Talk:Settler colonialism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 26/3/2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
I am currently working on this article. Please discuss any changes or additions with me, I'll be glad to see how we can improve it. Not anymore, "thanks". Format aspects and so might be inconsistent because the article isn't complete yet. There is also many information that's missing which I'll add soon. --Rodrigo Cornejo 18:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Israel
I have removed that section because it's nothing but POV WP:OR unsupported by reliable sources. Most of the Jews who immigrated to Israel/Palestine were either refugees or Socialists - please use WP:RS to prove that is was "Settler colonialism" - and indeed, up to 1977 the Israeli politics was dominated by the left. The Palestinian Arabs left as a result of a 1948 Arab-Israeli War, instigated by Arabs - again, hardly "Settler colonialism". ←Humus sapiens ну? 23:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Israel
The IUSSP is cited in Wikipedia many times [1]. So much for WP:OR and reliable sources. Besides, there are many sections in Wikipedia that contain OR and are tagged, not deleted. Same goes for POV disputes. As it goes for jewish settlers being socialist or refugees, they settled in a new land. So, they were settlers. Feel free to dispute if it's colonialism or not, but political ideology does not exempt one from being contradictory. Socialism doesn't make the jewish settlers there any better or worse - you are just appealing to the no true Scotsman fallacy. Palestinians left because the 1948 Arab-Israeli War was instigated by arabs... so next time the russian army attacks Chechenya I'll say it's every single russian's fault. There was no national military organization in the Arab Palestinian community at the time of the war, and the war efforts were mainly done by other arab countries. Then again, don't insert your POV claiming that since some arabs started a war, other arabs deserve to be displaced - that's a hasty generalization. --Teh Original Mr. Orange (Orange juice?) 23:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- The reference you gave says nothing about "settler colonialism". The section you added is your original research. Meanwhile you have also violated WP:3RR. Please do not revert again. Thanks. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 00:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Indians in Fiji
Without knowing a lot about the subject, my impression is that the Indians in Fiji are an example of settler colonialism. --Richard 16:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] It's not OR
http://books.google.com/books?q=settler+colonialism+israel&btnG=Search+Books That claim is outlandish. It's not OR to include a section discussing IF Israel has exibited the characteristics of settler colonialism. Then again, in the newly included section it is clearly stated that it could be so, but not that it is so. --Teh Original Mr. Orange (Orange juice?) 21:04, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- As it was pointed out earlier, the content that you repeatedly reinsert is based on unreliable sources. ←Humus sapiens ну? 21:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I repeat. Care to read the above to see that the IUSSP is cited in Wikipedia many times [3] If you don't think (shall I say "believe"?) that that isn't a reliable source, maybe you should point out why. You haven't done so. Remember that there are other reliable sources apart from the Tel Aviv University --Teh Original Mr. Orange (Orange juice?) 21:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps this is a good time for you to get familiar with WP:RS and other WP policies. ←Humus sapiens ну? 21:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
"The International Union for the Scientific Study of Population (IUSSP) promotes scientific studies of demography and population-related issues. Originally founded in 1928 and reconstituted in 1947, the IUSSP is the leading international professional association for individuals interested in population studies."[4] Does this not comply with WP:RS? If so, why not? --Teh Original Mr. Orange (Orange juice?) 21:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Also, have you read this? [www.iussp.org/Brazil2001/s60/S64_02_dellapergola.pdf] Maybe if you read it we can talk about how it's unreliable.--Teh Original Mr. Orange (Orange juice?) 21:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- A discussion based on reliable sources is not the same as a loose summary of the Arab-Israeli conflict which makes an allegation based on the title of this entry. TewfikTalk 21:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Again, I'm disappointed a user with heavy involvement in this sort of subjects has come here to talk about my outlandish claims. Would you be so kind of pointing me to where I can get mediation from a neutral third party? Thanks in advance Tewfik. --Teh Original Mr. Orange (Orange juice?) 21:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Feel free to follow the process outlined at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. I also encourage you to review Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Attribution. For the record, I said nothing of "outlandish claims"; the problem is that you've produced a summary of the Arab-Israeli conflict with no direct connection to this page's topic. TewfikTalk 22:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I beg to my loyal opponents to provide me with trusthworthy sources so I can write the section that has caused such a stir. If you don't do so, I will just keep rephrasing the paragraph until you become so annoyed that you actually have to do something rational about it. --Teh Original Mr. Orange (Orange juice?) 06:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- Your source doesn't mention "settler colonialism". This has been explained before. Please stop engaging in original research. Jayjg (talk) 02:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Settler colonialism in Latin-America
This section needs some reworking. Two points: 1) It is focused entirely on Mexico. 2) The voice it is written in, especially the last paragraph, feels biased. It seems to be speaking in a rather nationalist/leftist/populist voice, and when talking about the various 'privileged' immigrant groups takes on a nativist tone as well. Such claims may actually be true, but the way they are stated here has no place in a encyclopedia article. I added a Citation Needed at the end of that paragraph.--KobaVanDerLubbe 00:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Exploitation colonialism
Hi, I think it's very important to write a complementary article to this page: exploitation colonialism 2 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] OR again
I've removed this section to Talk:
While Israeli settlements aren't widely regarded as being an effort to "colonise" the territories which they occupy, there are allegations of that practice, involving the contentious nature of such settlements. It is worth noting that a number of international bodies, including the United Nations Security Council, the International Court of Justice, the European Union, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and many legal scholars have characterized the settlements as a violation of international law, but other legal scholars, Israel, and the Anti-Defamation League disagree with this assessment. Opponents to the policy of Israeli settlements have characterized said efforts as being colonialism [1] even though the validity of either Israeli or Palestinian claims is a matter of an ensuing controversy.
Not only is most of the paragraph not about "settler colonialism", but the sole source used, Nasser al-Qidwa, is a former Palestinian Foreign Minister making a political speech - hardly a reliable source for this kind of claim. In addition, editorial comments like "it is worth noting" are un-encyclopedic. Please make sure your sources are reliable, and please ensure that your text matches those sources. Jayjg (talk) 00:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I used reliable sources extensively, consulted scholarly sources, framed the paragraph appropriately, added citations when needed, and quoted opinions and analysis hence not presenting them as facts. I believe that now the case has been *finally* settled. Teh Original Mr. Orange (Orange juice?) 04:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
