Jump to content

Talk:Benjamin Netanyahu/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Holocaust Denial

How are we going to deal with this?[1] Normally we'd label him a holocaust denier and link him to antisemitism. Any thoughts?109.154.105.52 (talk) 12:14, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

--How is he being "anti-semitic" or an holocaust denier? Many jews support him and he has been a strong leader of Israel. About the holocaust denial part, it's not actually denial at most I'd label him as a revisionist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.55.182 (talk) 12:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I thought Holocaust Revisionism WAS Holocaust Denial. Perhaps you could explain when revisionism is denial and when it isn't?109.154.105.52 (talk) 12:36, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Holocaust Revisionism is a difference in the official narrative, Holocaust denial is the complete rejection of the systematic extermination of Jews or existence of gas chambers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.55.182 (talk) 12:42, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Is Holocaust revisionism not anti semitic then?109.154.105.52 (talk) 15:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Try asking Wikipedia about holocaust revisionism. It redirects you to a locked article about Holocaust denial. Netanyahu is a holocaust denier.109.154.105.52 (talk) 15:43, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Got to agree look for yourself, he's a Holocaust Revisionist or Holocaust Denier, if you follow that equivocation, check for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNpnfflmjuc Not all, virtually no, Holocaust Revisionist dismisses the Holocaust narrative completely. --41.151.47.4 (talk) 00:36, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment - I just want to add my dismay to what Bibi claimed. I have had many discussions with members from the Institute for Historical Review, and this is a line they frequently use. Along with the Zyklon B and 'oven temperature' smoke screens, trying to absolve Hitler by stating he "only wanted to relocate the Jews" but nobody else would take them, is a static argument the history revisionists/Holocaust denialists use. This is more than just disappointing. Dave Dial (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
But that's what ALL the documents say. I'm sure Bibi has read them. --41.145.152.218 (talk) 00:39, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Here's Moshe Zimmerman calling him a holocaust denier. This would be clear-cut if it was anybody other than the Prime Minister of Israel, so I'm taking the initiative and adding both Zimmerman's comments and the category. Sceptre (talk) 09:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Further to this comment: Netanyahu's comments fall under the IHRA's definition of holocaust denial; specifically, point 5 (blaming racial or ethnic groups for the Holocaust). Sceptre (talk) 10:14, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment2 - That may well be true(and I think it rates a 'mostly true), but it doesn't mean we can label Bibi a "Holocaust Denier", any more than we can label the Palestinian Authority a "Nazi group" based on that one source. Let's not start edit wars to make a point. Dave Dial (talk) 14:12, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I think Dave Dial and NeilN have said it all, not much to add. Like Dave, I found the comments shocking and disappointing, but as both Dave and Neil have said, we most certainly cannot jump to label him a Holocaust denier. If reliable sources use it, we can discuss the matter. In the meantime, I don't think there's much to discuss. Jeppiz (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

We have one of Israel's most prominent Holocaust historians saying that this is Holocaust denial. I think that's a strong reason to support the category. Sceptre (talk) 14:52, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
However, Zimmerman did not explicitly call Netanyahu a Holocaust denier. --NeilN talk to me 14:55, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Sceptre, I'd agree it's a strong argument to include it in the article, but not to add the category. Jeppiz (talk) 14:58, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
As per Jeppiz and those he cites. The category should not be added to the page.Nishidani (talk) 15:18, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
But Zimmermann did say that his statements were a form of Holocaust denial and that made Netanyahu a Holocaust denier. Even so, it's hair-splitting of the most ridiculous degree that goes beyond BLP; would we really need a separate source to say that Cristiano Ronaldo is a footballer if we only had one source saying that he played professional football? Sceptre (talk) 17:36, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
"Any attempt to deflect the burden from Hitler to others is a form of Holocaust denial." Zimmerman is entitled to his view. It is fringe of course, so at the most it is a WP:Due issue. It is obvious that Netanyahu had no intention of denying the Holocaust: his whole life is obsessed with it, he reads everything in terms of the Holocaust. The definition of Holocaust denial is that it is 'the act of denying the genocide of Jews in the Holocaust during World War II.[1]' It is disputed by no one that Netanyahu shares the view of all sane people in the world at least on the fact that the Holocaust took place. Zimmerman's statement is saying that you deny the Holocaust if you don't blame Hitler for it, an extremely confused position. You probably need more than one single opinion on such an extreme spin to make it relevant to the article. What others have said is that Netanyahu used an argument that forms part of the armoury of Holocaust denialism, the one asserting that Hitler wasn't responsible, as the (dis) likes of David Irving have argued. It is an elementary principle of logic that denial of knowledge of an event does not mean the event itself is denied.Nishidani (talk) 17:52, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you seriously describing the views of Israel's most eminent Holocaust historian as fringe? Zimmermann said, and I quote, "With this, Netanyahu joins a long line of people that we would call Holocaust deniers.". That's pretty clear cut. And, yes, saying that anybody other than the Nazis were responsible for the Holocaust is Holocaust denial, as is saying that Hitler only planned to "deport" the Jewish population, under the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of Holocaust denial. Sceptre (talk) 18:03, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Yehuda Bauer is usually recognized as the (world's) most eminent Holocaust scholar, a position he assumed after the death of the late lamented Raul Hilberg. You should learn to construe words precisely, giving due weight to all words used:'"Hitler didn't want to exterminate the Jews at the time,' he wanted to expel the Jews." He said, with that profound ignorance, widely noted, of history that is the hallmark of his public utterances and books, that Hitler did not want the Holocaust originally, but Husseini persuaded him to carry it out. Rather than denying Hitler's responsibility, he asserts it, but (and this is the obscenity that outrages everyone) says Hitler more or less oversaw the Holocaust after a Palestinian mufti had persuaded him to go through with it.
i.e.'Netanyahu didn't say 'anybody other than the Nazis were (sic) responsible for the Holocaust'.That the Nazis with more than a little help from numerous friends all over the continent, were responsible for executing the Holocaust is denied by no one in his right or left mind.Nishidani (talk) 19:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
  1. ^ http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.681525

