Talk:Itamar Ben-Gvir

Family status, children

That Ben-Gvir is married and has five children can be read here:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:LU9ECCFOHnwJ:www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.694601

Quote:

"Ben-Gvir is married to Ayala Nimrodi, and the couple has five children." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.141.1.162 (talk) 10:55, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

has six children

https://www.newyorker.com/ Faktenundvernunft (talk) 00:12, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Additional source for having six children https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/ben-gvirs-wife-yes-i-carry-a-gun-deal-with-it/ 2600:100A:B057:4286:0:9:9431:3001 (talk) 08:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

[1] Here's a quote 2600:100A:B057:4286:0:9:9431:3001 (talk) 08:50, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Here's a quote from the article 2600:100A:B057:4286:0:9:9431:3001 (talk) 08:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Personal life: 5 children

summary: 6 children

so how many kids does he have? 142.231.80.58 (talk) 11:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Added it in, as well as the citation. ShimonChai (talk) 11:21, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit request

The article mentions waqf. It should be piped like so: [[Jerusalem Islamic Waqf|Waqf]]. Zerach (talk) 05:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done ShimonChai (talk) 07:18, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Photo of Baruch Goldstein

The article currently says that "Ben-Gvir has a photo of Baruch Goldstein, ..., hanging in his home". However, I remember that Bibi convinced him, in preparation for the 2020 elections, to take it down. Note that the source given for this statement was from 2019, which means that it preceded Bibi's request. Animal lover 666 (talk) 11:07, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Itamar Ben-Gvir is a convicted terrorist. 2605:A601:AFF2:E400:3183:66BC:46F9:53C4 (talk) 08:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 July 2021

Add Category:Members of the 24th Knesset (2021–). Quacelinz3 (talk) 16:00, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

It has been added. David O. Johnson (talk) 22:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Location

According to the knesset website he lives in Kiryat Arba, not Hebron proper.

--2A00:23C7:C081:8000:898D:D78E:C5F3:6315 (talk) 22:29, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Why is it necessary to write that Hebron is illegal under international law; has absolutely nothing to do with his location and is a random politically motivated statement 185.182.71.29 (talk) 20:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Foiled assasination attempt by hamas

I think it should be mentioned that earlier this year (2022) shin bet arrested three Hamas operatives that planned on assasinating Ben Gvir. I think it should be added in to the article. Yakir-morris (talk) 05:24, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

wrong sources

"outlawed by the Israeli government.[4]" The source is NOT about the government outlawing Kach. BTW, it is the Supreme Court -- not the government -- that can outlaw parties -- is it not? 95.91.242.171 (talk) 08:54, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Name

Writing Itamar Ben-Gvir is inaccurate Itamar Ben Gvir would be better Multiverse Union (talk) 17:04, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Long article in Tablet magazine

Tablet (magazine) recently published an extended profile and discussion of Ben-Gvir here. It might be useful in this article. CWC 12:53, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Guys, be more neutral

It is true he is a radical and most probably racist. But as encyclopedia you shouldn't give him titles like "an extremist" and mention his criminal activity before his political one. He is a member of a parliament, a politician. His past with Rabin has to go to biography section. 2A10:8012:3:BD37:A8D1:98B1:D360:9241 (talk) 16:01, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

By any measure of the political spectrum he is an extremist - that is hardly controversial: maybe too polite. The tablet article listed above is a good read. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:41, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

This is what sources describe him as. Think Marjorie Taylor Greene, only 10x more evil.--SinoDevonian (talk) 15:15, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Is AOC an extremist? Should she be so described in Wikipedia? WBcoleman (talk) 00:46, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Please don’t try to relate American politics to the rest of the world, the diversity of contexts and cultures mean politics differs tremendously between states Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

AOC is a social democrat. Even in the US, that is not an "extremist" philosophy. Try again when she vocally espouses the anarchist theory of "propaganda of the deed" or runs for office as a Stalinist. Ianbrettcooper (talk) 17:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

As noted above, this article does not read as an unbiased source of information. Words like "extremist" carry a strong political bias and therefore hurt the article's neutrality. It should be enough to identify him as "far right", though that as well is a value judgement. In addition, the reference to the picture of Baruch Goldstein appears several times. Whereas it may be relevant to indicate the subject's political views, it is trivial and really only serves to colour the reader's opinion, rather than giving a neutral overview of Mr. Ben Gvir's background. ZhangYanYang (talk) 08:57, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree a brief summary of his political career should be immediately after the info box, although it’s hard to blame editors for being biased against fascists Alexanderkowal (talk) 11:29, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Update

