a restricted topic. You are not an extended-confirmed user, so you must not edit or discuss this topic anywhere on Wikipedia except to make an edit request. (Additional details are in the message box just below this one.)
|
![]() | 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:
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.
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Name
editWe should probably change the name. The fact that Mohammad Deif is included in these warrants is good enough reason to remove "for Israeli figures". Maybe something like "Israel-Hamas war International Criminal Court arrest warrants" would work. Personisinsterest (talk) 21:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- Or do another one for Hamas figures. Selfstudier (talk) 22:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- NO, it is the same issuance.Sportsnut24 (talk) 10:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- There have literally been more on this and it was posted before your unilateral move. Since it is NOT just israelis.
- NO, it is the same issuance.Sportsnut24 (talk) 10:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Undiscussed move
editI reverted the page move, it needs an RM, I think. It is not obvious that the page is primarily about anything other than the two Israeli figures. The Hamas figure is almost an irrelevancy, more a case of going through the formalities. Selfstudier (talk) 11:34, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- The coverage I've read (just a few articles, I haven't looked systematically) have focused overwhelmingly on the Israeli indictments, with the Hamas figures only mentioned in passing. All the headlines only mentioned the Israelis too.
- And I suppose that makes sense, right - the Hamas leadership are all wanted on terrorism charges in dozens of countries already, so the warrants for them are of limited notability/interest. AntiDionysius (talk) 11:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- On a broader and possibly more subjective note, I find the phrasing "...arrest warrants for Israeli figures" oddly grating. Is that just me? I'm not advocating any specific alternative, but it sounds awkward. Perhaps "Israeli leadership"? AntiDionysius (talk) 11:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that Israeli leadership is probably a better characterization, however idrk how much my opinion matters since I'm not logged in :/ 2601:647:4400:C80:5F2:9737:9B32:5944 (talk) 07:21, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- The warrant issued BY the ICC involved all 3 figures. Making up stories is not WP is about.
- Also see above.Sportsnut24 (talk) 11:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- If you feel strongly about this, you can open an RM but I can't see that the warrant for Dief is anything more than dotting i's and crossing t's. Lots of RS report their death even though Hamas has not explicitly confirmed it. Of course, should there suddenly be proof contrary, then we can revisit the matter.
- I am not enamored of the Israeli figures thing but it was apparently based on International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Russian figures. Selfstudier (talk) 11:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Ahh, I see. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Many might think that Deif is dead, but the fact remains that he is one out of the 3 figures for whom a arrest warrant was issued. Wikipedia shouldn't give a distorted impression of simple facts. Gugganij (talk) 22:03, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- No one is advocating removing mention of Deif from the article, this is just a discussion about the title.
- Do you also think all those news organisations whose articles I linked below who only focused on Netanyahu in their headlines were providing a "distorted impression of simple facts"? AntiDionysius (talk) 02:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- By not mentioning 1/3 of the arrest warrants it very much indeed distorts first impressions...and news organisations are not writing an encyclopedia article - we do. Gugganij (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Once again, Deif's warrant isn't going to be "not mentioned" in any scenario, we are merely discussing whether it should feature in the article title. Articles frequently have titles which do not mention every single facet of the subject at hand, because that's not the function of a title. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- By not mentioning 1/3 of the arrest warrants it very much indeed distorts first impressions...and news organisations are not writing an encyclopedia article - we do. Gugganij (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Right, but we follow the lead of secondary sources over primary ones, and the secondary sources are focusing very much on the indictment of Netanyahu and Gallant, particularly the former. A quick Goole News search of headlines just now:
- CNN: International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu
- AP: Warrants put Israeli PM and others in a small group of leaders accused of crimes against humanity
- The Economist: The arrest warrant is a diplomatic disaster for Netanyahu
- CBS: U.N. court ICC issues arrest warrants for Israel's Netanyahu, former defense chief and a Hamas leader
- FT: Israelis rally around war effort after ICC issues warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu
- Vox: International arrest warrants are out for Netanyahu and Gallant. What happens next?
