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. Despite the long discussion, the consensus to keep is very clear, 18 to 3. Sandstein 07:20, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

Racial profiling in Israel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page is a tiny fork of the Racial profiling article with no additional substantial information. Kigelim (talk) 13:42, 20 June 2018 (UTC)The user can't vote per WP:ARBPIA3--Shrike (talk) 17:23, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 June 20. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:01, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 14:53, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a Blatant WP:POVFORK of Airport security#Israel and Blatant WP:POVFORK of Racial profiling#Israel. Article creator appears to have "created" a paragraph already available on two other pages. And Note that looks awfully WP:POINTY that this is the sole Racial profiling in... article we have about a country.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:42, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah well, there's airport racial profiling in the United States. Not a WP:POVFORK anymore. Ethanbas ^(talk) 04:13, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as POVFORK. Shift content somewhere else if necessary. D4iNa4 (talk) 17:35, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not a WP:POVFORK anymore. Ethanbas ^(talk) 04:17, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Information in that article (a single paragraph) can be merged to Airport security#Israel or other articles related to this topic.--יניב הורון (Yaniv) (talk) 21:28, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not just a single paragraph now, and the current text can't be merged into any other single article now. Ethanbas ^(talk) 04:20, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, no need for this fork as info already included in two other articles. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:50, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is new content now. Ethanbas ^(talk) 04:17, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. Copy pasted material, not a valid fork.Icewhiz (talk) 19:32, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is new content now. Ethanbas ^(talk) 04:17, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Struck !vote based on new content. I still suspect this is a POVFORK of something (Security screening in Israel?) - but I need to veriffy this. At the very least this will need to be renamed, but reserving judgement as I have not checked throughly yet.Icewhiz (talk) 18:04, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. The campaign against this article was either begun by, or participated in by a reader of my blog who announced today that there would be an organized campaign to delete it. I suspect that the blog post I wrote, which linked to this article spurred the campaign to delete it. Here is the quote that the commenter wrote in the comment thread concerning this article: "And you Israeli profiling article will be deleted soon. Can’t believe you bring Wikipedia as a source, especially a tiny little article that is clearly written by an anti Israeli." (Redacted) Editors should keep in mind that there is a campaign to suppress what he views as anti-Israel speech in suppressing this article.

I also note that Kigelim, the first to request deletion here, has a history of stalking articles I've contributed to and has false accused me of sockpuppetry in the past: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Richards1052/Archive

In other words, he is not a disinterested Wikipedia editor, but someone with an ideological agenda.

If this article is available in other formats in other Wikipedia articles, you should realize that when I did a Google search for sources on the subject, this article was the only Wikipedia article which was listed. I fear that deleting the article will render the subject more obscure and less accessible for journalists and researchers like myself. Richard Silverstein (talk) 01:15, 22 June 2018 (UTC)The user can't participate in this AFD per WP:ARBPIA3--Shrike (talk) 13:23, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Me, anti-Israeli? Ha-ha... Thanks for sharing the comment from your blog. I will add material to this article and then vote to keep. Ethanbas ^(talk) 02:04, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ethanbas: The sort of unrelated sources you added and the minimal effort you have made when creating this article show your deep opinion on the matter.

