Open main menu

Talk:Palestinian prisoners of Israel

Active discussions

WikiProject Palestine (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Israel (Rated C-class, High-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

NPOV and factEdit

Few clear issues that need rectifying before the tags can go.

  • Short introduction to the Arab-Israeli conflict backdrop.
    • I'm not sure this necessary, and do not see in any case how it is related to NPOV. Tiamuttalk 17:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
      • The backdrop of the Arab-Israeli conflict is pertinent to the Palestinian "resistance" which results in many Palestinian prisoners. Without this backdrop it is unclear on why Israel would take in so many Prisoners. JaakobouChalk Talk 17:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
        • There is a link in the first paragraph to Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Any readers who are not aware of it, can go and read about it there. I do not see the need to engage in a summary of that whole mess here and I doubt we will ever agree as to the wording. Tiamuttalk 13:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Background input on the levels of violence and the incitement to violence.
    • Where and how do you think this information should be included? Tiamuttalk 17:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
      • In the background. JaakobouChalk Talk 17:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
        • Could you provide an example of what youa re talking about here? I don't understand the relevance. Tiamuttalk 13:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
  • "Palestinian Centre for Human Rights" is not a reliable source of the caliber of Betzelem and cannot be used as such. Their claims should be cited as their claim and not as a verified fact.
    • Where are they used exactly? Could you simply preface the sentence attributed to them with "According to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights"? That would solve that problem rather quickly no? Tiamuttalk 17:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
      • No. This center is not reliable and we have nothing to back up their claims. I can agree to having their claims presented under "Criticism by Palestinian organizations" section at he bottom but not to give them undue reliability. If we were to do this, then to maintain NPOV we would add be forced on adding claims by Partisan Israeli advocacy groups as well. JaakobouChalk Talk 17:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC) clarify 17:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Marwan Bargouti, is held imprisoned after being convicted of multiple murders. This is glaringly missing from the article.
    • That information has since been added. Please do note Jaakobou, that this article is still a work in progress and that you are welcome to make additions to achieve NPOV, rather than simply issuing directives to your fellow editors on what they need to do. Thanks. Tiamuttalk 17:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
      • Agreed that this issue was handled within reason satisfaction. JaakobouChalk Talk 17:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

After these few fairly obvious issues are resolved, I'm willing to rethink the tags.
Cheers, JaakobouChalk Talk 17:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, Jaakobou, the entire article needs to go. There is nothing even remotely encyclopedic about it as it is currently presented, nor can there be. Aside from a discussion of the term itself, which belongs in a Dictionary of International Propaganda, the article, as presently formulated, makes clear that this is propaganda. (Were it otherwise, Palestinian prisoners in countries other than Israel would fall under the rubric of this article.) There may be Palestinians who are prisoners in Israeli jails, but they have to meet notability standards individually. Tomertalk 13:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I decided to be bold and move this page to Palestinian prisoners in Israel. There is an article, for example, on Lebanese prisoners in Israel which provides some precedence for such a title. This will also help in addressing the scope of the article, which focuses on those Palestinians incarcerated by Israel, and not those incarcerated by the PA (Presumably, those could be covered in an article on Palestinian prisoners of the Palestinian National Authority.) In any case, I hope people will work on making changes they would like to see effected to the article, rather than simply tagging it or proposing it for deletion. This is a huge subject, worthy of coverage in this encyclopedia. Let's do our best to make it a good one. Tiamuttalk 14:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I would have to say I don't think I can agree with your assessment. It may be a huge subject in some people's minds, but that doesn't make it encyclopedic. If anything, you've just shown that there are two completely ridiculous articles on this "subject", rather than just the one. Where are American prisoners in Singapore and Mexican prisoners in the U.S., for example? I've got an old keyboard around here, btw, if you need that "v". ;-) Tomertalk 18:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I need that old keyoard as you can well see. To your point, we do hae Italian prisoners of war in the Soviet Union, Japanese prisoners of war in the Soviet Union, and Finnish prisoners of war in the Soviet Union. There is also Incarceration in the United States. I suppose we could create Incarceration in Israel and hae a section on "Palestinian prisoners" which would likely need its own spin-off article eenutally anyway. (In any case, this whole discussion is useless since WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS) since people seem to want to write about this suject and it is a notale suject (Do a google scholar search for "palestinian prisoners in israel" as a phrase and its 82 and higher without), I say we go aout trying to improe it, rather than deleting it, since I'm quite sure it will surie any AfD ased on the notaility of the suject. And now, I'm out for now since this keyoard is driing me nuts. Tiamuttalk 18:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tomer, I remoed these three links from the see also section:

I think it's a little inappropriate to place redlinked articles in a see also section (they are not yet functional and may simply confuse our readers). y all means go ahead and create such articles so that we can link when they are done, ut until they are luelinks, I don't think they should e there. Thanks for understanding. Tiamuttalk 22:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


per the following diff: [1] - added diff JaakobouChalk Talk 06:49, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

