Talk:Masada2000

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Extremely biased quotations (calling the site a "pornographic hate website"), no capitalization of "Israel" - who wrote this? It reads more like a polarized rant than an encylopaedic entry.

• Not biased at all. The site displayed pictures of naked human beings accompanying listings on its "S.H.I.T." list in order to further disparage the individuals named. It suggested that Jewish women featured for defamation at the site should be "reamed." It featured discussions about Palestinian "dildos" which it said could be purchased by liberal Jews.

Despite the fact that the site has been taken down all you need do is review the Wayback Machine for archived versions of this site (I added a link in the article to the version of the site archived at the WM). I would be happy to provide specific links to pages at the site which i referred to above to document what I wrote here.

I removed the POV tag from the article since the complainant has made his comment anonymously & also made no attempt to contact me or anyone who contributed to this article about its alleged biases. It is FACTUAL and not biased. The fact that this site is being exposed for what it was is what disturbs some people. But the substance of what was featured at the site cannot be denied. It's there for anyone to see. Richard 08:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

For the 2nd time an anonymous user has placed a POV on this article w/o supplying any justification for doing so & w/o explaining their action on this pg. I plan on reporting this to Wikipedia moderators. This to me seems like a modified version of vandalism. I am removing the POV once again. Richard 07:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category

Why does Wikipedia list this under Judaism websites? It doesn't really have anything to do with Judaism as a religion - after all, Judaism does not equal Zionism. Furthermore, why isn't it categorized under hate sites? (Watcher1981 15:59, 20 July 2007 (UTC))

(1) You raise a good question about Judaism websites vs. Zionism websites. There is no category for Zionist websites, so I've moved it to Category:Political websites. (2) There is no category for hate websites, as hate is a very subjective judgment and any attempt to label a site as a hate site would become mired in politics. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 02:21, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

All the sources in this article are from Masada2000 or one of its puppet sites. There are no notable secondary sources which discuss this articles notability. Prehaps the article should be deleted for this reason; nontheless, it needs secondary sources. Randomly picked quotes to push a view about the site do not belong in the article.--Sefringle^Talk 00:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on it. It'll have sources in a little while. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 05:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

PS - I added quotes from the site because you deleted the description of the site with an edit summary of "attacks like these need sources". It's not an attack if it's supported by quotes from the site itself, is it? — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 05:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

It is very selective quotefarming meant to present a certian view of the site. Maybe now notability has been established, but this article clearly is written in a negative tone. I don't see any praise about the website in the article, and quotes seem to make the website look even worse. Prehaps a section on the websites arguements may be in order?--Sefringle^Talk 04:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the first paragraph explains the purpose of the site from its own POV. Maybe it can be beefed up a little, but it's hard when the site's founders and maintainers use pseudonyms and rarely agree to be interviewed. You may think the quotes in the article have been cherry-picked to make the site look bad, but that isn't the case. Visit the site and take a look for yourself. In writing the article, I tried to avoid words that conveyed a POV and instead let the facts speak for themselves. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 23:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Praise

I wanted to praise editing work that's gone on regarding this article. It's even better than when I worked on editing it some time ago. I don't agree with the member who claimed that article is too negative. As Malik said, if you visit the site the hate practically oozes fr. the page. The best that can be said for the site is that its owner truly believes that he's defending Israel and the Jewish people by upholding these values. 10:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)Richard (talk)