Talk:Ahed Tamimi/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Op-eds

Shrike, regarding this unhelpful edit, I obviously didn't see the other op-ed. A lot has happened in a short amount of time. Why do you think it is proper to reinsert an op-ed when you know it isn't RS? Because it said something negative about Tamimi. Can you please self-revert and discuss for once? Your drive-by reverts are getting stale.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:00, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

I removed the "Jew-hatred" accusation by a nn columnist: [1]. Please keep the BLP DS in mind. --K.e.coffman (talk) 20:01, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

We should cut out op-eds - including the one by Peter Beaumont that was added today. Enough op-eds have been written about Tamimi that one can SYNTH/POV whichever way with op-eds - we should stick to what notable figures say - who received coverage beyond their self-authored op-ed. Petra Marquardt-Bigman is probably notable - we could create a Wikipedia article for her - but there is little reason to include any op-ed which hasn't received secondary coverage.Icewhiz (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

First of all OP-ED are RS for the opinion of the writer.And you only complain about negative op-ed and not positive . But I have no problem to remove all OP-EDs positive and negative.--Shrike (talk)

Shrike that literally makes no sense. And where did I complain about just negative op-eds? Like I said, I didn't notice the other one and do not approve of op-eds unless the opinion is recorded consistently in secondary sources.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:13, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

So do you agree to remove the other op-ed?--Shrike (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Shrike sure and you could have done so had you not wasted your revert to make a point. I will note sources like the New York Times and Aljazeera also describe the double-standard -- and those aren't op-eds. Regardless, it is probably better suited for the article on the killings, not here.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:26, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

This is what I can't stand. It's always the same double standard. Pro-Palestinian editors can add all the biased opinions against Israel from left-wing and Muslim propagandists around world, but when someone adds a different opinion to balance the article, they immediately remove it by claiming it's not "notable enough". Peter Beaumont's article is literally one sentence... and he is more notable than a journalist from Haaretz? (which is an Israeli newspaper that criticizes Israel on a regular basis). Don't get me wrong. I'm not crazy about Op-Eds in general, but if Beaumont stays, so should Bigman.--יניב הורון (talk) 20:34, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

• The bottom line, please do not insert BLP smears, even if couched in an attribution, into articles. Shrike should be aware of that. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:43, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Bottom line, remove Beaumont's Op-Ed or leave both.--יניב הורון (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Beaumont is a respected journalist and author, who made a factual comparison, while Marquardt-Bigman, if an article were to be created, would probably be best known for her vitriolic views. Not all opinions carry equal weight. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:11, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Grace we should remove all opinions per WP:NPOV--Shrike (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Sure... the article is full of "factual comparisons" by "notable scholars", such as Ehrenreich: "A great deal of work goes into ‘othering’ Palestinians", he wrote, "to casting them as some really recognizable other."--יניב הורון (talk) 21:32, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Comment and reply to K.e.coffman: Who decides who is "respected" and who is not? Who decides which animals are more equal than others? I think the argument that one op-ed is more important than another because it's written by a "respected journalist" is patently fallacious, but if you have something personal against Bigman (actually now that I think of it, your comment about her is in itself a borderline BLP violation), how about Ben-Dror Yemini? He wrote a similar article. So did many other respected Israeli journalists. If you really want to keep the Guardian op-ed, feel free to pick an article by any of these journalists as a counterbalance. However, as others have said here, I would also prefer removing both op-eds. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 21:30, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Ynhockey everyone else here has exhausted their reverts and it appears some editor has come back from leave to reinsert the op-ed. Could you do the honors and remove the op-eds?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:39, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Its really inconceivable to try to exclude Petra Marquardt-Bigman, but to include Peter Beaumont. Even beside this, the article looks very POV driven, thats why I suggest removing both op-eds and reversing this article into WP:NPOV line. Tritomex (talk) 23:42, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

I was bold and moved the op-eds into the analysis section -- I don't think we should be "seasoning" (as some might say) our presentation of facts with commentary on them. Opinions like these belong in their own section and it already existed. Regarding the asserted BLP issue with "seasoned with Jew-hatred" I've removed that piece of the quote as part of trimming; I also removed Beaumont's statement that an unarmed protestor was "no threat" as this is (a) mostly redundant and (b) if it's not then we'd have to note that its his opinion and not state it as fact which will take up more space. Hope that all works for everyone. Cheers, --Calthinus (talk) 00:49, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Both op-eds should be in this article. They both source relevant points of view from commentators about this event:

• That the sentence is or would be disproportionate
• That the motivation of Tahimi is or would be the hate of Jews

Ynhockey: Your comparison with animals is not acceptable. That's the 3rd time I remind this to you.

Pluto2012 (talk) 06:07, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

If we are to report opinions, they should be the opinions of:

• legal experts
• political scientists
• high-ranking (national level) politicians or govt officials.

Authors and journalists writing op-eds aren't experts per WP:SCHOLARSHIP and op-eds aren't WP:RS, that's what an "Analysis" section should contain. AadaamS (talk) 05:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Since when do the predictable POV opinionizing spins of 'high-ranking (national level) politicians or govt officials,' have encyclopedic value outweighing the interpretations given by journalists or authors who have an established record in covering the political, social and conflict history of any region? Everyone in the world knows that Michael Oren, whom we quote, was just blathering, but since it is in secondary source we include that patent nonsense. Fine. But to include such tripe, while using the oped gambit to exclude an intelligent observation by a journalist specializing in the Middle East is manipulative. Nishidani (talk) 08:20, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Beaumont. This is not oped material. Specious removalism without any checking of other sources

Shrike strikes again with a blind revert without examining the evidence

This cannot but go back in, because, while citing Beaumont, I knew that it was not Beaumont’s personal oped opinion, but a general view in several sources.