Binyamin vs Benjamin

Several UK sources (Economist, Telegraph, Guardian) use the spelling "Binyamin". Why? Why is that alternative spelling not mentioned in the article? --JHP (talk) 23:14, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

"Binyamin" is closer to how this name is pronounced in Hebrew, which is presumably why some news organisations use it. On the other hand, his own English website uses "Benjamin" [1]. It would be ok to mention it or not; I don't have a strong opinion either way. Zerotalk 23:29, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

New book

The Resistible Rise of Benjamin Netanyahu by Neill Lochery, 2016, Bloomsbury Press Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 18:17, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Benjamin Netanyahu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:45, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

1 RR rollback error

My mistake in rolling back this edit, it was not a 1RR contravention by TTAAC. Sorry about that. Happy Christmas. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:31, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

It was, however, a violation of DS due to the insistent reinsertion, without talk page engagement, of content that I challenged with policy-based reasons in my edit content. It was also a violation of DS for the personal attack and false statement about my/his editing histories on this article in his edit comment. He knows this was false because I politely showed him the diffs on his talk page. SPECIFICO talk 02:21, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
No, SPECIFICO, Israel/Palestine really isn't subject to the same ridiculous DS as American Politics (you know, the ones you are so adept at systematically WP:GAMING)—as you would know if you regularly edited in the area. A simple glance at my edit history reveals that 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict is among my top-edited pages, with 79 edits to the article and 90 edits to the talk page. You deny WP:STALKING me here because you made a total of five edits to Benjamin Netanyahu over a year and a half ago, but those edits—like virtually all of your "contributions"—were also reverts, and concerned solely with trivial political scandals when they weren't directly related to American Politics. When have you ever shown an interest in Israeli settlements? Merely asserting, with no elaboration, that this historic UN resolution is "WP:UNDUE" is transparently ridiculous and if you were even vaguely serious you would have taken any concrete concerns to this talk page. Your consistent pattern of following and reverting only my edits ([2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]) while vowing "TTAAC needs to be blocked or banned" could hardly be more obvious; I submit there is virtually no chance you would have reverted the edit I made to Benjamin Netanyahu if it had been made by anyone else. I hate to break it to you, but—while you directly reported me to three admins, initiated a topic ban proposal against me at ANI, and aggressively pushed to have me sanctioned at AE—I haven't been "blocked or banned" yet (in part because of your proclivity for "misguided...at best" misrepresentation of my words and requesting "retaliatory and unwarranted" sanctions against me)—and you have no right to erase every edit I make out of spite, and then demand I get your permission! In fact, if it had not been for those five earlier reverts giving you some plausible deniability (though your refusal to be more specific than "WP:UNDUE" certainly hurts your case), I would have called this the last straw, and reported your stalking already.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 03:35, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Further example of SPECIFICO's WP:STALKING: [12], [13]; Guccisamsclub then notes that SPECIFICO's "edit summary consisted of false statements and threats. you need a better rationale for deletion." As with "WP:UNDUE," in the absence of any explanation on the talk page it is hard to take such edit summaries seriously, because it does not appear they are intended to be taken seriously. Rather, they are a fig leaf excuse to arbitrarily purge content SPECIFICO just doesn't like—which, in the area of American Politics, means it cannot be restored without an exhausting process of gathering consensus. (If you consider Wikipedia a WP:BATTLEGROUND rather than an encyclopedia, there is really no downside to frivolous deletions: Even if consensus is eventually achieved, you can still slow the other side down considerably. On the other hand, many editors—including involved admin Volunteer Marek—routinely ignore the DS, as they are inconsistently enforced: [14], [15], [16], [17].)TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 04:07, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on the discussion at Talk:Netanyahu

Comments are very welcome, should Netanyahu be a primary redirect to this article? Thank-you.--Nevé–selbert 20:50, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

It states that his mother Tzila Segal was born in Israel in 1912, however Israel was not a recognized state at that time, leaving her to be recognized as a Palestenian born, right? Jereamorris (talk) 13:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Prime Minister of Israel

Bibi is the 9th and 13th PM of Israel. In his current administration he is the 13th PM. Please update the template as seen in Yitzhak Rabin article. Sokuya (talk) 15:19, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

checkY Done. Veritycheck (talk) 16:14, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

This makes no sense. Netanyahu was the ninth different person to hold the office, but his first administration was Israel's 13th prime ministerial administration, not its 9th, and his current one is the 17th. In order to make it consistent with the Yitzhak Rabin article, which counts by total number of administrations, Netanyahu would need to be labeled as the 13th and 17th. However, that's then inconsistent with the way that mostof the other PMs are numbered - e.g. Levi Eshkol is labeled as the 3rd PM, but while he was the third *different* person to hold the role, his was the fourth different administration (Ben Gurion having been PM twice). The same approach is taken to Golda Meir (labeled as the 4th PM), but then it gets inconsistent with both Yitzhak Rabin and Menachem Begin labeled as the 6th PM (but Begin's successor Yitzhak Shamir labeled as the 8th)! So the whole thing is a bit of a mess.

If one looks at other parliamentary democracies, Canada's PM Justin Trudeau is referred to as the 23rd PM, as he is the 23rd *different* individual to hold the office; Australia takes the same approach, where Malcolm Turnbull is the 29th different PM. To be consistent with the way those countries are treated, Netanyahu should be labeled simply as the 9th PM (and the labels for David Ben-Gurion, Rabin and Shamir should be changes to 1st, 5th and 7th respectively.

The other alternative is to follow the approach taken with British prime ministers, where the infobox simply labels them as "Prime Minister of the United Kingdom" without assigning a number (e.g. see Theresa May or David Cameron. This feels more natural to me, as Brits wouldn't generally refer to May as "the 76th prime minister" (and I suspect the same is true in Australia, Canada and Israel - i.e. people don't normally refer to Netanyahu as "the 9th/13th/17th PM). JayZed (talk) 15:53, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Edit request: 9th Prime Minister of Israel

Per the discussion above headed Prime Minister of Israel, please amend the infobox so that it describes Netanyahu as the 9th Prime Minister (not the 9th and 13th). This will make it consistent with Wikipedia practice for other parliamentary democracies (e.g. Canada, Australia, India, Italy) whereby the number assigned to a prime minister reflects the fact that the subject is the Nth different individual to hold the office. I am requesting similar edits to Ben-Gurion and Rabin to ensure consistency.JayZed (talk) 12:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Benjamin Netanyahu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:50, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Jewish nationalist

Why is this man not said to be a Jewish Nationalist, yet Jared Taylor is called a White Nationalist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:A000:4A88:6F00:6D2B:4FB8:D43C:F850 (talk) 06:06, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Birth date 1949 or 1944 ?

