This article was nominated for deletion on 9 December 2021. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello Marloweperel. My concern is that the recent changes add a lot of text that is not in accordance with WP:NPOV, and not supported by independent sources. Please feel free to discuss this in further detail here, of course. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:40, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello MrsSnoozyTurtle. The idea behind the rules against POV and close-to-topic-sources is to avoid bias. Here it's all about a military research institute, and the material you keep on removing is descriptive and bland, not here nor there in terms of bias. It names former heads of the institute, the domains of research... Gives an idea about what it's all about. The fact that a researcher, Brig. Gen. Eran Ortal, who has at least a master's degree in this field (see bio), has now become the head of the institute, does in no way disqualify him; he has earned his degrees over a long period of time. There is no advertisement, propaganda, triumphalism... anything of the kind in the info. There are hardly any adjectives, it's all just dry, precise, technical lingo, with 9 different valid sources - of which your reverts keep on removing 7 (!).
As to notability, google for "Bein Haktavim". If it's good enough for King's College London, the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) at Tel Aviv University, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Routledge (here), University Press of Kentucky (here), the University of Washington dissertation of Dr. Marwa Maziad, an Egyptian-American scholar of Middle Eastern Studies with an impressive CV, Americans for Peace Now (here), "Pakistan Defence" (here), etc., etc., etc., it certainly is notable enough for Wikipedia. If I look a bit longer, I might find a reference to it by Yassir Arafat, Colin Powell and Archangel Gabriel.
If you have an issue with Israel's occupation of the West Bank, heavy reliance on its military, export of military hard- and software, etc., then add a "Controversies" section if you can find material particularly referring to this institute and its publications. Or add your voice to the choir. But removing good, useful, i.e. informative and neutral material from this article is not the way to go.
By removing all that info, you are leaving the article empty and useless, and for no good reason. Do you have an issue with the IDF? With military in general? I don't get it. Wiki is first and foremost supposed to inform, and you are here working against it IMO. Please, try and be reasonable. I thank you for that. I have no special interest in this topic, but I came across "Dado Center" and its journal in another article, I knew nothing about it, and was glad to find a good, explanatory Wiki article to help me out. So I'm commenting this from the position of a happy user. But then you intervened and removed most of it. If I leave it as it is now, any future user won't get the benefit I had when I first read it. We're here to serve the user, not to do anything else. Thanks again in advance for rethinking it and accepting these, I hope, rational and convincing arguments. Arminden (talk) 02:06, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Anyway, as per the opening comment in this Talk Page discussion that I started, this is simply a case of applying Wikipedia's policies regarding WP:NPOV and independent WP:RS. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:37, 28 March 2022 (UTC)