- JNS: Hours after ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, Biden recycles six-month-old statement
- WSJ: ICC Issues War-Crimes Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant Over Gaza War
- BBC: Arrest warrants issued for Netanyahu, Gallant and Hamas commander over alleged war crimes
- NYT: Netanyahu’s Arrest Sought by International Criminal Court
- ToI:ICC issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant over Gaza war; PM slams ‘antisemitism’
- WP: What the ICC arrest warrants mean for Netanyahu and Gallant
- AJ: ICC issues arrest warrant for Israeli PM Netanyahu for ‘war crimes’ in Gaza
- The Guardian: ICC issues arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu for alleged Gaza war crimes
- AntiDionysius (talk) 12:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- I think the article should be named "International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas figures". News articles are not encyclopedia entries, so they are not alike. Also, there are many sources that include Deif in the title, like [1], no need to even prepare a comprehensive list. We should just stick to the accurate article title. Tomer T (talk) 09:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note that Deif's warrant was also classified as "secret", another reason to treat that case independently."The warrant of arrest for Mr Deif is classified as ‘secret’ in order to protect witnesses and to safeguard the conduct of investigations. However, the Chamber decided to release the information below since conduct similar to that addressed in the warrant of arrest appears to be ongoing, in particular the holding of a number of hostages captive. The Chamber considers it is also in the interest of victims and their families to be aware of the warrant’s existence." Selfstudier (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how this is relevant, we still need to choose a more reflecting name. Tomer T (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- I think that this article's title reflects a good scope. The overwhelming coverage and notability is for Netanyahu's arrest warrant, with slightly less prominence given to Gallant's arrest warrant. Mohammed Deif, who isn't even confirmed to be alive, is very clearly not what news sources are primarily talking about, and governments are not primarily reacting to Mohammed Deif's arrest warrant. If Deif's arrest warrant becomes notable enough, and there's enough reliable sources independently covering it to warrant an article for it, there's the option to create International_Criminal_Court_arrest_warrants_for_Hamas_figures (there's no need to have a single article that extensively covers both Israeli figures and Hamas figures). If Israel hadn't killed the people that the ICC was preparing arrest warrants for (Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh), maybe those two would have their arrest warrants also receive prominent coverage and this article could have covered that too. But they're not alive, the ICC retracted their arrest warrants, and Mohammed Deif was/is not a well-known figure the way the other two leadership figures of Hamas were. Let's keep the current title, but if there ends up being notable coverage of Mohammed Deif, we can create a separate article for that. But for now, I don't think that a person who we can't even confirm is alive should require changing the scope of this article. Just mention him in this article in passing for now, alongside the withdrawn arrest warrants for Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh. JasonMacker (talk) 20:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Muhammad Deif is confirmed dead, so the only living people with the relevant arrest warrants are the Israeli leaders. JasonMacker (talk) 19:10, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- I think that this article's title reflects a good scope. The overwhelming coverage and notability is for Netanyahu's arrest warrant, with slightly less prominence given to Gallant's arrest warrant. Mohammed Deif, who isn't even confirmed to be alive, is very clearly not what news sources are primarily talking about, and governments are not primarily reacting to Mohammed Deif's arrest warrant. If Deif's arrest warrant becomes notable enough, and there's enough reliable sources independently covering it to warrant an article for it, there's the option to create International_Criminal_Court_arrest_warrants_for_Hamas_figures (there's no need to have a single article that extensively covers both Israeli figures and Hamas figures). If Israel hadn't killed the people that the ICC was preparing arrest warrants for (Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh), maybe those two would have their arrest warrants also receive prominent coverage and this article could have covered that too. But they're not alive, the ICC retracted their