To make that clear, I’ll rephrase it so the objection drops.

Hanan Ashrawi, Peter Beaumont and social media, contrasted the length of the sentence Tamimi received for slapping a soldier with that of an Israeli border guard who was sentenced to nine months for shooting dead an unarmed Palestinian demonstrator, and with the case of another Israeli soldier, Elor Azaria, who eventually received a sentence roughly of the same length as Tamimi’s after he executed a wounded Palestinian militant while the latter lay on a road.

A nanosecond's googling would have told you, Shrike, or Icewhiz or anyone else, that this is not reducible to a journalistic oped, but formed part of the media reportage of the Tamimi verdiot, unlike the smear op-ed removed with Beaumont earlier. Anyone, feel free to restore this. Nishidani (talk) 09:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

• Can someone fix this, the mess made by my edit? My new section keeps being collapsed with a prior section and becomes unreadable. Thank you.Nishidani (talk) 09:37, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @Nishidani: is this what you wanted?--Calthinus (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Stone Throwing

As may be seen in this WaPo piece, the Tamimis were not only allegedlyinvolved in stone throwing during the riots, but also allegedly threw stones from their compund [2] On Friday, the army said, soldiers were in the village to contain a riot involving some 200 people, including the Tamimis. Some of the rioters, the army said in a statement, entered a nearby house and continued to throw rocks at troops. Then, it said, Tamimi and some women exited and started to “violently provoke” the soldiers..Icewhiz (talk) 15:35, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

An army statement, not an established fact then. -DePiep (talk) 15:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Its in the sources we may attribute it to the army then.Also, we can't say in wiki voice that cousin was shot by the IDF as it claim by the palestinians.--Shrike (talk) 17:09, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Whataboutery. What do you propose? -DePiep (talk) 21:47, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

We probably should have an 'according to the Tamimi family..." and "according to the Israeli army.." paragraphs. DePiep - please refrain from inserting stmts by Bassem Tamimi without attribution in wiki's voice - NPOV.Icewhiz (talk) 19:01, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

A lot of information is omitted regarding her violence activities Charlotte253 (talk) 18:27, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

"Slapping incident" should be retitled

Why is this the name of the section? Shouldn't it be "Assulting a soldier"? This seems more accurate, especially given that she plead guilty to that Brileiweis (talk) 22:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Agreed! She also kicked him and it wasn’t the first time she had been violent. Charlotte253 (talk) 18:34, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that's another factor. It was not just slapping. Multiple actions. The previous history of violence I don't think is a good reason to change the sub-heading title, but the fact that it was not only slapping is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brileiweis (talk • contribs) 04:29, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Family members killed

Ok, AFAIK she has had at least two close relatives killed by the Israelis.

Why isn't this in the article??

I would think that would be...rather influential (to put it diplomatically) on her outlook on life, Huldra (talk) 23:45, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Her aunt was died 8 years prior to her birth. Other Nabi Saleh deaths are not that closely related. If cousin relationships go in, we should include Ahlam Tamimi and Nizar Tamimi who would also be a relevant influence.Icewhiz (talk) 03:12, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

No, Im thinking about that it has been reported that she watched her maternal uncle Rushdi Tamimi being killed in 2012 (when she was about 11), in addition her cousin Mustapha was killed by the Israelis the same year.(A quick googling brings eg.: Why the trial of Ahed Tamimi, who slapped an Israeli soldier, is gaining international attention Memo to ‘NYTimes:’ Go to Ahed Tamimi’s village in Palestine and report the truthPortrait of Ahed Tamimi: A Palestinian Child Star in Israeli Prison) Huldra (talk) 22:41, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

The simple question is whether or not sources discuss these in this context.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:08, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Opinion

Shrike, you removed this (another revert - will you ever stop?) I presume on the grounds that one editor, The Graceful Slick did so. There was no discussion on this page for your claim that we decided not to include opeds. But I had an exchange at the time with the excising editor on my page, in which I explained the edit, - it is not Beaumont's personal 'opinion', but Beaumont reporting on what, as the part of the edit you did not touch shows, was a current response among several sources documenting reactions. Since TGS did not challenge this, I thought it reasonable to infer that his original objection was waived. Examined Beaumont's piece, though headed 'Opinion', has none of the hallmarks of an opinion piece since it reports two court verdicts and summarizes what was being said by Ashrawi. Nishidani (talk) 17:05, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

And yet, it is clearly marked as an opinion in the top left of the piece, indicating this did not undergo the Guardian's editorial controls that are present for news reporting, nor would this ascribe to the POV of the Guardian's editors.Icewhiz (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

I have to fix your bad editing.Its appears on opinion section "Comment is free" and headed 'Opinion'.We can't have an exemption just because you want so and think that its not opinion.I have no problem restoring all the opinion pieces that was used before but this should consistent--Shrike (talk) 17:57, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Talking about my bad editing is what, in psychology, is called projection. Well, to run past you both the ABC of wiki policy. When using them, it is best to clearly attribute the opinions in the text to the author and make it clear to the reader that they are reading an opinion.Otherwise reliable news sources—for example, the website of a major news organization—that publish in a blog-style format for some or all of their content may be as reliable as if published in a more "traditional" 20th-century format

