Talk:Land for peace
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Land for peace is part of WikiProject Israel, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Israel articles. |
|
Project Israel To Do (Drop-Down Menu):
|
|
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
Land for peace is part of WikiProject Palestine - a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative, balanced articles related to Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page where you can add your name to the list of members and contribute to the discussion. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Palestine articles. |
| NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the Project's importance scale. |
 |
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses. |
[edit] Results section is OR
The current results section as it is written today is complete OR. The sources references do not connect the events they describe as being a result of the "land for peace" strategy. It is just anti-Palestinian POV and one notes that there is no mention of ISraeli expansion of the settlements that has occured since this strategy has begun or the resistance that Netanyahu put up again this strategy in the mid-1990s. This section feels like someone is taking the opportunity to engage in Palestinian bashing.--70.51.232.124 02:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed the OR section. --70.51.232.124 02:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- How about as a compromise we call this the criticism section, because the events of Gaza post-disengagement are used to criticize land for peace.--Urthogie 02:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- But this is where I argue it is OR. The Gaza disengagement is not arguable a land for peace deal in that it was unilateral, land for peace is a better description of the failed Oslo process where both sides were parties to the events. The chaos and unrest in Gaza post-disengagement is legitimately an aftermath of the disengagement, but it is already detailed in that article. --70.51.232.124 02:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know what I'm saying is that land for peace is criticized because of what happened in Gaza. I'm not saying Gaza was land for peace by saying that.--Urthogie 02:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually I just read through the disengagement article and it doesn't talk about the aftereffects in Gaza except very briefly. I know there is criticism of the land for peace on both sides, but the results section sources didn't connect the events describes to the land for peace process. I think land for peace has failed as well, as it is sort of obvious after more than a decade of attempts. But the results/criticism section as it was was not appropriate, which is why I initially tagged it as POV. --70.51.232.124 02:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- I wasn't using the wikipedia article as my source for citing the Gaza disengagement as something that is used to criticize land for peace. A simple google search will show you many sources which bring up this point.--Urthogie 02:57, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually I just read through the disengagement article and it doesn't talk about the aftereffects in Gaza except very briefly. I know there is criticism of the land for peace on both sides, but the results section sources didn't connect the events describes to the land for peace process. I think land for peace has failed as well, as it is sort of obvious after more than a decade of attempts. But the results/criticism section as it was was not appropriate, which is why I initially tagged it as POV. --70.51.232.124 02:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- I know what I'm saying is that land for peace is criticized because of what happened in Gaza. I'm not saying Gaza was land for peace by saying that.--Urthogie 02:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- But this is where I argue it is OR. The Gaza disengagement is not arguable a land for peace deal in that it was unilateral, land for peace is a better description of the failed Oslo process where both sides were parties to the events. The chaos and unrest in Gaza post-disengagement is legitimately an aftermath of the disengagement, but it is already detailed in that article. --70.51.232.124 02:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- How about as a compromise we call this the criticism section, because the events of Gaza post-disengagement are used to criticize land for peace.--Urthogie 02:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
