Talk:Michael Oren

Criticisms

I don't know if those criticisms are notable or relevant, but I separated them from his biographical details. —Quiddity 04:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Citizenship/Possible Treason to the USA

I think that the fact that Oren, born a citizen of the USA and now an officer and propagandist for a foreign military should be highlighted. Is he still an American citizen? I don't get it, is he an Israeli who just happened to be born in the USA or an American who later on got the Israeli citizenship for the simple fact that he is a Zionist Jew to fight off the Christian and Muslim Palestinians? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.133.15 (talk) 16:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

What's the difference between him and, say, Adam Gadahn or Tokyo Rose? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.211.190.176 (talk) 13:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

Moving house to a new country is not inherently an act of treason. Also, you might like to read through Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons before commenting further. Thanks. --Quiddity 04:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I have little faith in the veracity of Oren's remarks or writings based on an opinion piece he wrote for the Wall Street Journal 12/16/06. He claimed that America has always supported Israel since the time of the Pilgrims who recognized the Jews right to Zion. A bit of a stretch, but when he went into how much Harry Truman supported Israel without mentioning the agony Truman went through before agreeing to the establishment of Israel, he, Oren, presented a very distorted story. Truman's former haberdashery partner, a Jew, gained, access to Truman for Chaim Weizman. In a letter to Eleanor Roosevelt, Truman said something to the effect that he feared that the Jews like all oppressed people when given the chance would become the oppressors. ("Truman", David McCullough) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by rnau, made original comment 3/01/07, added WSJ date 3/02/07. rnau168.103.232.234 (talk)

I certainly would not call Oren a traitor, he is a historian, not a "propagandist." However, I believe that serving in a foreign military is automatic forfeiture of American citizenship, and it explicity states that on American passports. Amssports06 14:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

No, serving in a foreign military CAN lead to forfeiture of your citizenship, but it is certainly not automatic. Think of all the Americans who volunteered to fight in the Spanish Civil War, WW1 and WWII before the US entered - many are now regarded as American heroes. Further, although I did not read the WSJ piece, what Oren says in Power, Faith and Fantasy is very different from what you are claiming he says. He doesn't say that American supported the Jews right to Zion starting with the Pilgrims - he describes the restorationist movement which was prevalent in American society in the 19th century and aimed to bring Jews back to Palestine because thats what they believed their religion required. They also hoped to covert these Jews to Christianity. The stuff about Truman's doubts about Israel and the meeting his friend insisted that he take is in the book. GabrielF 19:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

In an interview on NPR's All Things Considered on Tuesday 18 August, Oren declared that he has renounced his American citizenship. Bangpound (talk) 21:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Oren did not lose US citizenship over his Israeli Army service. Until recently, he was a dual US-Israel citizen. However he had to renounce his US citizenship when he was appointed Israel's ambassador to the US.BorisG (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

2008/09 Gaza

a few days ago CNN broadcasted a live interview with oren in a battle dress ready to fight with the ZAHAL in gaza as a reservist. he said he feels "privileged" to serve this army and also that he was chosen as a kind of military spokesperson for western media. maybe someone has another source, as i'm not sure whether a tv broadcast (from which i don't remember the exact title and date) is a recognised source for wikipedia.--Severino (talk) 13:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Citations are need for a proper wikipedia article.

I am unsure how most of this article's content came about. There are almost no citations in the bulk of the text. Almost every citation is to a book review in the section about his books. How do we know any of these statements about his life, IDF service and his current affiliations are true? All of the biographical details in this article need to be sourced for this to follow Wikipedia's proper format and high standards. --John Bahrain (talk) 14:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Criticism

The Israel apologetics are having a field day editing this page, so let's make one thing perfectly clear: academic, published criticism should always be noted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shoplifter (talk • contribs) 11:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

First of all, please abide by WP:Assume good faith and WP:No personal attacks. The issue with Finkelstein's criticism is that it is not simply criticism of the book, it also entails a personal attack, labeling Oren as a vulgar propagandist, which violates the strict conditions of WP:BLP. ShamWow (talk) 19:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Really? I distinctly recall someone commenting on Joseph Goebbels' page that it was written by an enemy of the man who included ONLY information to give a very distorted, very negative information about the man. I remember the Jewish editor of the page saying quite openly that wikipedia does NOT require that the coverage of a man be balanced, but that since the almost conventional opinion of Goebbels is that he is in fact an evil man, such a biased portrayal of him was permissible. In other words, even if there was sourced, undisputed information about him that might help balance the portrayal of him as a "vile propagandist", excluding such information to maintain a factually skewed portrayal of him did not violate wikipedia "standards". I make these comments not to imply that Oren was Goebbels, though like Salman Rushdie and Ellie Wiesel, they are really Zionist war mongers in sheep's (well, in Oren's case, wolf's) clothing, but to point out the absurdity of removing Finkelstein's comments because he believes Oren is a vile propagandist. If that is the standard, then only the opinions of those commenters who do not have a p[oor opinion of the subject should be allowed. I see a very clear double standard employed repeatedly by wikipedia on issues peripherally related to Israel or Jews in general, even when the information being excluded comes from other non-warmonger Jews like Norman Finkelstein. It does a tremendous disservice to the legitimacy of wikipedia.