@Richards1052: Your article clearly shows you don't understand what does Wikipedia is all about. Many, if not most, of the article you have edited, have been related to your blog. Kigelim (talk) 09:25, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep. I have added a lot of new material, meaning that this article can no longer be considered to be a redundant fork. I'm happy to add 10,000 more bytes of text if you don't agree (: Ethanbas ^(talk) 04:25, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Substantial article. רדיומן (talk) 04:58, 22 June 2018 (UTC)The user can't participate in this AFD per WP:ARBPIA3--Shrike (talk) 13:23, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Note Please note that there has been canvassing (Redacted).Icewhiz (talk) 08:28, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Note that Racial profiling in the United States has been redirected to Racial profiling. Which makes the canvassing push to keep this article look awfully WP:POINTy.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:20, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - looks like a valid spin-off article off the main one. I note that earlier "delete" votes must have been based on some watered down version and the editors should revisit their votes in good faith.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:30, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Note - it's strange that this article was nominated for deletion just now, even though it's existed since September 16th.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:34, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It's understandable that moves were made to delete the article in an earlier, skimpy state of editing. Ethanbas has shown that abundant material exists on the topic. Following his lead, I also have begun to add some material. A cursory examination of sources proves the field is covered widely, and therefore deserves a stand-alone article.Nishidani (talk) 14:39, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Volunteer Marek and Nishidani. --NSH001 (talk) 14:59, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep — the article is well-sourced and this is enough of an issue in many countries that I don't believe all racial profiling on earth should be described in a single overview article. -Darouet (talk) 16:08, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete seems to be a POVFORK and possibly a coatrack, I echo Icewhiz's comments. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 17:00, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - obviously. Extensively covered in reliable sources, meets GNG by a mile and does not fail any WP:NOT criteria. nableezy - 17:10, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per Darouet — the fact that some subjects still need development and new article creation (like racial profiling, domestic violence is another one) doesn't have anything to do with whether the topic meets WP:GNG, which it does. Seraphim System ^(talk) 18:03, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - notable and well-sourced. Landbroke99 (talk) 19:40, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above, good sourcing and notable topic. Emass100 (talk) 06:18, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Appears to be a valid spinoff; too much substance in this to merge the whole thing back into one of the suggested targets above. Multiple weighty sources discussing the subject. Vanamonde (talk) 06:57, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• (voted keep below) Delete indiscriminate collection of minor incidents, coupled with a few general definitions which have nothing to do with Israel. wumbolo ^^^ 11:49, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, let's see. The article has an "Overview" section which discusses in detail the emergence of the practice. This is not "minor incidents" nor "few general definitions" and it has everything to do with Israel. Then it has a section on "Racial profiling at Ben Gurion airport". Yes, the first paragraph describes an "incident" but it's not a minor one. Are you really claiming that the Lod Airport massacre was a "minor incident"? Really? The next two paragraphs of the section describes academic views and security analysts views and discusses the efficacy of the practice. Not a "general definition" and since this is Ben Gurion airport it also has a lot to do with Israel. I think. Then there's a section on "Racial profiling in other context" which discuss where else the practice is utilized. Again, there's no "minor incidents" here, nor is this "few general definitions". Finally there's a section on "Emulation in United States" which provides further encyclopedic information. So, I'm sorry, but I don't understand your comment at all. It seems to be completely detached from reality.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:55, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. WP:NPOV fails heavily on this one, throughout it all, and it starts with the title, which fails WP:POVNAMING and should rather be the neutral formula "Criminal profiling in Israel," but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, even when clearly the article utterly fails WP:BALANCE and WP:IMPARTIAL. It should also be mentioned that criminal profiling is legitimate in Germany^[1] and a majority of police officers in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada consider profiling to be useful, ^[2] so it'd probably be negligent of the Semites to not do the same as their Anglo and Germanic colleagues do. XavierItzm (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Offender profiling is not the same thing. Law enforcement can't take an "offender profile", like the decsription that "most serial killers are white males" and then cast a wide net and begin investigating white males, in general, without specific probable cause. That is when it becomes racial profiling. Racial profiling has been used, and in the United States, for example and it had led to 14th amendment challenges, and convictions being overturned in some states in the aftermath of Whren. They can use an offender profile to try to id a specific suspect after a crime has been committed, in pursuit of a criminal conviction subject to the the rules of criminal procedure. The article can be improved, it will be improved, the sourcing will be improved. I hope this sufficiently explains the difference betwen criminal profiling and racial profiling as distinct concepts.Seraphim System ^(talk) 12:42, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I indicated on the article's talk page, XavierItzm, your summary of what the articles say about Germany is completely erratic. Criminal profiling which has elements of racial, ethnic, religious or national profiling is formally forbidden in Germany and Europe. Your suggested name change would nicely gut the article of all the evidence numerous quality sources on Racial profiling in Israel cites. That indeed would be POV-pushing by suppressio veri. Nishidani (talk) 13:23, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seraphim System makes an argument about U.S. law which is entirely irrelevant to a foreign country. Seraphim System confuses ex-ante and ex-post criminal profiling. Seraphim System appears to believe only ex-post profiling exists ("to try to id a specific suspect after a crime has been committed") In reality, ex-ante (predictive) criminal profiling "can be effective law enforcement".^[1].
Nishidani is just flat out wrong. Nishidani seems to not realize that in Germany "the creation of criminal profiles is generally a legitimate method of prevention and investigation used by the police".^[2]. XavierItzm (talk) 13:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The quote continues