arrest warrants, and Mohammed Deif was/is not a well-known figure the way the other two leadership figures of Hamas were. Let's keep the current title, but if there ends up being notable coverage of Mohammed Deif, we can create a separate article for that. But for now, I don't think that a person who we can't even confirm is alive should require changing the scope of this article. Just mention him in this article in passing for now, alongside the withdrawn arrest warrants for Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh. JasonMacker (talk) 20:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how this is relevant, we still need to choose a more reflecting name. Tomer T (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note that Deif's warrant was also classified as "secret", another reason to treat that case independently."The warrant of arrest for Mr Deif is classified as ‘secret’ in order to protect witnesses and to safeguard the conduct of investigations. However, the Chamber decided to release the information below since conduct similar to that addressed in the warrant of arrest appears to be ongoing, in particular the holding of a number of hostages captive. The Chamber considers it is also in the interest of victims and their families to be aware of the warrant’s existence." Selfstudier (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- I think the article should be named "International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas figures". News articles are not encyclopedia entries, so they are not alike. Also, there are many sources that include Deif in the title, like [1], no need to even prepare a comprehensive list. We should just stick to the accurate article title. Tomer T (talk) 09:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- On a broader and possibly more subjective note, I find the phrasing "...arrest warrants for Israeli figures" oddly grating. Is that just me? I'm not advocating any specific alternative, but it sounds awkward. Perhaps "Israeli leadership"? AntiDionysius (talk) 11:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Edit request: correct date 2024 -> 2023
editUnder "Starvation as a weapon of war", it says
> Yoav Gallant made a public speech in early October 2024 saying,
The statement is from October 2023 though. PeterTrompeter (talk) 09:02, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done it has been changed Mason7512 (talk) 23:58, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Western ally or US ally
editCertainly Israel is not a traditional or mainstream Western ally or a western-allied country. Israel may be considered an ally of the US (and the sources claiming that is indeed from the US), but certainly not of the West. The Western world traditionally does not include Israel, and the concept western-allies usually refers to NATO (which Israel is not a part of). In fact, the stance of traditional Western countries such as Norway, Spain, or Ireland, widely differ from something you could ever consider to be an ally of Israel. When I claim it is a "fringe" source, I do not refer to CNN in general, but to the particular article . In fact, the large majority of the sources (including CNN) would not ever consider Israel either as a part of the West or a Western ally. I don't think that claim would have any ground in other other part of the West outside the US. SFBB (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- I see what you are getting at but isn't it the case that just as a political matter, Israel would be considered as a friend of the West rather than say the East? Not only by virtue of the US relationship altho that obviously has a lot to do with it. Historically Israel got a lot of arms from Germany, France and UK, less nowadays but still. Western allied might be overegging it slightly but I don't think Western aligned would be.
- Having said that and not wanting to get into any more OR, if we can produce reliable sourcing that would at least caveat if not contradict what CNN is saying then I would agree to taking that sentence out of the lead. Selfstudier (talk) 16:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Selfstudier: it is not about OR, but about cherrypicking. The current source was clearly cherrypicked to back a questionable sentence (that's what I imply by "fringe" source). Without any major effort (first result in google) I've got sources referencing Colombia, Chile, or Ethiopia, etc. etc. as "western allies". The fact is that the traditional definition neither includes them nor Israel. If I google "what is a western ally" I get these results (first page) 1, 2, 3, 4,5, etc. etc. none of them meaning Israel, but indeed the traditional understanding implying NATO. SFBB (talk) 23:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SFBB: Please desist from the slow broil edit war. The reliable sources disagree with you. Either provide some sources that say the opposite/support your position (i.e. that Israel's leaders are not the first leaders of a Western ally to have warrants issued by the court) or please stop injecting your personal opinion, a.k.a. OR, into your editing. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
