Jump to content

Talk:Hezbollah

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gilisa (talk | contribs) at 10:18, 22 July 2013 (→‎EU and Hezbollah: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Pbneutral

Good articleHezbollah has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 16, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
August 12, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
May 2, 2007Good article nomineeListed
November 20, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
June 28, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article
Archive
Archives

Topical archive:

  1. POV-Disputed-Controvercial discussions
  2. Terrorist allegations
  3. Structure
  4. Lead/Introduction discussions
  5. Good article

Archive index

Transcript of an interview of Jeffrey Goldberg by NPR radio being used for verification of facts in the Wikipedia voice

This is a ridiculous source for verification of facts in the Wikipedia voice. As it is an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg the conversation represents the opinion of Jeffrey Goldberg not a factual news report by NPR, at best it should be used for the opinions of Goldberg. This edit [1] which restored the source for verification of a factual statement is nonsensical, because we have other suitable RS which verify the statement and do not need attribution. Dlv999 (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ideology: Anti-imperialism

Anti-imperialism was removed[2] from ideology by a sockpuppet of blocked user AndresHerutJaim, citing his own opinion on the topic. I restored it as ant-imperialism is clearly a part of Hezbollah's ideology as discussed in the Hezbollah manifesto and reported by this article. NMMNG removed the material in favour of the AJH sock without citing any evidence or policy based reasons.

For RS discussing Hezbollah's anti-imperialist ideology see e.g.

  • Elie Alagha, Joseph (2011). Hizbullah's Documents: From the 1985 Open Letter to the 2009 Manifesto. Amsterdam University Press. pp. 15, 20. ISBN 9085550378.
  • Shehata, Samer (2012). Islamist Politics in the Middle East: Movements and Change. Routledge. p. 176. ISBN 0415783615.
  • Husseinia*, Rola El (2010). "Hezbollah and the Axis of Refusal: Hamas, Iran and Syria". Third World Quarterly. Volume 31, (Issue 5, ). {{cite journal}}: |issue= has extra text (help); |volume= has extra text (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link) CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) Dlv999 (talk) 21:55, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the article and this seems to be recently added. I don't know if the person who deleted it is a sock or not.
Anyway, of the two sources above which I can actually read, neither seems to support putting "anti-imperialist" as fact in the infobox. The first source uses it once in passing, the second source says it's what the author claims. If we're using what outsiders claim about the organization, I could also put "anti-semitic" there. Would you like that compromise? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 22:03, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The usual ridiculous levels of parsing of sources for anything that is not 100% compatible with the Israeli Foreign Ministry position on a given topic. The first source has two separate page citations so please explain to me how the term is used "once" and please explain to me how an (approximately) one page discussion of Hezbollah's anti imperialist ideology in the first source (pg 20) is "in passing". Regarding the second source, the author is an assistant professor of Arab politics published by a prestigious academic press. He discusses "Hezbollah's anti-imperialist ideology", citing statements made by Hezbollah. I'm not particularly interested in getting into a hypothetical discussion as you haven't produced any sources, but if you have high quality academic sources and you accurately represent what they say I'm not going to get in your way, I would appreciate if you would do the same. Dlv999 (talk) 22:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hezbollah is a proxy of foreign powers: Iran and Syria, so adding "anti-imperialism" in the infobox is not remotely serious nor NPOV.--MelissaLond (talk) 22:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We write articles based on what RS say, not based on editors personal views on a topic. Dlv999 (talk) 07:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, and I would restore that. OR does not trump RS. If NMMNG has sources that refute that Hezbollah is anti-Imperialism he is free to bring them up, but without them the article will say what the sources do. nableezy - 15:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Designation (or view rather, of Hezbollah in Lebanon)

I cut down the unnecessary excess of Gebran Tueni's quoted opinion of Hezbollah: “Ask Mr. Nasrallah whether there would be a place for Christians in the Islamic Republic of Lebanon,” he said, “You might remind him that we are not an external force. We’ve been here longer than the Muslims—we are not Afrikaners!" Obviously undue weight given to Tueni. These lines more than suffice: "Gebran Tueni, a conservative, Orthodox Christian editor of an-Nahar, referred to Hezbollah as an "Iranian import and said “they have nothing to do with Arab civilization.” Tuení believed that Hezbollah’s evolution is cosmetic, concealing a sinister long-term strategy to Islamicize Lebanon and lead it into a ruinous war with Israel." Also, I clarified that Tueni's attackers have not been identified instead of the previous sentence which just states he was assassinated in 2005 to avoid implication that Hezbollah was behind his killing. On a slightly separate note, the section is pretty skewed towards Hezbollah's critics in Lebanon presenting the critical opinions of unnamed government officials, Saad Hariri unnamed Future movement official, Gebran Tueni and the generally negative views of many anti-government Syrians who feel betrayed by the organization's stance on the ongoing Syrian uprising/civil war. The latter are not Lebanese by the way. Doesn't Hezbollah have some supporters in the country too? (rhetorical question). --Al Ameer son (talk) 23:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hezbollah does not want an Islamic state

See latest development: http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/14777 FunkMonk (talk) 00:55, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RS being removed???

an editor removed my RS on ahbash hezbollah clash..so what is the explanation??? Baboon43 (talk) 23:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a legit edit with what seems to be a valid and reliable source, though the edit itself could use some copyediting for style. I don't see why anyone would remove it, either. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian terrorist designation

I don't think there are enough sources for Norway's designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist org. Could someone please add more?

Dutch terrorist designation

I don't think there are enough sources for Netherland's designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist org. Could someone please add more? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.171.162.22 (talk) 15:31, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The governments of the U.S...first paragraph

The "U.S." is a shortened version of the United States of America. It is only used when the United States of America is already noted and can be shortened. It is not correct to reference the United States of America as U.S. without previously stating the full name. The full name of the country should be listed. 68.50.119.13 (talk) 01:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This also applies to the "U.K." It should be "United Kingdom," because the latter has not been mentioned. 68.50.119.13 (talk) 02:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hezbollah Flag Use Discussion

Controversy over the use of Hezbollah's flag has been going on for a while, but it has ust been brought to my attention with the removal of a Hezbollah flag thumbnail from Battle of al-Qusayr (2013. It was removed due to alleged copyright violations. What startles me is that this flag is used on so many other pages (ex. Hezbollah, for starters). The flag on that page is still around, for whatever reason, although the original was a Commons file that is now deleted.

I dug up the exact reason why: Copyright violation. Hezbollah has never come out and said that their flag can or cannot be used for non-profit purposes (and, to be honest, they love publicity), so a handful of people in a 2010 Commons deletion discussion concluded that, since no one was going to directly contact Hezbollah to ask them about it, the image could not be used. Under US law, the image is evidently fair use. Moreover, countless news organizations use the flag. I am not versed in Lebanese copyright law (nor do I know where I could find the info on it), but this is utterly absurd.

This seems to set some kind of bizarre precedent. If we cannot directly contact a foreign group with a flag for confirmation of fair use, must we not use their flag? What about the Lords Resistance Army? If you thought contacting Hezbollah was hard, try contacting those guys. Hell, I doubt al-Qaeda has sent Wikipedia a letter authorizing use of their flag. While I understand Hezbollah is a unique case as a quasi-governmental, non-state actor, this precedent could be used to delete countless flags across the wiki. Perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but it has never been made clear.

Is usage of these files against Wikipedia's current copyright policies/precedents? Perhaps, but it's in the rare case like this that we must consider WP:IAR. I am setting this up as the new discussion section for Hezbollah's flag usage.Marechal Ney (talk) 17:57, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • A lot of misunderstanding there. The fact that someone has not explicitly stated an image cannot be used for all purposes does not mean the contrary, and we cannot assume that it does. That's pretty much end of story. And the al-Qaeda flag is a different story altogether, since there is no design, only text. FunkMonk (talk) 18:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could uploading a new version of the flag help? Charles Essie (talk) 16:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem would be the same. FunkMonk (talk) 00:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article includes misleading information regarding Hezbollah's funding.

This line:

It receives financial and political support from Iran and Syria

... is not supported by the cited source. The source says:

The United States, Britain, Israel and other Western countries consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization that they say has received weapons and also financial and political support from Iran and Syria.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HG20Ak02.html


According to a BBC report from 12th June 2013:

A recent report by the International Crisis Group (ICG) on the impact of international sanctions on Iran found no indication that the sanctions had affected Iran's regional role.

And the report's principal author says there is no evidence of any financial support provided to Hezbollah. "There isn't a single line in the budget that confirms any aid or financial support to Hezbollah", Ali Vaez contends.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22878198

92.22.7.162 (talk) 18:42, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


The BBC story linked above is titled "Hezbollah heartlands recover with Iran's help"
here is the lede:
In the years since the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shia movement's strongholds have recovered from the widespread destruction they suffered - in large part down to major investment from its closest ally, Iran.
The assistance has helped consolidate the relationship, but while Iran's role has drawn praise from Lebanese Shia, others are suspicious of its motives, as Carine Torbey reports from Beirut. --BoogaLouie (talk) 21:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I could find no mention of Syria or Hezbollah in the The ICG article: Spider Web: The Making and Unmaking of Iran Sanctions
But here are some better sources The Best Guerrilla Force in the World
"The amount of Iranian funds reaching Hezbollah was estimated at $25 million a month, but some reports suggested it increased sharply, perhaps doubled, after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took over as president in Tehran last year, the specialist said." --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:08, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


First of all, the strongholds mentioned in the BBC article would be areas in Lebanon, as that is where Hezbollah is based. The article continues: Modern buildings have risen from the ruins and some new structures have been added to the area, a stronghold of Hezbollah, leaving no doubt as to what is meant by the term strongholds.

Just as British government investment in infrastructure in Northern Ireland, a stronghold of the IRA, does not mean the British government financed the IRA, and Qatari investment in Gaza infrastructure does not mean Qatar finances Hamas, Iranian investment in infrastructure in Lebanon does not mean Iran financed Hezbollah.

Secondly, why do you say a Washington Post article from 2006, which quotes an anonymous 'specialist,' who's alleged research is based on un-named documents, is a better source than a BBC article from last month which quotes Ali Vaez, who's knowledge on the topic is based on the recent ICG report that he was the principle author of?

http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/about/staff/field/mena/ali-vaez.aspx


Although the text on the wiki page I originally quoted has been changed since I quoted it, it now reads:

Hezbollah receives military training, weapons, and financial support from Iran, and political support from Syria.

This line is not supported by any cited source whatsoever. It is no less misleading than the text I originally quoted, and it does not take account of Ali Vaez's findings.

92.22.72.103 (talk) 20:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

EU and Hezbollah

As of today the European Union has taken a decision that the legal status of Hezbollah is terror organisation. Please include this in the opening paragraph. --Gilisa (talk) 10:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hezbollah&oldid=565311448"