Talk:Palestinian airborne arson attacks

editorial
Editorials are reliable for opinions, not for facts, and you have WP:ONUS backwards here. The onus is on your for inclusion of material, not the other way around. Im tagging the article in the meantime.  nableezy  - 18:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You got it wrong here. My onus is to provide a reliable source. Loew Galitz (talk) 18:28, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:ONUS: The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.  nableezy  - 18:30, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The material is disputed on the grounds of it not being a fact ie you can't say it in wikivoice. You can cite it as an opinion if you want ie attribute it to those giving the opinion but frankly, if an opinion source is the best you got, you ain't got much.Selfstudier (talk) 18:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, unless there's some airborne arson experts in there :) Selfstudier (talk) 18:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Fails WP:WEIGHT as opinion. The Jerusalem Post editorial board is not an expert on "environmental terrorism".  nableezy  - 18:39, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I see. I removed the sentence and changed the title to neutral. Loew Galitz (talk)

Jerusalem Post as nonreliable source
Wikipedia has [several thousand refs] to JP. Use WP:RSN to prove your point. Loew Galitz (talk) 18:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Not needed, the url tells you https://www.jpost.com/opinion/hamas-incendiary-balloons-are-ecoterrorism-638873 See where it says "opinion". Selfstudier (talk) 18:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You are referencing the editorial board of the Jerusalem Post, and per WP:RSOPINION you may not use it for claiming facts.  nableezy  - 18:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Tags
Please provide evidence for your concerns expressed in the tags. Loew Galitz (talk) 18:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I just did, you are using unreliable sources to make POV claims. You can pretend like the section above is not justifying the tag, but it is. The Israeli Terrorism Information NGO is a likewise poor source, and the IDF spokesperson is a poor primary source.  nableezy  - 18:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * If you want to accuse some sources as unreliable, please go to WP:RSN. If you think that some sources make POV claims, please find sources which contest them. You cannot single-handedly accuse sources as POV. For example in the case above you said that a newspaper editorial cannot be expert in ecology, and I agreed with your argument, not just opinion. Please discuss other issues. Loew Galitz (talk) 19:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed the disputed opinion. IMO the rest of the article are verifiable facts. If you see any other opinions, please tag them Loew Galitz (talk) 18:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

"Border riots"
Goes without saying that referring to the great march of return as "border riots" in the general sense is biased in favour of Israel and goes against Wikipedia's neutrality laws. I don't have the seniority to edit this page but someone should rectify this, or at least add in the caveat that Israel provoked violent responses from the Palestinian side of the boarder after firing into crowds of protesters indiscriminately on the first day of the great march of return. 2607:FEA8:A4E1:BC00:70B8:900:F3E8:D3AE (talk) 01:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)