Talk:Pierre Rehov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pierre Rehov is part of WikiProject Palestine - a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative, balanced articles related to Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page where you can add your name to the list of members and contribute to the discussion. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Palestine articles.
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the Project's importance scale.
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to actors and filmmakers on Wikipedia.

Such a crap to add this to this article:

"However, his opponents maintain that international organizations such as Reporters Without Borders keep telling on the wounding of journalists by IDF's firings ( http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=20764)."

WHy is it there? While: The country’s journalists enjoy a freedom not found elsewhere in the region, but though 2006 was one of the safest years for them since the start of the second Intifada in 2000, many problems remain. (Israel - Annual Report 2007 ) http://www.rsf.org/country-43.php3?id_mot=153&Valider=OK

and: Since Hamas came to power in January 2006, journalists have faced the usual shooting from Israelis and, more recently, have been victims of fierce clashes between supporters of the Islamist Hamas and El Fatah, which supports President Mahmoud Abbas. Palestinian Authority - Annual Report 2007 http://www.rsf.org/country-43.php3?id_mot=155&Valider=OK

btw, reading the first article "the usual shooting" appears to be mainly clash related unlike the kidnappings and such in areas such as Gaza.

Contents

[edit] Removed rebuttal to criticism

I've removed the following as POV. It is completely improper to baldly assert that rehov's point of view is "closer to the facts" than others with no sources to back this up. Similarly, asserting that it was impossible for Israeli soldiers to have killed Muhammad al-Durrah is a much stronger claim than is made in the Muhammad al-Durrah article itself. I'm keeping these here because it should be possible for these rebuttals to be restored if sourced and ascribed to a particular person or group.

Allthough, in many occasions it has been proven that his point of view was much closer to the facts than most pro-Arab clips. For instance, his film "The road to Jenin" sticks to the number of casualties, acknowledged by both Palestinians and Israelis, and has been used as a proof in Justice against Mohammad Bakri's " Jenin Jenin ", which was advocating the theory of a " massacre ".
His work on the Muhammad al-Durrah event was also controversial. But later events indicate that it was actually impossible for Israeli soldiers to have killed this child, whose death was only witnessed by one Palestinian, namely the reporter who accused Israel of this death.

--Saforrest 17:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "States" vs. "Claims"

"Claims" is a non-neutral word. "States" is neutral. Please respect WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 15:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

"Claims" is appropriate since what he is claiming is itself non-neutral.--Kitrus 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm sure it's your opinion that it's non-neutral. Nevertheless, WP:NPOV requires that we use neutral terms when describing positions. See WP:NPOV#Fairness_of_tone. This is policy, so please stop ignoring it. Jayjg (talk) 12:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the following WP:BLP violation to the Talk: page for now:

Pierre Rehov is criticized by anti-Zionists for a lack of objectivity and depth. His work systematically depicts Israelis as victimized protagonists, and Palestinians as manipulative aggressors.[1]

User:Kitrus added the link at the end of the paragraph, but the source makes none of the claims that are actually in the sentence. Jayjg (talk) 15:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I added the N.Y. Times link several months ago, found it deleted (I wonder why) and re-added it recently without re-reading it. Another source should replace it as a reference to the claim of bias. Rehov is clearly biased.--Kitrus 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
First you have to find a link that actually supports your claim, though. Do you have such a link? Please abide by WP:V, which is policy. Jayjg (talk) 12:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

Pierre Rehov is not neutral and neither is this article. Please apply WP:NPOV standards when editing.--Kitrus 04:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Have you actually read the policy? You're doing the exact opposite; you're asserting your personal opinions as fact, rather than what I have done, which is attribute the opinions to the people who have stated them. Please explain which statements in the article you think fail WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 12:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

Jaakobou, since you won't stop trying to insert your Zionist-centric views into this article, I've decided to delete the reference to Hannity & Colmes altogether. What partisans might be saying in support of their ideological brethren does not constitute ostensibly impartial commentary (of the type exemplified by the NYT review, as pointed out by 151.201.141.132), and violates WP:NPOV. Your blatant and transparent attempt to muddy the water by comparing third party criticism for Rehov's filmmaking with partisan cheerleading is illegitimate and agenda-driven and has no place here.Stingray86 19:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Stingray86

User:Stingray86, (1) try giving a look at WP:CIV. (2) i simply reverted one POV with the other POV, your choice to prefer one POV over the other does not constitute WP:NPOV. (3) NYT is not impartial, best i reccolect, they allow terrorists to have their own op-ed articles... or was that the LAT, i'm not 100% sure. JaakobouChalk Talk 10:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Template:Jaakobou As indicated above, I warned this user against editing in violation of WP:NPOV, to which s/he asserts that s/he has the right to insert her/his own POV into the article. The existence of partisan opinion in support of Rehov has no relevance to the discussion regarding Rehov's critics, which makes the reference to Hannity & Colmes completely gratuitous. I note as well that Jaakobou's User talk page indicates a longstanding problem regarding NPOV. Given Jaakobou's rather blatant admission of editing in violation of WP:NPOV, I request that s/he be blocked from making any further edits to this article. Stingray86 18:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Stingray86
personal attacks are frowned upon in wiki, just NPOV the article instead of making personal attacks. JaakobouChalk Talk 12:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hannity and colmes

the text:

Rehov's latest film, 2006's "Suicide Killers," was supported by Hannity & Colmes who asserted that it would reveal "the nature of the enemy".

why is this information taken out of the article?[2][3] JaakobouChalk Talk 12:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)