Dear author of the unsigned paragraph above: Your analogy, apart from the fact that it is prepostorous, is wrong on three counts: 1) Finkelstein's words are not (only) criticism but an insult. Criticism of Oren is welcome in the article, but not insults. This is against WP:BLP. Note that Oren is a living person. 2) Finkelstein's is not a vast majority's view by any means. 3) The example of Goebbels is indeed extreme and, to me, demonstrates that an exception can be made when the view expressed is nearly universal. But even then, in my view, it is better to avoid words like 'evil', as these words just don't carry much information and do not really belong in an encyclopedia. When Finkelstein uses the word 'vulgar', he is not using academic language, is he?BorisG (talk) 17:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe it is incorrect to call Israel's invasion into Lebanon in 2006 as the Israeli-Lebanese conflict. It was a one-sided genocide, with Israel's aerial bombardments wantonly destroying Lebanon's civil infrastructure. The same could be said for Israel's killings in Gaza. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.223.139.182 (talk) 20:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Stupid idiot, you are obviously too much of a moron to understand what the term genocide is. Go jump off a cliff along with the rest of your Communazi friends. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.185.237.37 (talk) 01:41, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Why can't Finkelstein be noted? Noting it is not agreeing with it. So what if his view represents a tiny minority (I of course can't help thinking of world Jewry here - a tiny minority, who should presumably be ignored?), or "2) Finkelstein's is not a vast majority's view by any means." (who said it was, and why would it matter anyway?) - 124.191.144.183 (talk) 14:46, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

He then forfeited his United States' citizenship in order to accept the post.

Where is the source to support this? Wikifan12345 (talk) 23:32, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Book reviews

User:Avaya1 deleted a comment from a book review and wrote, "book reviews and summaries are hardly encyclopedic content."

WP:RS WP:BIASED says, "Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject."

WP:RS WP:NEWSORG says, "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact.... The opinions of specialists and recognized experts are more likely to be reliable and to reflect a significant viewpoint.... If the statement is not authoritative, attribute the opinion to the author in the text of the article and do not represent it as fact. Reviews for books, movies, art, etc. can be opinion, summary or scholarly pieces."

It sounds like book reviews are specifically included in WP:RS. Can anyone give me a reason why book reviews are not encyclopedic content? --Nbauman (talk) 17:00, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

We have mentioned the book review in this article. But there is no reason to extract quotes from various book reviews. This book has already dozens and dozens of book reviews released, which has been mentioned in the text - it will be inherently POV to cherry pick which particular book reviews to extract quotes from, and if you want to quote from them all it will clutter up the article with non-encyclopedic content. If people wish to read book reviews, they are available online - but I don't see that a biography on Wikipedia should function as a review-aggregator. The point of the article is to give people the facts on the person in question. Avaya1 (talk) 21:12, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by "non-encyclopedic content." Why is a book review non-encyclopedic content?" Why can't we summarize viewpoints from a book review, just as we would summarize viewpoints from any other WP:RS? --Nbauman (talk) 17:20, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Book reviews are the subjective opinion of the reviewer. Now you might think that the reception of a book by reviewers is a notable fact for an author, but there are likely over 50 or so reviews of this book now out. Who would decide which of those book reviews to quote from (it is inherently POV), or will you try to aggregate all the reviews released? The result of aggregating reviews would be non-encyclopedic, unless you think the function of an encyclopedia is to function as a review aggregator like Rotten Tomatoes. We have already noted that the reception included positive and negative views, and that the author has noted that the reception is controversial. Avaya1 (talk) 20:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

As I cited above, WP:RS WP:BIASED and WP:NEWSORG say that we can and must include non-neutral, subjective, WP:POV opinions, including book reviews. So there is no debate that book reviews belong in Wikipedia.

