Talk:Isabel Kershner
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
kershner and rodirens bias
editin favor of israel is absolutely clear. the notion she was biased against Israel is prima facie absurd and comes from wholly unreaonable far right zionist types, the kind who patrol wikipedia to make sure it isn't "too honest"
What about one of these sources - do they work, or are they "not reliable" - the standard trick of hasbara wiki editors?
https://electronicintifada.net/tags/isabel-kershner
http://ifamericansknew.org/media/meet-nyt.html
The times sends only jewish reporters with deep ties to israel to cover israel/palestine - leads to bias, empirically found, e.g.
http://antiwar.com/blog/2014/02/06/the-truth-about-cease-fire-violations-between-israel-and-gaza/
This is empirical proof of bias.
Can these sources be used before any fleshing out is attempted, or are these sources "not reliable"?
38.97.64.130 (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)CMC83
Hi unnamed user 38.97.64.130.
Biography pages are complex, I agree.
I improved the article by referencing factual accusations of bias regarding this particular journalist. One's opinion about whether or not the accusations are valid - and the author is actually biased this way or that - is beyond the scope of wikipedia articles, because it is solely opinion. Please see WP:PROMOTION: "You might wish to start a blog or visit a forum if you want to convince people of the merits of your opinions."
Also, please refrain from personal attacks on the editor by insinuating that I "patrol wikipedia to make sure it isn't "too honest."" Instead, you can try focusing on the content, dealing with the facts (the existence of bias accusations), and staying objective, as per Wikipedia's Talk Page guidelines[1]
References
- ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines.
{{cite web}}: Missing or empty|title=(help)
Very surprising
editTo see veteran editors involved in such basic BLP violations with respect to RS. Happy to discuss further changes with editors here provided matters stay professional and are addressed in a fair and well-reasoned manner. Publius In The 21st Century (talk) 23:07, 27 November 2021 (UTC)