Jump to content

Talk:The Israel Project

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Deletions by anon claiming to be associated with organization.

[edit]

94.188.130.146 (talk · contribs) has been making substantial deletions from the article, with edit comments like "The text deleted was added by a person/group who tried to attack TIP on many occasions, using illegal methods sometimes. I am in charge of the web department at The Israel Project." These have been reverted by other editors. Some discussion on talk would be appropriate. --John Nagle (talk) 17:28, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added some additional references and fixed some of the reference templates. --John Nagle (talk) 17:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More blanking by anon claiming "I am the Web director at the Israel Project. Please stop accepting hate edits abour our group." IP is 84.228.211.216 (talk · contribs). The anon is complaining about material cited to sources including Newsweek, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, and J Street. --John Nagle (talk) 16:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Israel_Project. Thanks. --John Nagle (talk) 17:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism in the lede.

[edit]

I agree that RightWeb may not be a reliable source. J Street has also criticized The Israel Project. [1] J Street wants The Israel Project to "remove any pro-settlement, fear-mongering talking points from her organization’s materials."[2]. They're also not happy about The Israel Project's closeness to John Hagee. The New Jersey Jewish News has been critical of The Israel Project, or at least of its political tactics.[3] The writer there used to be the head lobbyist for AIPAC. What we need in the lede is a reliable source that places The Israel Project in the political spectrum. They're definitely harder-line than J Street, and may be harder-line than AIPAC. --John Nagle (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote on WP:COIN, I have to go offline for a few hours now, but yes, if we can get some decent criticism out of the JTA or some other source that would be great. Obviously, this group is in a fracas with other groups, so we should be able to put something reasonable and factual together without that much work. -- Avi (talk) 16:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notes about using TIP as a source

[edit]

Per WP:SELFPUB, we may use TIP for information about TIP. However, saying that "such-and-such" person is a big supporter or opponent of TIP is a statement about that person, not about TIP, so we need third-party, verifiable and reliable sources. In this regard, I believe neither TIP itself nor rightweb are acceptable, and I will be removing (or have removed) that information. We should be able to put together something reasonable with acceptable sources. -- Avi (talk) 23:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your start. I continued with a direct quote from J Street, and added many other changes, all cited to RS such as J Street, JTNews, Jewish Press, and Mother Jones plus the good sources we already had. I think the CN citation at the beginning can be removed - this is now a very well cited document - certainly better than most WP pages. Cheers, Jgui (talk) 05:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent work; the article is MUCH improved from the earlier mess. -- Avi (talk) 06:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the article is definitely much improved. As for the endorsements TIP publishes about itself, they seem to be real, but exaggerated by removal from context. Obama is presented by TIP as a TIP supporter, but more reliable sources indicate only that Obama, while a candidate, made a statement about stopping Iran from becoming a nuclear power, somehow connected with a petition that The Israel Project had been circulating to candidates.[4]. The only news source known to Google News that actually says Obama signed The Israel Project's petition is the Kansas City Info-Zine, and cites an Israel Project press release.[5]. --John Nagle (talk) 16:36, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV edits

[edit]

These edits by "BobWhitehall" are highly non-neutral, because they changed the article to a state where it now implies that what The Israel Project presents are objective facts. 31.18.251.194 (talk) 23:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed this diff, and found that all the information added was factually correct and sourced with reliable sources. Removed the tag now. -Shalom11111 (talk) 13:13, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, quotes are being used to such an extent that the article is vastly more about what TIP says about itself than how third parties describe TIP. Sepsis II (talk) 13:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sepsis, since you wrote "the ridiculous amount of quotes make this article more TIP than wikipedia, very far from neutral", could you please give specific examples of such quotes or any other issue? If not, say what should be done in order to improve the article, and to eventually get rid of that tag on top. -Shalom11111 (talk) 13:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the two worst quotes which were being used to sneak in POV statements when prose would be superior. Feel free to make changes to the text. Sepsis II (talk) 02:48, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, good edit. I removed the tag now, thanks. Shalom11111 (talk) 09:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Marty Pertez

[edit]