Ben-Gvir has been announced as the new Minister of National Security - which according to this article sounds like a blending of several offices.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/25/far-right-extremist-itamar-ben-gvir-to-be-israel-national-security-minister Marleeashton (talk) 10:40, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

The exact same section

is in the lede and then repeated again, word-for-word in the "Controversy" section. This is clearly redundant but I am reluctant, being new here, to make a change. If I do it will be to remove it from the lede. Carptrash (talk) 16:34, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Kach

Barely anyone knows what Kahanism is, therefore I specified that it is a religious Zionist movement, a clearer description. Makeandtoss (talk) 20:02, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Update

Don’t lock the page and then not update it Helpfulguy101 (talk) 16:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Discussions on Itmar Gvir

This Wikipedia content about Itmar Gvir was both biased and Anti-Semitic. Who is the terrorist or who is the Revolutionary? It depends on your point of view but multiple viewpoints are not discussed here just person attacks on MK Itmar Gvir. 71.191.192.116 (talk) 23:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

This is not an encyclopedia entry. This is a dog bark. Adolf Hitler is described in better terms. Shame on Wikipedia. And I know it will not be corrected, not for better anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:6302:BACA:B91E:4A0:7C16:A49A (talk) 05:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Updating

It's not clear what https://www.timesofisrael.com/surprise-arab-town-doesnt-love-anti-arab-party/ in the lede's paragraph starting "Under his leadership" is supporting but it's likely there's one which has more relevant content.

The first paragraph of the Early life section includes "and then joined the youth movement of the even more radical Kach and Kahane Chai party" as if it's referring to the youth movement of one party. What was the youth movement's name.

In the paragraph relating to the 2022 election "... Ben-Gvir and his party are expected to be an integral part of a Netanyahu-led government. It was reported in late November 2022 that Ben-Gvir would head the newly created National Security Ministry, whose duties would include overseeing the Israel Border Police in the West Bank." needs updating. Mcljlm (talk) 01:54, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

"Ben Gvir's lawsuit against his father's caregiver"

a) Stating he "counter-suited" could be more appropriate (since the caregiver sued first).

b) According to Haaretz, while litigation was ongoing, he proposed a legislation change that could have retroactively affected his case. https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/law/2023-07-09/ty-article/.premium/00000189-3925-d145-a1e9-3b7784af0000 2A06:C701:496D:8800:E5AD:2C75:C2C3:21 (talk) 00:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

You're right Hanay (talk) 04:49, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Mistake in Article

"In the 2022 Israeli legislative election, Ben-Gvir's party had an unprecedented success, more than doubling its votes from the 2022 Israeli legislative election, thus becoming the 3rd largest party in the 25th Knesset."

The second election mentioned should be a link to the 2021 election, and text should be edited to reflect that. 129.120.67.51 (talk) 00:46, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Ancestry

His father was not born in Jerusalem, but in Kurdistan in Iraq: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2016-01-04/ty-article/.premium/jewish-terrorisms-star-lawyer/0000017f-eda1-da6f-a77f-fdaff1f00000

In fact, this very same source, which is not referenced in the article, is that which provides the fact that his father 'worked at a gasoline company and dabbled in writing'. So the editor has failed to provide referencing for that quoted line while simultaneously not realising the error in the preceding sentence in the Wikipedia article that the source of the quoted line makes apparent. The error needs to be corrected and the missing reference also added. N4m645n66jhkb (talk) 06:12, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Categories

@Iskandar323: Category:Otzma Yehudit politicians is already under Category:Israeli far-right politicians and Category:Israeli Kahanists. There is no need to include the latter two categories when the first one covers them. CJ-Moki (talk) 06:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@CJ-Moki: Ah, I understand. I've removed the duplicative cats again. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:14, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: Thank you for the quick reply and self-rv. CJ-Moki (talk) 06:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 November 2023

Change children 5 to children 6[2] N242h289 (talk) 07:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done Lewcm Talk to me! 23:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

defending Jewish terrorists

Suthasianhistorian8 the material you are removing is not, despite your claim, calling an identified person a terrorist. It is saying that he has defended people suspected of acts of terror. And thats what the source says, "His client list reads like a “Who’s Who” of suspects in Jewish terror cases and hate crimes in Israel." nableezy - 18:57, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. We don't use the word "terrorist" regardless of whether the individual is notable/identified or not in or even if sources call them a terrorist, in Wikivoice - we use in text attribution, from what I understand, to countries or prominent intergovernmental organizations. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:15, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Nonsense, we call acts of terror acts of terror all the time. Theres a whole list of them. Kach was banned as a terrorist group in Israel, the charge against Ben-Gvir was support of a terror group. Your change misrepresented the facts and the sources, and it will be reverted. nableezy - 19:20, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Let's just simplify this and ask an uninvolved admin to determine whether or not the previous version contravened MOS:TERRORIST. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:23, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

