Talk:International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance

Help request
Hi! I have tried to update the factual information relating to the article but am wondering if I still need more citations to remove the banner at the top of the page?

Have I used to many links to the org website? Shall I remove them?

I wasn't able to get the flags to appear for the observer countries I added - could anyone help me out with that?

I also wanted to add that I work for this organization. I am trying to maintain a neutral tone and felt the need to edit as the page was factually very out-of-date. I am happy for any support that can be offered!

Thanks!

Help request
Can you advise me on how to improve the tone? i think I have done all I can to try to do this.--Kameyer (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you to the administrators for advice on how to improve the article. I have already made some changes, in an attempt to make the tone of the article more neutral, and will continue to try to improve the text.

As the ITF has, until now, been a relatively low profile IGO, much of the information used to write the article was taken from their own literature. This was unavoidable if I wanted to provide a full account of the way the orgsanisation functions. I have tried to edit out some of the more subjective - rather than purely factual - sections of the article, and will continue to look for other (external) sources on the organisation.

The Conflict of Interest issue - caused by a badly chosen username - is, of course, an important one. Where the editor shares the views of/sympathises with the organisation being written about, a conflict of interest may always be perceived. However, I would suggest that the fact that I support the organisation's ideas and work is not sufficient to be interpreted as a conflict of interest. I still believe that this is an important topic for a wikipedia article - the ITF is an inter-governmental organisation, in which 34 governments actively participate, it surely therefore merits a page in its own right. The aim of the page is in no way promotional (the ITF is not an organisation that seeks financial or other support - it is self-sustained by the contributions of its member states). Any suggestions on how to edit the page to avoid misinterpretation are very welcome.--Kameyer (talk) 07:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

A further issue: many of the wiki-links in this page go to empty spaces (ie. pages are not yet written). I see how this is a problem! Is there any problem with me also writing the missing pages (which I believe are worth writing in themselves)? --Kameyer (talk) 08:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No, there's no problem if you create the articles. The article seems a bit biased IMO. The fact that you are a supporter of the org. will not be a COI unless the article is promotional. I suggest that you try to keep the article as encyclopedic as possible. If there's a problem, ask me for help on my talk page. Do take your time to read our MOS. Pmlineditor    Talk  15:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

definition of anti-semitisim issued by IHRA
I found this 'definition' in a recent issue (Aug. 2018) of the Guardian newspaper.

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

There are several observations one could make about this short text, but the most outstandingly inappropriate statement in it is undoubtedly 'directed against ... non-Jewish individuals ...'. It calls to mind the US organization called the Anti-Defamation League, the sole concern of which is defamation of Jews and its apparent lack of concern for other groups discriminated against.

The principal issue here is surely ethnic and racial hatred expressed in often violent ways, both in word and deed, by one set of people against another.

The attempt inthe above 'definition' at an all-embracing condemnation is not only fairly semi-literate but profoundly ill-advised. (Unsigned).


 * This is discussed at Talk:Working Definition of Antisemitism. Mock wurzel soup (talk) 13:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Un-encyclopedic edits
Yesterday, I removed this text from the lede: "Its key aim is to conflate the ever-peddled atrocities of World War II with the modern-day expression of solidarity with the Palestinians. It is now the case that in affiliated societies, one is classed as Anti-Semitic purely for opposing the Israeli illegal occupation of the West Bank and Golan Heights, and this concept is frequently twisted to imply that a person denies Jewish people their right to self-determination, even if no Jews lived on the specific land that Israel has occupied and/or annexed." It was reinstated today by an anonymous editor with the explanation "so is the fantasy peddled in this very article where it masquerades as something benevolent. However, on Wikipediia we follow sources and don'r remove them when we don't like them)". I am not removing now as I do not want to get into a revert war, but I believe it should be removed immediately. The link here is to an opinion piece by Peter Beinart who says the"definition, produced by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance in 2016, includes among its “contemporary examples” of antisemitism “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination”. In other words, anti-Zionism is Jew hatred." That may be a legitimate criticism of the definition, which, if considered noteworthy, might have a place in the definition's article in an appropriate section, (a) an opinion piece should not be used as a source for a factual claim; (b) the lede is not a place to include one person's criticism; and (b) the citation in no way supports the text that the IHRA's "key aim" is this conflation, and in fact makes no comment on the aims of the Alliance. The text is editorialising, which should not be done in the voice of the encyclopedia; it is badly written to the point of incomprehensibility; and it is not justified in the source used. BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Paul A. Levine
Please add him and his donation for International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_A._Levine מתיאל (talk) 18:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)מתיאל

