Oldak Quill wrote:
It is necessary to say that Israel's status as a
country is under
dispute if you call Israel a county in the category. If you don't say
"Israel is a country in the Middle East" then there is no need to say
that its status as a country is not recognised by all.
This perhaps points the way towards a solution in this case. If the
category, which is a tool of navigation, simply avoids making any claim
of any kind, this problem can be avoided completely.
I do not personally agree that it is necessary, anytime and in any
context one mentions Israel or Taiwan or any other disputed place or
area, that one mention the dispute. In some cases doing so may actually
generate the opposite of neutrality by calling too much prominence to a
dispute, that is to say, this gives the disputants the moral right to
raise their point in every possible context.
However, my view, as I just stated it, is not universally shared, and
Oldak Quill (for example) has staked out a different but respectable
position.
His compromise position, not to say "Israel is a country in the middle
east", but rather to simply have Israel as one place among many (some of
which are countries, some of which are not).