Talk:Crazy Water Park

comment by RolandR

 * According to The Independent, "There is a widespread assumption in Gaza that Hamas... or at least businessmen close to the Islamic faction," the Crazy Water Park and several other recently opened businesses in Gaza. Some think that Hamas is backing a wave of new businesses including the new Gaza Mall, Asdar Media Centre, a Hamas-owned business that combines a livestock farm with a film production company, and the Al Bustan Restaurant and Leisure Park. Mohammed Al-Araj, Minister of Economics in the 2006 Hamas cabinet, the first government formed by Hamas in Gaza, is believed to be the director of the Crazy Water Park. Some observers believe that Hamas is creating these ventures in leisure services and retail because these sectors yiled returns faster than manufacturing and the organization needs cash to finance its political and military activities.
 * This edit does not even make grammatical sense. What the article cited actiually states is "There is a widespread assumption in Gaza that Hamas, its de facto government, or at least businessmen close to the Islamic faction, are behind the venture (Gaza Mall), though Hamas denies it." No suggestion that Hamas owns the Mall, let alone any other business. Later, referring to this park, it states: "the Crazy Water Aqua Fun Park for children, one of whose directors is believed to be Mohammed Al-Araj, the economics minister in the first government after Hamas won the elections in 2006." That is a VERY long way from suggesting that Hamas owns or controls it. I have again removed the edit. RolandR (talk) 13:32, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I have shortened the statement.AMuseo (talk) 15:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

20$ million? Why not 40$ million?
The number 20$ million is not backed by any reliable source. In the JPost article there is a reference that a 15-20$ million might have been invested, a claim made by the "owner of a popular seaside fish restaurant". I don't think anything negative about mr. Abu Khair, but he is not an authority on corporate economics by default. Let's leave out the figures, rather than copypasting the speculations presented in the Israeli media. --Soman (talk) 20:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Let's do what is usually done on Wikipedia and cite the figure to the reliable newspaper that published it.AMuseo (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * But Israeli newspapers are notoriously unreliable when it comes to Palestinian affairs. And as you can read yourself, the source of the journalists' comment is by no means reliable. Leave out the numbers if they cannot be backed.--Soman (talk) 15:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Israeli newspapers are notoriously unreliable you are becoming disruptive.AMuseo (talk) 16:25, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * "...when it comes to Palestinian affairs". I'm not opposed to using Israeli sources, I do it myself every now and then. However, in any issue remotely related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, you really have to read the fine print when using sources. In this case it is quite clear from where the JP journalist gets the figure, and we can also conclude that the number is not reliable. --Soman (talk) 17:40, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Khaled Abu Toameh is a highly respected journalist. He cites the estimate of an individual  in Gaza.  But that does not mean that he relied solely on the cited individual.  Abu Toameh is extemely unlikely to have cited this figure unless he was following the usual journalistic procedure and making his own judgment that the figure was realistic.  In other words, he would have done the math, added up the probable cost of the several new restaurants beach resorts swimming pools and so forth that have recently opened and decided that the figure he was citing was Plausible.  It is, however, standard Wikipedia procedure to cite such a figure to the nnewspaper, which is what I have done.  What you are doing is original research.AMuseo (talk) 18:22, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Respected by whom? 2) I'm not opposed to stating that the construction is part of a larger process of construction/reconstruction of the devastation left by the brutality of the occupation, but let's leave exact figures out if they cannot be backed up by references. In this sense wikipedia is not a newspaper, it is not ok to add a plausible on what we think is a realistic number (i.e. OR) nor simply forwarding the speculations of others whilst stating it as fact. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news portal. --Soman (talk) 18:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * What you are doing is original research.  I am citing a WP reliable source.AMuseo (talk) 19:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Au contraire. I'm safeguarding wikipedia's standards by insisting reference is reliable. Where is my "original research"? --Soman (talk) 19:13, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Agree w/Museo. Well established journalist for RS.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:10, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Repeated blurb on multiple pages
The same, extremely out-of-date quote by "Egyptian journalist Ashraf Abu Al-Houl" is used verbatim in all the related articles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Bustan_resort, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisan_City_tourist_village as well as this one. The article itself is written as a puff piece, with notable errors (Zahrat Al-Madain "resort" does not seem to exist, or ever did). Mcdruid (talk) 19:56, 20 September 2022 (UTC)