Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Occupation of Palestine
The following discussion comes from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. This is an archive of the discussion only; please do not edit this page. -Kbdank71 20:27, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I count 10 delete votes (including nominator and one anonymous IP) and three keeps. Consensus to delete. -[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 23:41, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
POV duplicate of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Author moved one page into this category. The page in question just survived VfD and is currently being merged (by consensus) to a page already contained by Category:Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Note, same author as Category:Advocacy --Viriditas 21:14, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- KEEP. The term "occupation" is widely accepted as fact. There is NO consenus to merge the article; Viriditas apparently thinks that agreement by one side (ie. her band of Palestine deniers) is consensus (!?). Using a euphemism (in this case: "conflict") is egregiously POV (see Jimbo Wales) because it places the occupier and the occupied on equal footing and denigrates the rights and suffering of victims. HistoryBuffEr 22:47, 2004 Nov 13 (UTC)
- Delete. Usual attempt to create a POV fork. Jayjg 23:19, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Obvious POV aside, what would go into one category that wouldn't go into the other? -Sean Curtin
- delete - redundant and POV. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 03:45, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Del. As a matter of fact, conflict is as neutral as can be, while occupation is POV. ←Humus sapiens←Talk 09:08, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. --Mrfixter 11:39, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete--Josiah 22:28, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete.--Truthaboutchabad 21:54, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete as we already have the full range of articles in Category:Palestine and Category:Israeli-Palestinian conflict already lists articles from all sides of the dispute. This is just another example of User:HistoryBuffer wasting everyone'e precious time with obfuscatory diversions. IZAK 03:20, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- KeepCheeseDreams 19:57, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- 'Delete The term "conflict" is much more widely accepted terminology, and semantically, it includes crucial chapters of the relations between the parties prior to June 4th, 1967. The term "Occupation of Palestine" is vehemently POV and, I think it's fair to presume, would probably concern exclusively Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, ignoring Egypt's and Jordan's respective 19-year-long occupation and ultimately representing an anti-Israeli POV perspective of history. 217.132.221.56 17:02, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Keep, although I realize that I'll never understand how English words get perceived as "POV" or contaminated by a pro-or-contra position. /Tuomas 22:03, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)