Talk:Edward Said/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Add

Please add Category:People educated at St George's School, Jerusalem to the article --Abubiju (talk) 21:42, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Missing word (minor)

Final paragraph of opening summary, which reads "...developed with Barenboim, was created Berlin" may be missing a word, which could read "...created in Berlin." azwaldo (talk) 19:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Missing child in the Infobox

Under "children", in the Infobox, the english language article on Edward Said lists only his daughter "Najla Said". However, the text of the article also references his son, "Wadie E. Said". This seems like an inconsistency.

The german language article on Said lists both children in the text (no Infobox though): "Aus der Ehe gingen zwei Kinder hervor, der Jurist Wadie E. Said (geb. 1972) und die Schriftstellerin und Theaterautorin Najla Said (geb. 1974)."

I think "Wadie E. Said" should be added to the Infobox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.180.39.170 (talk) 10:04, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Useful ref

• ‘Charisma incarnate’: My former teacher Edward Said was the quintessential outsider

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 07:31, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

David Price

I know Counterpunch is deprecated, but I am restoring the usage by David Price. Price is the author of a book specifically about the FBI spying on intellectuals in the US, published by Duke University Press, and this specific article is cited a number of academic articles. nableezy - 23:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

That makes sense under WP:SPS: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications."VR _talk 03:38, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Some of the facts are also supported by this piece in The Nation. This New Yorker piece mentions the FBI file. Firefangledfeathers 06:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

If they supported by other sources why use depreciated source? Shrike (talk) 06:36, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

That should be 'deprecated'. One cannot maintain the double standard of allowing generously a lot of trash sources (Algemeiner, Arutz Sheva, Jewish Chronicle etc.etc.etc., all over wiki pages, uncontested, while warring out any reference to CounterPunch/Mondoweiss, some of the scarce webzines that do provide on occasion solid reports written by authorities in the field. Context has always determined what to use in these cases. If the credentials are solid, and the article cogently written, it is acceptable, as VR notes. Otherwise people should press for a total ban on every noted writer, thinker, historian or scholar whenever they choose to write for that webzine - which would be folly.Nishidani (talk) 10:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Why use this source? Because it is written by an expert in the field. By the person who uncovered the FBI surveillance of Said. Do you think this specific source is unreliable? nableezy - 13:38, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Shrike, let me ask you a straight question in the hopes of getting a straight response. David Price is the author Threatening Anthropology: McCarthyism and the FBI’s Surveillance of Activist Anthropologists, published by Duke University Press, a book focused specifically on the FBI's surveillance of of academics they considered activists, andAnthropological Intelligence: The Deployment and Neglect of American Anthropology in the Second World War, also published by DUP, focused on collaboration between the US intelligence agencies and military and anthropologists. His work is widely cited (eg [1], [2]). Do you challenge that David Price is a reliable source for the topic of the FBI surveilling Said? Because if you do then sure Ill take this specific source to RSN. If you dont, then kindly remove the tag. nableezy - 14:08, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Though Nish, I think it best to give Shrike the opportunity to challenge the source or remove the tag himself tbh. nableezy - 14:27, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Well, occasions when Shrike has argued for his views at length are few and far between. Correct me if I am wrong Shrike. I would want to see evidence that Shrike has read the source, rather than, as it strikes me is often the case, spotting the word Counterpunch and then removing or challenging it automatically. Boy I could spend days and ratchet up my edit count exponentially if I had a mind to question thousands of uses of Arutz Sheva, the Algemeiner and any of the dozens of provincial newspaper sources. One should always concentrate on the quality of the specific source, and its author. The case is obviously a no-brainer. And whatever the 'deprecation' judgement in that bizarre RSN discussion, the fact remains that numerous authoritative scholars choose to publish in that source, and attempts to purge anything ever written on CounterPunch from wikipedia indiscriminately is a mere cleansing on an abstract pretext for POV ends. I've removed the tag, since only Shrike objects. Nishidani (talk) 14:35, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