There are some questions regarding the birth date of Benjamin Netanyahu. According to Lawyer David Levi, you can see in this picture, dated of 1962 that he is a soldier, doing his service during 1962-1963. His post (in Hebrew) explains it in more details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pscheimann (talk • contribs) 18:08, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

This section says the following.

"Netanyahu was born in 1949 in Tel Aviv, Israel, to an Israeli-born mother, Tzila Segal (28 August 1912 – 31 January 2000) and a Warsaw-born father, Prof. Benzion Netanyahu (1910–2012), the middle of three children. He discovered via a DNA test that he has some Sephardi Jewish ancestry."

In 1912 there was no State of Israel. There was not a British Mandatory Palestine.Tzila Segal was born in Ottoman Palestine.

The terms "Sephardi" and "Ashkenazi" refer to liturgies. They should not be used ethnographically. I consider some of my ancestors that practised Judaism in the Ukraine to have been ethnically Slavo-Turk (a term used by Tel-Aviv University professor Paul Wexler). Some of my other ancestors in the Ukraine were religious Jews that migrated to the Ukraine from Pontus. They were obviously non-Slavo-Turk. (They had to learn to speak Yiddish.) They were originally Pontic Greek speakers. They might be better described ethnically as Pontic, Ionic, or Yavanic. (I have seen all three terms used.) The Czarist Empire and historic Poland hosted Jewish communities of several different ethnicities although the Slavo-Turk ethnicity predominated. None of these communities had any roots in the Ibero-Berber Jewish population that left Spain although there were a few Ibero-Berber Jews that are documented to have migrated into Polish and Czarist regions. In any case, DNA tests don't show ancestry they show affinity between an individual's DNA make-up and an alleged typical profile for an often ill-defined population group.

ThorsProvoni (talk) 12:29, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Benjamin Netanyahu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:58, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Request for your opinion on a dispute in the Hebrew version of this Article

Hi all,

I hope this is not an improper request, but I have a debate with others concerning a small issue on the Hebrew version of Bebjamin Netanyahu's article and would love to get more people to speak their mind. It's not a factual debate as the facts are clear and I've already added a section with an explanation in English of the issue in the talk page here: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%97%D7%94:%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%9F_%D7%A0%D7%AA%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%94%D7%95#RfC_on_the_need_to_mention_Netanyahu.27s_1993_publicly_confessed_adultery

Thanks in advance and cheers,

Itai --Itai leshem (talk) 17:22, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

infobox clarity

the current infobox layout REALLY does not deal well with the concept of a person having non-consecutive terms in the same job.

or with concurrent terms in different jobs, for that matter.

ultimately, that probably needs to be fixed in the box design &/or the mos rules.

BUT

speaking as a reader, the infobox layout about bini's career history is miserably unclear; in the way it deals with his intermittent & overlapping terms as pm & foreign affairs boss, in particular.

that needs to be fixed.

Lx 121 (talk) 05:41, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Infobox Picture

This is clearer, newer, and should be used as his infobox portrait:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Asmithca (talk • contribs) 08:54, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

inappropriate use of html markup in cs1|2 templates

With this edit, Editor Anomalocaris has improperly added html markup to |title= in this {{cite news}} template:

{{cite news |date=13 September 2013 |url=https://news.walla.co.il/item/2677526 |<!--script-title is proper but it messes up mixtures of Hebrew and digits for Firefox users-->title=<bdi lang="he" dir="rtl">40 שנה לאחור: היכן היו אז, המנהיגים של היום?</bdi>|language=he |trans-title=40 years ago: where were the leaders of today? |publisher=[[Walla!]]}}

cs1|2 templates produce metadata for use by reference management software. Adding extraneous html markup to parameter values contaminates that metadata. The metadata for this citation as Editor Anomalocaris has written it contains this (emphasis added and a random number of the actual title characters removed for clarity):

&rft.atitle=%3Cbdi+lang%3D%22he%22+dir%3D%22rtl%22%3E40+%D7%A9%D7%A0%D7%94+%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%97%D7%95%D7%A8%3A+...+%D7%A9%D7%9C+%D7%94%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9D%3F%3C%2Fbdi%3E
– spaces are +, non-Latin UTF-8 characters and reserved characters (<, /, >, etc) are percent encoded

The <bdi lang="he" dir="rtl">...</bdi> tags do not belong in |title= nor do their percent-encoded counterparts belong in the metadata.

cs1|2 has a parameter that is specifically designed for non-Latin scripts: |script-title=. That parameter should be used with Hebrew-script titles. The claim from the edit summary that script-title with rtl languages and digits looks terrible in Firefox... may be indicative of a failing in Firefox for which cs1|2 should not be held accountable. cs1|2 wraps any value assigned to |script-title= in <bdi lang="xx">...</bdi> tags (where xx is the language ISO 639-1 code; in this case he). It does not set the dir= attribute because, for <bdi>, the default is auto which allows the browser to decide for itself what to do with the tag contents.

The remainder of the edit summary, ... and substituting title simply adds harmless quote marks, as explained above is not true.

The cs1|2 templates are responsible for the rendering and presentation of citation elements. Editors should not interfere with that by including extraneous markup. Instead of adding markup that 'fixes' one thing but 'breaks' another, the correct solution is to fix the template (if it can be shown that it is broken), or, perhaps in this case, to fix the browser, or to not use the cs1|2 templates – they are after all, general purpose templates that are great for the majority of en.wiki's citation needs but are not and will not be perfect for every use case.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 20:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Is this the israeli national anthem?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KN5wo-NYLwU — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.230.4.167 (talk) 00:26, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Means you are very angry, and your thoughts are very old - but the Tora or the old testament does not give a clue how to solve the current situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.230.4.167 (talk) 00:31, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Benjamin Netanyahu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:58, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Unexplained edit

@GTVM92: explain your edit in the infobox. You reverted all improvements I made recently. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 12:36, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Cleanup of ministerial roles in infobox

Some are doubled (Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs) and roles from 2009–13 should be merged. Hydromania (talk) 23:45, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Article mentions "war criminal" only once!!