Beaumont there was used with attribution, he was named. Secondly, as usual, the excisionist edit summary was false. There was no collective decision. Don't waste my time with argufying. Memorize the policy and then next time don't write a false edit summary ('we' agreed) No one agreed. To the contrary.Nishidani (talk) 18:59, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Again I don't have a problem to use op-eds but all othe op-eds should return to the article do you agree?--Shrike (talk) 06:47, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

We evaluate things on a case-by-case basis. Opeds depend on (a) the quality of the writer (b) the quality of the publishing venue (c) the pertinence of the 'opinion' given to the basically factual thrust of wiki articles (and her T he Graceful Slick has given good advice). Nishidani (talk) 07:44, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

A bunch of comments

Content from Arabic and Hebrew Wikipedias

From a cursory glance at the Arabic version of this article using Google Translate, it doesn't seem to have notable info we don't have (or had and deleted) here, but I don't understand Arabic, so I hope someone else will review that. However, I do understand Hebrew, and the Hebrew version definitely has some notable info that isn't in the English version (and hasn't been here as far back as I checked). For instance, it mentions petitions by Amnesty International, Avaaz, and Dream Defenders that call for Tamimi's release, and mentions that Abbas met with her family at his office and declared her a honorary member of the Palestinian National Council. Any thoughts? Professor Proof (talk) 12:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Good article nomination

TheGracefulSlick, there have been some edit wars here relatively recently, and some content is still disputed. Doesn't that fail good article criterion #5? As a part of the said content disputes, some editors seem to think the article isn't neutral, and thus if I were to review this nomination I wouldn't immediately determine that it meets #4. It fairly clearly meets #6, and it seems to be well-referenced enough to meet #2, though I didn't make sure the article reflects the sources. I'm not qualified to check the article against #1 and #3, which is why I won't actually review the nomination. Again, any thoughts? Professor Proof (talk) 12:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Typo

This one is trivial, but the article is extended-confirmed protected, so: the article describes Ammar Dweik as the "director of the The..." and makes a wikilink longer than it should be. I'd change it to "director of the Independent Commission for Human Rights". Professor Proof (talk) 12:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

That was it. If you reply, please do me a favor and ping me (not only in your first reply, I'm high-maintenance ). Cheers! Professor Proof (talk) 12:18, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Professor Proof. That was very helpful input. (1) Technically, virtually all Palestinian articles are generally subject to challenge as POV-based. If they seek a DYK, that applies all the more. I think the #5 criteria regarding this should examine if the protesting editors have drawn up a list of problems/concerns, and, if so, whether they have been addressed. Revert wars are to be expected, but good faith is shown by this procedure. I don't think anyone has troubled themselves to outline on the talk page such a bulleted list and in the meantime, those issues that have been raised were addressed here and in editing. The article has stabilized. (2) Your point re Dweik has been readily adopted, sensible. (3) I removed one dead linked article, which was an eyesore and, on scrutiny, not needed given the abundance of references for the same content. Regards Nishidani (talk) 13:04, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 July 2018

1) Change: "... to the expansion of Jewish settlements and detention of Palestinians."

To: "... to the expansion of Israeli settlements and detention of Palestinians."

Reason: Israeli settlements are open to all Israeli citizens regardless of national/ethnic identity

2) Change: "... were filmed slapping, kicking, and shoving them; the soldiers do not retaliate"

To: "... were filmed slapping, kicking, and shoving them; the soldiers did not retaliate."

Reason: Grammatical accuracy Mwishlight (talk) 10:33, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

The second change has already been made. The first needs a reliable source indicating that the settlers were not Jewish. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:26, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Ahed Tamimi to be freed from Prison

Ahed Tamimi to be freed on Sunday after serving 8 months time in prison after hitting soldier.

• "Ahed Tamimi to be freed Sunday after serving time for hitting soldier". The Times of Israel. 26 July 2018. Sokuya (talk) 20:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

• "Israeli Officials Confirm Ahed Tamimi's Release Sunday". Telesur TV. 26 July 2018. Shushugah (talk) 16:36, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Ahlam Tamimi Family connection- The Sbarro suicide bombing

How come some information is omitted such as her Family’s criminal records and terror activism? Ahed’s call for terror attacks in social Media? Without mentioning all facts, this log is slanted and won’t portray the truth. Facts should be included in the most impartial manner. Charlotte253 (talk) 18:33, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Can’t agree more. The entire article is biased and omits basic facts such as the fact that her aunt is Ahlam Tamimi, the perpetrator and facilitator of the The Sbarro restaurant suicide bombing, also called the Sbarro massacre, which was a Palestinian terrorist attack on a pizzeria in downtown Jerusalem, Israel, on 9 August 2001, in which 15 civilians were killed, including 7 children and a pregnant woman, and 130 wounded (from the Wikipedia article). Or that her cousin - Nizar Tamimi who married Ahlam Tamimi is the murderer of Chaim Mizrahi in another terrorist attack.

