Talk:Federation of Zionist Youth

Vandalising

I am in the process of improving and adapting this page but a vandal: RolandR saldly keeps altering this. I intend on slowly developing this page whilst this man seems to want to keep it a stub.

Notability under question?

FZY is the oldest and largest Zionist Youth Movement in Britain being nearly 100 years old. A Google search for "FZY Zionist" returns over 3000 entries, every single one of them about the movement in question. [1] It has a vast and rich history that has involved many members who have gone on to hold high positions in the Jewish and Israeli communities. FZY's notability is utterly unquestionable. Dino246 14:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The primary guideline for notability of a company or organization as stated in Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)is: "A company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject." There is no evidence in the article that this is the case for FZY and I could find no evidence on line. Before you cite any such sources I would recommend reading through Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) to make sure it is not excluded. I think that if no such sources can be found the best arguemnet for notability would be to argue the "The organization’s longevity, size of membership, or major achievements", which can also be considered per the guideline. Also you mention former members holding high positions, do any of them have pages on Wikipedia, that might help. [[Guest9999 15:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)]]

Abba Eban mentions FZY in his autobiography as he was a very active member and an editor of the FZY journal The Young Zionist. The Jewish Chronicle is replete with references to and articles about FZY (and the Young Zionist Societies as they used to be known) as are most British Jewish papers. A cursory search of Israel's Jerusalem Post turns up over a dozen articles [2]. I really don't believe that FZY's notability is questionable. I will concede that the article needs a bit of work though. It appears to have been mostly written by members. This is not really surprising given the nature of youth movements - a few of them probably took it on as a project to develop FZY's Wikipedia article. I'll see what I can do to enhance the article with independent sources and references but I don't believe that the notability tag is justified as it is definitely isn't a candidate for deletion. Perhaps replace it with the 'doesn't quote its sources' tag. Dino246 17:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I think you're probably right and FZY is notable, I agree that the article needs a lot of work as among other things it doesn't cite sources and it doesn't really say why FZY is notable. [[Guest9999 00:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)]]

I changed the tag to unreferenced. I'll have a go myself when I get a chance but that should encourage others to help out rather than getting us sidetracked into a discussion about notability or even possible deletion which is clearly not the issue in this case. Dino246 05:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism/copyright violation

Fzyuser is repeatedly adding text copied directly from other sites, including [3], [4] and [5]. This is not permitted under Wikipedia policy, and could result in the user being blocked. Anyone wanting to improve this article with the use of the material in question should rewrite it in their own words. RolandR 10:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

This blatant plagiarism, adding material taken directly from the website of the FZY itself, has just been repeated by Fzy112233. I have reverted to the earlier version, and I repeat my warning above that plagiarism can lead to blocking, and that editors wishing to improve this article should do so using their own words. RolandR 15:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Take a breath

There's a little tug of war going on here and both sides need to take a step back. To the person/people trying to add content to this article; I'm sure your intentions are pure but the FZY website itself is not a sufficient independent source for information on the movement and wholesale copy/pasting of info from there is against Wikipedia policy. Do some research, find some newspaper articles or 3rd party references to the history of FZY and write original prose summing up the history and operations of the movement. The Jewish Chronicle, Jerusalem Post and Haaretz should have plenty of articles on FZY's programmes and activities, Abba Eban's autobiography mentions his involvement in the Young Zionist Societies. Use sources like these. Avoid writing stuff that looks like promotional material and no one will have any justification for reverting your edits. Roland, on your talk page you are a self-identifying anti-Zionist and are perhaps being a little overzealous in your reverting here. FZY has a long history and is a major British Zionist youth movement today, the article really should be more than a mere stub. Give the new editors some time to develop the article. With clear guidelines to avoid plagiarising the FZY website and to back up their claims with independent sources they should be able to flesh this article out, please give them some space to do so without them feeling intimidated. Dino246 (talk) 21:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I know that FZY has a long history -- forty years ago, I was an active member. I agree that it should have more than a stub article. But simply cutting and pasting from its own website is not good enough. And I doubt that we are talking here about "new editors", since there have been several previous attempts to add exactly the same material in the same way: see edits from 11 March 2006, 10 June 2006, 24 April 2008, and 18 June 2009. You have reverted some of this yourself. And there have been many more edits adding unsourced quotes from the FZY website and other related sites. Indeed, it seems as though from the first edit, this article has been simply a cut-and-paste promotional piece. Over the nearly four years of this article's existence, there seems to have been no attempt to write any original text, to explain what FZY is, and why it is notable; merely a self-advertisement.

There was a proposed deletion in 2006, on the grounds that the article was "a vanity project for the group", and that " after removal of copyright violations, there are only two sentences left, still written in the first person". Although six editors voted to delete, and only two to keep, it was still ruled a "speedy keep". But, in the three years since, there has been no attempt to improve the article.

I am not swayed here by my political views. I would find it very helpful to have a properly researched and sourced article, including criticism, of this and similar organisations. FZY has its own website, which is linked in our text, where they can present themselves how they like. But they can't simply use Wikipedia as free advertising space. RolandR 23:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I basically agree and I am aware that I have reverted similar edits in the past. What I haven't done though is instantly ban every user who attempts to add material here. I wouldn't be so hasty to assume that it's one person, you know as well as I do that it is probably a small group of young people who got back from year course or summer tour with a mission to improve the article on Wikipedia.. Accusations of sock puppetry and instant user bans do not create a pleasant atmosphere for well intentioned young new editors. Please be a little less trigger happy and instead offer them guidance. Dino246 (talk) 04:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I am discussing this matter with the editor involved. He did create multiple accounts, many. He has selected one account to edit under, and depending on both full disclosure and improvement in his editing may be unblocked. A calm collegiate atmosphere will be helpful. Fred Talk 14:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Federation of Zionist Youth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726025414/http://website.thejc.com/home.aspx?AId=54066&ATypeId=1&search=true2&srchstr=fzy&srchtxt=0&srchhead=1&srchauthor=0&srchsandp=0&scsrch=0 to http://website.thejc.com/home.aspx?AId=54066&ATypeId=1&search=true2&srchstr=fzy&srchtxt=0&srchhead=1&srchauthor=0&srchsandp=0&scsrch=0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:30, 16 January 2018 (UTC)