"War criminal" should appear at least 913...0319 times, please correct instead of having this indefensible IDF propaganda — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.70.0.39 (talk) 21:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.251.67.171 (talk)

List of international prime ministerial trips made by Benjamin Netanyahu

New article list, I don't know where to put a link to it in the article. Sokuya (talk) 14:59, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 January 2019

I think it should be added that Netanyahu had a new granddaughter last week: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/256946 BoazBen84 (talk) 20:05, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jack Frost (talk) 01:47, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 February 2019

| office3 = Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Israel)|Minister of Foreign Affairs | term_start3 = 14 May 2015 (2015-05-14) | term_end3 =

He is no longer the Foreign Affairs Minister and this should be included some more:

| office3 = Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Israel)|Minister of Foreign Affairs | term_start3 = 14 May 2015 (2015-05-14) | term_end3 = 17 February 2019 (2019-02-17)[1] 2601:447:4101:5780:F980:12A0:5F77:2B92 (talk) 23:45, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

 Done DannyS712 (talk) 02:07, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-minister/netanyahu-gives-up-role-as-israels-foreign-minister-idUSKCN1Q60G0

indictments

While it has been announced that indictments would be coming, afaik, and according to the cited source (and the NY Times and Haaretz) he has not yet been indicted. nableezy - 23:10, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

That is correct. The attorney general announced his intent to charge. There is a pre-charging procedure (optional - the defendant can waive it) in which the defendant can have a hearing with the prosecutor, and possibly refute the prosecutor's evidence prior to a charge being filed - that hasn't happened yet (and unless waived - is a couple of months away - after the election). There are also issues with parliamentary immunity for MKs (BB is currently one) regarding charging. I corrected however, diff, "would be seeking" to " intent to file" both since this is congruent with the sources and since in Israel (as in a few other systems) there is no grand jury - the GA has the final say on the indictment (in this case - receiving the recommendation from a prosecutor group a few months ago).Icewhiz (talk) 09:53, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Otzma Yehudit

Regarding this revert: the source (Jerusalem Post) does NOT say that OY "has been accused of racism". It says that it IS a racist organization. Please don't WP:WEASEL it. Likewise, this, and many other sources, refer to the Kahanist movement as "terrorist" and note that it has been designated as such by the United States.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:04, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Adding a 3-paragraph sub-section for minor deal brokering (involving approx. 1 prospective MK) in a different party in the 2019 elections, is out proportion. It probably merits inclusion in some form in the 2019 election coverage here, but we shouldn't overstate the significance of this minor deal. Note that implying various individuals are "terrorist" while they haven't been convicted by a court of law in this regard is a rather serious WP:BLP issue. Icewhiz (talk) 07:17, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
According to sources it is ANYTHING BUT "minor deal brokering" (and that "approx. 1 prospective MK" (it's probably more than that) can make or break Netanyahu, so yeah, it's crucial). This "minor deal" would be about the equivalent of Trump making David Duke a cabinet member or getting him into the government. That's, again, per sources. So yeah, it's a big deal.
As for the "terrorist" label, it's straight from the source. And US law.Volunteer Marek (talk) 09:01, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Note also that no "individuals" have been described as "terrorists". An organization which has been designated as such by the US government (as well as reliable sources) is being described thus. So you're misrepresenting the actual text under discussion.Volunteer Marek (talk) 09:04, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Association by proxy, which we generally avoid. This is a fairly minor deal for a technical bloc that will potentially result (if the combined bloc gets 5 eats) in a single Otzma MK (out of 120) entering the Knesset (and not the cabinet - it is in fact highly likely Otzma will sit in the opposition in any government headed by Netanyahu - source). In terms of Netanyahu, who receives a rather large amount of coverage, this is a 2-3 news cycle blip which possibly merits inclusion, but not at this length. Also - please format your references - bare URLs (which is what you've added) are generally not acceptable per Wikipedia:Citing sources. Icewhiz (talk) 09:15, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
This is clearly a violation of WP:NPOV and WP:RACIST, as well as WP:UNDUE. ShimonChai (talk) 10:30, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
No, what's a clear violation of WP:NPOV is the complete removal of information that has appeared in tens of reliable sources and which constitutes the biggest story of the upcoming election (possibly second to the indictments). Removing this info is just ridiculous. Claiming this is "trivial" is WP:OR and WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT seeing as how that's contradicted by coverage in scores of sources. Likewise WP:RACIST explicitly states "unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject". I'm not even gonna bother citing sources for the fact that the Kahanist movement is "racist" since, that's actually the official position of the Israeli government (not to mention, again, scores of reliable sources). That's no more controversial than the idea that the Ku Klux Klan is racist. Is Otzma Yehudit described as racist? Let's see:
Of course I could go on. That's FIFTEEN freakin' quality sources right there though which should be more than more than more than more than enough. We have dozens of sources from across the political spectrum, and from wide variety of Jewish denominations, which describe this party as "racist" and which condemn Netanyahu's actions, but... of course on Wikipedia we're gonna get a bunch of editors who will sit there and try to pretend with a straight face that this party isn't racist. Gimme a fucking break. This. Is. Not. Controversial. (except in the wacky world of Wikipedia). Or they will pretend that this is "trivial" or a "minor story" or some other nonsense even though there's literally dozens if not hundreds of sources writing extensively on this subject (pretty much all the outlets listed above have MULTIPLE stories on this). Shameful behavior here folks.Volunteer Marek (talk) 15:30, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
I agree as per WP:BLP we should write our biographies "conservatively" the VM edit don't fall under this category --Shrike (talk) 10:32, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh bunkum. If reliable sources extensively describe a political party as "racist" and compare it to the K K fucking K, we don't "write conservatively" and WP:WEASEL it by trying to pretend it's something it's not. We don't remove all the relevant info in a major development just because of some editors' WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT. THAT is POV. Removing this stuff so blatantly against policy should be a topic-ban worthy action.Volunteer Marek (talk) 15:30, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
This is literally basic Wikipedia editing, WP:INTEXT per WP:RACIST.. We do the same thing for most other contested labels, the party themselves deny that they are racist. You can say "ABC News has referred to the party as "racist", though they deny this." which is how we handle most controversial labels. ShimonChai (talk) 16:02, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
No, it's not. What are you proposing? That we write: "The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Post, Cleveland Jewish News, The New Yorker, The Times of Israel, Haaretz, Los Angeles Times, Tablet Magazine, Forward, ABC News, Time Magazine, ynetnews, Straits Times <insert every single major newspaper in United States and Israel here> <insert every major Jewish organization in Israel and United States here> have called the party "racist""? Don't be ridiculous. This. Is. Not. Controversial.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:08, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Multiple sources have called OY "the Israeli Ku Klux Klan" (for example [18] [19], other sources already provided above). In the first sentence of our article on the Ku Klux Klan it states that the KKK "is an American white supremacist hate group". We DON'T say "according to this source, and this source and this source and this source and this source and this source and this source and this sourceand this source and this source and this sourceand this sourceand this source and this source and this source and this sourceand this source and this source and this source and this source and this source and this sourceand this source and this source and this source and this source and this source ... and this source OOOOOFFFFF .... the KKK is a white supremacist hate group." That would be ridiculous. Same thing here. This. Is. Not. Controversial.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:13, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Haaretz is not an NPOV source, and are not reliable for right-wing ideologies. For the same reason we don't cite Arutz Sheva to call Meretz far-left. ShimonChai (talk) 16:18, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
"Haaretz is not an NPOV source, and are not reliable for right-wing ideologies" <--- well, see, there's your problem right there. Haaretz (which I should note is only one out of fifteen sources I listed) is most definitely reliable and NPOV (though sources aren't really NPOV or POV). If you reject mainstream reliable sources, then you really have no business editing controversial topics on Wikipedia because that's sort of fundemental. If you really want to you can ask at WP:RSN whether Haaretz is reliable or not, but I'm gonna tell you right now, it'll be a waste of time. And if you persist in insisting that mainstream sources are not reliable, then you should be aware of the fact that this article and topic area are under discretionary sanctions.
So if the objection is that "haaretz is not reliable" that can be dismissed and this is going back in.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:24, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

