Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alleged Palestinian genocide of Israelis

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to 2023 Israel–Hamas war. There is a clear consensus below that the article cannot be retained (I'd argue near-universal agreement). Debate was split between 'delete' and 'merge', and then within 'merge' to various different targets (including existing articles and potential new articles).

Based on this, I have closed this discussion as a redirect to the top-line article. This means the history is preserved behind the redirect at Alleged Palestinian genocide of Israelis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Editors can now, editorially and using normal consensus-building tools such as the talk page and relevant noticeboards, merge or split this content into any potential new articles as they see fit. This redirect can also be re-targetted from 2023 Israel–Hamas war to a more suitable target should a merge or split occur. Daniel (talk) 10:15, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged Palestinian genocide of Israelis

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Alleged Palestinian genocide of Israelis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Duplicates content already at Amin al-Husseini and 2023 Israel–Hamas war

The connection between the content is also very tenuous; while individual aspects might meet GNG, the totality does not. BilledMammal (talk) 08:46, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323: I don't see how it is a "SYNTH" because the synthesis is in the sources, not of my creation. I didn't invent the allegation that the Palestinian cause is a continuation of the Holocaust; I'm citing an Israeli academic who accuses Netanyahu of making that claim; I'm also citing a couple of American academics who make that claim. You may think that A and B have nothing to do with each other, but if there are sources presenting them as connected, then the claim that the connection has been made (which neither I nor the article ever endorse as accurate) is not a SYNTH. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 09:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the connection is based on claims made by Benjamin Netanyahu is really pretty much all that needs to be said about this. "A politician said X" is not a reason to create a topic. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The connection pre-existed Netanyahu, and had been made by other pro-Israel figures before him, as the 2009 cite from Dershowitz demonstrates–six years before Netanyahu's infamous address. When Raz-Krakotzkin accuses many of his fellow Israelis of unfairly conflating the Palestinian cause with the Nazi Holocaust, he's not presenting Netanyahu as the origination of that conflation, merely as the highest profile expression of it. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 09:47, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, so the one half-decent source says the topic is idiotic. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:50, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If notable people are making idiotic claims, what is wrong with documenting their idiocy? SomethingForDeletion (talk) 09:59, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it has a home on some page somewhere, under idiotic ideas for the ages, but not here, on its own page, giving the idiocy undue credence. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:03, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Maybe it has a home on some page somewhere" seems to be an argument for "Merge" rather than "Delete". And I'd actually be okay with "Merge" as an outcome. The question is, merge where? My original idea was not a separate article, it was a subsection at the end of the Genocide against Palestinians article, but both you and User:Scientelensia were opposed to the idea of a section in that article; Scientelensia suggested a separate article, so I've done what Scientelensia suggested. As I've said all along, I think it is more important that the content live somewhere, whether it is its own article or a section within some other article is less important to me. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 10:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My original plan was not to create a separate article, it was simply to add a section describing Israeli genocide claims to the Genocide against Palestinians article. I only decided to create another article instead when the feedback I got from other editors was that they didn't think the content belonged in the same article, and they advised me to create a separate article instead. How can it be that "article created merely to prove a point" when I didn't originally intend to create a separate article at all? My point was simply to document the fact these allegations have been made – a fact many people seem to be ignorant of – if we merged this content into some other article, I wouldn't have a problem with that. Because I think the allegations are notable (because the people who make them are notable). SomethingForDeletion (talk) 09:54, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Löschen or merge with a section on another page. I don't believe that a population can be said to be experiencing genocide whilst it is also increasing in size. I understand why some are reaching for this extreme language, I don't really see that en.wiki needs to treat it as much more than a WP:FRINGE idea. JMWt (talk) 10:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't believe that a population can be said to be experiencing genocide whilst it is also increasing in size The definition of genocide under the Genocide Convention doesn't require a population to shrink (or even stagnate). Under the Genocide Convention's definition of genocide, an ineffective attempt at genocide still counts as genocide. As Jens David Ohlin argues in "Attempt, Conspiracy, and Incitement to Commit Genocide" (2009). Cornell Law Faculty Publications. Paper 24: "However, the crime of genocide has, in a sense, an inchoate component already built into it, since the crime does not require the successful destruction ‘in whole or in part’ of an ethnic group or another group protected by Article II of the Genocide Convention. Indeed, the crime of genocide simply requires the intent to destroy a protected group and the actus reus of the offence does not require the actual destruction of the group. In one sense, this suggests that all crimes of genocide are better characterized as attempt to commit genocide" (my emphasis) SomethingForDeletion (talk) 10:17, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, I'm not arguing with you about genocide. JMWt (talk) 10:25, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There are several competing definitions of the term "genocide", and in many cases the biggest factor determining whether or not something counts as "genocide" is which of those definitions you choose to use. You give me the impression you are only familiar with one of those definitions, the narrowest one. