File talk:No Israel.svg

维基共享资源，媒体文件资料库
跳转到导航 跳转到搜索

I've undeleted this per COM:UNDEL even though I made that request myself. Subsequent deletions were apparently done without knowledge or respect of the decision made at COM:UNDEL - any future deletions would require a new DR, unless one wishes to break policy. I apologize for acting with a conflict of interest here, but I think it the situation is clear enough that I am in the clear.

 — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]

_________________________________________


  • Just for the record:

Jan 2008 - Commons:Deletion requests/Image:No Israel.svg is closed as keep by an administrator, who also uploaded the image. The closure is undone after a request at COM:UNDEL, re-opened DR was closed as keep in Dec 2008.

is simply not true. In fact this Deletion Request ended on January 17 with "Deleted" by User:Zirland (who was not the uploader). Mutter Erde (talk) 09:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]

Thanks for the clarification.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]

As Commons are supposed to respect legal issues in all involved countries, how does this image relate to laws in Israel? Also, can such an image in general be considered "free"? And can a construction like this where a part is possibly protected through law be relicensed? Jeblad (talk) 03:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]

No, that's not quite true. All images must be legal in the US and in the country of origin, which I don't think is Israel here. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]

The image is a hate propaganda

[编辑]

and has nothing to do with the Flag of Israel--Mbz1 (talk) 16:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]

It's nothing to discuss here, really. That issue has been discussed on the DR & was later restored through the undeletion process. --Kanonkas(talk) 16:35, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]
Agree It's nothing to discuss here and I'm not going to duscuss anything. I simly stated my opinion about the image. I guess I should add that this image cannot be compared to other images with the crossed out flags like for example American Flag, Japan Flag and so on. I believe that these images are also hate propaganda, but at least nobody threatens to wipe USA, Japan and so on off the map, as ahmadinejad threatens to do with Israel, and besides I also believe that, if somebody with the name, for example, osama, from, for example, Saudi Arabia wtites: " No Israel", he really means it.BTW thank you for voting at least neutral here --Mbz1 (talk) 19:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]
People regularly threaten to wipe out america. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]
The worse to those people, yet I meant that for Israel it is a very, very real threat, if of course somebody here cares.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]
Though it is not related to the debate here but ahmadinejad is just a stupid puppet and his words and idea is not really idea of Iranian people.Too many people here like Jewish people and Israel here .Though i have stated before i am not happy with all thi no flags but keep in mind it would be help to have in anti Israel and en:Antisemitism articles.lets wish for the peace over the world --Mardetanha talk 20:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]
I wish I could agree with you about Iranian people, but I am afraid I cannot.I know Iranian people are highly educated people, and I hope that one day they will be able to live in peace with Israel. I do not think that images like File:No Israel.svg are helpful to the process.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]
Wow, now this image is a threat to world peace. Amazing. Adambro (talk) 21:15, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]
Sorry, you did not understand me right. It is not that this image is a threat to world peace now. It is that this image was, is and will be threat to world peace until this no value, hate propaganda image stays on commons because this image might be yet another reason for a homicide bomber to commit a haines crime.
Thanks for the comments, everybody, but I've promised do not discuss the image any more, and I've alredy broken my promise. So this was my last comment for this matter.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]
Glad to hear it. Adambro (talk) 21:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[回复]

Category:Anti-Judaism

[编辑]

I'm appreciating Mattbuck hark work, but I guess Israel as a state doensn't equal Judaism as a religion. Same as in Iran and Saudi Arabia, they are saying that they're Islamic countries, but they as states don't equal the Islam as a religion, they're Jewish opposing Israel, they're Muslims opposing Iran and Saudi Arabia.--OsamaK 18:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]

What did I do? -mattbuck (Talk) 18:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]
You added that category.--OsamaK 18:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]
Oh, well, whatever, I don't care. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]

Sorry, I'm not sure who's on what side here. Is OsamaK saying "Israel" and "Judaism" are different & thus the image doesn't belong in the anti-Judaism category?  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]

I think so, yes. I have removed it from the anti-Judaism category. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 01:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]
So, there's no problem then.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]
It was a simple one :), thank you all.--OsamaK 07:14, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]

Variations on flags of Israel

[编辑]

I looked up the word "Variation" in a dictionary. It says:
"Variation is the act of changing or altering something slightly but noticeably from the norm or standard." I do not think that the image changed the Flag of Israel slightly.
That's why I'm removing the category. Neither this image is Flag of Israel, nor it is Flag of Israel variation . Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]