coverage of the deal with Otzma Yehudit

  • Haaretz - has published AT LEAST THIRTY articles and stories on the topic (I stopped counting after 30, but there's 29 pages of search results [20], with ten stories per page and it looks like at page 7 it's still on THIS topic, so the actual number of stories is probably closer to 60.
  • Jerusalem Post - also about THIRTY articles on the subject [21] and that's ignoring slightly earlier stories.
  • Times of Israel - ten pages of search results, with ten articles per page, but true, "only" 7 or 8 per page are relevant to the merger and Natanyahu. That's still shitload of articles.
  • New York Times - at least TWO articles [22] [23]. In fact, they thought it significant enough to publish an official statement from the editorial board.

But yeah. Let's pretend that this is a "trivial detail". Freakin' a.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Coverage of the technical block deal Netanyahu brokered between OY and a different party merits brief inclusion - however Netanyahu is routinely covered at depth by multiple NEWORGs every day on a great number of issues - anything beyond a brief mention is UNDUE.Icewhiz (talk) 19:01, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
" is routinely covered at depth by multiple NEWORGs" - not in this much depth and not like this. When you have sources comparing this to bringing in the Ku Klux Klan into the US government and you have sources which emphasize that Netanyahu is doing this to try and head off potential consequences of the indictments, then yeah, this is a big fucking deal. At least THIRTY articles in Haaretz. At least THIRTY articles in JPost. About FIFTY in Times of Israel. Please stop pretending that this is "minor".Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:52, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Nope. Israeli newspapers publish daily election news and polls. Obviously most such items include Bibi (a candidate) and Otzma (part of a list running). That does not mean such items even mention, let alone cover, this technical bloc deal and Bibi's role in brokering it. As has already pointed out to you, with a source, the likelihood of Otzma being in government (coalition) is close to zero - the 1-2 MKs are expected to split off of the technical bloc they are in after the election and sit in opposition.Icewhiz (talk) 04:38, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
e.g. the first hit on the JPost search result you link to - ELECTION COMMITTEE VOTES TO LET OTZMA YEHUDIT RUN, JPost, 6 March 2019 - doesn't even mention Netanyahu. Running a search result for "Otzma" - returns all sorts of coverage of their election run and other activities. Icewhiz (talk) 06:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, but that's ONE of more than 60 hits. And I *only* counted those which did mention Netanuyahu and which were relevant to the alliance, and I got to 30 then stopped. So yes OUT OF THE 60+ hits, a few are not related. But at least 30 are.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
The deal between Likud/Netanyahu and OY has been and still is extensively covered not only in the Israeli press but in the world press. I count at least 6 articles in WaPo, many more than that in the Forward, some in the Guardian, Le Monde, etc etc. This deal is the reason why OY now has frequent coverage, instead of being practically ignored like before. Your arguments are counterfactual. Zerotalk 09:34, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Wow, what an aggressive and confrontational post by @Volunteer Marek:, what's his problem? I don't see anyone objecting to this being addressed in the article. Also, I'm seeing an incredible double standard: he pops by Talk:Ilhan Omar to call a controversy that's been covered by 5-6 NYT pieces WP:UNDUE and a WP:BLP violation, and here he's repeatedly inserting/renaming the section something inflammatory. And by the way (and I think this should be covered) let's not be lazy and go by search results. Arguments should be accompanied by references to specific reliable sources. Additionally, only an utterly irresponsible editor, or someone who's pushing a POV, would ever describe a BLP subject's views as "relentlessly hawkish" in Wiki voice. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 20:15, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Obviously some are objecting - either by reverting the info and/or by making claims on talk that this is a "trivial detail". As far as your WP:OTHERSTUFF argument regarding Omar let me explain this to you: on the Omar article I'm objecting to including the info, which has NOT been covered as extensively as this, in the lede. And for fucks' sake. I listed FIFTEEN freakin' "specific reliable sources". Then I point out that there's dozens more. And you try to turn this around on me and pretend that I've only listed search results and accuse me being lazy??? Seriously? Go try pull that stunt on someone else.Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
