Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Settler violence


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep.  MBisanz  talk 00:26, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Settler violence

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:POV, WP:ESSAY. Based on heavily partisan and unreliable WP:RS. I wonder if an article titled Palestinian violence would be legitimate balance to this one. Shuki (talk) 22:23, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as nom. --Shuki (talk) 22:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  —Shuki (talk) 22:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions.  —Shuki (talk) 22:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - There is an article similar to what you describe, it is called Palestinian political violence. Nableezy (talk) 22:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Well sourced article about a notable aspect of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Factsontheground (talk) 23:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Most of the sources are from partisan left-wing and far-left-wing anti-settler organizations. There is no news here or encyclopedia article material for that matter, only an attempt to collectively delegitimize Jewish settlers and Israel. In contrast, the 'Palestinian political violence' article is about organizations who have openly declared their right to use violence as a legitimate tool, while the settler article is about a fictitious 'phenomenon' that has no apparent academic basis except the attempt to create one with this article. There are no settler organizations promoting violence and no phenomenon that can be attributed to 300 000 settlers. --

Shuki (talk) 22:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Shuki both points simply aren't true. Most of the sources are mainstream Israeli media, such as Factsontheground (talk) 03:20, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Aren't true? FWIW, everyone knows that HaAretz is left of mainstream and certainly not a pure RS on settler issues (as stated explicitly in past by the editors). Most of the sources are certainly not mainstream media, check for yourself. The article is a POV essay to defame 'settlers'. This is a perfect piece for someone's personal blog, not an encyclopedia. Most of the claims are out of context (settlers attack diplomats), some sections are irrelevant to the attempted subject (IDF mutinies?), others based on heresay ( "It is widely suspected" ), and others are dramatized to evoke sympathy for alleged victims ("Amnesty International has alleged"). As for those organizations, they already have articles. If you read them, then you'd understand that they were not representing anyone but themselves and certainly not settlers. Claiming otherwise is POV analysis. --Shuki (talk) 18:29, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This article is indeed poorly written and resembles an essay. An article could certainly exist on 'Settler violence', there are an abundance of sources on the topic and while I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a phenomena or an innate quality of Israeli settlers there are a number of notable acts of violence committed by settlers against Palestinians. But the article, as it stands now, is not an encyclopedic entry. I'll work on it for a bit as the topic is one that gets a lot of coverage in numerous RSs. And Haaretz is certainly a RS on these issues. Nableezy (talk) 19:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep needs work, but a usable sourced start for a notable topic. If there are good right-wing sources for the material described, they too should  of course be added. DGG (talk) 04:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep but rename/refocus. The article is currently a daughter article of the Israeli settlement article, specifically subsection Israeli settlement. It should be (as some of the content in it suggests) a daughter of the broader section Israeli settlement. That will be more useful. Rd232 talk 20:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 01:27, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete If this article is kept it needs to be almost entirely reworked, it is heavily biased and POV throughout. I'd say it would be easier to simply delete and start fresh. --Pstanton (talk) 01:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ? There's far too much sourced stuff which would be part of a useful article (if refocussed as I suggested above) to simply delete. I don't see the content particularly biased per se either - the bias flows from the frame of the article focus, which needs correcting to look at the wider picture. Rd232 talk 03:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * keep The New York Times or Haaretz are not extremist left wing publications, so it is not accurate to deprecate the numerous references as was done above. Unchecked violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians has been widely reported by reliable sources. This could be covered as a section in a more general article, but the number of sources appear to justify a break-out article. It should be retitled to show its middle east focus, since there were "settlers" in many other countries, such as the U.S., and they were often violent, or were victims of violence. Edison (talk) 04:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * comment Whenever I see a specific population being singled out and accused, I exchange the words in order to hear how it would sound with other minorities in the title or as subject of the article. I also look for other similar examples for other populations. So when it comes to racism, I do not AGF. Look at other conflict areas around the world and show me how violence carried out by the public warrants such a blanket generalized title. Some I found (Kosovo, Serbia), are somewhat decent overviews, a format that might actually be suitable for the settler and Arab issue. But then it would be expected that that article actually be NPOV and provide context, perhaps even legitimizing the settler protests, and the extremely rare instances of violence committed by settlers. The current article is just an excuse to pull an issue out of the context of the larger conflict and also attempt to then list every occurence of rock throwing and shooting, by accusing all 'settlers' of the actions of unconnected, and unorganized individuals. The Palestinian Poltical Violence article is not a good comparision at all. If this article stays, then we will also need to open a parallel article about Palestinian individual violence, an article that could also be sourced a plenty with Israeli and foreign sources. --Shuki (talk) 14:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Isn't that what I said? It needs a wider focus. Rd232 talk 14:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * This article is a WP:POVFORK of the wider focus that already exists at Israeli–Palestinian conflict. --Shuki (talk) 14:44, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't be silly, Israeli–Palestinian conflict covers the entire conflict, how it can possibly be a POV fork of that?! Even Israeli settlement is quite big. This is why I argued that it should be a daughter article of Israeli settlement rather than of Israeli settlement as it is now. Rd232 talk 14:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge. Doesn't cover anything that can't reasonably be included in Israeli settlement. At the very least it needs to be renamed - the current title does not make clear which settlers we are talking about and could be expected to include historical settlers in Ireland, America or South Africa - a more specific title is needed. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 01:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment As I said in the first part, I see this as an appropriate expansion of an aspect of a topic, not a POV fork. One of the manner elements connected with the israeli settlement is settler violence. DGG (talk) 11:50, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * keep - IF it was amended to the focus on the subject at the meta level rather than the incident level. Alternatively merge into Israeli_settlement to frame it better. I have to declare a bias in that I'm not a fan of any of the I-P violence related articles. They seem to turn into POV-fests.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 07:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC)....and this UN OCHAOPT report "Unprotected: Israeli settler violence against Palestinian civilians and their property" is a good source for a higher level approach....so amended from weak keep to keep.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 14:13, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.