Palestinian academics' letter
Re this edit by : I strongly believe this letter is undue in the further reading/external links, as it refers to one small element of the IHRA's work from one very particular perspective: It is not a good Further reading entry for this encyclopedia article. I will delete unless editors disagree. BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:53, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Criticism ...   Is Semitism a word, and is it racist to use this word?
Regarding  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Holocaust_Remembrance_Alliance#Controversies

See  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitism See  ... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Semitism See  ... https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/antisemitism/spelling-antisemitism See  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Israel See  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacism#Jewish

Is Semitism a word, and is it racist to use this word?

"IHRA’s concern is that the hyphenated spelling allows for the possibility of something called ‘Semitism’, which not only legitimizes a form of pseudo-scientific racial classification that was thoroughly discredited by association with Nazi ideology, but also divides the term, stripping it from its meaning of opposition and hatred toward Jews"

Or is Semitism Racism, or Jewish Supremacy?

"policy or predisposition favorable to Jews"

I suggest there be a new section added, Criticism, in addition to the section Controversies.

See  ... https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/11/23/the-ihra-and-the-palestinian-struggle-for

Also, the words anti-semite or anti-semitism are misnomers, because most Semites are not Jews, they are Arabs.

See  ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misnomer See  ... https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Semite

SteveBenassi (talk) 14:18, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No. Antisemitism is one of those many words that, taken etymologically, don't reflect what users take them to mean. Use, since 1879, determines nonetheless the field of its denotation, which here refers to one people, Jews. It turns odium against anyone Jewish into a principle (-ism), and sneaks around the obvious contempt in what properly and accurately should be called clinical 'Judeophobia' (for it is a neurotic pathology) by hiding the referent, Jews, behind the concept of a pan-Semitic label. I.e., 'Who me hate Jews? Oh dear me, no. I am just resolutely opposed to having any 'Orientals' (wogs) in our midst'. That condemns each and every Jew while not naming them. It's true that the sentiment persists now mainly against Arabs in general. It is irrelevant that 'Semitic' has a linguistic, but not a 'racial' sense, or that the Ashkenazi are overwhelmingly European, as much historically, and indeed 'genetically', at home in that continent as any other western people.Nishidani (talk) 15:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * As for the IHRA, it is a political lobby trying to mess with language, indeed engage in an Orwellian kind of reengineering of concepts whose purpose is to so restrict with politically correct definitions and sub-definitions of Zionism(Antisemitism/Israel that open rational debate on any of these topics could only be legitimate if it were overseered bureaucratically by a cohort of verbal monitors, and a mobile administrative workforce of legal sherpas.Nishidani (talk) 15:29, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Holocaust denial and distortion on social media
Through the network, IHRA has developed specific recommendations for policy-makers and decision-makers on recognizing and countering Holocaust distortion with the input of international experts, published in partnership with UNESCO, and the global awareness-raising campaign #ProtectTheFacts initiated by the IHRA together with the United Nations, UNESCO and the European Commission.

Lisa Rechelle (talk) 10:55, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

IHRA
A quick google news about IHRA reveals that its antisemitism definition controversy dominates coverage about the alliance. I see no weight to the argument that a brief mention of this in the lede is "undue", especially as the lede should summarize most important controversies. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:11, 12 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't object to briefly mentioning controversy if this is one of the reasons the Alliance is noteworthy, but a description of specific criticisms of the definition (which are given plenty of space in the definition article article) don't belong in the lead of the article about the Alliance. BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:31, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:LEDE "It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies." Makeandtoss (talk) 13:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Today, I would suggest that the definition is very much something that contributes to the IHRA's notability (even centrally). I certainly first encountered the acronym in the context, and I'm sure many others have too. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:06, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The content will be restored if no counterarguments are provided here. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Introduction of Another Controversy on the Page
I would like to introduce another controversy regarding the IHRA and its part on HR bill 6090. Correditor56 (talk) 02:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)


 * https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6090/text Correditor56 (talk) 02:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)