We're trying to work around a few of the POV issues so that it would be possible to remove the POV tag sometime in the not too distant future. I would apprecaite it if you do not revert with such edit summaries as "WP:DONTLIKEIT" as it will certainly not help resolve the raised concerns. If the raised concerns are something you disagree with or that you need further explanation, please make note of it. Cheers, JaakobouChalk Talk 06:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jack. How nice of you to give out notices -- have you become a headmaster or something? I'm too used to your veiled incivility to take the bait, though...
Let's take a look at your last few edits:
  • here you slip in the information that prisoners are held "for short term periods" and here you add a (duplicate, mind you) source. The "short term periods" is not exactly a precise wording and doesn't fly well with WP:WTA. The source you gave doesn't substantiate that claim either. If you want to include this, I suggest using a sourced timespan instead of "short term periods".
  • here you obviously don't like The Guardian (re-read the edit summary, the WP:IDONTLIKEIT was a question directed at you). It's a reliable, unbiased source. Get with the program. This statistic is in several other sources anyway, so attacking the Guardian won't get you anywhere. If you want this removed then you'll have to find a reliable source saying this is hock, and then we'll place both of them side by side.
So your mission, if you chose to accept it, is to find a reliable source for the "short term periods" and to find a source that says The Guardian and a number of other sources is full of faeces regarding Palestinian prisoner statistics.
Cheers and have a nice day, pedrito - talk - 11.09.2008 06:57
I'm adding another, very recent edit to the list:
  • here, what do you mean by "apprehended and released after a short term period"? They are apprehended after a short period? And what's up with the argumentation in your edit summary? It's exact, trust me, but I'm still looking for a ref? Come back when you've got the ref.
Cheers, pedrito - talk - 11.09.2008 07:04
It might be an idea to ask for administrator assistance at this article immediately. We've seen other cases where sterile time-wasting attacks have been launched on RS (even those such as major newspapers!) - often while bloggish material of mendacious intent is being shovelled into the same articles. In some cases, this has gone on for so long and with such dis-concern for core policies that good editors have been driven to exasperation, either leaving the project or breaching CIVIL. Both of these consequences play into the hands of abusers. It might also be useful to collect statements regarding presence or absence of CoI - perhaps even asking for edit-protection until this has been completed. There is no point in having this article if it reads like propaganda for one "side" or the other. PRtalk 08:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

adding a sectionEdit

why not add a section of prisoners who were relased and then returned to commiting acts of terrorism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:17, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure, do you have a reliable source?
Cheers, pedrito - talk - 22.10.2008 06:18

How many prisoners are there now?Edit

11,000?--Qwarto (talk) 12:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Could be more. More interesting to know how many of them are Hamas and how many are Fatah. JaakobouChalk Talk 11:16, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

6,011 as of August 2010, according to B'Tselem [2] Sanguinalis (talk) 14:26, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

What Crimes Have Been Committed?Edit

Just looked at this page for the first time and it seems strange that there is no mention of the type or range of crimes that have been committed. Political prisoners are those people who have committed crimes because of political ideals rather than for personal motives but what are the crimes? Oxford73 (talk) 08:04, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


This is one of the most biased articles I have ever seen on Wikipedia. By reading it you'd think the prisoners were arbitrarily imprisoned. How about some statistics on (or at least mention!) the crimes that were committed. If people are incarcerated because they killed other people, I think that is very relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:15, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

"Terrorists vs prisoners of war" sectionEdit

I've put some more background from the Third Geneva Convention (ratified by Israel) and Additional Protocol I (not ratified by Israel) (with citations from the conventions on the ICRC site), since the situation is not as clear-cut as the statement (claiming detained Palestinian resistance fighters are prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions) implies. The reference given for that statement is a dead link, I notice - maybe the assertion was made in that reference?

The section may still need a bit more clearing up. Kingal86 (talk) 23:01, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

My revertsEdit

I reverted two recent edits by SimplesC for the following reasons:

  • The inclusion in the "Public figures" section of a bit about former prisoner Hussein Fayyad's current role in the PA is irrelevant to the article. This article is not about former prisoners and what became of them, it's about current Palestinian public figures who are imprisoned by Israel.
  • There was no explanation for removal of this referenced and interesting sentence: "According to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, from the Six Day War (1967) to the First Intifada (1988), over 600,000 Palestinians were held in Israeli jails for a week or more." Instead of accurately stating the action taken, the edit summary was simply "added 2013 numbers."
  • We already mention the 2011 prisoner exchange deal between Hamas and Israel in a neutral manner in the lead. The new edits were peppered with political bias, namely these two unnecessary bits and commentary inserted in the middle of the sentence: "... including hundreds of convicted terrorists and murderers" and "In 2013, Hamas stated that the "kidnapping of IDF soldiers is at the heart of Palestinian culture."
  • I partially restored one of the edits, which was an update of how many Palestinian prisoners there were in April 2013. --Al Ameer son (talk) 03:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)


Is a fine source for an attributed statement. Just as B'tselem, HRW, or on the other side the IDF or MFA can be used for attributed statements. nableezy - 13:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree, PCHR obviously has a very strong POV. How can readers trust that they report accurately and without a bias? I can't. At least HRW is an international NGO with more of a reputation. The IDF and MFA have responsibilities as government entitites, they can't just make things up.SimplesC (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Lol they cant just make things up. Youre trusting them isnt my concern, its an attributed statement, if you dont believe then dont believe them. nableezy - 13:13, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
What do you mean they can't make things up? They don't have any obligation to tell the truth. Just because an organization has an NGO doesn't mean they are accurate, on both sides of the argument. Even though it's attributed statement, the organization itself is not a reliable source and has a very open POV.SimplesC (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:36, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
No, I was laughing at the idea that MFA or IDF cant make things up. Youre free to believe what you want, but this is no different than citing the IDF or the MFA, neither of which are "reliable" for facts and have "a very open POV". POV does not mean it cannot be cited. The source is fine for an attributed statement. nableezy - 14:24, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Merger proposalEdit

I think we should merge the article Palestinian Prisoners' Document with this one. Any opinion? Shalom11111 (talk) 16:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Addameer linkEdit

Addameer is a shady, little-known organization with direct ties to Palestinian terrorist, that doesn't even seem to have a Wikipedia article yet, but somehow it's assumed to be a reliable source for this article? What's up with that? --2A02:8071:3190:7D00:4059:36FC:3BDD:B23A (talk) 17:46, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Return to "Palestinian prisoners of Israel" page.