Re the lead to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_Israeli_apartheid WP:LEAD states that a good lead "should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it could stand on its own as a concise version of the article." The problem with the current lead is that it only summarizes the arguments against the "Israeli apartheid" allegation without mentioning a single argument in favor of the phrase. This means the intro is unbalanced and very POV. Either equal space should be given to pro and anti-arguments or the arguments from either side should be removed from the lead and left to the body of the article. Unfortunately, the article is the subject of revert wars so there's a real need for impartial admins to go in and mediate IMHO. On 1/9/07, C. Currie <coreyjcurrie(a)gmail.com> wrote: Africa's treatment of non-whites during the apartheid era to Israel's treatment of Arabs living in the 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" is the