Profiling, however, must be led by the principles of the presumption of innocence and of impartiality, in order to fulfil the demands placed by the rule of law. Consequently, the indicators used to create profiles of suspects and perpetrators must be based on evidence or other sufficient information related to a specific crime. If, however, profiling is not based on substantiated assumptions, but only on the use of unchangeable characteristics such as skin colour or an alleged immigrant background, it represents a form of discrimination. In such a scenario, the terms ‘ethnic profiling’ and ‘racial profiling’ are used, synonymously. . . According to the FRA EU-MIDIS study ‘Understanding and Preventing Discriminatory Ethnic Profiling’, unequal treatment on the basis of ethnic background or religion is never legitimate nor lawful.

I.e. as in Canada, Germany regards criminal profiling as related to investigations that follow up a specific crime. It is, as I showed by citing the German court case verdict, German courts regard racial profiling as contravening European law.Nishidani (talk) 14:24, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You only appear to read the first paragraph or title of the sources you cite. In all of them, your simplistic assertions are contradicted, as shown (the Canadian article actually says criminal profiling is based on crime scene analysis, which means it is totally irrelevant to what we are discussing etc.) This is not the place to discuss this.Nishidani (talk) 14:17, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD is not the right place for detailed discussion about the offender profile article which deals with multiple countries — I only raised the issue to explain that Racial profiling and Offender profiling — which always deals with a specific offender — would be two separate articles. This applies to the spinoffs as well.Seraphim System ^(talk) 14:04, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to Airport Security in Israel as that is the main topic of this article. AadaamS (talk) 19:28, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is not the point of this article. Feel free to make a new article. Ethanbas ^(talk) 19:36, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but Rename to Security screening in Israel - which is clearly the topic of this article (and this article would be a POVFORK of, if we had it). Profiling in security screening in Israel is wider than just racial or ethnic in Israel - it is also based on age, travel group, behavioral metrics, and a number of other parameters.Icewhiz (talk) 19:45, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the material has nothing to do with security screening in Israel, but with racial profiling since the late 1940s, where the express intent was not 'security' of the state but he establishment of a ethnically defined majority. So a name change along these lines is pointless.Nishidani (talk) 08:31, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. And it would be interesting to have more articles like this for more countries.Wikisanchez (talk) 02:54, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. When I first heard about this article (by chance) I was dubious of the possibility of a good article despite the phenomenon being a fact of everyday life in Israel covered by many sources. But I changed my mind after seeing what is there so far and considering the possibilities for further improvement. I just suggested a whole additional section on the talk page. Whatever justification for deletion that used to exist does not exist any longer. Zero^talk 06:49, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP. A few discussions have been started on the talk page. Let's wait and see if the article will be improved. wumbolo ^^^ 15:07, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep and Rename to Security screening in Israel, article is about the use of ethnic profiling in Israel, which sources show is used for security purposes.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:18, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, sources do not show that. The article is about racial profiling, it's purpose and perhaps more importantly, effectiveness, are debated, especially since there are arguments that it may actually increase risk. It's also not limited to "security screening".^[1] Israel's oft-repeated statement is that it's as issue of "nationality" and not "race" but this is not widely accepted as relevant, most sources continue to describe the practice as racial profiling. (As it effects Americans also, based on their race - Americans of one race are treated differently than Americans of another race). Seraphim System ^(talk) 10:30, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although racial profiling can be used in security screening, they are obviously not the same thing. The title should fit the topic of the article, which is racial profiling. Zero^talk 14:56, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Airport screening procedures and racial profiling are not the same thing, Israel happens to use racial profiling at the airport, but also outside the airport - however, on balance, it is not necessary to use racial profiling in screening. Still, every country has security screening at the airport. In Turkey, no one can set foot inside the airport without going through a full security check.Seraphim System ^(talk) 16:00, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Israel uses profiling (a bit wider than just racial) in a number of security checks (and there is a full security check and an "extra full" one). The practice in Israel is closely related to various security activities (also outside the airport).Icewhiz (talk) 16:29, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure some editors will meet that concern by adding to the page materials like these:

• Marc Tracy, Israeli Airport Security Now Checking Emails Tablet 5 June 2012
• George Khoury, ‘This is our Israel, this is for the Jews. No Palestinian should come to Israel’: A Palestinian-American’s story of being detained at Ben Gurion airport Mondoweiss 29 July 29 2015
• Nirit Anderman, 'Arab Actress Tells of Humiliating Security Check at the Airport,' Haaretz 29 July 2016
• Bethan McKernan, 'Palestinian women sue Israeli airlines over 'unwarranted' strip searches,' The Independent 9 October 2017
• Mariam Barghouti, 'Palestinian Women Are Harassed And Humiliated At Checkpoints. Here Are A Few Of Their Stories,' The Forward 17 October 2017 Nishidani (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Based on the efforts of content contributors, but oppose any name change that misinterprets the subject of the article such as "Security screening in Israel".TheGracefulSlick (talk) 22:23, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, have struck out my delete, well referenced article. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:37, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notable, sourced, improved. /Julle (talk) 10:36, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• needs a title change Because Israel is populated by Arabs and Jews, most of whom are of broadly Middle Eastern origin, so that you usually cannot tell an Arab from a Jew by skin tone, facial features, height, hair type or any other visible physical characteristic. The profiling is done on grounds of ethnicity, citizenship status, and other aspects of personal status and background. This is NOT AT ALL like an American, French or German security office visually screening for people who look black, or look Mediterranean.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:27, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There may be some Western Ameri-centered bias in the academic language being used, but that is source bias that we can't correct on Wikipedia. The language "racial profiling" is more than sufficiently attested to in WP:RS to establish notability. Maybe this is more precisely a form of "religious profiling" where religious affiliation is also inferred based on nationality - but there are legal reasons preventing the adoption of this language in the US. There are exceptions under the 14th, but not the 1st. Some people have written papers arguing for them, but it's too soon to tell if they will gain any traction.Seraphim System ^(talk) 16:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this suggestion is the best one. Profiling in Israel would encompass everything and be more neutral as per EMG. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 16:14, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli profiling, all the best sources affirm, is not 'neutral'. And, nope. The sources say otherwise. You can't tell an 'Ashkenazi Jew' from a 'European' for that matter, something that's never stopped anti-Semites, or stupid people usually, from thinking they can spot a Jew in a crowd. Ask Seth Meyers. Or ask Mira Awad, the Palestinian-Israeli singer identified as an 'Arab' at Ben-Gurion until, when an admirer of her talent among the police recognized her, racheted her status up to Jewish by changing the earlier sticker branding her as an Arab, to make transit easier for her. Her photo doesn't look 'Mediterranean', whatever that means. Nishidani (talk) 16:15, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You prove the point that profile if done is ethnic or religious and not racial. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 16:22, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is perhaps not neutral, but it is perhaps a Risk-neutral measure.Icewhiz (talk) 16:25, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• struck my keep vote. Article title is hopelessly misleading. A clear abuse of Wikipedia.