Talk:Deception: Betraying the Peace Process

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!

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Palestine Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Israel Low‑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 articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-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.
Categorization : Diffuse articles from Category:Companies of Israel.
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.
- Merge Nahal Rafiah (draft, heb) into Nahal as requested by Wikipedia authority

Comments[edit]

Okay - tricky one this....some notes. Not really my forte but I'll give it a go....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

" PA systematically promoted an ethos of hatred...." is pretty emotive. I think I'd reword to something like "...concludes that the PA systematically used tactics such as glorifying terrorism and (-something about anti-israeli sentiment - ) to undermine the peace process and a two-state solution. " - it is better to let the facts speak for themselves

Need to add details of time - when was the book published and what year was the analysis over?

Any details of review by arab- or palestine-sympathetic reviewers who challenge or criticise the book for factual inaccuracy?

I'll see to incorporating your suggestions. As to critical reviews, I have not found any, though this might be a question of time. Ankh.Morpork 12:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The prose seems ok to me at first glance, but I admit I am possibly not the best at judging POV. I'll have a think and another look later. Interesting book.... Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:27, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the prose is fine. The article structure is also logical. The main problem, in my view, is that the subject of the article is a propaganda-book. As such, people sympathetic to PMW's anti-Palestinian cause will write about it, while those who are not will ignore it. That makes it very difficult to write a balanced and WP:NPOV compliant article. --Frederico1234 (talk) 14:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's the case, generally a variety of views are published where warranted. Have a look at The Case for Israel which recieved a lot of critical reception. Ankh.Morpork 15:31, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. But The Case for Israel was published by a major publisher, Wiley. This book appears to be published by PMW themself, making it a lot easier to ignore it.

On another note, the NY Times article seems to be quite balanced. I think the article can be made more WP:NPOVish if more content is taken from that source instead of the various op-eds. --Frederico1234 (talk) 15:46, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BOLD.Btw you made good work on 3D test..--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 17:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And yes, I might give it a shot. I just though Ankh might want to do it himself. --Frederico1234 (talk) 17:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated. I have re-examined the NYT article and it seems that much of the article is addressing the wider issue of media monitoring, and belong to an article like Media coverage of the Arab–Israeli conflict, e.g "the subject of incitement and media monitoring has become as contentious as some of the messages...", and not this book per se. Could you clarify which points that directly relate to this book, you would like included?

I have added to the article that critics of Marcus note that he lives in the West Bank though this too seems like individual criticism rather than criticism directed at the book he co-authored? Ankh.Morpork 22:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The NYT article is about the book but it also gives context. We should follow its example and give the reader the necessary context, as you did with when you explained that Marcus is a settler (although attribution is not required as the NYT article counts as WP:RS for statement of fact).

As for other parts from the NYT article suitable for inclusion:

"Some of the examples publicized by the Israeli monitoring group are old ones that have been repeated over the years, and some of its interpretations are arguable." (attributed to NYT, as it's more like an opinion rather than a fact).
The comment by Ghassan Khatib (attributed to him)
"That While Palestinian Media Watch acknowledges that there is less blatant incitement than in the past, with fewer direct calls for violence" (using own words, sourced to NYT but without attribution as it is a statement of fact and the NYT article is WP:RS). --Frederico1234 (talk) 20:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]