It is a variation on the flag of israel, as is meant in the common sense - altered. To say whether it's altered slightly is semantics - is it still based on the flag of Israel? Yes. Then it's a variation on the flag of Israel. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]
Certainly looks like a variation on flags of Israel to me. If this isn't then that would draw into question the whole contents of this category rather than this single image and the solution then would be to discuss renaming the category, not removing images from it. Adambro (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]
Hi, Mattbuck. If I am not mistaking, you just learned the difference between Judaism and Israel few days ago, and said that you do not care about this issue. How then could you decide to what category this hate propaganda image belongs to? It calls no Israel flag. It completely changes the meaning of the subject. Category should stay, only this and one more image should be removed from there, but no worries, I'm not going to remove category again. I've done this only for the History to be kept. I know I will loose like I always do,( the image would get protected, I'll get blocked and so on) , but the History would stay and the History will win! May I please wish you to have a nice day?--Mbz1 (talk) 21:22, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]
I do know the difference between judaism and israel, it's like the difference between stupidity and america. I have no idea why I added anti-judaism originally, what I said was that I didn't care whether it was in that category or not. I am obliged to care about this image since you keep trying to get rid of it. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:46, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]


I did not try to get the rid of the image, I only tried to remove the wrong category. Otherwise you said it all. I really have nothing to add, except maybe this:

" 'Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."

Abraham Lincoln and --Mbz1 (talk) 22:03, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]

In order to be a vet'ran first you gotta be a beginner, but if you keep on pushin', you can be a winner. God I loved Space Jam. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[回复]


This is ridiculous.

[编辑]

I can't believe this is allowed. It's OBVIOUSLY a hate propaganda, and has nothing to do with an encyclopedia or the gathering of human knowledge. For crying out loud, look at "File usage on other wikis" - you don't have to be Einstein to figure it out. I'm repulsed by the decision to keep it. An encyclopedia is supposed to be neutral. 79.181.25.114 11:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]

Commons is an image repository, not an encylopaedia. We host objectionable content if it can be used for educational purposes, which it apparently can as it's in use. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]
It's in use in user pages of people who hate Israel and in articles in Arabic such as one titled "Good Muslim". If that's what you call "an educational purpose", I give up. 79.181.25.114 13:37, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]
Then go to the other wikis - we're not going to delete something which has been decided to have a legit use just because some people do use it for bad reasons. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:37, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]
But that's exactly my point... It's ridiculous that it has been decided to be "legit" and marked as keep. It has NO educational value, and the ONLY pages that are using it use it as a hate propaganda, which is the best proof for that. It's so obvious that the people who decided to keep it are biased against Israel, and I find it disgusting such decisions are accepted on Wikimedia. 79.181.25.114 19:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]
OK, less personal attacks against people who voted to keep it please. I understand this is an emotive topic, and I should say that, if I remember correctly, I said it should be kept. That's not because I hate Israel, am antisemitic or have a particular dislike of the flag. I'm neutral on the Israel/Palestine conflict - I think both sides have done grievous wrongs to the other but I also don't think that anything will be solved if people keep bringing the past back. I said keep this image because I don't think we should be censoring ourselves. Can this be used educationally? Yes, as a header for a template on anti-Israeli sentiment for example. People shouldn't be bringing intolerant userboxes onto Wikimedia, but just because something can be used wrongly doesn't mean we should ban it. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:58, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]
I have however asked that it be banned as a political statement on Commons userpages - see COM:VP#Proposal_to_ban_the_use_of_File:No_Israel.svg_as_a_political_statement_on_userpages. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]


I am honestly torn apart that this photo is ok, but that pornographic images IN USE in articles, that actually demonstrate something (and are thus educational, unlike this image which only demonstrates hate towards a group and has NO historical context or value) are not because of Fox News, and because a drawing can be used in their place. What a fucking disgrace, WP:SCOPE obviously means nothing. - Floydian (talk) 02:25, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[回复]

Intended use examples

[编辑]

Where is it actually being used for the intended purpose (that is to indicate that a work is not public domain / is copyrighted in Israel, as far as I understand)? All uses I are see so far are to indicate an anti-semitic sentiment: within the user-pages on the Arabic Wikipedia, mostly. eugrus (留言) 00:18, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[回复]

取自“https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:No_Israel.svg&oldid=562347398”