We call acts of terror acts of terror, but we don't identify individuals or organizations as terrorist in Wikivoice. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 19:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

We identify correctly the charges against a person, and that was support for a terrorist organization. nableezy - 19:29, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

• Third opinion: Agree with nableezy, as per "Theres a whole list of them. Kach was banned as a terrorist group in Israel, the charge against Ben-Gvir was support of a terror group." IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

  @IOHANNVSVERVS Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say something along the lines of "Kach, an organization designated as a terrorist group by Israel" as it would include attribution. Also what about the line at the end of the lede saying As a lawyer, he is known for defending Jewish terrorists on trial in Israel.? In my opinion, that is beyond the pale and excessively acerbic, since it doesn't include attribution and not even notorious militants like Osama Bin Laden and Abu Bakr al Baghadi are called terrorists in such a straightforward manner in Wikipedia. 01:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC) Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

  You have some good points here and there is always room for improvement. But the text "As a lawyer, he is known for defending Jewish terrorists on trial in Israel." is not even close to being "beyond the pale and excessively acerbic". IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 05:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

mistake in year number - should be 2024, not 2023

• What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}):

In the section "Political career", second-last paragraph, it states 'On 1 January 2023, Ben-Gvir said that the war with Hamas presented an "opportunity to concentrate on encouraging the migration of the residents of Gaza."' - this should say 2024, not 2023, as is clear from the already-existing reference.

• Why it should be changed:

Obvious mistake.

• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Reference already behind the sentence I'm requesting to be changed.

Steffens123 (talk) 04:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

References

 Done ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:56, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

This reads as extremely biased.

I have no interest in israeli politics, but try to be objective. read yasser arafat’s article in comparison. 174.238.164.76 (talk) 22:06, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. I can't take this article seriously because of how overtly biased it is.  2600:1702:1D90:1420:6537:C57F:9DFA:4FDB (talk) 21:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Reads like a reverse conservopedia article lol ShaiGoldman18 (talk) 13:44, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Broad complaints of bias aren't really actionable, if there are specific passages you object to then you can name them. Try to understand that just because you may not like the portrayal doesn't mean it's unfairly biased, as the article is meant and appears to be an accurate reflection of this person's coverage in reliable sources. XeCyranium (talk) 05:16, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

How is it biased? I think it reads fine. Which phrasing would you change? Maybe the first sentence after the info box? I can’t see anything else. Alexanderkowal (talk) 16:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Lede: His living room

I'm not sure this:

was known to have a portrait in his living room of Israeli-American mass murderer and Jewish extremist Baruch Goldstein, who massacred 29 Palestinian Muslim worshipers and wounded 125 others in Hebron, in the 1994 Cave of the Patriarchs massacre. He removed the portrait after he entered politics.

belongs in the lede. Although it gives considerable insight into his character. It should be moved to main content.

Having said that it should be neutrally explained that he is very controversial and seems to hold fringe views. The opening salvo of this profile article, written about him well before the current crisis, describes him as "a dangerous lunatic" and suggests he is insane.

My impression is that Tablet Magazine is generally considered reliable (see: [3] & [4])

Just collecting sources: [5] [6] [7] [8]

--Jabbi (talk) 13:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned in my edit summary, most RS talking about him mention the Baruch photograph. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss:, the fact that some RS mention this about the subject does not mean it should be in the lead. If you look at WP:LEAD (not being pedantic, I just don't know how informed you are): "The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies." I'm not sure the fact that he had this profile in his living room falls under any of this. Can you elaborate on WHY this specific fact should be included in the lead? It is not apparent in and of itself in my view. --Jabbi (talk) 12:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

It is certainly a prominent controversy that was widely reported on by RS. [9], [10], [11], [12], [13] Makeandtoss (talk) 13:09, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I would disagree that it is a prominent controversy. This seems to be an unpleasant anecdotal fact. It is not apparent that this had a significant impact in Israeli politics. However, I am not opposed to this being in the lede, based on the fact that it is supported by reliable sources, as you helpfully point out. It is however, not trivial to explain why it is important in introducing this individual, to note that he's chosen to display a portrait of a religious fanatic and mass murderer in his living room in the past or why he brandished Yitshak Rabin's Cadillac hood ornament. --Jabbi (talk) 23:19, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Last elections (2022)

"In the 2022 Israeli legislative election, Ben-Gvir's party had an unprecedented success, more than doubling its votes from the last legislative election, thus becoming the 3rd largest party in the 25th Knesset."