It also omits the fact Chezi-Schlaff (talk) 23:57, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Using wiki-voice for POV stmt that at the minimum needs to be attributed

This edit re-instated in wiki-voice "her case also highlighted Israel’s mistreatment of Palestinian minors.". This is citing 3 sources (2 added vs. the original). The first, the Guardian (which was the original citation), says nothing of the sort and merely mentions minors being imprisoned. The second, The Intercept, is a highly biased anti-Israel source with factual reporting issues in its past - it doesn't quite say this - though I suppose one could summarize it. The third - CNN - is an acceptable source - however it doesn't say so in its own voice, but rather attributes this to HRW's Omar Shakir. At the very least, such a stmt should be attributed.Icewhiz (talk) 14:49, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Text her case also highlighted Israel’s mistreatment of Palestinian minors. Sources for the text.

There is no need for attribution when several sources state a fact. You call a POV statement a fact that is universally attested by the most important Human Rights analysts in the world. To call the beating hauling before military courts and gaoling of minors in an occupied country a 'point of view' is ridiculous, a refusal to face the obvious. I.e.

• 'Minors in Jeopardy:Violation of the Rights of Palestinian Minors by Israel’s Military Courts,' B'tselem March 2018
• Rebecca Carr, ill-treatment of detained Palestinian minors must end Amnesty International 7 February 2018:

While the case of Palestinian teen activist Ahed Tamimi has conjured significant international media attention, her case is not unique. According to Israel Prison Service (IPS) statistics published by Israeli anti-occupation organization B’Tselem, Israel is holding over 300 Palestinian minors in prison. Just like Tamini, an alarming proportion of those minors are being held in detention until the end of legal proceedings, without having been convicted. Israel is the only country in the world that automatically prosecutes children in military courts that lack fundamental fair rights and guarantees. The systematic ill treatment and torture of Palestinian children has been widely documented in recent years, with Amnesty International finding that Israeli forces had “tortured and otherwise ill-treated Palestinian detainees, including children, particularly during arrest and interrogation”, with methods including “beating with batons, slapping, throttling, prolonged shackling, stress positions, sleep deprivation and threats.”

• Palestine: Israeli Police Abusing Detained Children: With Arrests Spiking, Growing Concern Human Rights Watch 11 April 2016

The three sources are stating the obvious, and together warrant the mild statement about the facts paraphrased in Wikipedia. If this were an extraordinary claim you might have a leg to stand on. It is obvious and therefore taking exception to them is carping. The Intercept is 'a highly biased anti-Israel source'? Well, The Jewish Chronicle, Jewish News and Jewish Telegraph are 'higjly biased anti-Palestinian sources' whose use on the Antisemitism in the UK Labour Party page you fully endorse. I don't object to their use, even though there the intent is to smear; you shouldn't object to the Intercept's reportage of, not a smear, but a universally accepted reality. Nishidani (talk) 15:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

While the "imprisonment" (and judicial process in military courts) of minors prosecuted for committing crimes is an accepted fact, labeling application of justice as "mistreatment", based on RS quoting HRW's director (or an Amnesty report) - should be attributed.Icewhiz (talk) 15:53, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Read the reports. All three sources document and unequivocally state that they are maltreated, and no one who actually reads the evidence can doubt that 'maltreatment' is in fact a euphemism. Protection of minors is a u universal part of international law, and seizure, arrest, physical molestation, gaoling, and interrogation of children by grown battlehardened soldiers without the presence of parents or lawyers is psychologically devastating, and the first to know the effectiveness of this Stasi like treatment of minors are the people engaged in it. Nishidani (talk) 16:07, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

• Read The Guardian once again and see: "Concerns about her treatment in detention were raised after..." and also "Her case has highlighted the arrest and detention of what local human rights groups say are more than 300 Palestinian minors." Please note that the latter quote is attributing the number of detainees to human rights groups, so the fact her case "highlighted" something is not attributed in the text. CNN is saying almost the same thing in his own voice. Such a well-established fact does not need attribution. --Mhhossein ^talk 14:13, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 September 2018

The main photo is form 2016. There is more updated one of the same person: file:20180807 Ahed Tamimi West Bank Palestine 2.jpg. Please add it to the article. Corvus (talk) 16:21, 27 September 2018 (UTC) Corvus (talk) 16:21, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 12:41, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Legitimation of stabbings and suicide atacks?

I wonder to find nothing about this alleged quote of Ahed Tamimi: "They have to take responsibility for whatever our reaction is — whether it's stabbing attacks, or suicide attacks, or stone throwing," Source:

At first, I'd like to discuss if Tamimi really said this. You can also find this quote on several conservative Israeli media outlets, but this is the most neutral one that I could find. But it's just one. Does anyone know an actual video or post or twitter where she said/wrote that?

Second, if she said this, it would mean that she thinks that US and and Israel are to blame if any Israeli citizen gets stabbed or bombed. You could argue this was pretty close to "It's the Jews' fault their are being killed", and the cited article says it's actually the same thing. So if it's her actual quote, this perspective should be presented in the article.

