Submission declined on 26 April 2024 by Gobonobo (talk). Neologisms are not considered suitable for Wikipedia unless they receive substantial use and press coverage; this requires strong evidence in independent, reliable, published sources. Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability. Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Pallywood instead.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
|
Submission declined on 19 April 2024 by Wikishovel (talk). This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner. Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Pallywood instead. Declined by Wikishovel 5 months ago. |
Submission declined on 19 April 2024 by Sungodtemple (talk). This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner. Declined by Sungodtemple 5 months ago. |
- Comment: "Popsicle-stick propaganda" is only mentioned in the LinkedIn post, and appears to be a non-notable neologism per WP:NEO. Wikishovel (talk) 03:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: See WP:SYNTH. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Palestinian Popsicle-Stick Propaganda is a term used in the field of rhetoric and persuasion to describe baseless Palestinian propagandist arguments that initially appear robust and compelling, but upon further examination, prove to be unstable.[1] This metaphorical term likens these arguments to a house made of popsicle sticks, which, while appearing strong, lacks a sturdy foundation and can quickly crumble under critical analysis.[1]
This concept bears similarity to the self-licking ice cream cone argument, a term used to describe a situation that exists primarily to sustain itself.[1][2]
In the context of Palestinian Popsicle-Stick Propaganda, it refers to narratives or arguments that may initially appear persuasive but are fundamentally baseless and can dissolve under the heat of critical scrutiny; like a melting popsicle.[1]
An example of this can be seen in the casualty figures reported by the Gaza Health Ministry. Experts like Abraham Wyner have questioned these figures for their unnatural consistency, suggesting potential data manipulation.[1][3] Wyner also highlights the lack of correlation between child and female casualties, indicating the numbers may not be accurate.[1][3] Furthermore, the ministry’s admission of possessing “incomplete data” for a third of the casualties undermines its credibility.[1][3] These examples align with the concept of a self-licking ice cream cone argument, a situation that exists primarily to justify its own existence.[1][2] It’s crucial to critically examine these narratives and strive for a discourse that values truth and substance over empty rhetoric.[1] These instances of misinformation and skewed narratives are the popsicle sticks that prop up the fragile structure of the propaganda, ready to collapse under the weight of truth and critical examination.[1]
The self-licking ice cream cone argument is intended to draw parallels with the type of circular propaganda often employed by Pro-Palestinian propagandists.[1][2] Their arguments are structured in a way that they feed off themselves, typically relying on emotional responses that discourage critical review.[1][2] As a result, these arguments exist primarily to perpetuate their own groundless claims.[1]
This concept closely relates to the idea of Palestinian Popsicle-Stick Propaganda.[1] Both involve the use of seemingly convincing narratives that, upon closer examination, lack substantial evidence or logical coherence.[1] They both rely on emotional appeal rather than factual accuracy, and they both serve to perpetuate a particular narrative rather than encouraging a balanced and critical examination of the situation.[1] In essence, they are self-perpetuating narratives that melt under the heat of scrutiny, much like a popsicle or a self-licking ice cream cone.[1][2]
The Al Shifa hospital incident is another example of how Palestinian Popsicle-Stick Propaganda operates.[1][4] In this case, the narrative hastily propagated by Hamas and the Gaza Health Ministry was that Israel had bombed the hospital.[1][4]
However, upon closer examination, it was revealed that the damage was actually caused by a failed missile strike from another militant group, not Israel.[1][4] This misinformation, which initially seemed convincing, lacked substantial evidence and failed under scrutiny.[1] It served to feed off emotional responses and discourage critical review, thereby perpetuating groundless arguments.[1]
This incident underscores the importance of thorough examination and critical thinking as this incident significantly swayed public opinion against Israel.[1] This reinforces the need for rigorous scrutiny and critical thinking in the face of such narratives.[1]
References
edit- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x Testani, Jeff (2024-04-09). "⚠️ Palestinian Popsicle-Stick Propaganda ⚠️". www.linkedin.com. Retrieved 2024-04-09.
- ^ a b c d e Brody, Ben (2023-12-04). "U.S. Military Lingo: The (Almost) Definitive Guide".
- ^ a b c Rahim, Mohamed (2024-03-27). "Rahim Mohamed: Hamas death numbers can't be trusted — here's more evidence they are inflated".
- ^ a b c "Aerial photos reveal scene of Gaza hospital explosion — a charred parking lot". 2023-10-18.