I would like to draw the attention of readers to the current introduction of an article entitled "Allegations of Israeli Apartheid":
*"Allegations of Israeli apartheid* draw a controversial analogyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogyfrom South Africa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa's treatment of non-whites during the apartheid erahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_South_Africa_in_the_apartheid_erato Israel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel's treatment of Arabs living in the West Bank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank and Israel. Those who reject the analogy argue that it has no basis in fact and is intended as political slander to malign Israel. They say that legitimate Israeli security needs justify the practices that prompt the analogy, and argue that the practices of many other countries, to which the term is not applied, more closely resemble South African apartheid."
Some editors are of the opinion that this introduction is one-sided, arguing it lists the arguments of critics but not proponents, is weighted toward one position, and goes beyond the succinct definitions usually favoured for Wikipedia introductions. Other editors have opposed efforts to modify the section, arguing that the current version follows the Manual of Style.
This is obviously a contentious article, and accusations of partisanship have been made on both sides. I would request that mailing list contributors review this dispute, and suggest fair and neutral wording.
Thank you,
CJCurrie