@Iskandar323: I'm not war editing. I opened a discussion in the Talk, I provided sources that clearly back my statements, namely that Israel is not a Western ally in the traditional/mainstream sense. Your proposal namely: "to provide sources that Israel's leaders are not the first leaders of a Western ally to have warrants issued by the court" is a strawman, because it is not what I'm disputing
Also, the reliable sources agree with my statement (see above) that most mainstream sources do not consider Israel to be a Western ally. And I also not claiming that CNN as a source is fringe or cherrypicked, but a single article within CNN, the Times, BBC, the NY Times or wahtever may indeed be. This is clearly a case when an article in a mainstream source, contains a single claim that is fringe and it is being cherrypicked to back a story that contracticts the mainstream understanding of Western allis, as implied in Western world, Western allies , NATO, Cold War, etc. etc. etc. The fact is by no means Israel is a Western ally in the traditional understanding. And I insist: sufficient reliable sources (including NATO) have been provided to back this claim (see above). SFBB (talk) 17:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- And btw....unless someone disputes this issue in the Talk page (note that you merely reverted and issue a warning without addressing the concerns), I'll make the changes again or I'll move this to the noticeboard. You cannot merely sit on a cherrypicked source and revert everything, even when backed with substantial references. SFBB (talk) 17:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I disputed it as well and so do the sources, so quit the edit warring. Selfstudier (talk) 17:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- which sources? a single< fringe claim (not even the core of the reference) in a RS? you did not dispute the sources I provided to claim it is a cherrypicked reference. Again, I won't desist unless sources are provided that disprove the mainstream understanding of Israel NOT as Western ally. SFBB (talk) 18:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- There are four RSP sources attached to the statement: CNN, WAPO, AP and the Guardian. Conversely, I don't believe any of the sources that you have provided actively say that Israel is not a Western ally, which appears to be the one portion of the statement that you've chosen to take issue with. And frankly, who even argues this? It's bizarre. Netanyahu has himself previously likened Israel to being the USA's aircraft carrier in the Middle East.[2] And the USA, for reference, is part of the West. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Iskandar323:: my only problem with the statement is whether Israel is a mainstream "Western ally" or not. That's only mentioned very briefly and as an aside (not the core) in the CNN source. All the other sources do not include this. And yes: in mainstream mannerm Israel is undoubtedly an ally of the US (and if the sentence would be framed that way, it would be perfectly fine; I do not dispute that at all, , but I agree it's not very elegant), but it is not a mainstream Western Ally.
- The sources I provided do not claim whether Israel is or isn't a Western Ally. They explain the common/mainstream/traditional understanding of Western Ally, along the lines of the US/UK in WW2 and NATO since Cold War. None of the sources even mention Israel when discussing the traditional understanding of Western Ally. It is absolutely undisputed that NATO members such as Turkey, Norway or Spain are part of the Western Allies and clearly Israel is not a part of any alliance with the aforementioned countries. Ireland (another mainstream Western ally) just joined the genocide case against Israel.
- That being said: I 100% agree that the information contained in the sources is important (basically first time that the leader of a country politically aligned with the US is being prosecuted), but the framing including the concept "Western ally" is not accurate or rather, not mainstream. Sadly, I could not think of any more precise framing of the sentence. SFBB (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- NATO and Israel have been involved in joint training exercises since at least 2005, and the Israeli military closely coordinates with the militaries of the US, UK and Germany at the very least. The CNN piece refers to Israel's alliehood three times, including in this phrase:
"Critics say the responses suggest two sets of rules: one for the West’s traditional allies, and another for its foes."
