Wikipedia

Talk:Zionist Freedom Alliance

Latest comment: 8 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified


This is the same nonsense as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yehuda_HaKohen and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_Feinstein-Cohen. Their articles are not referenced and were most likely all written by one person, perhaps Hakohen. Its irrelevant and I move they all be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shlevin (talk • contribs)

The Yehudah article is notable, because the Iron Wall (film) article is notable. By the way, there are many references on Yehudah. How many sources were favorable to Garibaldi and his army? how many told the truth about MLKJ instead of smearing him (and Ho Chi Minh) as communists? what about Howard Zinn? or Naomi Klein? a good person is either over-reported or under-reported regardless of notability because press brings more press, and obscurity is sometimes difficult to shake. That being said, unless HaKohen's old accounts have been deleted, he should recruit others to make new accounts and contribute themselves to the 'Wikipedia Revolution'(words spoken on his radio show) instead of making new sock puppets to make truth. I gladly will stand up for the truth about MLKJ or Garibaldi or MCollins or David Raziel or Ze'ev Jabotinsky. Khazaq!Altalena5768 (talk) 19:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I dont get it. Is the Zionist Freedom Alliance right-wing or left-wing? Divina SJ 23:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Their politics can best be described as Bob Dylan, and I've done extensive research on the movement. Altalena5768 (talk) 19:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
Shlevin, read up on how to do and Afd and other general editing use of WP. --Shuki 00:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Tone

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The article could use a more neutral tone in some parts. --Stormbay 02:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

yea, definitely. for example: "...jewish freedom fighter abraham stern..." --Severino (talk) 23:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Lingualism

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article seems to relate everything to the Hebrew language, and imply that Hebrew culture is somehow more long-lasting or more unchanging than other culture. This is called lingualism, and it is analagous to racism(the belief that there are 70 races of languages). This article should be made neutral, just like Bar-Ze'ev the family pet. Yes. let's remove any reference to justice, or truth, or freedom. Those Ideas are dangerous and are not neutral, so let's get rid of the thoughtcrime to prevent those moral absolutists from trying to claim that truth exists. i'm sure that truth does not exists. i can say unequivocavably that there is no such thing as certainty. Am Yisroel ChaiAltalena5768 (talk) 19:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Primary Sources and Conflict of Interest

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I am the creator of and major contributor to this article and I have no conflict of interest. I am not a member of the Zionist Freedom Alliance but I have taken an interest in the organization and have researched its activities in Israel and the United States. Sources for this article are reliable and come from a variety of places including Jewish and Israeli news carriers (JTA, INN, JPost, NRG) as well as local and student newspapers where the organization is active. I don't know why these tags were placed on the article to begin with but I am removing the primary sources and coi tags. Benny K (talk) 21:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

While I thank you for your additions to Wikipedia, and will AGF for the non-involvement you claim, these are different than being reliably sourced, and we won't broach the subject of ownership. The RSs that you claim remain far from a NPOV of what the ZFA is. In light of your involvement, I might suggest that if you do not understand the tags, then they are most properly left there, and I have returned them. In addition, I find your recent edits to the page reflect a repeated unwillingness to allow notable content that provides the necessary context and neutrality that an encyclopedia is supposed to represent. I will again provide that, and we can discuss what is notable. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 05:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
The sources used in this article are primarily from news providers that range across the political spectrum. Israeli (and probably most) news carriers all maintain some political bias. I have also included news sources from local and student newspapers that portray the subject in both positive and negative lights. Anything cited from the Zionist Freedom Alliance website is meant to provide examples of the organization's ideology and how they present themselves to the public. Regarding both of our recent edits on the article's first paragraph it is known in Israel that ZFA and Magshimey Herut have functioned as two separate organizations for some time now and that the Israeli branch of ZFA is called L'Herut Tzion. Thats why I thought it safer to simply write that ZFA was founded by Magshimey Herut activists. Repeatedly editing the article to state that ZFA and Magshimey Herut are the same organization is known by many to be factually incorrect and harms the legitimacy of Wikipedia. I don't think the split necessarily merits inclusion in an encyclopedia article but I could be mistaken. I also find your choice of wording in the first paragraph to be highly politicized and think that Wikipedia articles should carry a more neutral tone. While many Israelis consider the West Bank/Judea and Samaria to be part of Israel and many people in Israel and elsewhere prefer to call it Palestinian territories I think a more neutral term like "disputed territories" or "lands captured by Israel during the Six-Day War" should be used for the sake of maintaining a sense of neutrality. Both my suggestions provide facts without offering a political opinion. Your edit of "which they consider includes the Palestinian Territories, occupied by Israel since 1967 and officially opposes the notion of territorial concessions to attain peace" does seem to carry a strong political slant. Why not simply write that the subject opposes territorial concessions? Regarding peace there is a section for the subject's views on peace and the conflict further down in the article. You also insist on stating that ZFA is connected to Revisionist Zionism and Religious Zionism. I have seen nothing to indicate this. Do you have a source for these claims? And I fail to see how this article warrants a primary sources or coi tag. I am removing them and would advise you to look through the sources provided before returning them. Benny K (talk) 20:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, for starters, I will note that the reference you insist on reinserting in the lede concerning ZFA’s provenance does not mention ZFA, nor does it contain any reference to ZFA’s link to Magshimey Herut. It is therefore irreverent, and I will again add its older link that does note it, quite specifically. As this is a non-news link, it thus provides a broader third-party knowledge base for the article, as suggested by the POV tag. I make no claim that the two are the same; the cite only blockquotes what, until recently, the MFA site cited. You may interpret that as what the MFA has said and I believe we both tend to consider it as reliable. If there have been some changes since, then they should be added. Secondly, I will note that it is difficult to determine easily how widely across the political spectrum the current sources really are, as you claim, since the refs are not formatted to indicate exactly where they come from. I have re-formatted the MFA ref to indicate a way to provide that, without the time involved to discuss it in such detail. If this re-formatting continues, without re-directs, you might better see how limited they are, with many coming from Arutz Sheva, and the Religious Zionism, which it represents. As for ZFA’s links to traditional Revisionist Zionist ideology, one need only look at the links to Israel Eldad, who heavily influenced it, and just what Eretz Israel represents in a more global view of the situation. While I see that some of my edits are acceptable, I am starting to question how neutral a linked ‘moral right’ is in this very situation, without some mention of the others’ moral right, which may be more easily RS’d with simple links. For now, I will leave that up to you, but have added these ideological links in ‘See Also’, which are already heading that way, ideologically speaking. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 03:45, 27 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Does ZFA exist?

edit
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

While checking some of the existing links and 'external links', I find the message "This Account Has Been Suspended" on all the 'zfa.org.il' links that I tried. Maybe someone knows whether this is a temporary or permanent condition. I'll leave things for a while, but consider the present situation both notable and indicating some non-notability at the same time. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 05:54, 28 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Interesting conclusions but the truth appears less sexy. I noticed today that they've changed sites and it looks like someone already edited the External Links section of the article to link to ZFA's new address. I'll do the same for the References.Benny K (talk) 22:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Zionist Freedom Alliance. 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, 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:05, 20 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Zionist_Freedom_Alliance&oldid=1206578356"