Talk:Walid Shoebat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

This is borderline. If I believed in vfd, I would nominate it. It's little more than an ad for this guy's website. --user:Ed Poor (deep or sour) 15:54, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

Ok Ed , I have therefore expanded this article quite a bit.--CltFn 02:51, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Expanded with information like "Walid is part of a growing movement of former Muslims who are taking a stand against Islam and it's terrorist tactics." and words like "PLO terrorist". How very NPOV. Please read WP:NPOV. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 02:53, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

There is a citation for interested readers to verify that assertion. And yes he was a PLO terrorist, that is a fact which he admits. Unless you do not consider putting explosives in bread with the intent to blow up children terrorism. --CltFn 03:15, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Do we need to see his ID card?

The very first line "the assumed name of the owner of the website Shoebat.com" is unfortunate wording. This sounds like "an imaginary character". Then, the article goes from bad to worse. We say "This biographical entry is based primarily on the information provided on his website", even though a half-a-dozen of ext. links is provided. I think we should use the word pseudonym and get rid of POV. This guy is real, he travels and lectures. Humus sapiens←ну? 00:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes he is very real indeed, as in other free thinker articles covered on Wikipedia , there are those who wish that he was not real and who seem dedicated to blanking them out.--CltFn 12:03, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The problems with anon's version

The major problem it starts in a bad faith and goes on to worse.

  • is pro-zionist author. -- nothing wrong with being a pro-Zionist author, but this characterization is a severe POV compared to is a Palestinian author and former Muslim and a former PLO terrorist who captured international attention by converting to Christianity and becoming a ardent critic of Islam and a supporter of Israel
  • His biographical entry is based primarily on the information provided on his website. -- this is just silly to say in the article with a dozen or so of independent external links.
  • His original name is not publicly known, and his story is uncorroborated and not otherwise verifiable. -- another silly phrase. See the section above about his ID card.
  • What's the problem with the image?
  • While praised by some for his pro-Israel stand, some charge that he is motivated by profit. -- Proof please. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 04:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Good obseravtions. Also observe that anonymous editor is an infidel-hating muslim. He doesn't need facts or anything of the sort to "prove" anything.--Nosharia 13:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gren's changes

Just to explain my changes.

  • I removed the pictures because when I saw the argument I figured the best way to sort it out was to make CltFn source his images and give copyright tags. He sourced one but couldn't provide the copyright tags so I deleted them as I told him I would. If there is going to be conflict over images then they should be well sourced. If he can add the images with sources and legitimate copyright tags then they can stay. He said he e-mailed Shoebat so when the results of that get back he might have permission for that one image. For the Fox screenshot he needs to show where he got it and why it's fair use.
  • "growing" -- Is the movement growing? Is it really a movement? I think we'd need some good sourcing on that besides Walid's website to actually discuss if this is a valid, real, and growing movement. There was no legitimate sociological study or anything of the kind cited.
  • Husseini's alliance with the Nazis is of no consequence to this article. If anything it's trying to defame a man's name... when it really was not the largest part of his life nor the most relevant.
  • NPOV, because of the arguments between the editors I think it's safe to say there is a neutrality dispute. My biggest concern in this regard is the copious number of quotes. It makes this more dramatic than anything else in my book. What is the use of the anecdote about Arab-state's propaganda versus the reality of the Israeli Army's success? I'm not sure... but, things like that should be discussed.

About the edit changes between Anonymous Editor and Cltfn... well, I don't know exactly. I haven't taken the time to see what comes from Shoebat's site and what comes from independent sources. To AE, some of this must be credible because BBC reports on it... so we can't ignore it saying it comes from Shoebat's site. (Humus is right about that) But, I don't know if all of it comes from credible sources... and you must discern between what does and what doesn't. gren グレン 04:39, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Culture of Hate and Barbarism?"

There must be a more NPOV way to express this; as it stands it seems rather racist and suggests that the dislike in Palestine for Jews is just an outburts of unprovoked and irrational anger and not a predictable response to living under occupation for six decades. I mean, objectively, we should dislike prejudice in whatever form and seek to cleanse ourselves of it but we must exercise charity in our understanding of the roots of prejudice. Cant about 'the culture of hate and barbarism' only serves to obscure the underlying socio-political problems that Palestinians face. --لقمانLuqman 01:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Will Youmens

Someone keeps inserting the phrase "anti-Israel activist, former spokesperson for the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and rapper (under the name Iron Sheik)" in the section about Will Youmens's CounterPunch article about Shoebat. This looks as if it's intended as an ad hominem attack on Youmens, discrediting him by referring to his political beliefs instead of addressing the substance of his claims about Shoebat. However, if other users think that this phrase is justified and relevant, I won't object to it being restored.--GagHalfrunt 18:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

--- I think it should be kept. I mean, I have no idea who the guy is and his biases should be laid on the table if there is no article on this man. I say restore it and then keep it. Either that or delete the part about him, I mean, Will Youmens? Who the hell is this guy? Why should I care what some guy I have never heard of before and who is obviously extremely biased thinks about Walid Shoebat?

And I personally am against Shoebat so it is nothing personal. I think the man is a bigot who is using crimes he has committed in the past to his advantage which I think is equally reprhensible. Why should a man profit off of crimes he committed just because his version of events fits our version of reality in the West? Just putting that out there.128.138.26.42 03:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism notes

"An article on Electronic Intifada, a pro-Palestinian website, describes him as a member of a "fanatic" sect (apparently referring to Evangelical Christianity) who makes "blatantly racist declarations against Islam"

I wasn't aware Islam was a race.72.152.206.218 07:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)