Ahhahh. No apparently this was a joint list with Smotrich's nutter party and Noam, resulting in a totality of 14 votes, split so that Otzma received 6 seats. Clearly, Otzma was not the 3rd largest party. --Jabbi (talk) 00:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 May 2024

216.71.204.241 (talk) 05:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

This page is overly biased. Not comprehensive at all. Hate him or not you clearly have an agenda. Most of wikipedia is biased now. Nothing on the Hamas terrorist pages that immediatly identifies them as being antisemetic or having radiacal ideaology... like advocating decapitation. this is simply a message to the editor. You are a scumbag and your bordering antisemitism with your onside take on this. Wrong side of history pal 🖕

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.

Please also refrain from making personal attacks. Jamedeus (talk) 05:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Requested Edit--- Photo - Cadillac hood ornament from Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's car

Please add this photo to -- Early life section

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GLY15iVW0AEteEf?format=png&name=small

In 1995, Ben-Gvir appeared on television brandishing a Cadillac hood ornament that had been stolen from Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's car, and declared: "We got to his car, and we'll get to him too." Several weeks later, Rabin was assassinated by right-wing extremist Yigal Amir 2601:243:820:2F5E:D447:D70E:206F:4AF2 (talk) 17:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: that's an unsourced image. Feel free to upload a sourced on to WP:COMMONS before opening the request again. M.Bitton (talk) 19:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Please add this photo to end of -- Early life section

https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2022/07/bengvir-400x250-1.jpeg

Itamar Ben Gvir seen holding up an ornament from prime minister Yitzhak Rabin’s car, in an October 1995 interview.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/i-made-mistakes-ben-gvir-tells-high-court-hes-refined-since-entering-politics/ 2601:243:820:2F5E:D447:D70E:206F:4AF2 (talk) 21:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: I don't see evidence that the image meets the image use criteria. It does not appear to be freely licensed and likely does not qualify for fair use considering there are multiple images of the subject already. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:03, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I suggest clarifying that Otzma Yehudit is literally "Jewish Power" in the intro.

"He is the leader of Otzma Yehudit, a Kahanist and anti-Arab party that won six seats in the 2022 Israeli legislative election, and is part of what has been called the most right-wing government in Israel's history."

Writing that clarification is important because people might otherwise miss the similarities with other far-right racist movement due to language barriers. Omar Jabarin (talk) 10:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Do you mean to say that the English translation emphasises the far-right nature of the party whereas Otzma Yehudit, has no meaning to English speakers? --Jabbi (talk) 13:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Otzma Yehudit has no meaning to English speakers. While the literal translation "Jewish Power" conveys much more information. That's why I suggest adding the translation in the intro. Omar Jabarin (talk) 11:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (political parties) it makes sense to use the name Otzma Yehudit because its English translation is "rarely used even in the English-language media, either inside or outside the country." --Jabbi (talk) 11:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Middle paragraph ambigious

Apologies if this repeats earlier discussion (see: earlier discussion here). Currently paragraphs 2 and 3 in the lead read like so.

Ben-Gvir, who is a settler in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, has called for the expulsion of Arab citizens of Israel who are not loyal to Israel and has been convicted of hate speech against Arabs. He is "widely known for his openly racist, anti-Arab views and activities". Ben-Gvir was also convicted of supporting Kach, classified by Israel as a terrorist group, which espoused Kahanism, an anti-Arab and religious Zionist ideology. In the 1990s, he protested against the Oslo Accords and was seen brandishing a Cadillac hood ornament stolen from the car of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was later assassinated. Ben-Gvir was known to have a portrait in his living room of Baruch Goldstein, a Jewish extremist and Israeli-American mass murderer who massacred 29 Palestinian Muslim worshipers and wounded 125 others in the 1994 Cave of the Patriarchs massacre in Hebron. He removed the portrait after he entered politics. In 2007, Ben-Gvir was found guilty in an Israeli court of inciting support for a racist terrorist organization.