– so incorporating that all important word "traditional" for you. The Guardian mentions the ally point three times, AP once. In the WAPO source I struggled to find a reference, so maybe that can go, but that still leaves us with three reliable sources. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- NATO and Israel have been involved in joint training exercises since at least 2005, and the Israeli military closely coordinates with the militaries of the US, UK and Germany at the very least. The CNN piece refers to Israel's alliehood three times, including in this phrase:
- There are four RSP sources attached to the statement: CNN, WAPO, AP and the Guardian. Conversely, I don't believe any of the sources that you have provided actively say that Israel is not a Western ally, which appears to be the one portion of the statement that you've chosen to take issue with. And frankly, who even argues this? It's bizarre. Netanyahu has himself previously likened Israel to being the USA's aircraft carrier in the Middle East.[2] And the USA, for reference, is part of the West. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- which sources? a single< fringe claim (not even the core of the reference) in a RS? you did not dispute the sources I provided to claim it is a cherrypicked reference. Again, I won't desist unless sources are provided that disprove the mainstream understanding of Israel NOT as Western ally. SFBB (talk) 18:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I disputed it as well and so do the sources, so quit the edit warring. Selfstudier (talk) 17:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- And btw....unless someone disputes this issue in the Talk page (note that you merely reverted and issue a warning without addressing the concerns), I'll make the changes again or I'll move this to the noticeboard. You cannot merely sit on a cherrypicked source and revert everything, even when backed with substantial references. SFBB (talk) 17:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
@Iskandar323: you're indeed right that both AP and The Guardian also describe Israel as a Western ally. But that's far from being a generally accepted sentence. The same news/situation is framed differently by other sources. To make this clear (and not being accused of cherrypicking) I just googled "Netanyahu" "ICC" "first time" (from Atlanta, GA and using US-google in American English): I got the follwing first 10 results (in order):
- Al Jazeera: "This is the first time that Netanyahu or any Israeli official has been indicted by an international court..." [3] (focus on Israel; no mention of alignments)
- PBS: Corruption trial; almost completely unrelated [4] (no mention of the issue)
- CNN: Corruption trial; almost completely unrelated [5] (no mention of the issue)
- Le Monde: "It's a first time the ICC has done so for a leader of a Western country." [6] (it goes way beyond the previous claim implying that Israel is not only a Western Ally but a Western country)
- Al Jazzera: "...the first time that’s happened to a leader backed by the West." (not a Western ally, but backed by the West; the point I'm making; in other passage, it also mentions the Western allies without implying Israel being part of them). [7]
- Axios: "It is the first time the ICC has issued arrest warrants against a major U.S. ally, as well as the first time it has issued warrants for the leader of a democratic country.", and "Netanyahu and Gallant will be under the risk of arrest if they travel to one of the 125 countries that are party to the Rome Statute that established the international body, among them many of Israel's western allies". (again, precisely my point: Israel is a US ally and it has many Western allies, but it is itself not a Western ally) [8].
- Le Monde: " For the first time since the creation of the Court in 1998, political leaders have been indicted against the wishes of their Western allies." (idem, Israel has many Western allies without implying it would be one) [9]
- Times of Israel "The decision marked the first time the ICC has ever issued arrest warrants against leaders of a democratic country." (no mention of any alignment with the West) [10]
- AP: "Israel and its top ally, the United States, are not members of the court. But others of Israel’s allies, including some of its close European friends, are put in an awkward position" [11] (again; no implication Israel would be a Western ally)
It is clear, I did not cherrypicked any reference (I searched in a fully neutral fashion), and most of them do not formulate the issue the way it is formulated in wikipedia (where the it is clear that the references were searched/cherrypicked to back the unreferenced sentence that I, and later @Selfstudier: had deleted because of lack of references). It is also clear that we're talking about a novum for i) a democracy and ii) a country backed by the traditional Western Allies:
I propose to formulate the sentence this way: "The warrant against Netanyahu is the first against the leader of a democratic country backed majoritarily by the West..
This goes along what it is contained in the majority of the sources, without making claims about Israel being a Western ally (which I dispute and do not seem to be the way the large majority of the references frame the issue).SFBB (talk) 19:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- That search doesn't include the words "ally" or "Western ally" or other related possibilities so it is unlikely to turn up anything relevant to the claim. Btw,
backed majoritarily by the West
is not customary English and I do not know exactly what is its intended meaning but if you are saying Israel is backed by most of the West, then doesn't that make it a Western ally? Selfstudier (talk) 19:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)- This just seems to be an exercise in pointless pedantry. RSP sources do use "Western ally" in the context, and "backed by the West" and the various other iterations amount on the whole to the same thing, so let's just keep using the normal English. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- First of all: the search obviously did not include the words "ally" or "Western ally". That would be begging the question and it would only produce cherrypicked references including those words. I already showed above tat doing so with many country countries (I used Colombia, Ethiopia, and Chile, but I could do it again with a dozen of countries that are not customarily considered to be part of the Western allies) but I can do it with many more countries.