For now, I'd like to discuss on this discussion page IF she said this at all. JakobvS (talk) 13:04, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

• According to Newsweek, Tamimi's "mother, who filmed the event, was charged with assault and incitement after posting a video of the teen on social media in which she urges others to protest against Israel with stabbing attacks or suicide bombings." Per Times of Israel: "The 17-year-old was also filmed encouraging attacks against Israelis, including stabbing attacks." Scaleshombre (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

This is a talk page for discussing article improvement, not the Bash The Tamimis page. Zero^talk 01:53, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Exactly. To improve the page with relevant, RS information, like in this case. Scaleshombre (talk) 05:58, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

You can find anything you like in a "reliable source"; it doesn't excuse you from the obligation to locate the best sources and cite them correctly. If you had clicked on Newsweek's source for this "quotation" you would have found that it is not a quotation from the video but a quotation from the military prosecutor's indictment. Everyone who keeps track of these things knows that such indictments can't be treated as fact. Indeed, it soon transpired that there was no mention of "suicide bombings" on the video at all. What she said was "martyrdom operations", or to some translators "martyrdom-seeking operations", which in Palestinian parlance is a far wider expression that includes things like walking towards the Gaza fence. Zero^talk 09:40, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

We should possibly include the full quotation of "martyrdom operations" (suicide operations). However, it is clearly relevant and DUE to the subject of this article - given that much of her infamy/publicity has arisen from her arrest and conviction for (partially, in addition to her other actions) these words. Icewhiz (talk) 12:09, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Alright. So, Newsweek quotes Haaretz, which quoted Ahed what Tamimi said in her mother's video : “Whether it is a stabbing attack or suicide bombing or throwing rocks, everyone needs to do something and unite in order for our message to reach those who want to liberate Palestine.” It's the same quote we find here. (However, this Camera-site has a clear pro-Israel stance):

I suggest: Let's put this quote in the article, and let's mention that she and her mother were prosecuted due to this statement, because she would encourage stabbings. Due to this site, Medium, which has a clear Anti-Israel stance, these charges were later dropped: . Al Jazeera, which has an Anti-Israel-stance as well, but is a source you can quote, confirms that the Tamimis lawyer, Gabi Lasky, said the prosecution dropped the charges.

I think this is enough to put the whole matter in the article. She said something controversial, we quote that, tell the reader that she was prosecuted due to this, and that later the charges were dropped. Everyone agrees? JakobvS (talk) 07:28, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Besides the language in the video being rather self evident, the quote in Newsweek (and Haaretz which says Tamimi said this - not that the prosecutor said she said this) is more than sufficient for WP:V, and this definitely merits inclusion - which is strengthened by this appearing in later sources as well - e.g. the NYT on her release in 2018 - Critics of Ms. Tamimi point to a part of the video in which she declared, “Our strength is in our stones,” and appeared to condone, or justify, stabbings, suicide bombings and other violence.[3] as well as Haaretz,[4] as well as later - e.g. JTA in Sep 2018 - [5]. Icewhiz (talk) 07:55, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh, please try to write things that are true. Newsweek: Ahed is quoted saying in her indictment, Haaretz reported. “Whether.... Haaretz: Whether ... the indictment quotes Tamimi as saying. NYT: appeared to condone (where is "appeared" in your proposed text?). The actual video does not literally say "suicide bombings", regardless of the indictment and sources that quote from the indictment. Even extremely hostile sources [6] [7] translate it as "martryrdom operations", as does at least one newspaper source [8] more highly respected than JTA. Zero^talk 08:52, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Peer Haaretz in July 2018 - "The court also convicted Tamimi of incitement over statements she made in the video of the slapping incident: “I hope ... Our strength is in our rocks ... they need to bear responsibility for every response that will come from us – Whether it is a stabbing attack or suicide bombing or throwing rocks, everyone needs to do something ...""[9]. This is not attributed to the indictment or court - but as a stmt in Haaretz's voice regarding what Tamimi said. The term used by Tamimi is the term used in local Arabic for suicide bombings and is generally understood as such (but - we won't get far arguing over Arab translation between the two of us). Icewhiz (talk) 09:03, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Haaretz is quoting the charge she was found guilty of and I have no doubt they are quoting correctly. What she said in the video was "amaliyat istish’hadiya", which is "martrydom operations". For sure suicide bombings are examples of "amaliyat istish’hadiya" but so are lots of other things. Your claim that "amaliyat istish’hadiya" is generally understood as "suicide bombings" is simply a falsehood. In the Palestinian context, every time a Palestine is killed by Israel during an act of resistance it is called a martyrdom operation and the dead person is called a martyr. But why do I have tell you something that you already know? Zero^talk 11:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

As you know, amaliya is an action. It isn't any act of resistance - but some sort of attack against the opposing force. The most common form of "amaliyat istish’hadiya", in particular when the speaker already excluded stabbing operations (which may be seen in this manner), is suicide bombings - a term Muslims avoid since suicide is forbidden by Islam. Saying "martyrdom operations" sounds in English like some sort of odd euphemism or something medieval - which is why non-Arabic sources have tended to translate this to suicide bombing (and this is generally the case with the term - NEWSORGs, when they use it, do so almost only in quotes). However - all of this is neither here nor there (we won't be translating this ourselves) - Do you have an alternative mainstream source with a translation of the passage, or a description of the passage? Icewhiz (talk) 12:37, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

If "martyrdom operations" is the more literal translation, I think we should stick to this. The interested reader can then inform himself further how this term is to be understood. Her inclusion of stabbing as possible actions, for which not the stabber, but Trump would be responsible, says enough about how her approach isn't entirely non-violent, but rather ambigious. Icewhiz,Zero, both of you seem pretty competent about this case. Would one of you like to formulate something on the subject and include it in the article? JakobvS (talk) 16:15, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 February 2021