The sources used to criticize Marty Peretz do not mention TIP, at all. Including them here, and implying criticism of Peretz is criticism of TIP is very clearly original research , and 'guilt by association'. This contravenes Wikipedia policy and needs to be removed. Brad Dyer (talk) 22:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which policy? Haminoon (talk) 00:18, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SYN : "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources." You are takign material form one source (the TIP page that shows Peretz is a board member, combining it with material from other sources which criticize Peretz without mentioning TIP, to imply criticism of TIP by placing it in the TIP article under the "criticism" subsection. It really does not get any clearer than that. Brad Dyer (talk) 16:16, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit concerned here because the original reason given for deleting this material was "dead link".[6]. After I fixed the dead link using an Internet Archive link, the same material was deleted with the claim of "original research"[7]. That Marty Peretz is associated with The Israel Project is worth noting. Peretz was involved with The New Republic for decades, expressing strong positions on Israel issues. (The New Republic has recently been converted to a "digital media vertical" by the new owner, one of Facebook's founders.) There's a vast amount of material by and about Peretz. Some of the cited quotes for him being racist don't seem to back that up. (See this Prospect article: [8]. He's called a "neocon", "liberal", and "batshit-crazy", but not racist. The connection between Peretz and The Israel Project needs to be explored better. Edit warring is not productive. John Nagle (talk) 06:29, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need for "concern" - you just need to pay more attention. The material removed because it was sourced to a dead link is still in the article, after you provided a new link for it. That Marty Peretz is associated with The Israel Project maybe worth noting - in a section that describes current board members. It is unacceptable to take criticisms of Peretz unrelated to TIP, and use them here to imply criticisms of TIP. Brad Dyer (talk) 17:57, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duss

[edit]

Why is the opinion of M. Duss (who is he?), in an OpEd in the Forward, of importance to this article? Brad Dyer (talk) 18:16, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So we are not questioning the importance of the Forward? Good, because it was you who added Duss's name to the article. (see here) If you didn't know who he was why did you red-link his name? Regards, Haminoon (talk) 20:29, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I corrected false and misleading information that you had placed into the article, which made it seem as if the Forward had reported something. I clarified that it was a guest Op-Ed, by a relatively unknown contributor. Now that the article is at least accurate, I am questioning the importance and notability of this one line in a guest op-Ed by a non-notable commentator, in a relatively minor publication, to this article. Do you have an answer to the question? Why is the opinion of M. Duss (who is he?), in an OpEd in the Forward, of importance to this article? Brad Dyer (talk) 22:29, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't false. His opinion is important because it is in the Forward. Haminoon (talk) 23:06, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It was misleading. You implied the Forward had reported something, when in fact you were referencing an opinion written by a guest OpEd. I'm afraid simply being in print is not evidence of notability. If that was the standard, then anything written at any time, anywhere, mentioning TIP would be included in this article. If you have nothing else than "It is important because it is in an OpEd in the Forward, than I shall be removing this .Brad Dyer (talk) 23:12, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It also reflects a commonly-held view of TIP. We have already watered down the criticisms on this page, and I don't see any reason this should be removed. Haminoon (talk) 20:54, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
if this is a commonly held view of TIP, you should be able to provide several sources documenting this. The way Wikipedia works is not for me to provide reason for why it should be removed (though I have done this - it is WP:UNDUE), but for you to get consensus for inclusion of contested material, per WP:ONUS. Please edit in accordance with Wikipedia polices. Brad Dyer (talk)

[4] is a dead link; latest revision suspect

[edit]

The sentence stating that TIP maintains "an active peace program" was removed earlier today because the sole citation in evidence of the claim was a dead link ([4]). A few hours later, the sentence was restored, along with the footnote, and the same dead link, while two sentences were added - "TIP was the first Jewish or pro-Israel group to host Palestinian Prime Minister Fayyad in the United States. Their team regularly meets with Arab leaders and activists to try to encourage negotiations for peace and a better future for both sides" - for which no citation is provided, and which was possibly inserted by someone working for TIP and attempting to shore up its reputation as a proponent of an equitable peace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.66 (talk) 21:38, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A quick look at the page history proves your comment to be untrue. Nevertheless a dead link is not a reason to remove material - there are web archives and web references usually have a date of access. -- haminoon (talk) 10:16, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Israel Project. 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) 16:15, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Israel_Project&oldid=1213861158"