Talk:Palestine exception

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2025/May;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

You are an administrator, so you may disregard the message below

You are seeing this because of the limitations of {{If extended confirmed}} and {{If admin}} You can hide this message box by adding the following to a new line of your common.css page:

.ECR-edit-request-warning {
	display: none;
}

Stop: You may only use this page to create an edit request

This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is subject to the extended-confirmed restriction.

You are not an extended-confirmed user, so you must not edit or discuss this topic anywhere on Wikipedia except to make an edit request. (Additional details are in the message box just below this one.)

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a contentious topic.

The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:

All participants in formal discussions (RfCs, RMs, etc) within the area of conflict are urged to keep their comments concise, and are limited to 1,000 words per discussion. Citations and quotations (whether from sources, Wikipedia articles, Wikipedia discussions, or elsewhere) do not count toward the word limit.
You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours (except in limited circumstances)

Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

Freedom of speech Mid‑importance

	Freedom of speech portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech 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.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palestine Low‑importance

	Palestine portal 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.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology: Social Movements Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the social movements task force.

Discussion of Undue Weight for Op-Eds in Responses section

Thank you, Buidhe, for raising this concern. I’d like to offer some context for including the op-ed sources currently cited.

Placement in "Responses" section: These sources are not being used to assert facts or make claims in Wikipedia’s voice. Rather, they document notable public commentary and reactions related to the topic. Op-eds from prominent individuals or outlets can be appropriate for this purpose, especially when attributed and clearly presented as responses.
Consistency with existing usage: There are other op-ed citations currently used elsewhere in the article that have not been tagged or challenged. For the sake of consistency and clarity, I would appreciate any suggestions on whether all such uses should be re-evaluated, or whether this specific instance is seen as uniquely problematic.

Of course, I’m open to trimming or revising the section if a specific source is shown to give undue weight to a minority viewpoint, or if better sources are available. In the meantime, I believe these citations serve a valuable role in capturing the range of responses.Ungathering (talk) 21:23, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Better sources are available. Just cite the scholarly sources. A non-notable person's non-expert opinion is almost always UNDUE. (t · c) buidhe 21:53, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article as a whole is a mess, in my opinion. I don't think any of the sources listed are reliable enough for the article to assert it as a fact, instead of a theory. Hal Nordmann (talk) 18:26, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]