Every Wikipedia article, including this one, requires deciding (selecting) what WP:RS to include or not to include. You and other editors have already decided which sources to include. You and other editors have included sources from the Jerusalem Post, Ha'aretz, New York Times, etc. That's who decides -- you and other editors.

If it doesn't violate WP guidelines for you and others to select those sources, why does it violate WP guidelines for different editors to select book reviews?--Nbauman (talk) 22:10, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Book reviews are subjective opinions. They might be used to cite facts, or if the opinion of the person or the reception of the work is considered particularly notable. But the subjective opinions of book reviewers are generally not encyclopedic content, and when a book has dozens of reviews, choosing what to quote is inherently POV (unless the reviewer is particularly notable according to some objective criteria, or you want to aggregate all the reviews).Avaya1 (talk) 12:43, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

As I said above, it seems to me from the text I quoted in WP:RS WP:BIASED and WP:NEWSORG that non-neutral, biased sources, including opinionated book reviews, are WP:RS. Do we agree that opinionated book reviews can be WP:RS? --Nbauman (talk) 20:45, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Michael Oren. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090930084259/http://www.haaretz.com:80/hasen/spages/1117342.html to http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1117342.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:34, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Michael Oren. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120308153724/http://israelemb.org:80/index.php/en/latest-news/629-commemoration-of-prime-minister-rabins-zql-90th-birthday to http://www.israelemb.org/index.php/en/latest-news/629-commemoration-of-prime-minister-rabins-zql-90th-birthday

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:48, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Personal life

User:James swimmer has been making unsourced claims that Oren divorced in 2017 [1], and removing the sourced material about his wife [2]. I have not been able to verify the claimed divorce, but even it that were correct I see no reason to remove all of the information about his wife of 35 years. Meters (talk) 23:17, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

And now User:Michaelscottoren , who claims to be the subject of the article, is making the identical edits. Can anyone verify the divorce? Meters (talk) 22:22, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The user first claimed that the 2017 divorce could be sourced to "Hebrew language issue of Haaretz Newspaper dated 1.20.17" but actually used a source from a 2015 English story [3]. Searching the English website for January does not show any mention of Michael Oren's divorce Then stated that it happened on January 12, 2017 and could be confirmed as "published in Maariv hebrew newspaper" [4] but with no source or even date for the publication. The webpage for Maariv is http://www.maariv.co.il/ Searching on "Michael Oren" does not find a link, but then, I don't read Hebrew so it's quite possible a native reader/writer would be able to find it. Meters (talk) 23:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Section on graduate education begins with the line "a few years later." That phrase refers to his migrating to Israel, but it follows a line about renouncing US citizenship, which happened long after. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex.c.park (talk • contribs) 06:10, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Michael Oren. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1167467760830
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1256037264837&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
• Added archive https://archive.is/20121214205305/http://www.monmouth.edu/newsdisplay.aspx?id=17404 to http://www.monmouth.edu/newsdisplay.aspx?id=17404
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141216174929/http://blogs.yu.edu/news/2010/06/01/israels-ambassador-to-the-u-s-michael-b-oren-advises-yeshiva-university-graduates-and-community-to-stand-with-israel/ to http://blogs.yu.edu/news/2010/06/01/israels-ambassador-to-the-u-s-michael-b-oren-advises-yeshiva-university-graduates-and-community-to-stand-with-israel/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714174851/http://mobile.newsweek.com/detail.jsp?key=6752&rc=top&p=1&pv=1 to http://mobile.newsweek.com/detail.jsp?key=6752&rc=top&p=1&pv=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070403104942/http://www.wweek.com/editorial/3314/8560/ to http://www.wweek.com/editorial/3314/8560/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080829003733/http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/17390 to http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/17390

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) 19:50, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Oren. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20161228201001/http://explore.georgetown.edu/news/?ID=31583 to http://explore.georgetown.edu/news/?ID=31583

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) 07:12, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Recent edit

Preserving here by providing this link; my rationale was: "this does not really belong under "Writing" and has been rejected from two articles". Please let me know if there are any concerns. --K.e.coffman (talk) 22:30, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

This has not been "rejected" - there is currently a lack of consensus in two other articles (which will probably end up eventually in a RfC) - mainly as to whether Oren's comments are DUE (or even FRINGE) for those articles. This is not a concern for Oren - as Oren's statements are definitely not FRINGE or UNDUE in his own article. The writing section also contains speeches - though we could move this to his Knesset career.Icewhiz (talk) 06:56, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

On a further note, I added this significant statement and inquiry to this article on Revision as of 08:45, 28 January 2018 after an editor, who was in favor of rejecting the text in another article, said on Revision as of 17:02, 27 January 2018 that

