User:6SJ7/Past writings/2006 Arb

"Pro-Israeli bias"
The "Proposed decision" page currently includes a proposed finding of fact alleging a "slight pro-Israeli bias" relating to certain Wikipedia articles, as well as a proposed remedy that seeks to address this "slight... bias." Kim has raised issues above regarding the remedy, and if I agreed with the proposed finding of fact on which it is based, I might share her concern. However, I do not believe the proposed finding of fact is correct. There are many examples of anti-Israel bias in Wikipedia articles. However, I do not think that is what this arbitration is about. It is not necessary for the ArbComm to decide whether some articles have a pro-Israel bias, an anti-Israel bias, or an NPOV. As I have said earlier, I believe that if you look at all of the Israel-related articles at any given moment, you would probably find some examples of each of the three categories. The point, however, is that the original title of the article in question here, "Israeli apartheid," does express a POV, and proposed finding of fact number 2 agrees with this. If finding of fact number 2 is accepted (as I believe it should be), the implication is that a move to a more neutral title such as "Allegations of Israeli apartheid" represented a reduction in the biased nature of the previous title, rather than reflecting a bias.

That being the case, my first choice would be that there be no finding of an overall bias. However, in the event that the arbitrators believe that there is a bias, then I think the proposed decision should be modified to reflect what can be proven, that is, there is a perception of bias. This would involve amending proposed finding of fact number 10 and proposed remedy number 5 as follows:

Pro-Israeli bias
10) Due to the aggressive editing of a number of talented users (and some administrators) there is a slight pro-Israeli bias to Wikipedia articles which concern controversial issues which relate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, see, for example this recent edit.

Perception of pro-Israeli bias
10) Due to editing by a number of talented users (and some administrators) there may be a perception of a slight pro-Israeli bias to Wikipedia articles which concern controversial issues relating to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Please note that I have deleted the example because there are many counter-examples of anti-Israeli bias that could be included, but rather than make this an "example war," my proposal is to make this a matter of "perception" rather than accepted fact.

Existing bias
5) Recognizing that there is some pro-Israeli bias in articles such as Allegations of Israeli apartheid, which by their nature involve criticism of Israeli policies, efforts to correct the situation which result in disruption are discouraged. Patient negotiation is counseled together with assumption of good faith on the part of users who take a pro-Israeli point of view. Expressed plainly, a slight pro-Israeli bias such as substitution of "allegations of Israeli apartheid" for "Israeli apartheid" is not an excuse for edit or move warring.

Perception of bias
5) Recognizing that there may be a perception of some pro-Israeli bias in articles such as Allegations of Israeli apartheid, which by their nature involve criticism of Israeli policies, efforts to correct this perceived situation which result in disruption are discouraged. Patient negotiation is counseled together with assumption of good faith on the part of users who are perceived to take a pro-Israeli point of view. Expressed plainly, the perception that the substitution of "allegations of Israeli apartheid" for "Israeli apartheid" introduces a slight pro-Israel bias is not an excuse for edit or move warring.