Talk:Anti-Zionism

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 April 2025

[edit]
−
The belief that Zionism in general is antisemitic Joseph Massad believes that the Zionist conflation of Jewish people with Zionism has become a global "antisemitic consensus".[62] In 2023, according to the Zionist organization StandWithUs, George Washington University psychology professor Lara Sheehi said that Zionism itself was antisemitic;[63] she faced accusations of antisemitism (which were not upheld by her university) for this and other comments.[64]s
+

Denninithan (talk) 03:43, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this section should be removed because its unrelated to the article and would fit better on the Anti-Zionism article Denninithan (talk) 03:44, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Anti-Zionism. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:49, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 May 2025

[edit]

to put in external links

fixed a broken link and added a link to a site that speaks out against zionism in peacefull way 2A00:A041:3A22:BA00:F0A1:C646:A6CC:3E7F (talk) 11:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: these links do not meet Wikipedia's guidelines for the inclusion of external links in articles. The first is not publicly accessible and the second is in Hebrew and appears to be of poor quality when machine translated into English. Adam Black talk • contribs 01:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Without commenting on the value of these texts, I would point out that The Holocaust Victims Accuse certainly is publicly accessible. There are several copies for sale online (admittedly at a huge price), and copies are held by many public and university libraries. RolandR (talk) 20:29, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have a scan of it, but I don't recall where I got it from. Zerotalk 01:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have a physical copy of the book, which I bought when it was published nearly fifty years ago. RolandR (talk) 14:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 14 June 2025 changing line to be more neutral and supporting of material fact

[edit]

Description of suggested change: i believe the line "with the Arab populace of Palestine largely opposed to what they considered the colonial dispossession of their homeland" should be changed to "what is the colonial dispossession of their homeland" as it is a material fact that the state of Israel was founded by expelling Palestinian Arabs, referred to as the Nakba, i think this phrasing is unnecessarily anti Palestinian and doesn't reflect on the tone of neutrality that should be maintained. Diff:

−
ORIGINAL_TEXT
+
CHANGED_TEXT

Drzaiusoffical (talk) 09:11, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Also please considerthat all material must adhere to the WP:POV policy; thus suggestion may not. —Fortuna, imperatrix 10:02, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lausanne movement

[edit]

We have a whole paragraph about the Lausanne Movement with pretty poor sourcing (dead links, opinion pieces). Seems to me we should cut it. But is there a case for adding something more encyclopaedic about evangelical anti-Zionism? BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:20, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DONE. --GHcool (talk) 22:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I think the place for a more encyclopaedic general comment on evangelical anti-Zionism would be the section on Protestant anti-Zionism which currently includes on fact of questionable noteworthiness rather than any general account BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 August 2025

[edit]

During early British rule, three members of the British administration, Ronald Storrs, C. R. Ashbee and Ernest Tatham Richmond, who were anti-Zionists, used the sphere of culture, arts and crafts to slow down the implementation of the Balfour Declaration. Within their scope of action they attempted to preserve the Arab character of Jerusalem.

Reference:

Moya Tönnies. Colonial Diplomacy through Art. Jerusalem 1918–1926. Leiden: Brill, 2024. Reventlou (talk) 08:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Day Creature (talk) 18:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Richmond is not significant enough for this article. But it might be worth adding a short paragraph on anti-Zionism within the British imperial establishment in the 1917-1948 period? BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 24 August 2025

[edit]

Description of suggested change:

Suggest review of Conspiracy theories section. In particular, the last two paragraphs are ambiguous, lacking nuance and detail; oversimplified, bordering on inflammatory. Problem paragraphs pasted below, asterisks have been added by me to indicate critique.

"Anti-Zionism is a major component of Holocaust denial. **[unclear] According to one strain of Holocaust denial **[?], Zionists cooperated with the Nazis and are guilty of the crimes committed during the Holocaust.[170] **[perhaps referring to {/wiki/The_Other_Side:_The_Secret_Relationship_Between_Nazism_and_Zionism}?] Deniers see Israel as having somehow benefited from what they call "the big lie" **[need clarification/citation] that is the Holocaust.[at] Some Holocaust deniers claim that their ideology is motivated by concern for Palestinian rights.[au] **[inflammatory]

As an alternative to outright denial of the Holocaust **[ambiguous; consider rephrasing], Holocaust inversion acknowledges the Holocaust and uses it to discredit Israel **[unclear; inflammatory towards criticism of Israel?]. Following the October 7 attacks, many instances of Holocaust inversion were reported on social media, "with the memory of the Holocaust weaponized".[171] **[the connection here is unclear]"

Diff:

−
ORIGINAL_TEXT
+
CHANGED_TEXT

49.196.189.2 (talk) 15:37, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Remsense 🌈 论 15:42, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:ECR there's not a consensus-building conversation to have here, but it's worth some indication on my part that I'm perfectly in the dark why most of the phraseology is considered problematic or ambiguous here. Ultimately, it seems likely to be one of those cases where the language is actually pretty clear to someone who's choosing not to get it. Of course the language is broad and lacks nuance—this is an encyclopedia article about an inherently irrational and fractured social condition, it's not like we can provide a deep dive as if it would represent the subject in a balanced manner. Maybe some more meat could be put on the bone, but these suggestions just aren't helpful. Remsense 🌈 论 15:44, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]