Talk:Ilan Pappé

---

I believe that the content from EI can stay, regardless of the reliability or depreciation of the source, does someone disagree?

While EI is obviously controversial and currently depreciated per RFC: Electronic Intifada? I believe that all content sourced here is acceptable due to ABOUTSELF, unless a better source is found. Does someone disagree? FortunateSons (talk) 11:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Controversial?

This was recently added

His views have been described as controversial.

Two of the sources fail verification because WP:HEADLINES only, leaves the Jerusalem Post which starts of "Controverisal Israeli historian...", YNET, which starts off "Controversial historian..." and JewishNews "controversial anti-Zionist authors Ilan Pappe and Noam Chomsky..". None of them say His views are controversial, they just assert that he is controversial without explanation, and these sources are not great and as well biased. Seems undue POV pushing, are there no decent sources that say his views are controversial? Selfstudier (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

It's also, IMO, just kind of a dumb thing for a Wikipedia article to say about anybody. What does "controversial" mean? Who isn't "controversial"? Levivich (talk) 17:03, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, not an encyclopedic thing to say and it is more the subject matter he deals with that is controversial. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 02:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

References

Selfstudier (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Extraordinary claim

I have removed the sentence "In 2007, Pappe publicly announced his close friendship with Hamas leader and then-Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh." Only one source exists for this claim - a piece by David Keyes in the Jerusalem Post. Although the piece does not appear to be labelled as opinion, Keyes was not a journalist, but a PR adviser working at various times for the Strategic Division of the IDF, Israel's ambassador to the UN, and (from 2016-8) Binyamin Netanyahu - a post from which he resigned following multiple accusations of sexual harassment. The claim is both extraordinary and unlikely, and does not appear to have been picked up or confirmed by any other news source. Given this, and Keyes' background as a paid propagandist rather than as a journalist, I do not consider this to be a reliable source. Stronger evidence is needed if someone wishes to re-add this claim. RolandR (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, good removal. Levivich (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Recent change

I removed the following from the lede: "He has blamed Israel's existence for the lack of peace in the Middle East, arguing that Zionism is more dangerous than Islamic militancy, and has called for an international boycott of Israeli academics."

I don't believe this is either accurate or due for the lede. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 02:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I replaced the text with "A strong critic of Zionism and the State of Israel, Pappé has called for an international boycott of Israeli academics." IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 02:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

References

Conflict of interest

In January 2022, Alon Schwarz's film Tantura was shown at the 2022 Sundance Film Festival World Cinema Documentary Competition. In it, former Israeli soldiers admitted that a massacre took place in 1948 at Tantura. One former combat soldier stated: "They silenced it. The victims of the massacre were buried under what is today the Dor Beach parking lot, in an area measuring 35×4 meters." Adam Raz commented in Haaretz that there had been a public debate about the issue, with Yoav Gelber trying to discredit Katz's thesis, while Pappé defended the thesis. Raz said: "With the appearance of the testimony in Schwarz's film, the debate would seem to be decided."

Raz's Haaretz article discloses that his employer contributed to Schwarz's film, so there is a conflict of interest. The final sentence, Raz's commentary on his employer-contributed film, should be struck. WP:BOLD implementing now. Discuss it here if you disagree. (I'll save the reference) Scharb (talk) 23:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

What it actually says is "The Akevot Institute assisted the filmmaker (without remuneration)." That isnt a COI for Raz. nableezy - 20:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

It's important that the source article includes that disclosure, @Nableezy.

It is in the best interest of his employer to speak positively or promotionally about a film to which his co-workers (if not he himself) contributed research. Scharb (talk) 04:04, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

last revert

First, the change to the bit on Tantura, in which Scharb says that Israeli troops "asserted", not admitted, the source repeatedly gives greater credence to the admissions than "assert". The source says for example "Now, at the age of 90 and up, a number of combat soldiers from the Israel Defense Forces’ brigade have admitted that a massacre did indeed take place in 1948 at Tantura". Next, Scharb says that "Pappé's qualified support for" the Hamas attacks of 2023, when the source says "Prof Pappé stressed that he “condemned” these attacks “now more than ever before”" That Pappe condemned the attacks was also remove. Nowhere does the source say that Pappe supported the attack, and that os a straightforward BLP violation. Next, Pappé's unexplained dismissal of evidence is editorializing. As that revert was made on BLP grounds, Ill just remind anyone who wanted to re-revert of WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE. nableezy - 21:03, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Pappe said he admired the "courage" of the Hamas fighters who stormed the military bases. That isn't support? He said he supported one part but not the other? Isn't that qualified support?

