This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the
project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
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
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.
@
Ohoad77: Such as? Making a sweeping statement is easy, but please discuss specific mischaracterisations instead of yelling "it's all wrong!". The latter is rarely useful.
Kleuske (
talk)
12:33, 27 March 2017 (UTC)reply
@Kleuske I know that it isn't the best way to do it. Operating on a small time window, and was hoping someone with more time would spot and follow-up. My bad. But My complaint about the bias remains. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ohoad77 (
talk •
contribs)
12:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Additional citations and content have been added since March 21. Therefore I am removing the template from this article.
Kith (
talk)
15:55, 27 March 2017 (UTC)reply
This isn't protected BUT per {{ARBPIA}} it should be. Anyways, can it be moved to just plain
IfNotNow? It's a redirect here anyway. Is this the correct way to request this? -- BobTheIP editing as
2.28.13.227 (
talk)
19:42, 11 April 2018 (UTC)reply
This edit made on August 24th seems to be largely not constructive, and may even rise to the level of vandalism. A reversion may be appropriate, or at least substantial revising to reinstate a neutral point of view.
Leyarburns (
talk)
18:20, 30 August 2019 (UTC)reply
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
I would extend that to all three revisions made on August 24th. They deleted correct information about If Not Now being American and progressive (at least as self-defined), and added in the biased language "Jewface." Additionally, the entire description at the beginning of the article has been turned into a polemic against If Not Now, when it is better placed in a "Controversies" section below. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Jerdol (
talk •
contribs)
18:48, 30 August 2019 (UTC)reply
Not done Highly unreliable source. Not only that but you are misrepresenting what the source says. It does not say "chairman", it says "board member". I checked that Woody is not even mentioned in the WP article that Camera is attacking.
Zerotalk11:57, 22 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Not done Friedman is the former ambassador now, but the sentence is describing an event that occurred while he was ambassador.
Zerotalk03:56, 21 January 2022 (UTC)reply
"Far-left" as used by the subject is inaccurate
Whereas generally a left right spectrum is used to describe groups accurately, "far-left" has become a pejorative deployed by centerist and right wing groups in the United States, where this article is edited.
The JSTOR article cited to support the claim of IfNotNow being "far-left" is unavailable to the general public and therefore I cannot audit it, but even the quote suggests that it is the politics of IfNotNow that place it on the left of the spectrum, and thus characterizing it as "far-left" as a pejorative does not belong in WikiPedia.
Another article reveals
[2], "when pollsters working for the Jewish Electorate Institute
[3] asked specific questions about Israel and Palestine to 800 Jewish American voters in 2021, what they found shocked some Jewish leaders. Fifty-eight percent of respondents said they supported restricting US military aid to Israel so that it could not spend the money on expanding settlements in the West Bank. Roughly a quarter of those surveyed said they agreed with the statement “Israel is an apartheid state.” And 31 percent said that Israel was “committing genocide” against the Palestinians. Younger Jews were much more likely to agree with both statements."
These pieces of information from 2021 place IfNotNow's views in the *majority* of American Jews, not in any way in the biased, error-riddled "far-left".
I would like to understand what the basis is for characterizing IfNotNow as 'far-left' given that the definition was placed by an (inaccessible) JSTOR article in 2018 on the basis of the polling beliefs of the American Jewish community, when I've provided direct evidence to the opposite.
Biggyshorty (
talk)
13:01, 19 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I did not notice the other two links, my apologies on that.
Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel are both nationalist Israeli newspapers with clear biases about what constitutes the American Jewish community - I do not understand how often this needs to be repeated, there is *actual* evidence of what the *actual* American Jewish community thinks that I've posted, which does not correspond to that characterization, and you refuse to even entertain that edit.
It doesn't need appealed to administrators, since admins will not rule on content by fiat.
You would take it to
the Reliable Sources Noticeboard, or start a
Request for Comment. You may be right that those two sources are so inherently biased we can't rely on them for this topic, but that doesn't eliminate the JSTOR post.
And for the final time: your "evidence" is based on your personal conclusions from those poll results. We cannot use that as the basis for editing. Look, I don't like that the "Israel shouldn't be occupying Gaza" stance is considered far-left, but we need reliable sources to say otherwise, we can't just try to extrapolate from polls ourselves. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite14:30, 19 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Yes I unfortunately concede that Times of Israel is an RS; but one cannot say that in the political context the noun (as opposed to adjective) "far-left" is very much a right wing pejorative term used to discredit (possibly, or not) mainstream opinions as out of the rame of possibility (see eg Lakoff or Overton Window theory).