Ben-Gvir had been long accused of being a provocateur, having led several contentious marches to the Temple Mount as an activist and member of Knesset, through Jerusalem's Old City Muslim Quarter, and set up an office in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood which witnessed several evictions of Palestinians. On 3 January 2023, he visited the Temple Mount where the al-Aqsa Mosque is located, spurring an international wave of criticism that labelled his visit purposely provocative. As a lawyer, he is known for defending Jews accused of terrorism on trial in Israel. In 2024, he was the subject of a foiled assassination plot by seven Arab citizens of Israel and four Palestinians from the West Bank.

I find a couple of things problematic:

• the references to the portrait that hung in his living room and the fact that he appeared on public television brandishing a car hood ornament are relevant but their inclusion in the lead are not justified as things stand, the context is not given. Answers to the questions: why was it important in Ben-Gvir's life that he had a portrait of Goldstein in his home or why was it important that he appeared in public television with Rabin's hood ornament are not clear. I think the reason is that, although these are very interesting factoids, they don't have much significance
• he has a long record of convictions and this is not summarised clearly, the 3rd and the last sentence reference the same conviction.

I therefore want to rework the middle paragraphs and propose the following as a starting point. Pinging @Makeandtoss:

Ben-Gvir is a settler in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, whose "political background lies in Kahanism - a violently racist movement that supports the expulsion of Palestinians from their lands". He has a long history of anti-Arab, pro-Israeli activism leading to dozens of indictments and at least eight convictions of crimes including incitement to racism, possession of propaganda for a terrorist organization (the now illegal political party Kach) and support for a terrorist organisation (also Kach). As a lawyer, he is known for defending Jews accused of Jewish extremist terrorism on trial in Israel.

Ben-Gvir is known for being a provocateur and has grabbed headlines for a variety of reasons; threatening Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin on live television in 1995 (Rabin was assassinated shortly after that), having had a portrait in his living room of Baruch Goldstein, a Jewish extremist terrorist and mass murderer, calling for for the expulsion of Arab citizens of Israel who are not loyal to Israel in 2019, inciting violent clashes between Jewish settlers and Palestinians in the East Jerusalem neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah in 2021 and for visiting the Temple Mount where the al-Aqsa Mosque is located, spurring an international wave of criticism in January 2023.

--Jabbi (talk) 12:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC) Jabbi (talk) 12:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

@Jabbi: I find this reasonable but I would still insist on the mention of Baruch's portrait, which features almost in every RS reporting about him. I think it is a fair compromise to add that mention to your well-written proposed text. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

References

Description of family home

@Nonstopdrivel, with this edit you corrected the number of children Ben-Gvir has, but I cannot see how this description of where the family lives: ", which is illegal under international law, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank" is anything but factual. Should Ben-Gvir be an Indian national and his family live on the Pakistani side of the current Line of Control, that would be noteworthy.

If you do not reply here I will proceed to revert your edit and keep the information about the number of children he has. --Jabbi (talk) 14:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

I can completely understand such verbiage in a discussion of the legality of the settlements; and indeed, there is an entire article devoted to the topic. Regardless of the factuality of the statement, I don’t see how it can possibly be considered NPOV in this context. It is clearly placed there to bias the reader against the subject. Is such verbiage placed in every article on people who live in the settlements?

I have no dog in this fight. I’m neither pro- nor anti-Israel, and I have no Zionist or anti-Zionist leanings. But if I saw such verbiage in an article on someone not related to the Israel-Palestine controversy, I would immediately flag it as NPOV too.

The only NPOV solution I can see is to simply link to the article on the settlements and let the reader decide. Nonstopdrivel (talk) 13:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I have to disagree, living in illegal settlements is a very controversial thing, highlighted by increased media coverage and punitive actions by various countries around the world in response to the current government's policy on settlements which Ben-Gvir is part of.

These settlements are illegal under international law and that is noteworthy and unusual - I do not know of any comparable situation in the world. Indicating this fact cannot be non-NPOV. Please explain in what way mentioning it can bias the reader? How can being informed of and unusual and noteworthy fact about something bias someone? In Israel living in an illegal settlement is a political statement, note for instance that in the article about Avigdor Lieberman he is quoted on being ready to move away from his settlement in return for peace. There is a category of Israeli settlers and checking a few random articles, I could not find other examples of it being noted that the settlements were illegal except for the article on Bezalel Smotrich. However, I do not think that invalidates the points I've raised and so I am opposed to removing the reference to the settlements being illegal. I would even argue the opposite, that not mentioning that they are illegal is biased. --Jabbi (talk) 14:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)