Talk:Limmud South Africa

I think we should have an open discussion about how to portray the Budlender report on this page. A prior edit citing those portions of the Budlender report which corroborated Limmud allegations about abusive behavior by protesters at the 2009 conference (in tandem with, though not replacing, discussion of elements of the report critical of Limmud), as well as clarifying that Mr. Budlender rejected the "racial profiling" allegation, was reverted as not "constructive".

I'm not sure what was non-constructive about the edit I put forward -- indeed, I would say it corrects a critical lack of neutrality. The Budlender report clearly focused on two issues -- first, the allegations of racial profiling, and second, the allegations of abusive harassment by the protesters. The prior iteration of the post only focused on the former. I added the latter, and also clarified the details of the former (namely, that Mr. Budlender did not find a policy of racial profiling, while also finding some disparate treatment occurred). This information was extensively cited, is clearly topical to the article at hand, provides important context, and furthers Wikipedia's goal of providing a balanced, neutral perspective by not excerpting only the elements of the Budlender report hostile to Limmud (needless to say, I did not, nor would I approve of, deleting reference to the portions of the report that are critical of Limmud).

I'd would be open to hearing why only those elements of the report critical of Limmud should be present on this page, but I am skeptical why negative and positive information about Limmud from the same source about the same event ought to be treated differently. Alternatively, it might be useful for some proposals of alternate wording that incorporate all critical aspects of the report (rejecting that racial profiling occurred, affirming that some disparate treatment did occur, and affirming that the protesters engaged in inflammatory and offensive language directed at conference attendees).

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Limmud South Africa. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110829155025/http://prog.limmud.org.za/index.cgi?temp=2011%2Fconferences_sum2011 to http://prog.limmud.org.za/index.cgi?temp=2011%2Fconferences_sum2011
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110829155020/http://prog.limmud.org.za/index.cgi?temp=2010%2Fconferences_sum2010 to http://prog.limmud.org.za/index.cgi?temp=2010%2Fconferences_sum2010
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120330225239/http://prog.limmud.org.za/program/2009/showpresenters2009.cgi?city=cpt to http://prog.limmud.org.za/program/2009/showpresenters2009.cgi?city=cpt
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081221160510/http://www.limmud.org.za/program/showpresenters2.cgi?city=cpt to http://www.limmud.org.za/program/showpresenters2.cgi?city=cpt

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Limmud South Africa. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110411021935/http://www.saifac.org.za/staff.htm to http://www.saifac.org.za/staff.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:51, 23 December 2017 (UTC)