And if you have an issue with accurately reflecting reliable sources (by calling what these say "inflammatory") then that's YOUR problem, and a problem with YOUR approach to editing, not mine. THAT is "utterly irresponsible". Regarding the "relentlessly hawkish", that was there before my edits and it does indeed accurately describe the source which is titled... wait for it, wait for it, wait for it... "Benzion Netanyahu, Hawkish Scholar, Dies at 102"Volunteer Marek (talk) 23:28, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Can you cut the shtick? It's not a trivial detail, obviously, and it should be addressed in the body. What I'm seeing is that other editors simply trimmed what you wrote. Furthermore, whether you original added "relentlessly hawkish" or not is irrelevant—you restored it, and that kind of editorializing without in-text attribution is totally inappropriate. Subheaders are a complex issue, and if it does involve allegations of racism, they should always be described in those terms—you don't call something racist in Wiki voice, even if it is. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 00:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Umm... there is no shtick. Thanks for acknowledging that it's not a "trivial detail", but it's obvious that other editors have tried to insist otherwise. I mean, User:Shrike's edit summary is... <suspense>... "this is rather trivial detail". Icewhiz has referred to it as "minor deal" (despite the fact that there's literally hundreds of stories on this in just the top three or four Israeli newspapers). So yeah, there's an attempt to minimize the importance of this development.
And of course we call racist things in Wiki voice if they are racist and are described as such in multiple sources. We call the Ku Klux Klan "white supremacist" in the first sentence. We state it's a terrorist organization. Same here. Every. Single. Source. About this party that I listed above - fifteen, and like I said, there's hundreds more - describe the party as "racist". Most of these sources emphasize the ties to terrorism. It's impossible... well, ok, not impossible, but not desirable to attribute something so widely stated to every single source that has made statement. We would have to write: "According to the Jerusalem Post, Haaretz, Washington Post, New York Times, Times of Israel, Tablet Magazine, Time Magazine, Forward Magazine, Los Angeles Times, The Cleveland Plain Dealer, The New Yorker, ABC News, The Union of Reformed Judaism, American Jewish Committee, American Israel Public Affairs Committee etc. etc. etc. ... Otzma Yehudit is a racist party". Are you seriously proposing we do that? Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
To be clear a minor political deal. Yesh Atid - Gantz, in contrast, was a big political deal. This deal involving zero to two potential MKs is minor. Bibi's involvement in brokering is also not direct. In terms of Bibi's involvement - this was mostly in the news two weeks ago. There is a bit of continuing coverage, not all that much. Bibi is (as any other head of state, particularly during elections) covered by a few stories in each local newspaper every day - so starting in CAPS LOTS OF COVERAGE - is not convincing (particularly when your search link returns results unrelated to Bibi a, just covering Otzma). Just another usual item in the newscycle.Icewhiz (talk) 11:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
No, this is false. If it was a "minor deal" why so much coverage? Or think of it this way, if the GOP explicitly backed David Duke for Congress, whether he won or not wouldn't matter. If he won that'd be only one extra seat. BUT. It would still be a huge deal. And of course, here it's an even bigger deal because those couple extra MKs can make or break Netanyahu's majority in Knesset and potentially save his butt from any fallout from the indictments. Anyway, at the end of the day, whether we consider it a "minor deal" or not depends on whether sources think it is a minor deal or not. And it's pretty obvious that they do not. They think it's a huge deal and are treating it as such. And sure, there isn't fifty stories coming out per day anymore, but it's not true that there isn't "all that much". You're making that up. It's also completely false that this is just a "newscycle" or that my search returns are diluted by "results unrelated to Bibi". I've already addressed that. There's something like 300 stories in the search result. I counted THIRTY on just the first five pages (out of 29+) which ARE relevant to this alliance and which mention BOTH "Bibi" and OY. So please drop that inaccurate and false misrepresentation.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:39, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
If nothing else, the statements from AIPAC, as well as Lipstadt have made sure this is gonna continue to keep getting continuing coverage. Please stop pretending that something which is obviously false is true.Volunteer Marek (talk) 11:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
As has been mentioned to you, Bibi and Otzma appear (with every other party) in regular coverage of the election (e.g. in polls). Merely asserting news hits means little.Icewhiz (talk) 12:46, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
And as has already been explained to you this isn't "asserting news hits". I listed fourteen sources above (not "news hits"), and I can list 30 from Haaretz alone (see next section). Please stop pretending that something which is clearly false is true.Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

We should move past this cursory search-results based analysis, which is meaningless because it doesn't discriminate between reliable/unreliable and opinion pieces/secondary. The sources indeed describe Otzma Yehudit as a racist party, and clearly the deal that was brokered was controversial because it gave them a platform. It should be covered in the article per WP:DUE, and indeed it is. I don't know what this thread is about. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

This isn't "search-results based analysis". The only reason I linked to search results is because the number of sources which discuss this issue is so freakin' large it's impractical to list every single one of them. The problem with the current article is that it white washes the deal and the nature of OY. For example, the mention of links to Lehava have been removed. The fact that AIPAC condemned the deal - which is almost a story onto itself - was also removed.Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles on alliance with racist Otzma Yehudit