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:59, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Needs a title change. Racial profiling in English at least usually refers to when the discrimination occurs due to physical appearance under the influence of racism (including not just racism but potentially also Colorism). As I believe has been extensively discussed above, positing that Israelis tell Arabs apart from Jews by primarily their physical appearance is preposterous. If this were the case millions of Israeli Jews including many dark skinned Ashkenazis, yes they exist, would be victims of self-hating discrimination, and it is quite possible a majority of Israel's Jewish population could pass as Arab if we were going by appearance alone; on the other hand there is Mira Awad, Ahed Tamimi and all the other very light and/or Euro-looking Arabs that do exist in Israel and the territories, and we would expect them to get preferential treatment (but do they?). Just because some sources clumsily use an American term for another country -- occasionally for lack of a better alternative -- doesn't mean we have to lower ourselves to such a clumsy standard. I can think of some other alternatives: "Security discrimination", "Cultural profiling", "Community profiling", though it might be best to see what alternatives sources are already using.-- Calthinus (talk) 17:17, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are not using it clumsily by the way - Jews are protected as a race under US law, as a class, so discrimination againt Jews is racial discrimination (it doesn't have to be discrimination against whites as a class). Race does not mean skin tone, or physical appearance. There is a lot of background the authors of scholarly sources can be expected to be familiar with, and I don't really think the above suggestions are an improvement - for a number of reasons I think it would be best to follow WP:RS.Seraphim System ^(talk) 17:32, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Note that the entire article is about security screening, even the misleadingly named subhead Racial profiling in Israel#Racial profiling in other contexts is entirely and exclusively about Security screening in Israel, a far more accurate and NPOV title.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is untrue, and asserting it constitutes a POV push to insinuate that Israel conducts its checks purely for security reasons, which, given the sources which illustrate many facets of these checks that historically arose to secure a Jewish majority, and expel Palestinians, something done for demographic strategies, runs in the face of the text as it now stands. 'Security had nothing to do with it from the outset, as the article shows. If this POV pushing to get the article name changed succeeded, i.e., the POV object of ridding the article of its primary focus, on racial profiling, the result would lead to the second step: ridding the article of much of its content. Clever (well, not really. Too obvious). The main architect of Israelo's colonization policies, Arthur Ruppin, whose ideas deeply influenced the postwar period's demographic plans, grounded his views in racial profiling (he even drew up a distinction between three Jewish 'races'!) Nishidani (talk) 20:44, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Note I would say at this point I take back the AfD. People have added content that made the article worthy on its own. Just wanted to highlight that was not how the discussion started when it was a mere copy paste of a few sentences.

The commenter from the blog was incorrect to call Ethanbas anti-Israel. He just specializes is micro articles such as this one but many more as he writes on his page. User:Ethanbas.

Whether or not the name needs to be changed is a matter of discussion.Kigelim (talk) 12:03, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17 editors have written Keep for an article entitled Racial profiling in Israel. There's no doubt here that the article will pass the AfD with flying colours under that name. If you want a different article, write it.Nishidani (talk) 12:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I want to point out that my keep !vote should not be construed as support for a specific name of the article. I have assessed whether I believe the subject in question merits encyclopedic inclusion or not. I don't feel competent or knowledgeable enough to have an opinion in the naming discussion. /Julle (talk) 22:04, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All I am saying, and I think Nishidani covered this in some of the above comments, is that most of the sources posted in this discussion and cited in the article use the term "Racial profiling" - often directly in the title of the source, and certainly in text of the source itself. NPOV is following the sources right? - and not accusing the sources of being POV because we disagree with them? I think this line of argument has been a bit frustrating, but is also becoming repetitive at this point with no change - most of this digression could be hatted to make things easier for the closing admin.Seraphim System ^(talk) 23:46, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.