Add A book was published in 2018 entitled "Ahed Tamimi: A Girl who Fought Back", authored by Manal Tamimi, Paul Heron, Peter Lathi & Paul Morris, (Vaktel Publishing of Sweden). Mogz100 (talk) 23:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Reactivate your request by setting the answered parameter in the {{edit extended-protected}} template back to no once you've provided reliable sources to support this change here. Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 09:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Pinging User:Mogz100. Please can you get back to me on this? Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 14:30, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 April 2021

one of the authors of the work dedicated to her in Bethlehem is Tukios arrested together with Jorit Agoch, in the following version both in the text and in the photo of the mural the name of the second artist is not specified Cayetano Navas (talk) 22:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: To have the description of the image changed to include the other artists please go to the Wikimedia Commons page, and if you have a WP:Reliable source of who the artists are then they can be added to the article. Terasail^[✉] 00:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 May 2021

Can you please change the picture? This is not a picture of her. 76.66.199.21 (talk) 15:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. It appears to be the same person as depicted in this reliable source and this reliable source, from the same time period. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Allegations

The cousin incident may be fabricated for media propaganda. It has to be precised that it is an allegation.--Zerbidash (talk) 17:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

False information change

“Change occupied West Bank to West Bank”

“Change Palestine to Israel” 67.68.63.102 (talk) 01:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Both terms are either inaccurate or controversial, at best.

"Occupied West Bank" should be changed to "West Bank".

"Palestine" should be changed to "Israel", or should be changed to "what was called Palestine under the British Mandate". 24.218.157.109 (talk) 18:53, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

It isn't in Israel and it is occupied, so you aren't going to get anywhere. Zero^talk 04:32, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

New photos of Ahed

• 
• 

I just uploaded two photos/portraits of Ahed.. Ggia (talk)

That photo is awful. It’s from when she got out of prison. It needs to be changed.

Marissamcl (talk) 21:23, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

she aint say that shit

she got hacked 174.215.242.103 (talk) 20:21, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

do you have a source? I've been trying to get in touch with her or her co-author, but no response. Liav.teichner (talk) 13:12, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Details of her conviction by Israel

In the article it is described that she was convicted, among other things, of incitement. At the same time, without detailing the reasons for the conviction - it is implied that she is innocent or at the very least that she was convicted without any legally solid reasons. I would like to add one of the testimonies for her conviction for incitement, her saying: "Our strength is in our stone - I hope the whole world will unite, so that we can free Palestine. Because Trump's decision is a decision that has been made, they have to bear its consequences with any Palestinian reaction that comes - whether stabbing attacks, suicide bomb attacks, throwing stones, everyone needs to do something so that we can unite on the path, which, if Allah wills, will be the liberation of Palestine." sources (including video of her saying this): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCXoHzX8LEs (Kan11) https://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/528779 (Maariv) and more. Saydale (talk) 13:24, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

There is an editing restriction on this page which prevents you from making the change yourself, although you can suggest the change be made by a qualified editor. YouTube won't generally be accepted as a source but I am unsure about Israel Hayom. Is the translation accurate? Burrobert (talk) 13:44, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, I am suggesting. The Youtube soruce was of a mainstream news channel in Israel. This is the same report from the channel website itself: https://www.kan.org.il/content/kan-news/defense/231977/

The translation is almost verbatim from what she said in the video. There are many reports saying that she was convicted, among other things, because of these terror-supported words. Saydale (talk) 09:15, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Instagram account suspended following call to butcher civilians

The article should include the fact her Instagram account (@ahed_tamimi15) was suspended on Oct 31st 2023, during the 2023 Israeli-Hamas war, following a story she uploaded saying in Hebrew and Arabic: "Our message to the flocks of settlers: we're waiting for you in all the West Bank cities, from Hebron to Jenin. We will butcher you and you will say that what Hitler did to you was a joke. We will drink your blood and we will eat your skulls. Advance, we're waiting for you."

Source: https://twitter.com/aradboaz/status/1719103795836158350 Liav.teichner (talk) 08:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done Eladkarmel (talk) 09:10, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Undone. Find a source that provides some evidence. Note that the only evidence that Maariv provides is someone's tweet. Also, Tamimi is entitled to the special rules regarding negative statements about living people, and I am entitled to enforce them. Zero^talk 13:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

The evidence is a print screen of her now disabled personal account.

The news are already making way through free media:

https://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/israelhamas-conflict-grim-fate-of-german-tattoo-artist-thought-to-have-been-kidnapped-by-hamas-revealed/news-story/e758830dc9df876451bc234073532d60 Liav.teichner (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure where news.com.au sits in the news hierarchy but I'd quite like to see a GREL WP:RSP report it, having confirmed that it's real, and the account hadn't been hacked, etc., before we go messing around with a BLP - especially given the through the roof levels of disinformation currently circulating at this time. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Please note sources such as Jerusalem Post and Mako confirm this as well.

[10][11] Homerethegreat (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Thats been responded to. They confirm there is somebody on Twitter saying she said this. That remains gossip. nableezy - 19:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:BLP this exceptional claim requires much better sourcing than this. And per BLP, this cannot be restored absent an explicit consensus for it here, see WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE. This is a collection of poor sources engaging in hearsay, and it is not acceptable in a BLP. nableezy - 16:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Agree with Iskandar323. And the twit linked above is dead and apparently improperly archived. The best primary source would be an archived link of Tamimi's post. But still, there's the possibility of account hacking, which Tamimi will have to assert herself.
Some criticized the sources reliability profusely, I'd like to see examples of bad reporting from them (not opinionated pieces; actual disinformation). –Daveout(talk) 16:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