Haaretz

  1. Dozens of Orthodox Rabbis Condemn Netanyahu for Deal With Kahanists (Otzma Yehudit)
  2. Conference of Presidents Joins Criticism of Netanyahu’s Deal With Far-right Party (Otzma Yehudit)
  3. "This racist incitement befits the person who, through a cynical political deal, is bringing Otzma Yehudit, the ideological heirs and admirers of Rabbi Meir Kahane, into the Knesset." (editorial)
  4. "The stench from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s foul deal with admirers of Meir Kahane’s rancid racism" (analysis)
  5. "Announcement comes day after pro-Israel lobby group condemns political deal endorsed by Netanyahu to strengthen right-wing bloc with racist Otzma Yehudit party"
  6. "...hit back at critics who denounced his endorsement of a merger between right-wing parties Habayit Hayehudi and Otzma Yehudit, whose members are supporters of the late racist Rabbi Meir Kahane."
  7. Top Jewish Members of Congress Condemn Netanyahu’s Deal With Far-right Party
  8. [24]
  9. Religious Jews Condemn Netanyahu's Far-right Pact in Jerusalem Protest
  10. Pro-Israel Democratic Senators Slam Netanyahu's Deal With Kahanists
  11. [25]
  12. U.S. Orthodox Organization Clarifies Support for Netanyahu Deal With Kahanists
  13. Following Controversial Deal With Kahanists, Religious Israelis Are Seeking a New Political Home
  14. Holocaust Scholar Deborah Lipstadt Resigns From Synagogue for Its Defense of Netanyahu Deal With Kahanists
  15. Decades Before Netanyahu Welcomed Heirs, Begin Warned of 'Dangerous' Kahane
  16. How Netanyahu Revived Jewish Supremacism and Paved Its Way to Power
  17. [26] (editorial)
  18. U.S. Jewish Leaders Slam Netanyahu for Promoting Kahanists
  19. Netanyahu still thinks he'll get a rousing reception at AIPAC, even after his deal with the Kahanist devils. (editorial)
  20. AIPAC Slams Kahanist Party Backed by Netanyahu
  21. [27]
  22. Amy Klobuchar First Presidential Prospect to Denounce Netanyahu’s Pact With Kahanists
  23. Conference of Presidents Joins Criticism of Netanyahu’s Deal With Far-right Party
  24. U.S. Won't Criticize Netanyahu's Courting of Kahanist Party, Pompeo Says
  25. Netanyahu's Trump-inspired Embrace of Racist Right Is Repulsive
  26. "Quite a number of decent right-wingers will find hard to swallow the approval of Meir Kahane’s successors and special legislation to save the prime minister’s skin from indictments" (editorial)
  27. Condemned Farrakhan and Mallory? Now Condemn Jewish Power (Otzma Yehudit) and Netanyahu
  28. Prominent Jewish Group Changes Course, Denounces Far-right Party Courted by Netanyahu
  29. Kahanist Party Rips Into AIPAC After Criticism of Netanyahu's Support
  30. Netanyahu is backing Israel’s KKK for naked domestic political gain (editorial)

So there's THIRTY articles from Haaretz alone. Can we please stop pretending that I'm "only linking to search results"? I'm linking to search results because THERE'S SO FREAKIN' MANY STORIES ON THIS TOPIC! Can we please stop pretending that this is a "minor deal" or "trivial detail"? Volunteer Marek (talk) 05:23, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

This is a minor political deal - deals involving 0-2 MKs are minor. Much of what you are linking to is editorial, and most of the actual coverage is back in February. Furthermore, you are ignoring the amount of coverage Netanyahu receives in the Israeli press (and to a certain extent international press) - every Israeli paper prints a number of items involving Netanyahu every day. To put this in proportion - at the moment we have a single line in the article devoted to " 1999, Netanyahu faced another scandal when the Israel Police recommended that he be tried for corruption for $100,000 in free services from a government contractor; Israel's attorney general did not prosecute, citing difficulties with evidence". I can find much more than 30 press items on the Netanyahu/Amedi affair - heck - it is still covered in the press - Analysis The Real Story Behind Netanyahu's 'Rushed Eviction' From PM's Residence, Haaretz 2016 - two decades later. There are multiple google book hits on this. The Netanyahu/Amedi affair was a much bigger scandal - possibly prompting his temporary retirement - and we give it a single line presently. Icewhiz (talk) 08:04, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
If it's a "minor political deal" why is there 30+ articles in Haaretz alone? Can you list 30+ for Amedi? Let's see them. And the "still covered" sort of gives it away - comparing overwhelming coverage within one week, to coverage extended over more than two years is at best disingenuous. So let's see those 30+ sources on Amedi all from one week.Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:14, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Statements about Arabs as second class citizens

The article is missing information on "Bibi"'s controversial remarks about Israeli Arabs not being co-equal citizens in Israel. Sources: [28] [29] [30].

In light of these remarks by such a high ranking government official, some may argue that any Israeli sources from 2019 onward should not be considered WP:RS on Wikipedia in any matters related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Personally I don't think that's the case but I have seen similar arguments made elsewhere recently.Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:20, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Belongs in the article Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People maybe, not so much here. nableezy - 19:48, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
To be precise, he said "Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people—and it alone.". Election rhetoric - that has nothing to do with RSness of Israeli sources who may, and in fact most do, freely criticize the PM for his stmts.Icewhiz (talk) 20:25, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
He said a bit more than that. What he said was An important correction: Israel is not the state of all of its citizens. According to the nation-state basic law that we passed, Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people – and of it alone. Leaving out that first bit makes your quote a bit more innocent looking than it was. nableezy - 20:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't even know what the point of this thread is. So based on the comments of an Israeli official, you believe that we should broadly dismiss and paint with the same brush all Israeli newspapers as unreliable? The Israeli media has reliable sources on all sides of the spectrum, so this is just patent nonsense. If you don't personally believe it, I'm not sure why you'd even bring it up. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Who exactly are you responding to? If it is not me then learn how to indent properly. If it is me, then what in the world are you talking about? nableezy - 21:48, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
VM is taking a swipe at an Icewhiz-esque argument elsewhere. Let's keep it off this page. Israeli press sources are of course reliable for this quote-worthy (and very very widely quoted) statement of Netanyahu. Zerotalk 05:05, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
NOTNEWS and we aren't a quote farm. Netanyahu's social media spat is gossipy as well. His support for the basic law is substantial - not random quips.Icewhiz (talk) 07:34, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Nope, no argument here. Zerotalk 08:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 April 2019

Suggestion: Add the Hebrew pronunciation of his name, as it is "Binyamin" and not "Benjamin". 217.132.26.126 (talk) 11:23, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

That doesn't seem that necessary since a voice recording of his name is included. – Þjarkur (talk) 23:25, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Infobox - Permanent Representative to UN section

What is going on in the "7th Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations" section? Why are PMs listed?   Jts1882 | talk  10:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Philadelphian Accent

I noticed it says he speaks with a Philadelphian accent. Do we have other sources to confirm this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SailingOn (talk • contribs) 16:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Category

Please add Category:Members of the 21st Knesset (2019–) Andrzei111 (talk) 23:00, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done. It's now Category:Members of the 21st Knesset (2019). – Fayenatic London 15:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Harvard?