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 10:29, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @JMWt: since you say "or merge with a section on another page", would you support or oppose the below proposal to merge to Second Holocaust? SomethingForDeletion (talk) 00:47, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge the two articles together to an article titled Accusations of genocide in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. nableezy - 14:07, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the only suggestion in this whole discussion that would produce an article that could possibly be neutral, if these were common topics of scholarship. They aren't, and this will still become a coatrack of claims given undue weight. – SJ + 00:02, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Articles can not be merged into a nonexistent article. Please do not suggest this before the article is created. Liz Read! Talk! 05:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
merge to the genocide of Palestinians article and rename that one. That work? nableezy - 00:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nableezy: since you are saying "Merge", would you support or oppose the below proposal to merge to Second Holocaust? SomethingForDeletion (talk) 00:46, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Löschen: Some odd SYNTH, with no sources from RS we'd use. One is green per sourcebot, but that's not enough for a whole article. Oaktree b (talk) 19:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    no sources from RS we'd use. Sources for the article include a chapter in a book published by Columbia University Press, and a law journal. Why are they not "sources from RS we'd use"? One is green per sourcebot What is this "sourcebot" tool? Is there a page explaining how it works? SomethingForDeletion (talk) 18:26, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete: per G3 criterion (pure hoax). It's just petty revenge against the creation of the "Genocide against Palestinians" article. (Which by the way, is just a bunch of postmodern activists proposing the expansion of the definition of genocide to conveniently include the Palestinians. There's no way someone would take that seriously. It's comically harmless, not even worth deleting, and it's going to be merged with another article soon). That should pacify the Israelis. –Daveout(talk) 20:07, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    pure hoax It isn't a hoax that some pro-Israel sources accuse Palestinians of committing genocide of Jews/Israelis. Did I invent articles in the San Diego International Law Journal, a major Israeli newspaper, and a well-regarded group blog by law professors claiming that? Did I fake the quote from a well-known Harvard law professor in which he claimed that? It's just petty revenge against the creation I'm not engaging in revenge. I just thought the existence of these allegations was noteworthy and the fact they have been made ought to be documented. I have never once claimed they are true. One of the sources I cite in the article (the book chapter by Israeli professor Amnon Raz-Krakotzkin) argues they are essentially an Israeli smear job to equate the Palestinian cause with the Holocaust. I think you should WP:AGF. Which by the way, is just a bunch of postmodern activists proposing the expansion of the definition of genocide to conveniently include the Palestinians That's a historically ignorant argument. The guy (Raphael Lemkin) who coined the word genocide defined it in an extremely broad way. Nobody is expanding the definition; on the contrary, the popular definition is heavily narrowed from the original one, and scholars and activists who you accuse of "broadening" it are just relying on the older broader definitions. No "factual relativism" involved here, just the perennial truth that different people define the same words in different ways, and most people are ignorant of definitions that differ from their own–even when those definitions are older. If I had an "agenda" in creating this article, it wasn't anything to do with trying to be pro or anti either side of the conflict, it was to do with trying to counter the ignorance of people who insist their own ahistorically narrow definition of "genocide" is the only correct one. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 18:37, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not encyclopedic, fringe use of polarizing language where inapplicable. Here again: There was no such genocide, we shouldn't have an article on allegations about it. – SJ + 00:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Löschen. Devoid of useful content and can't be fixed. This is only a "thing" in fringe circles. Zerotalk 10:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is only a "thing" in fringe circles This isn't sourced to InfoWars or the National Enquirer; it is sourced to a law journal article, an article in a major mainstream Israeli newspaper, a blog post by the dean of Cornell Law School writing in a notable law professor group blog, a chapter in a book by Columbia University Press discussing a speech by the Israeli Prime Minister, a blog post by a famous Harvard law professor on the website of another major mainstream Israeli newspaper, an article in JSTOR, etc. Those aren't "fringe circles"; they aren't people like Alex Jones or David Icke, which is the kind of circles we normally consider "fringe" SomethingForDeletion (talk) 18:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Second Holocaust: There is no reason to have two articles for the same topic. Parham wiki (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for that suggestion, I support it. It doesn't seem like there is support for this as an independent article, so I am changing my !vote to agree with yours. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Better yet, merge into "paranoia" or "Conspiracy theories" Lol –Daveout(talk) 22:24, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Second Holocaust: (article creator) seems like an appropriate merge target and doesn't seem like there is going to be support for keeping this as an independent article. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 18:41, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Totally Unencyclopedic! Using Wikipedia to gain sympathy against what that hardly exists. Palestinians don't have a military or armed forces to conduct this. The only force that do this is Hamas which itself is created due to Reverse genocide effect.Tousif ❯❯❯ Talk 09:36, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both this and the Israeli one into Allegations of genocide in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, per nableezy above and my comments in the Israeli AFD. Levivich (talk) 16:25, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alleged_Palestinian_genocide_of_Israelis&oldid=1181488544"