If those are the best sources (which rank right up there with the Sun, Daily mail, etc) that's pretty sad. Selfstudier (talk) 17:08, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Which one are you referring to? Could you please link the community discussion? –Daveout(talk) 17:20, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Dovidroth if you do not self-revert I am going to report the BLP and ARBPIA violation very soon. You may not restore material with a good faith BLP violation claim without consensus. Self-revert or be reported, up to you. nableezy - 16:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

If the report is correct, then it will almost certainly be pursued with great tenacity by her many foreign critics, and the necessary details will emerge. But as pointed out, an exceptional claim on a BLP page requires multiple, independent sourcing (not meme reproduction). It's not a question of censorship. If it can be reliably shown she said that, no one on wiki would stand by with toilet paper when the shit hits her fan(s). So I'm reverting until the full picture emerges. This caution is particularly important given that we are in a no-holds-barred war with reflexes in social media warring, not excluding hacking. Nishidani (talk) 17:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, if this is true it will be picked up in more mainstream sources. Right now there are sources reporting that users on Twitter are saying Tamimi wrote these things. If that becomes high quality sources actually reporting she actually wrote these things then yes that should be included. But this simply does not reach that bar. nableezy - 18:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

"picked up in more mainstream sources":

• 09:01 - Ice: https://www.ice.co.il/law/news/article/986164
• 09:38 - Maariv: https://www.maariv.co.il/news/israel/Article-1048782
• 15:12 - INN: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/379460
• 15:56 - i24: https://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/israel-en-guerre/1698760135-l-activiste-ahed-tamimi-aux-juifs-des-implantations-nous-vous-egorgerons-et-boirons-votre-sange
• 16:58 - Mako: https://www.mako.co.il/nexter-news/Article-317cec22a368b81026.htm
• 17:45 - Walla!: https://news.walla.co.il/item/3619692

TaBaZzz (talk) 20:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I feel like we have different understandings of the word "mainstream". i24, INN are definitely not that. Maariv is sure, but that still is just based on Boaz Arad on twitter. nableezy - 20:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

And for the record, your comments on the other 3 ? TaBaZzz (talk) 20:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Unfamiliar with Ice entirely, Mako closer to the INN side than the Maariv side, same for Walla. But I dont think any of these reach the bar for inclusion here, if this is actually real we are going to find out shortly, likely with an arrest and with international sources. I dont feel that these sources repeating the same hearsay suddenly merits inclusion, all of this is based on a twitter making unconfirmed claims about a supposed private story post. nableezy - 20:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Please explain "repeating the same hearsay suddenly merits inclusion". TaBaZzz (talk) 20:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

They are all reporting on the twitter of Boaz Arad saying that Tamimi wrote this stuff. There is zero actual confirmation. BLPs should avoid these feedback loops, see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Avoid gossip and feedback loops. nableezy - 20:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

And, as Zero wrote in the initial revert, Israeli Jews are being arrested for less. Has Tamimi been arrested for incitement? nableezy - 20:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Follow the RSs. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:A0BC:F130:EB66:4FA8 (talk) 21:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

And say that a twitter account by an unknown person in Berlin is claiming that Ahed Tamimi posted a Nazi inspired tirade on her private instagram? nableezy - 22:16, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

So, after a police inquiry into her inciting words, an arrest was made. Now does this justify its inclusion in the article? Saydale (talk) 09:17, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

At the time I'm writing this, it's in the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/article-771102 should suffice as a mainstream source with considerable reputation. Hellojed (talk) 09:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Actually, the fact that they have to admit the story is only "according to Israeli media" and features the same tweet as the only evidence shows that they failed to independently verify the story. That counts against it. Zero^talk 10:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

According to all the other mainstream media reports which include screenshots of her message, there is no reason to not include it in the article. Together with Instagram restricting her account. Over 7 independent verifications are enough for inclusion. dov (talk) 15:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

There are zero independent verifications, this is all based on the same screenshot from the same tweet by an unknown person in Berlin. It absolutely is not what is needed to include in the WP:BLP of Tamimi that she made a Nazi inspired tirade. If this is true, there will be real confirmation of it, and not just rumor. nableezy - 19:02, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Not only Israeli media. A greek source also confirms [12]

And news not established in Israel such as [13],[14]

And note that it isn't just based on this Boaz person. Homerethegreat (talk) 19:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

One of them is shaky. But the other two seem fine enough. Homerethegreat (talk) 19:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it is also based on David Collier lol. I dont know what is not clear here, you cant say a living person went on a Nazi tirade with sourcing this shaky. If it is true there will be actual confirmation of it, not just rumors repeated based on the same unreliable twitter of some random person on the internet. nableezy - 19:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Noting that the WP:SPECTATOR thinks the insta-thing should be included:[15] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

no, an op-ed by an unknown person thinks that, and thats not the UK Spectator that RSP is about. nableezy - 16:18, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, both Spectators have the same WP-article anyway. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Regardless, Hava Mendelle isnt a reliable source, and given she says she has started editing Wikipedia it almost seems like an off-wiki CANVASSING attempt more than any type of analysis. nableezy - 17:48, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

It's also just meta-commentary on this discussion. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I did like Harrison's recent article on WP and the Gaza war better, but it's a somewhat interesting perspective. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