By the way, the ones who stormed the military bases also committed warcrimes, including shooting the corpses in the groin to deface them.

It doesn't really make sense that Haaretz uses the word "admitted" other than its bent towards clickbait wordchoice and headlines, which should not be emulated to remain encyclopedic. The guy is accusing someone else of doing something, not admitting to anything himself. And there is legitimate criticism of the decades-later-interview as evidential history.

This broaches the third element in Pappe’s historiographical approach: his faith that oral testimony is valuable and valid, and that historians should base their narratives also on the testimony and the memory of witnesses, even decades after the event.

'Unexplained dismissal of evidence' is supported by the source, it is not editorializing.

Take the well-known story about Haj Amin's visit to the German consulate in Jerusalem shortly after the Nazis came to power. According to the consul's report, the mufti boasted that he could "get the Muslims, not just in Palestine but all over the Arab world, to support Nazi Germany." He appealed to Hitler "to impose a ban on the Jews of Germany, but not the kind that would make them move to Palestine." Without bringing the slightest proof, Pappe opines that "most of the report sounds like a fabrication." Scharb (talk) 04:21, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

If the source does not say Pappe supported something then you are misrepresenting the source in claiming he did, especially given the source flat out says he condemned it. That is a straightforward BLP violation. Next, Haaretz is a reliable source, and it reports these things as admissions by people who were there. Your downplaying that is again a distortion of the cited source. Finally, yes it is editorializing, we already say he does not provide evidence, you are upping that to make a judgment in our narrative voice. nableezy - 05:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

He didn't condemn the attacks, he condemned the "excesses" while praising the "courage" of Hamas.

Haaretz uses the word "admit," but other RSP do not, such as NYT. NYT does not use the word "admit" or "admission" anywhere and describes it much more neutrally, with the word "said". NYT also doesn't fail to mention the later objections to the film by the nonogenarian interviewees and their families.

Contrast the "admission" (at least one soldier was seen shooting multiple prisoners of war, who wasn't acting under orders) to the outrageous depiction in Katz's retracted thesis: Katz described a systematic Nazi-style slaughter of groups of young men shot and dumped into trenches dug by other Arabs who were themselves subsequently shot, while the village’s women and children sat on a beach a few yards away.

May I remind you that BLP should also apply to the veterans? After all, Katz's thesis was retracted not for political reasons but because he straight up fabricated quotes and failed to meet academic standards. Scharb (talk) 23:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Scharb: He didn't condemn the attacks. The source: Prof Pappé stressed that he “condemned” these attacks “now more than ever before”. Haaretz is a perfectly reliable source, your complaints about it being prone to clickbait wordchoice and headlines is completely evidence-free. Beyond that, the NYT says much more than "said", and they also support what you call an "outraegous depiction", reporting that In the film, Mr. Diamant recalled one soldier using a machine gun to kill captured men as they sat inside a barbed-wire enclosure, and remembered others chasing after villagers with a flame thrower and raping a woman. (That's a recalled and remembered). As far as BLP should also apply to the veterans, no person is named or specifically alleged to have done anything, and all we are doing is relaying what reliable sources have said about them. The difference between that and your edits about Pappe is that you are *not* accurately relaying what the source says, you are in fact removing what the source says and adding your spin to make claims it does not make. nableezy - 21:03, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Oh and your source is somebody repeating the debunked claim that they had seen babies decapitated. Maybe don’t use sources that have since been established to be completely made up? nableezy - 05:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Quote what you're referring to. Scharb (talk) 23:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I misread had seen bodies decapitated as had seen babies decapitated. All the same, that source doesnt once mention Pappe, so I have no idea what relevance it has to this discussion. nableezy - 21:03, 11 December 2024 (UTC)