- Second: No. It's not pedantry. Western ally is a well-defined concept in the English language and this concept usually does not include Israel (I already provided many references on the meaning of "Western ally"). Backed by the West would also be incorrect as references majoritarily do not write about the West as a whole but about selected Western countries (which is indeed correct). This is not about pedantry but about precision and messing up two very similar and closely related concepts, but fundamentally different. At first you claimed my points would not be backed by the references, but now I showed you it is indeed backed majoritarily by the references, you dismissed it as pedantry.
- Given that the references clearly support the point I'm making, I'll make the change once again tomorrow. SFBB (talk) 18:37, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Only if you intend to do so without consensus. Nothing is remotely clear, and you don't appear to have suggested a replacement text. It's very unclear what your even angling for here. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:38, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Of course, I’ve been searching for consensus. From the very beginning, I’ve made it clear that my only issue is with a concept (Western ally) that is well-defined and does not customarily include Israel. I’ve provided references to support the customary understanding of the concept, ons of how the concept can be cherrypicked to include any desired country, and on how to search for this specific news without cherrypicking; all the searches align with what I'm claiming (and are very easy to verify). However, you keep insisting that it’s fine and that I should drop it, simply because you think so (pedantry claim) and because some references — found through cherrypicking — say it so.
- Above I've proposed an alternative formulation that keep the spirit of the sentence, but without including the concept. SFBB (talk) 13:49, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you mean the "majoritarily" version, this is neither particularly plain English for readers, nor is it entirely clear what that sentence is meant to mean. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- I said already, it's not easy to phrase it, but here goes a new try: The warrant against Netanyahu is the first issued against the leader of a democratic country supported by a majority of Western nations. If you still do not agree, please propose a new phrasing without the contested "Western ally" concept. SFBB (talk) 01:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Or: The warrant against Netanyahu is the first issued against the leader of a country widely recognized as a democracy.<- this one is also true (and backed by the references I provided) and even broader. SFBB (talk) 01:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Russia is a democracy, so no, that's not true. The common convention for any proposed versions like this is to include the sources that you think support it alongside the proposed text, so other editors can actually verify it. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm starting to think you merely are trying to mess up with me...or rather, trying to find any possible loophole to undermine something clearly backed by the references and get it your way. All the references that the quotes need, have been already provided throughout this topic. I've been extremely careful to avoid cherrypicking (and not to search explicitly for references that would back my take on the issue) and if you'd the same, you'd soon realize how fringe the statement is I'm arguing against (but it exists, so it can be obviously be cherrypicked by googling the precise words). Anyways, if you had take the time to read (not the references; merely what I wrote here), you'd realized that this statement about a democratic country is contained in both the Axios and the Times of Israel references (both among the 10 most important references on the subject according to google). As it clearly seems you're merely trying to stall, I'll make the changes tomorrow. If you revert, I'll move to the Noticeboard, because it's clear that your attitude here's been anything but constructive and it won't change. SFBB (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- btw...Russia a democratic country?...well on paper yes...and surely you can cherrypick references to back that (same way it has been done with Israel as a Western Ally...funny enough for a country with such close ties with the very same Russia; see e.g. Unfriendly countries list, International sanctions during the Russo-Ukrainian War..such a clear Western Ally!!) ..anyways according to The Economist Democracy Index, this democracy looks quite red. SFBB (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- So you have only two sources for this, and those two sources are quite biased ones? One that is currently in the full thrall of war propaganda and the other that has such a close relationship with the state currently putting out war propaganda that it constantly just happens to have "breaking news" straight from the PM's office despite being a publication in a different country. I would say that these two being your only sources rather undermines your proposition, your perspective on Russia aside. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- btw...Russia a democratic country?...well on paper yes...and surely you can cherrypick references to back that (same way it has been done with Israel as a Western Ally...funny enough for a country with such close ties with the very same Russia; see e.g. Unfriendly countries list, International sanctions during the Russo-Ukrainian War..such a clear Western Ally!!) ..anyways according to The Economist Democracy Index, this democracy looks quite red. SFBB (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm starting to think you merely are trying to mess up with me...or rather, trying to find any possible loophole to undermine something clearly backed by the references and get it your way. All the references that the quotes need, have been already provided throughout this topic. I've been extremely careful to avoid cherrypicking (and not to search explicitly for references that would back my take on the issue) and if you'd the same, you'd soon realize how fringe the statement is I'm arguing against (but it exists, so it can be obviously be cherrypicked by googling the precise words). Anyways, if you had take the time to read (not the references; merely what I wrote here), you'd realized that this statement about a democratic country is contained in both the Axios and the Times of Israel references (both among the 10 most important references on the subject according to google). As it clearly seems you're merely trying to stall, I'll make the changes tomorrow. If you revert, I'll move to the Noticeboard, because it's clear that your attitude here's been anything but constructive and it won't change. SFBB (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Russia is a democracy, so no, that's not true. The common convention for any proposed versions like this is to include the sources that you think support it alongside the proposed text, so other editors can actually verify it. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Or: The warrant against Netanyahu is the first issued against the leader of a country widely recognized as a democracy.<- this one is also true (and backed by the references I provided) and even broader. SFBB (talk) 01:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- I said already, it's not easy to phrase it, but here goes a new try: The warrant against Netanyahu is the first issued against the leader of a democratic country supported by a majority of Western nations. If you still do not agree, please propose a new phrasing without the contested "Western ally" concept. SFBB (talk) 01:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- If you mean the "majoritarily" version, this is neither particularly plain English for readers, nor is it entirely clear what that sentence is meant to mean. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
- Only if you intend to do so without consensus. Nothing is remotely clear, and you don't appear to have suggested a replacement text. It's very unclear what your even angling for here. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:38, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- This just seems to be an exercise in pointless pedantry. RSP sources do use "Western ally" in the context, and "backed by the West" and the various other iterations amount on the whole to the same thing, so let's just keep using the normal English. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:55, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- I do not only have them: I have The Guardian, I have El Pais, I have Reuters, etc. etc. And if I keep searching that way, I can produce much more cherrypicked references backing my point (the same way it has been done to search for references backing the fringe point of Israel being a Western Ally) of view that you would be able to (because what I'm claiming is much more mainstream). The issue is about finding references neutrally (using neutral search topics) what is what I've been doing: there is even an essay on the subject: WP:Cherrypicking. You should take a look at it. SFBB (talk) 14:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- I haven't read most of your comment, but El Pais'
Western-backed democratic country
seems like a reasonable averaging of the surprisingly varied language on this. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:36, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- I haven't read most of your comment, but El Pais'
- I do not only have them: I have The Guardian, I have El Pais, I have Reuters, etc. etc. And if I keep searching that way, I can produce much more cherrypicked references backing my point (the same way it has been done to search for references backing the fringe point of Israel being a Western Ally) of view that you would be able to (because what I'm claiming is much more mainstream). The issue is about finding references neutrally (using neutral search topics) what is what I've been doing: there is even an essay on the subject: WP:Cherrypicking. You should take a look at it. SFBB (talk) 14:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
I have already proposed three options that preserve the main idea but bypass the questioned concept, in line with the references (not the cherrypicked ones) that have been provided. You cannot just neglect the discussion, avoid consensus and unpheld on a stable version by reverts. If there is no reaction, I'll make the changes tomorrow. SFBB (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Bitte um Version in deutscher Sprache.
editLieben Dank! 2001:4BB8:124:E0E6:D87F:9D4:A77F:FE58 (talk) 23:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- Bitte übersetzen! Iskandar323 (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Edit request 24 March 2025
editThis edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
'Description of suggested change: Please change broken link in "See also" section
− | Gaza famine | + | Gaza Strip famine |