The page says that he completed a thesis at Harvard while taking courses at MIT. It also says that Harvard is his Alma Mater. These are not supported by the sources.

It appears that he did take a graduate level course at Harvard while attending MIT, where he wrote a somewhat prophetic paper.

I think we should definitely remove the word thesis, and we should definitely not list Harvard as his Alma Mater.

I would also suggest rewriting that entire sentence to more consistent with the source and removing Harvard entirely. It is quite common for MIT and Harvard students to cross register, and the location of one course (out of about 60 apparently) is not as significant as which specific degrees he earned, etc.

EntropyTV (talk) 06:52, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

I agree with this suggested edit. The quote from the MIT News article cited says, "Mr. Netanyahu also wrote a paper for a graduate level course at Harvard in 1973 on a prophetic subject-the prospects for an Arab-Israeli pluralistic security community." Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).

Also please add the following crucial information at the end of this section:

On 15 September 2020 the United Arab Emirates and Bahrein established diplomatic relations with Israel as part of the Abraham Accords.[1]

A million thanks. Bye for now.--I say your name Yag (talk) 19:33, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "In break with past, UAE and Bahrain forge ties with Israel at White House". Reuters. September 15, 2020.
 Partly done: The section for the former request was removed per WP:NOTNEWS and having been overcome by later events. The latter request has already been added. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Updated Needed

With the 35th government officially collapsing the section needs an update. Also I think it may be a good idea to move the investigations against Bibi to personal life or another location due it spanning multiple governments and terms as PM and thus is not suitable to only be a sub section under his fourth term. Idan (talk) 09:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 January 2021

I think this category should be reverted. It's not supported by sources. The fact that Netanyahu expressed pride in the fact that Israel is the only country in the region where homosexuality is not illegal doesn't make him an "LGTB rights activist". That's a little bit of a stretch, I think.--Watchlonly (talk) 08:41, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, that is not an accurate category here. Jeppiz (talk) 12:12, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 Done Completed by User:Jeppiz Terasail[✉] 14:32, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox member of the Knesset

Template:Infobox member of the Knesset has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox officeholder. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 04:05, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 January 2021

I think this category should be reverted. It's not supported by sources. The fact that Netanyahu expressed pride in the fact that Israel is the only country in the region where homosexuality is not illegal doesn't make him an "LGTB rights activist". That's a little bit of a stretch, I think.--Watchlonly (talk) 08:41, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, that is not an accurate category here. Jeppiz (talk) 12:12, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 Done Completed by User:Jeppiz Terasail[✉] 14:32, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox member of the Knesset

Template:Infobox member of the Knesset has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox officeholder. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 04:05, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Spelling correction

In the discussion of Benjamin Netanyahu's father, the feminine form née should be changed to the masculine form né. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 02:44, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 May 2021

Sentence below should be updated using either Netanyahu “was” legally required or “will be” legally required….

Wiki article on Health Ministry position indicates that he has resigned.

“Due to the indictment, Netanyahu is legally required to relinquish all of his ministry posts other than the prime minister position.[21][22]”

Thanks. Bennelson8801 (talk) 21:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Also, Wikipedia is not a reliable source so it cannot be used as reference. Run n Fly (talk) 13:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Correct spelling of mother's name

What is the correct spelling of Bibi's mother's first name? In this article the spelling "Tzila" is used; however, his brothers' articles use other spellings: at Yonatan Netanyahu it says "Zila", and at Iddo Netanyahu it says "Cila". Animal lover 666 (talk) 05:57, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Recent change in Israel.

I don't follow what happens in Israel closely. I just noticed this https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/13/israel-parliament-to-vote-in-new-government-ending-netanyahu-rule.html . How does it work when there are news like that? Dominic Mayers (talk) 17:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

MIT class ranking

I added a dubious tag to the statement that Netanyahu graduated near the top of his class. Although it is referenced to a NYTimes article, it runs into the problem that MIT does not do class rankings. Roadrunner (talk) 03:24, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Roadrunner, Maybe they don't do them in todays era. Do we know if they did them in the past? Idan (username is Zvikorn) (talk) 10:51, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
And a class rank might be informally maintained by professors involved with the course. Solipsism 101 (talk) 18:32, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-Confirmed Edit Request 13 June 2021

CHange "Bennett signed a coalition agreement with Lapid, meaning that Netanyahu will very likely be ousted by 13 June (as of 8 June 2021)." to "Bennett signed a coalition agreement with Lapid, ousting Netanyahu on 13 June." to reflect current events [1] DTLT (talk) 18:34, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done Changed but not by me --Vacant0 (talk) 18:36, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/06/13/world/israel-knesset-bennett-lapid-netanyahu

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 June 2021

He was the former prime minister of israel succeeded by Benfatti Natalie 117.237.205.6 (talk) 21:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Misspelling (and whether or not that was a joke) notwithstanding, the article appears to correctly reflect this change, at least in the infobox. If there is any other part of the article that is wrong, please point out which one, or just wait a minute. The attention this article is getting today due to the recent change will likely ensure that it is corrected.  A S U K I T E  21:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 June 2021

Change "9th Prime Minister of Israel" to "9th and 13th Prime Minister of Israel" Keithshep (talk) 02:10, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

My apologies: I just saw the ordering system clarified above. Feel free to ignore. Keithshep (talk) 02:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

(Marking as answered) Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 04:43, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 July 2021

Add Category:Leaders of the Opposition (Israel). Quacelinz3 (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done Shellwood (talk) 17:42, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Benjamin_Netanyahu/Archive_2&oldid=1079509394"