In fact, this point should be clarified about a number of ostensibly 'deprecated sources' at the appropriate board. For the moment, everything deprecated refers to alternative websites that contain information on Palestinians, coverage of whom is reduced to 'mainstream' Israeli and US newspapers whereas the realities of Israeli and Jewish life have an indiscriminate and massive range of sources no one has waged a campaign against (and, in my view, rightly so). I dislike a large amount of the hysterical rubbish 'reportage' in the Tablet magazine, but at times (on the Yiddish dispute) it carries important and authoritative articles. Editors should learn to rely on consensual analysis of specific articles and not on a reflex 'gotcha' approach derived from an abstract egeneral judgement.Nishidani (talk) 14:40, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

revision 1060919212 Reverted by Nishidani (talk) we ARE quoting counterpunch, and the tag is apt, and tags should not be removed like that)-

No, we are not quoting CounterPunch, any more than if I cite Martin Litchfield West for an article appearing in Classical Quarterly, I'd be quoting CQ. No one challenges the fact that we cite here Said from CounterPunch and Alexander Cockburn . Now that I've tipped off editors who edit without actually reading the page that the objection to Price is anomalous, I guess they'll rush to tag those as well. Eventually we'll be banning Christopher Hitchens as well, because he wrote for CounterPunch, and therefore guilt by association with a paranoid, conspiracy-mongering anti-Semitic organ (according to the RSN deprecation screed). Nishidani (talk) 23:14, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

no idea what you mean, but we are quoting CounterPunch (regardless of who wrote the report), which is a deprecated source. Therefore the tag is warranted, and tags should generally not be removed without coming to a consensus on the talk page. Mvbaron (talk) 09:43, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

It is a simple distinction in English, between citing a source and quoting a person. If you can't see it, well. . . The reference does not quote CounterPunch: it paraphrases what Price writes. Ah, one can only deprecate the loss of all sensitivity to what words mean, and how in a semantic field, related terms neatly distinguished are collapsed and jumped as if they were all interchangeable synonyms (as, for a fourth example, the confusion of 'depreciate' with deprecate') above. Not understanding simple prose, lastly, is not a good sign for talk pages Nishidani (talk) 10:26, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

stop with the personal attacks. That's not how quoting or citing works. If you quote price in counterpunch you are using (citing Price in) counterpunch, which is depreacted and shouldn't be used. Mvbaron (talk) 10:37, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Price is an expert in the field and may be used if he were writing on his blog. Are you challenging the reliability of Price in Counterpunch here? nableezy - 21:02, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Since I find this tagging to be absurd, Ive raised the issue at RSN. nableezy - 21:40, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

No, you can't achieve WP:LOCALCONSENSUS against a broad general RFC on a local talk page. Also, please review WP:NPA and stop with the personal attacks - David Gerard (talk) 22:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deprecated_sources#Acceptable_uses_of_deprecated_sources specifically says that all removals are to be looked at. I am raising your editing elsewhere. nableezy - 22:04, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

I looked. HTH! - David Gerard (talk) 22:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Did you look at how you removed WP:ABOUTSELF sources and The Nation? Great help. nableezy - 22:58, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Clarify censorship employed at CSU Fresno

In the "Death and legacy" section, there's this snippet:

> In 2016, California State University at Fresno started examining applicants for a newly created Professorship in Middle East Studies named after Edward Said, but after months of examining applicants, Fresno State canceled the search. Some observers claim that the cancellation was due to pressure from some individuals and groups.

Source [115] clearly states that the it was pro-Israel groups (Zionists) and even mentioned that the Canary Mission was involved. Given that, it's not accurate to simply say "some groups", but to actually label the censorship from those who employed it: pro-Israeli groups.

Side-note, please consider updating the source 115 to point to the archived link: https://web.archive.org/web/20211204061306/https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/05/31/why-did-fresno-state-cancel-search-professorship-named-after-late-edward-said. Sauceweb (talk) 01:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Sauceweb (talk) 01:08, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Edward Said's father was a veteran of the U.S. Expeditionary Forces, not a U.S. Army veteran

The article says Wadie Said obtained US citizenship because he was a US Army veteran, but it would seem he was only a veteran of the U.S. Expeditionary Forces that were disbanded in 1920. 71.13.218.78 (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 August 2022

Edward Said was not an influence on Talal Asad. Talal’s critical account of Orientalism preceded Said’s book of that name. On the contrary Talal and Edward had substantial disagreements according to Tala Asad. Also Talal’s discussion of Orientalism was published 5 years early the Said’s Orientalism.
172.98.32.204 (talk) 21:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)