Talk:Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles 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.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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!

Violation of policy

It's my opinion, based on the sole source provided and the search I've conducted, that the subject of the article is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. That is a particular concern because the article is not written in a neutral point of view, is not verified by reliable sources, and appears intended to drive traffic to the site. I think that this is grounds for deletion, although I'm willing to give the article creator a little time to prove me wrong on this count. Captainktainer * Talk 06:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This complaint seems to me to be a form response written without due diligence and holds no merit. There is nothing in the article that is biased about the characterization of the organization. One may think that the what the organization does stems from a particular bias but this an altogether different claim than stating that the article itself is biased. To fail to see this distinction would make an article about Geroge Bush impossible. If the reviewer took the time to visit the website and review the news stories section, the reviewer would see the organization in question is mentioned in the San Francisco Chronicle.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tablaboy (talk • contribs) (03:24, 21 August 2006)

On the contrary, I went beyond the call of Wikipedia policy to look for sources, which is something that you should have done. A tangential mention in a news story about the tearjerking life stories of people who happen to have membership in the organization does not in any way, shape, or form establish notability per policies. If you can find policies that suggest that this article should be kept, I would be most interested in reading them. Captainktainer * Talk 07:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This shouldn't be an issue. Either write some background on the Jewish refugees or merge the article with Jewish exodus from Arab lands Spanglish 15:45, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or create an article on the International Rights and Redress Campaign that incorprates elements of this articleSpanglish 17:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

working on article

I have begin to work on this article. This group recently was successful at having a US House resolution passed. This, I believe, has caused them to meet the notability threshold. I have also gone ahead and made breaks, sections, etc with the appropriate tags. I am going through the links and will be adding refs. I also added a ref section. Bstone (talk) 19:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.194.15 (talk) 11:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on JIMENA. 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081011061042/http://www.unwatch.org:80/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=5118137 to http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=5118137

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 17:30, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hi Wikipedians,

I made a slight change --- added some more to the group's Political Activities section reflecting a larger leadership group. Cheers,

User:gc717  —Preceding undated comment added 15:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Categories in the article

Hello,

Re this edit, where User:Bohemian Baltimore re-added 4 categories which I had judged redundant, here would be my rationale for removing them from this article:

Category:Arab-American culture in California : the nearest relevant would probably be Category:Middle Eastern-American culture in California instead rather than the Arab American category, which is for a more specific group. However this category is already present through its grandchild Category:Sephardi Jewish culture in California. I could live with Category:Middle Eastern-American culture in California rather than the Arab-American child, but I still think it is redundant.
Category:Arab-Jewish culture: this is a pretty recent category, and I wonder how it scope would overlap with already present Sephardi and Mizrahi categories. I notice that nowhere in the article, or in the organization's website, do they self-define themselves as "Arab Jews" or use a related term. Instead, the website has a large banner stating Preserve and protect the heritage of Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews, and use wording such as from Arab states and from Arab countries. I therefore think that this term is not defining for this organization and the category should not be there.
Category:Zionism in the United States and Category:Zionist organizations: Zionism is not mentioned once in the article.Au contraire, the introduction statement describes the organization as one (emphasis is mine) headquartered in California that is dedicated to the preservation of Mizrahi and Sephardi culture and history, and seeks to educate the public and advocate for Jewish refugees from the Middle East. From the Middle East to California seems the opposite of Zionism to me. And if you consider that every Jewish organization is a Zionist organization, I wonder why we would have two different category trees.

What do other editors think about the value of these categories in this article? Place Clichy (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]