Talk:Confrontation at Concordia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Confrontation at Concordia is part of WikiProject Jewish history, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardized and up-to-date resource for all articles related to Jewish history. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, also consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Jewish history articles.
Project Jewish history To-do: edit purge watch Here are some tasks you can do: Requests: Occult writers and antisemitism Copyedit: International response to the Holocaust, History of the Jews during World War II, Antisemitism Cleanup: Xueta (quite a mess),Jewish assimilation Stubs: Category:Jewish history stubs, Category:Jewish biography stubs NPOV: Category:Hasmoneans Other: Review: Föhrenwald (expanded); Assess Sandy Koufax Translate: from German: Judensau
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Confrontation at Concordia article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

Contents 1 Claims 2 SPHR 3 Polemics

[edit] Claims

The claims "The documentary presents footage of intolerance, hatred, militant censorship and use of violence by the Muslim students at the University campus to intimidate and suffocate any free discourse of opposing views." is not supported by the source cited [1].Bless sins 13:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I have thus made corrections to that paragraph adding the corresponding details presented in the reference.--CltFn 00:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you please give a proper published reference for the Netanyahu quote. Thanks.Bless sins 18:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing "dubious" with quotes from the documentary which is the subject of the article. Bless sins, stop spurious tagging of material that doesn't fit your political agenda. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 10:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

"political agenda"?? Your actions on wikipedia are going from bad to worse. Violating WP:Uncivil will not help anyone. In any case please provided a published and reliable source that actually quotes the documentary. Otherwise, the info is unsourced.Bless sins 18:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense. We even have {{cite video}} for citations like that. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 23:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

So how can the quotes you have posted be verified? Am I expected to watch the entire documentary? What if it is hours long?Bless sins 15:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) You assume good faith that the editor has watched the entire video and placed it properly. Otherwise, if cited, there is nothing stopping yoy from checking it out yourself. -- Avi 15:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

What if the video is hours long? Asking me to spend hours to verify a sentence (that I may easily miss) is ridiculous!Bless sins 01:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

The video is only 45 min long. No one asks you to watch it. BTW, CBSC panel link includes some of the interviews. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 01:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

"No one asks you to watch it". How else can I verify it?Bless sins 01:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It's your problem. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 02:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't cut it on wikipedia. If I source something to a book, I must provide the page number as well. WP says "For that reason, edits that rely on primary sources should only make descriptive claims that can be checked by anyone without specialist knowledge." [2] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bless sins (talk • contribs) 02:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC).

Are you going to use the same argument to disrupt each of the hundreds of articles using {{cite video}}, or only those you dislike? ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:00, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SPHR

Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights claimed that Netanyahu was guilty of war crimes and therefore should not be allowed a forum to vent his views on a publicly-funded campus. Whether or not you agree with them is besides the point. That is their claim.

Furthermore, several students from all parties were injured in the ruckus from batons and tear gas. Despite claims of protestors being "violent," smashed windows and minor property damage would hardly constitute as violence in the normal sense. All human injuries incurred that day were from police tactics.

The original ad for a protest, which you can still dig up online, called for protesting peacefully and for delivering an "arrest warrant" for his alleged war crimes

As well, Netanyahu had previously been denied the opportunity to speak at other institutions, such as UC Berkeley and Northwestern.

I type as a student of Concordia University and as someone who experienced the aftermath of the riot firsthand, as well as knowing people who attended the protest.

=//Turnquest 02:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

This article is about the documentary. The SPHR's claims, "arrest warrants", "original ads for a protest", grievances, excuses, etc. do not belong here. As for being "someone who experienced the aftermath", please review WP:COI. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Polemics

The word 'Polemics' has connotations of criticizing something holy or theological, which unfortunately this documentary does not fall under. I would suggest, if my addition of the word "criticism" does not work well, that "controversy" be used instead.

=//Turnquest 02:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I think "controversy" is too strong, but OK. The word you used, "Criticism" is not going to work because the decision of CBSC panel and Michael Grand's suggestions hardly qualify as such. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 03:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)