Talk:Human rights violations against Palestinians by Israel

About the title and the non-NPOV tag
The title is specific, if verbose. @WeatherWriter's edit summary when adding the NPOV template: "Title seems iffy and with this being a new article, a full check should be done to ensure it meets all NPOV guidelines. Adding template until a check is preformed".

The previously created articles about Israeli human rights violations include: Human rights in Israel (which includes a section on the OPT, but is mostly focused on rights of Jewish nationals, rather than more broadly on those considered juridical citizens of Israel or those living under military occupation) and Human rights in the State of Palestine which is mostly focused on the PA.

Given the voluminous record of Israeli human rights violations specifically against Palestinians, a page dedicated to this seems justified, and the title itself does seem neutral in terms of POV.

This text seems to be primarily lifted from the relevant sections in Israeli occupation of the West Bank which is already too long. Note that page does not have a NPOV tag, and was recently reviewed for GA status (it was not granted GA status mostly on the basis of it being too long and having some formatting issues, although I think they did mention the structure indicated some potential POV concerns, it never got that tag).

Given that: When can we remove this tag? I can go through this page and the associated occupation of west bank page to reduce redundancy. DMH43 (talk) 22:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)


 * This article doesn't even attempt to present a neutral point of view, and you know it. Until the article presents all notable viewpoints on the subject in a balanced fashion, the tag needs to stay. Marokwitz (talk) 06:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC)


 * - if it is so obvious, what are the notable viewpoints from reliable sources, relevantly discussing the subject of human rights violations against Palestinians by Israel, that are missing from this article?  starship .paint  (RUN) 15:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I remind you that the contentious topics procedure applies to this article. If you (or any other editor) truly believe the lead of this article currently represents a neutral point of view, then, in my opinion, your EC authorization should be revoked, as you have clearly not internalized the policies.
 * Waiting for your reply. Removing the NPOV tag will be taken as a "Yes". Marokwitz (talk) 16:51, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It would help us all if you could give a specific reference to NPOV that is violated here. I can see that at least "there have been credible reports" should be something like "Human rights organizations including B'Tselem, HRW Amnesty International have reported". And also the sentence is too long and could be made more focused or high level. DMH43 (talk) 23:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * - you did not answer my question on reliable sources. But still we can make some progress. Does that paragraph you object to either misrepresent certain reliable sources or is there missing content from reliable sources, relevantly discussing the subject of human rights violations against Palestinians by Israel?  starship .paint  (RUN) 23:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Marokwitz how would you define neutral on this? The scope is a one sided interaction, crimes of group A against group B, but it seems fairly logical to have a lot of articles like that, we can't cover everything in every article. Irtapil (talk) 07:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Marokwitz how would you define neutral on this? The scope is a one sided interaction, crimes of group A against group B, but it seems fairly logical to have a lot of articles like that, we can't cover everything in every article. Irtapil (talk) 07:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Looks like a weird fork of Human rights in the State of Palestine to me. Arkon (talk) 22:14, 9 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Why? That article is focused on the PA, this one is focused on Israel DMH43 (talk) 14:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

- are there misrepresentations of reliable sources currently in the article or are there any missing and relevant reliable sources you would like added? The tag should not remain if there is no substantiation for the tag from relevant reliable sources.  starship .paint  (RUN) 02:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Proposal for handling overlap with Israeli occupation of the West Bank (IOWB)
DMH43 (talk) 17:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) `Resources` section is more relevant to IOWB. Propose to delete from this article, only including the main points in a small subsection.
 * 2) `Territorial fragmentation and domination over the Palestinians->Background` and `Territorial fragmentation and domination over the Palestinians->Planning for Fragmentation` seem more relevant to IOWB. Propose to delete from this article, summarizing the main points in a section describing background (which I would guess should include some other relevant background about human rights violations).
 * 3) Delete `Territorial fragmentation and domination over the Palestinians->Taxation`.
 * 4) Merge `Territorial fragmentation and domination over the Palestinians->Technologies of control` into a background section here.
 * 5) Move the remaining sections under `Territorial fragmentation and domination over the Palestinians` to a new section `Collective punishment and domination in the Occupied Territories`.
 * 6) `Economic and social benefits and costs of the occupation` section seems more relevant to IOWB. Propose to delete from this article, merging the discussion from HRW into a new brief section about `Economic exploitation`.


 * some degree of overlap is fine, we can go further into detail where more approrpiate and make it WP:SPINOFF
 * we shouldnt go deleting things willy nilly just because two articles say the same thing, you can't reasonably expect people to read every article to find every fact. One article can hold a summary of what the other article goes further into depth for and crosslink between the two where necessary. We have the potential to maximize the amount of relevant information this way. We may have the potential to make some of the more egregious things that may need to be trimmed down in the future into their own articles too, and reframe some things here to be centered around the violations themselves rather than the west bank per se, to make it more applicable to the article DarmaniLink (talk) 13:31, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Al-Aqsa
The archeology section might benefit from covering the excavation under Al-Aqsa? Or is that beyond the scope. Irtapil (talk) 02:45, 29 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I would imagine that restriction of access to religious sites, and the constraints that this places on the freedom of worship/religion, would be more pertinent. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Clean up
Iirc, we agreed to clean up Human rights in Israel after this article was kept. We just need a suitable summary there linked out to here. Selfstudier (talk) 18:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Which sections do you think need summary there? "Human rights in the occupied territories"? DMH223344 (talk) 19:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yea, that one. No hurry though, just something needs to be done idc. Selfstudier (talk) 19:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

US state department as arbiter
I'm not sure why this page begins with a reference to the US state department, as if it is the highest or worthiest arbiter on the matter. Surely the UN and uninvolved third-party subject-matter experts such as academics, human rights groups and others are more relevant? Iskandar323 (talk) 18:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Quite right, the article needs a lot of work tbh, to round it out and bring it up to date. I have been distracted lately, will give some thought to a suitable article skeleton. Selfstudier (talk) 18:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Organ Harvesting Section contains misinformation
The section titled "Israel illegally harvesting organs of Palestinians" contains several false and unsubstantiated statements and should be removed. For a more detailed and evidence-backed discussion, please refer to the Wikipedia article documenting the allegation.

The statement claiming that "Former Abu Kabir Forensic Institute head, Yehuda Hiss, claimed Israel was killing Palestinians to harvest their organs" is factually incorrect. Furthermore, the primary source of the allegations, the author of the Aftonbladet article, has explicitly acknowledged the absence of concrete proof to support his assertions Haaretz article and CNN report.

Moreover, the activities of the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute, while controversial, were not exclusive to any single group and involved unauthorized organ retention from various individuals, including IDF soldiers, which the institute has addressed. These points underscore the misleading nature of singling out one group as victims in the title and narrative of this section.

Given these considerations, I strongly urge the editorial team to remove the section to uphold the standards of accuracy and impartiality expected. Truthwillsetfree (talk) 06:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Not done. Removing the entire section requires consensus. Best left to EC editors to discuss. Selfstudier (talk) 09:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 May 2024
Change "thought at the time to pose a potential a security threat." under Impact on education to "thought at the time to pose a potential security threat." This is to fix a grammatical error. Snowey457 (talk) 17:27, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * ✅ Thanks for spotting that! My real namm  (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 18:19, 8 May 2024 (UTC)