Talk:Dov Lior

Shahak

You write: 'Shahak is not a reliable source, he was a chemistry professor who wrote anti-Jewish polemics', and advise me to find the original material. With regard to the second request, you are asking me to violate wiki policy, which is opposed to 'original research'.

As regards the first point, this is a judgement, I presume based on the wikipedia article on Shahak, since it shows no familiarity with his writings, but only with hearsay by critics who disagreed with him, mainly on hearsay. It is immaterial, in judging Shahak's essays and books, whether he was a chemist or a phlebotomist or whatever. Secondly, he did not write, 'anti-Jewish polemics': I take that to be your personal judgement, and would be interested to know on what basis you arrived at it? He wrote many essays against a variety of movements within Israel's political groupings which he thought a danger to the healthy development of a modern state. You, or I, might well disagree on this, but that is not relevant. As a strong source (he quotes his newspaper sources with author and date) for material on religious movements, he comes within the wiki rules, which were formulated to stop airheads from opinionizing about things without regard to verifiable and reliable criteria, not to censor sources by eminent figures in the public domain who happen to be controversial.RegardsNishidani 06:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Shahak was not a historian, he was a chemistry professor. His works are polemics; they do not count as reliable for historical information. Also, Wikipedia cannot be used as a source for claims in Wikipedia article. Jayjg ^(talk) 12:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Remarriage

So he remarried a dozen years before his first wife died? Arbeit Sockenpuppe 22:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Dates in this article

According to Wikipedia:Manual of style (dates and numbers), dates in Wikipedia articles should always use the Gregorian/Julian calendars, with other calendar systems used in addition to the Gregorian dates but not in place of them. Hence, the dates in this article, currently given in the Hebrew calendar, should be given in Common Era notation as well. Unfortunately, I can't change them myself as each Hebrew year corresponds to two Gregorian years; e.g., it says that Lior was married in 5720, but I don't know if that was in 1959 or 1960. Could someone who knows the details of this man's life please add in the clarified CE dates? Terraxos (talk) 16:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments made about civilian deaths

I've deleted a rant which breaks WP:BLP. Here is a link to an article reporting what happened. "When our enemies hold a baby in one hand and shoot at us with the other," announces Lior, "or when they purposely position missile launchers in the midst of civilian populations, we are obligated to act according to Jewish morality which dictates that 'he who gets up to kill you, get up yourself and kill him first.' This has been distorted to suggest he said it was ok to kill Gentiles while what he really said is quite different. We should only use reliable sources and should not comment on them ourselves. Dougweller (talk) 09:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

it is disgusting how u r trying to wash this fascist pig clean. reliable sources? u mean only good things confirmed by AIPAC or JDL? or what? Dov Lior is famous for his fascist statements all over the world, and there is not a word on that in his article? u always delete/remove the truth. thats how wikipedia dies: yeshiva students r editing this article or what? there is a self proclaimed jewish poet in Hungary called Ágnes Rapai. she made the wikipedia article of herself, so it is very very objective...like this one.

if someone has ever heard of Dov Lior, it is because these sentences: "a thousand non-jewish life are not worth a jew's fingernail", "Baruch Goldstein is a hero and a martyr", "Jewish blood is redder than non-jewish blood".

deleting relevant information? trying to hide the truth from readers? shame on you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.134.67.84 (talk) 17:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

lol. i just made an addition with references, and in a minute it was reverted back claiming i am biased...disgusting. is it a fact that he made these comments? yes. is it a fact that these comments are fascists? yes. is it a fact that Foreign Policy nemed him one of the World's Worst religious Leaders? yes it is referenced.

so why do u keep these informations deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.134.67.84 (talk) 18:15, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Zionist pressure to hide the truth

Some zionist organization probably pressurized wikipedia and Foreign Policy to hide this information. Since i added the article as a reference it has vanished from Foreign Policy too. Very interesting. It can still be found in the google cache

http://209.85.135.132/search?q=cache:1k_s_s1fzfIJ:www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php%3Fstory_id%3D4244+world%27s+worst+religious+leaders&cd=2&hl=hu&ct=clnk&gl=hu&client=opera

moreover there is another site that republished the article years ago so it can be still found there too

http://richarddawkins.net/articles/2462

Pls dont hide the truth just becoz the article is about a jewish person. Pls make it impossible to remove that TRUE, RELEVANT and REFERENCED information about that guy. Or wikipedia can be pressurized by zionist groups to hide true information about a rabbi that has fascist views?

Thx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.134.67.84 (talk) 23:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

"...zionist organization probably pressurized wikipedia..."? Very unlikely. I'm not jewish, no one has pressured me, I even had to read the article again to find out who the hell Dov Lior is. The reason why I removed the text you added is because the source you supply is a dead link. Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people makes it very clear that we should "Remove unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material" - indeed, Wikipedia has got into trouble before by failing to remove unsourced contentious material. If you can cite a reliable source (and preferably several reliable sources) for these allegations, then bring them here. If he is "...infamous around the world", sources should not be hard to find.

On the other hand, continuing to add unsourced contentious material will eventually get you blocked from editing. Astronaut (talk) 10:30, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

it wasnt a dead link when i added. it is there in the google cache so its simply tricking what u r doing to hide the truth about this ill nazi person... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.21.201.118 (talk) 14:04, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

btw i added another link. but i can add as many as u want, since u can type that infamous quotation into google and watch the results...

added 3 more. 4 working links would be enuf? or u r gonna force those sites to delete the article as u did with Foreign Policy? dont dare to hide the truth again!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.21.201.118 (talk) 14:23, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

This was never an issue of hiding the truth and I have absolutely no idea why Foreign Policy removed their article. I'm sure if you were to ask them, they would provide a reasonable explanation for their decision; they can be contacted using the details at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/contact_us.

As for Wikipedia, it is not really truth that matters, but verifiability. With the foreignpolicy.com source you originally provided being "no longer available" there was no means for readers to verify what was written. Now you have supplied some proper reliable sources, I am reasonably sure what you have written would be acceptable. That said, I have removed one unreliable source (the "desertpeace" blog on wordpress.com) and some point of view statements that were not supported by the sources - specifically the words "fascist" and "-even babies-". Please don't try to find conspiracy where there is none. Astronaut (talk) 17:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Breslau is not and was never part of Galicia

Does Lior live in an Israeli settlement?

Does anyone have a source for where Lior lives? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:14, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

State of this article

As far as I can see, all versions of this fought-over article are pretty poor. This is a controversial living person whose article has to be carefully written according to the best sources. We shouldn't be quoting al-Jazeera, even though that might be fine for many other things, but neither should we be censoring the controversy like Dwaldman is trying to do. Look at this for example: "after writing a short forward to a Jewish law book of another Rabbi". This is useless writing. What book is being referred to here and why would it interest the police? To see the sort of things Lior is associated with, read this opinion piece Haaretz. I think it is too polemical to serve as a source for the article, but most of the factual claims in there can be sourced without too much difficulty. Zero^talk 11:19, 5 June 2011 (UTC)