“ This content may be suitable for Oren's page but not here -- especially as written: ..... Given that the source seems to be Oren, add it to his bio. ”

I was merely following orders, and I'm more than a little perplexed regarding policy grounds for removing an statement and activity (inquiry) from Oren's own bio that received quite a bit of significant attention when arguments in other articles were on an UNDUE/FRINGE line which would seem inapplicable to Oren's own bio.Icewhiz (talk) 11:27, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't give orders to anyone :-), and, in any case, thinking on the matter has since evolved. There was a statement by Oren, followed by a brief news cycle. Oren's statement was rightly dismissed as a "conspiracy theory" (see Haaretz, for example). I don't think it belongs in his bio either. Wikipedia is not a newspaper and does not need to follow each and every news cycle. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

You wrote in the imperative, to which I complied. Oren's claims were dismissed in opinion style coverage in partisan sources (and Haaretz is highly partisan in this regard). It was not dismissed by sources who are not favorable to Tamimi. Regardless of the merits of the claim - this is probably the most widely covered activity Oren did in the past year or so.Icewhiz (talk) 05:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

One must also note, that this is getting significant WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE - e.g. in ABCNPRwapojpost from the past week (and several more - I just picked off stuff from the first page of results). I suppose one could open an article on Michael Oren's comments on Ahed Tamimi (or on the Knesset inquiry) seeing that these pass WP:GNG/WP:NEVENT by them shelf.Icewhiz (talk) 12:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Consensus

There's currently a lack of consensus for the inclusion of this material. Several editors have objected, at this article and on related pages. I'm preserving it here by providing this link.

Since the Talk page discussion has not led to a consensus, discussing at WP:NPOVN or WP:BLPN may be a good idea. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Some sort of policy based objection to inclusion, in light of the continued and wide coverage of this, would be in order. Beyond attacking the BLP above, your rationale was WP:NOTNEWS in relation to a brief newscycle - merits of such an argument aside - these comments (and similar comments - as he has spoken to a number of outlets independently) - have been demonstrated above to persist for multiple news cycles. I suppose we will have to go the NPOV/n or RfC route - despite the rather clear expected results.Icewhiz (talk) 05:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Scope of Coverage

He initially made some comments in December 2017 immediately when this broke a tweet, which was then covered sparodically for the next month by various outlets both in news and in opinion pieces, He was also interviewed on BBC radio (pain to locate transcript - there is reporting on the interview). Not that this is scant coverage, however what really got the ball rolling are comments on a parliamentary inquiry he made initially (on 23 January) to an Israeli newspaper, in Hebrew, Maariv. They were repeated in a number of other outlets in Hebrew - . Haaretz the next day, 25 Jan, ran a full feature rebuttal of the Tamimi family asserting that they are real. Haaretz (which vies with JPost for being the Israeli newspaper of record in English) then translated both pieces to English. This was also translated by other Israeli outlets, This was also picked up by AP, and oddly picked up by the Israeli YNET and Israel Hayom (someone was asleep the day before?) from the English AP wire. The English translations and the AP write was then repeated by a whole raft of other outlets, including first-line international ones, often attributed back to Haaretz. This was then discussed in in-depth pieces about Oren himself, Opinion pieces against Oren by highly liberal and/or pro-Palestinian writers (some in non-RS, however the opinion is attributable, others in significant outlets), including a J Street release against him (I'd guess he's more of an American Israel Public Affairs Committee kinda fella). coverage around Tamim's trial on 13 Feburary, other coverage of Tamimi related events, Independent re-interviews with Oren in Tamimi profiles. In which NPR says in its own voice: "ESTRIN: In 2015, Oren led a classified parliamentary inquiry to investigate whether the Tamimis were a real family and not actors dressed in Western clothing, provoking soldiers on camera. He acknowledges the inquiry found no proof. The Tamimis are a prominent family in the area. Now Israel faces another dilemma. Her arrest has given her even more international attention." And there is quite a bit more of this - Particularly in spurts (e.g. around 24-26 Jan, 29 Jan, 13 Feb due to this being in related / copied coverage) - I did not type in all of what is available - if I had more time we could push this into the hundreds.

References

NPOVN

The discussion at NPOVN is still on-going. I suggest holding off on reverts until it concludes:

• Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Michael_Oren_on_the_Tamimi_family

K.e.coffman (talk) 23:28, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Update external link

External link to his official site should go to https://michaeloren.org/ not https://michaeloren.com/ which redirects to spam site 2600:1700:99C0:247F:2D0B:220C:2888:EEE1 (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)