A good summary of the last three weeks. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Also, having read both, per Mendelle, I should now be protected from distortion from whichever the left-wing article is. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:18, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Meme replication is commonplace here, - as we saw in the 40 babies beheaded instance, so we need mainstream English sources, which will certainly pick it up since Tamimi's story is often discussed in them, esp. anything negative.Nishidani (talk) 22:20, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Already by last Sunday, 24 people had been charged with "incitement to terrorism", mostly for social media posts. There are even Jews among them, which is unusual since most such charges are made against Arabs. If and when Tamimi is charged, we can report that she has been charged (but not, per BLP, that she is guilty). Zero^talk 03:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I wonder if those eager to add this unverified allegation will hasten to add the directly reported tweet of Galit Distel-Atbaryan : "Erase Gaza from the face of the earth. Let the Gazan monsters rush to the southern border and flee into Egypt, or die. And let them die badly. Gaza should be wiped off the map, and fire and brimstone on the heads of the Nazis in Judea and Samaria. Jewish wrath to shake the earth around the world. We need a cruel, vengeful IDF here. Anything less is immoral."[16] Zero^talk 11:11, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Early life section

I think we should get something well sourced on her mother in there, her name seems to be in several sources (also in the article already), so I don't think it's a WP:BLP problem per se. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:24, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Arrested by idf

Here are two sources, https://m.maariv.co.il/news/military/Article-1050109

The Hebrew wiki already got updated. Why are you taking so much time? 201.207.0.74 (talk) 06:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

This contradicts the theory that she is a human rights activist, as cognitive dissonance takes time to have an effect. Saydale (talk) 09:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

I can only speak for myself, but I was sleeping. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:46, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the edit. Yet, it is hard not to be amazed by the bias that is reflected of what is written. "The arrest followed Israeli media reports of a post on her Instagram account that had threatened settlers in the West Bank". One might mistakenly think that she was arrested for the crime of ordinary angry words, which any of us can experience. As if it is not, in fact, wishes for an agonizing death and words of praise and praise for Hitler's actions. I believe that adding the literal content of the post, combined with the claims of the Tamimi family ("Tamimi's mother stated that there were "dozens of (online) pages in Ahed's name with her photo, with which she has no connection" "), brings both sides In an optimal and neutral way - as Wikipedia strives for. 31.154.45.114 (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 November 2023

on october 31st 2023, during the Israel Hamas war, Tamimi posted on her instagram page: our messege to all settelers: we are waiting for you from Hevron till Jenin. We will slughter you and you will say that hitler wasd a joke. We will drink your blood and eat your skull. come on, we are waiting for you" following that antisemitic post, Tamimi got arrested by the IDF on november 6th. 212.117.143.250 (talk) 11:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

WP:BLPCRIME. nableezy - 13:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 November 2023 (2)

In the sentence "Israeli soldiers arrested Tamimi in Nabi Salih on 6 November 2023 for "inciting terrorism".", add the word allegedly before "inciting terrorism". The quote marks are doing a lot of heavy lifting here and the word allegedly is better to use in a developing situation. Frunk10 (talk) 12:24, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

I tweaked the sentence with a new ref. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:37, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

thanks that's much better Frunk10 (talk) 13:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 November 2023 (3)

Ahed Tamimi posted on social media the following statement which led to her arrest: "Come on settlers, we will slaughter you. We are waiting for you in all the cities of the West Bank. What Hitler did to you was nothing. We will drink your blood and eat your skulls. We are waiting for you" 109.186.212.123 (talk) 12:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Its been denied, we document shes been arrested and charged but we cannot say she committed a crime absent a conviction per BLPCRIME. nableezy - 13:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

That said, we could consider quoting something from the post. Since it's fairly clear from the article (atm) it lead to arrest on "suspicion of inciting violence and terrorist activities", I don't think it's essential, but it's not unreasonable either.

Something like "...said in part "We'll slaughter you, and you'll say that what Hitler did to you was a joke. We'll drink your blood and eat your skulls."" perhaps (per Haaretz source). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't know. Wouldn't this A) be lending credence to the somewhat speculative reports, and B) risk erring in favour of BLP violation ... ? Iskandar323 (talk) 14:59, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Per source (there are others who quote too:[17]) and "The arrest followed Israeli media reports of a post on her Instagram account that had threatened settlers in the West Bank." I don't think it's a BLP problem. IMO, it's within editorial discretion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

If we use the heavy caveats of the BBC "she is purported to have written ... according to the newspaper Haaretz." then it is perhaps passable. It is telling that the BBC uses such caveats. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:33, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Yep, I noted that Haaretz did not, not in that piece anyway. WSJ added caveat too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:51, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Btw, does anyone have the "The Israel Defense Forces posted a screenshot of the post, which is written in Arabic and Hebrew, on its website and said it was the reason for Tamimi's arrest."-link? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Another caveat:CBS News has been unable to independently verify that the account belongs to Tamimi. Her mother, Nariman al-Tamimi, told the AFP news agency that her daughter did not write the post. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:10, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm ok with the current paraphrased wording. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:22, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, wording/balance seems fairly fine. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Movie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahed%27s_Knee 2A02:8109:1040:29C0:F513:E2CB:E107:45F0 (talk) 07:14, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done –Daveout(talk) 04:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Mention of her book in the WP:LEAD

@Makeandtoss, no, I explained it:[18]. You may disagree, but it was not unexplained. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: "We don't need that" is not an explanation. Lede is a summary of body; and the body reports prominently on her book. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

IMO, not so prominently it needs to be in the lead. It's a minor, new part of the whole. Also, "Her book is They Called Me a Lioness (2022)." sounds a bit odd, but at least it's short. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)