Its absurd that people are not even allowing for this possibility and there's no way other than to get various RS (all of whom are bound by whatever ideology you want) to say "IfNotNow is NOT far-left".
Biggyshorty (
talk)
15:44, 23 October 2023 (UTC)reply
The Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel are both well known as right-wing newspapers, and using them to characterize IfNotNow as "far-left" is inappropriate. I looked at how major media are characterizing IfNotNow in their articles, and most of them simply say "left-wing":
Yonah Lieberman, a founder of IfNotNow, a left-wing Jewish grassroots organization -
NBC News
Leftwing US Jewish groups gathered outside the White House on Monday to urge the Biden administration to pressure Israel into dropping its plans for a military invasion of Gaza and instead declare an immediate ceasefire. -
The Guardian, in an article about IfNotNow and Jewish Voice for Peace
IfNotNow, a left-leaning group of American Jews -
LA Times
A much smaller number of outlets call them "far-left":
far-left Jewish groups calling for an end to the intensifying Israel-Hamas war -
ABC News
Some news outlets simply describe them as "Jewish groups", without any qualifiers:
The demonstration, organized by Jewish groups IfNotNow and Jewish Voice for Peace -
Washington Post
JPost and ToI are not "well-known right-wing newspapers". They are reliable sources that criticize the Israeli right just as they do the Israeli left. If you take issue with their inclusion, take it up at
WP:RSP, where both are green. I notice you didn't address Newsweek, eJewishPhilanthrophy, and the academic article. Far-left is a subset of left-wing, so to use left-wing does not disqualify the more precise far-left label that RS, including peer-reviewed academic sources, use. Next time, do not make contested changes to an article without achieving consensus.
Longhornsg (
talk)
21:43, 23 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Longhornsg, that is not how
WP:RSP is intended to be used. There are different news agencies describing IfNotNow in different ways. NBC, The Guardian and the LA Times are also reliable sources, and they call IfNotNow "left-wing". With different green-labeled sources saying different things, what do we do? That's why saying, "This source is green in RSP, so we have to use it" is wrong, and it's not how RSP was ever intended to be used. You have to actually evaluate different sources in context and come to a decision. It's not as simple as saying "green means go".
The Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel are, in fact, well known as right-wing newspapers. The major liberal newspaper in Israel is Haaretz. "Far-left" is a somewhat pejorative phrase, and if we're going to use it in the lede, we have have to be very sure that it's the most common description of the group in major media. That does not appear to be the case at all. We know that some right-wing media in Israel calls IfNotNow "far-left", but we also know major news outlets in the US and UK are generally referring to it as "left-wing", "left-leaning" or simply as "Jewish" without any further political qualifiers.
About consensus and whether I'm overturning it, I don't see any consensus for using the term "far-left" above. I see you and one editor arguing that the term "far-left" should be used, but that's not in itself evidence of a consensus. -
Thucydides411 (
talk)
22:19, 23 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Just to illustrate the difference I pointed out above between right-and left-leaning newspapers in Israel, I looked up how Haaretz describes IfNotNow in its news articles.
This is the first article I came across: "The progressive group IfNotNow ...". Not "far-left". "Progressive". The Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel are to the right of Haaretz, and they choose a more derogatory term to describe the group. We should use the more neutral term, which is more widely used in news coverage. -
Thucydides411 (
talk)
07:06, 24 October 2023 (UTC)reply
I greatly dislike the usage on Wikipedia of relative terms like "far-left" or "far-right," which are specific to national contexts and fail to take a
WP:Global view of politics and governance. Although I can never affirmatively recommend those labels because they are not useful to readers, there's enough weight at the moment to continue to include the "far left" perspective in this article. I have edited this article today, including edits which address these points.
JArthur1984 (
talk)
14:39, 24 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Coming back to this a few weeks after my initial edit.... Glad to see that someone came to their senses about the misuse of 'far-left' especially given @
Thucydides411 actual sourcing. The fact that @
Longhornsg likes the edits I think Using the Jerusalem Post and ToI as valid sources reflects a far-right ideology, but so be it. I am satisfied, if only just, with your edits as well.
Biggyshorty (
talk)
19:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 June 2024
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In the section "Relationship with the Jewish community", remove the last paragraph "In November 2023, the Anti-Defamation League classified protest events led by groups including Jewish Voice for Peace and IfNotNow as "anti-Israel", adding the protests to a database documenting rising antisemitism in the US. ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt labelled the organizations "hate groups".[27]" given that the ADL is no longer a reliable source.
Wikifada (
talk)
01:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply