Talk:British-Israel-World Federation

Untitled

Why aren't there two pages, one for the generic term British-Israelism and one for the specific group British-Israel-World-Federation? I think it is wrong to combine the two. If anything, the British-Israel-World-Federation should be a sub heading under British Israelism. The books on the subject treat it this way.--Cberlet 18:41, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

British Israelism and British-Israel-World Federation are two separate pages, as of today. – wbm1058 (talk) 14:42, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 16 February 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 05:14, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

---

British-Israel-World Federation → The British-Israel-World Federation – I request a name change because the official name of the organisation this article talks about is incorrect. The official name of the organisation talked about contains the word: The, at the start to have: The British-Israel-World Federation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scynthian (talk • contribs) 10:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 07:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose – we don't normally include "The" in org names, but if you can present a good argument based on WP:THE, maybe some will be convinced. Seems unlikely though, as their own web site says "the BIWF" and does not have capitalized "The" in a sentence that I can see. Dicklyon (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
• Comment @Dicklyon: Looks like it does several times here. Doug Weller talk 19:07, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

@Scynthian: "The British-Israel-World Federation" is the official title of the international organisation in which this article is about. Adding "The" to the title is not going against the "Names of groups, sports teams and companies" section. Scynthian (talk) 03:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

• Comment no particular opinion on the "the", but the hyphens should be changed to n-dashes to show disjunction per MOS:NDASH. (Similarly in the article, except for Anglo-Israelism which is OK with a hyphen.) – Reidgreg (talk) 19:06, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose move. The onus is on the nominator to give a valid reason for a move, and I see no valid move reason as of now.  ONR  (talk)  18:02, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 7 March 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Andrewa (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

---

British-Israel-World Federation → The British-Israel-World Federation – The official registered title of the group this article is made for does not contain "The". This article title needs to contain "The", for this article to be correct. Ref: The Charity Commission Registration List of The United Kingdom. Scynthian (talk) 06:29, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

• Comment: You've provided a good reason for the move this time, but it remains to be see whether the leading "The" is truly in common usage. I personally don't see the move as necessary, but if we're fixing the hyphen/n-dash issues already, why not kill two birds with one stone?  ONR  (talk)  04:07, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
  • The title I have asked for is the correct title. Scynthian (talk) 10:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
    • It doesn't matter what is "correct" if the sources can't back it up. I'm personally leading toward a move at this point, but an official support on my end would allow the discussion to be closed early, and I'm not 100% clear on what the sources say.  ONR  (talk)  06:38, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
    • Would it do if we got clarification from the president? Scynthian (talk) 09:10, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
    • That would not clarify the common name, only the official one, but it appears there would be no objections to the "The" if it were official.  ONR  (talk)  04:22, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per nom's statement that "The official registered title of the group this article is made for does not contain 'The'". And sources mostly don't cap it in mid-sentence: [1], [2], [3]. No reason for us to include "The" then. Dicklyon (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
• Closing comment: There is clearly no consensus to move and none likely. But I would also call nom's attention to wp:official names and wp:correct, two essays that might clarify the policy on this. Andrewa (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 22 April 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. There is not a consensus that the second hyphen should be removed. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Dane ^talk 22:35, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

---

British-Israel-World Federation → British-Israel World Federation – Apologies for a new RfC, but I seem to have missed the old ones. Whatever the official name might be, reliable sources don't use it very often. Googlebooks[4] and Google Scholar[5] - many just call it the British Israel World Federation, those that use British-Israel still call it the British-Israel World Federation, with a few exceptions. WP:COMMONAME should apply. Doug Weller talk 17:55, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose: I don't think we should change the title to "British-Israel World Federation" for that is falsely named and I Wikipedia should be like an encyclopedia with a correct title. Books still hold to the "British-Israel-World Federation", as well the federation still publishes books under the proper title. Unless you won't to make things difficult in confusing people wanting information, the article should stay the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scynthian (talk • contribs) 20:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

• There'd be a redirect so it wouldn't affect anyone's ability to find this, so no confusion would be possible. We'd list it as the official name of the organisation as well. WP:COMMONNAME is how we choose article titles and your argument doesn't address it. Doug Weller talk 12:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• [This user already opposed, above. Drmies (talk) 14:54, 28 April 2017 (UTC)] Oppose: The title shows that the federation is of the Israel-World, not of the sinful world we live in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scynthian (talk • contribs) 22:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

That's a load of self-absorbed crap. 142.105.159.253 (talk) 00:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose: The second hyphen(Israel-World) is included and is the official charity registration. It has been the title since the founding in 1919. It is the world of the covenant nations and not the world in general that is being described. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.2.212 (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• IP, either you've been recruited to come here or you are editing logged out from an account. Neither is a good idea. In any case, you aren't citing guidelines or policies which is how this should be decided, not by a count. Doug Weller talk 12:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• Not me, to my belief, it was the president himself, Michael. Scynthian (talk) 11:00, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

• I knew it wasn't you, it's a UK IP. If it's Michael Walker, he may be the Michael Walker who has an account here. Doug Weller talk 16:24, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

• Ah, I hadn't looked at at the edit summary, he states that the IP is his. So the only opposes are from officials of the organisation. Doug Weller talk 09:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

• If we play grammarian, tt's either a hyphen between British and Israel, making "British-Israel" adjectival, or between Israel and World, making "Israel-World" adjectival. You can't have "British-Israel-World" in any normal English way. Reliable Google Book sources favor "British-Israel World Federation". Drmies (talk) 14:59, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose as per above. I am not sure this even really warrants this much effort.Slatersteven (talk) 08:28, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

1990s infiltration of Nazis into the Australian branch

During the 1990s and the very beginning of this century the Australian BIWF branch was evidently pretty close to Christian Identity and run by neo-Nazis. See this 2010 report [6] by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry Antisemitism Report 2010 1 October 2009 - 30 September 2010 "The British Israelites, maintain that the British people are the "lost ten tribes" of Israel and that they constitute the "Chosen People". Interpreting Christianity as a racially rather than religiously based community, Jews and non-Europeans appear as non-humans, or at best agents of Satan, in their cosmology. In addition to running religious services for its membership, it has bookshops and a mail-order service for literature and cassettes. The British-Israel World Federation bookshop in Sydney has increased stocks of Holocaust denial material and antisemitic literature and become more overtly concerned about "the Jews". The BIWF sells a large range of antisemitic material, from overtly "Identity" sources as well as from neo-Nazi and pro-Nazi groups who did not necessarily share their "religion". The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is amongst the titles sold in their book shop and by mail order." The New Zealand Herald in 2001 reported that the " Fuhrer of the Australian National Socialist Defence of Aryan People Movement" and head of the Australian KKK, David Palmer was "vice-president of the Australian branch of the London-based British Israel World Federation, a virulently anti-Semitic group in whose bookshop we meet in central Sydney." The Canadian Race Relations Foundation reported that "Christian Identity literature is distributed through groups such as the British Israel World Federation, which has branches in Vancouver, Calgary and Toronto." (this information was from another publication in 1997) Another source, also 1997 but not the one I've just mentioned, says the same thing. I can't find out what actually happened but there was a lawsuit and Palmer and his clique seem to be gone.[7] Of course we can't use that source. Doug Weller talk 16:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Correcting bias

The chief section is very biassed, in describing in some detail only a negative element that got unfortunately attached to BIWF. There is no balanced basic description. And the last paragraph "The central tenets of British Israelism have been refuted by evidence from modern genetic, linguistic, archaeological, and philological research.[5]" is simply untrue. The ref. [5] is to Legacy: a genetic history of the Jewish people, by Harry Ostrer. It is a perfectly good book in itself, but it does not remotely refute anything to do with British Israel - whose tenets regarding each issue need to be stated, before they could reasonably be declared "refuted". Unless good reason not to act is given, I shall delete this sentence and try to find someone who can write an altogether more balanced section Lucy Skywalker (talk) 17:00, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

I've added some sources. We don't strive for balance but for what we call a "neutral point of view" - you need to read WP:NPOV carefully. We're a mainstream encyclopedia. British Israelism is WP:Fringe and our article must make that clear. Doug Weller talk 19:50, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

COI tag

I have removed the COI tag from 2017. With edits since then, User:Doug Weller and I now account for more than half of the contributed text, and when including User:Editor2020, account for the majority of edits. That has certainly given enough non-CoI eyes to this to have been edited accordingly. I think at this point, it's reasonable to remove the tag. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:28, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Agreed Doug Weller talk 13:16, 13 October 2023 (UTC)