Talk:Benjamin Netanyahu/Archive 4

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add Affiliations section:

Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister of Israel, and his cabinet supported the Dead Sea’s candidacy ^[1] as one of the New 7 Wonders of Nature. NIS 8.75 million were allocated to the promotion of the Dead Sea in the global voting campaign. The site was an Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian contender in the campaign, and was one of the 28 finalists in the New 7 Wonders of Nature contest. Melita Cameron-Wood (talk) 15:45, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. This seems to be WP:UNDUE, as I've pointed out in other places. It seems as if you're trying to promote the new seven wonders. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Did he also serve as opposition leader between his loss in 1999 and Sharon being Likud's new leader in November 1999? SecretName101 (talk) 00:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

That wouldn't really be possible since the position didn't officially exist until 2000. Wikipedia's own page for the position also includes unofficial, pre-2000 LoTo's, and doesn't include any Netanyahu tenure from 1999. Totalstgamer (talk) 00:51, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Benjamin Netanyahu 2018.jpg

דגן דיגן (talk) 15:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

It is not written that the bloc led by him won a majority in the 25th Knesset, and he is going to serve for the sixth time as Prime Minister of Israel in the government that will be sworn in in the coming weeks. דגן דיגן (talk) 15:07, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

None of those things are official yet, i think its best if we wait until he's sworn in and write a full paragraph. Totalstgamer (talk) 15:50, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

About Netanyahu's Hebrew it is written that the bloc led by him won the majority of mandates in the Knesset and he is expected to serve as the Prime Minister of Israel. I believe that Israel is smarter in this matter than the rest of the world and it would be wise if the other languages in Wikipedia learned from the Hebrew entry. דגן דיגן (talk) 09:50, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Why does his education say "graduated at the top of his class," when that information is not generally available or shared by universities. I feel a source behind a pay wall making claims that would generally be illegal for a school to verify to a journalist is not exactly an objective thing. I get that people love this guy, but why is there so much bias allowed on this page? This is the entire issue with Wikipedia in a nutshell, it is extremely prone to bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.91.205.86 (talk) 18:18, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Why is this section here at all? Is his expertise on counter terrorism a political position? Political positions generally refer to how to run a state, not how to fight existential threats... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.91.205.86 (talk) 18:26, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Lede is a disaster. Filled with details almost about everything of no relevance to an average Wikipedia reader. Do I, as an average Wikipedia reader, want to know more about the details of how he managed his rotation agreement or the fact that he has championed the settler movement for example? Makeandtoss (talk) 18:49, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

The lede as it stands is a fairly reasonable summary of Netanyahu's early life and political history. As per the discussion on criticism we might want to add a paragraph or a few sentences on Netanyahu's ideology and on criticism levied towards him. Totalstgamer (talk) 19:03, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Here are some examples of redundant details:

"Netanyahu later clashed with Sharon, eventually resigning over disagreements regarding the Gaza disengagement plan."

Should be removed entirely.

"after Sharon stepped down to form a new party, Kadima."

Should be removed entirely.

"After the April 2019 election resulted in no party being able to form a government, a second election in 2019 took place. In the September 2019 election, the centrist Blue and White alliance, led by Benny Gantz, emerged slightly ahead of Netanyahu's Likud; however, neither Netanyahu nor Gantz was able to form a government."

Should be shortened to: "Despite three consecutive elections in 2019, neither Netanyahu nor Gantz were able to form a government."

"During Trump's presidency, the United States recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and brokered the Abraham Accords, a series of normalization agreements between Israel and various Arab states."

This is all about Trump and takes more than half of an entire paragraph of the lede, should be completely removed.

"Since December 2016, Netanyahu has been under investigation for corruption by Israeli police and prosecutors. On 21 November 2019, he was indicted on charges of breach of trust, bribery and fraud. Due to the indictment, Netanyahu was legally required to relinquish all of his ministry posts other than the prime minister position prior to his ousting."

This can be summarized in just one sentence: In 2019, Netanyahu was indicted on charges of breach of trust, bribery and fraud, and thus was legally required to relinquish all of his ministry posts other than the prime minister position prior to his ousting.

Much more could be done, but here's a few examples.

Makeandtoss (talk) 20:16, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't see why most of those should be removed. Netanyahu's resignation over disengagement was an important moment for his political comeback, The reason why Sharon left is a handful of words to provide context, which i think is appropriate. i entirely agree on the elections part.

The trump part is a lot more relevant in context. "Netanyahu made his closeness to Donald Trump, a personal friend since the 1980s, central to his political appeal in Israel from 2016." the latter part demonstrates that the two had a close, working relationship, which is frequently mentioned in reliable sources. The last part is for the most part okay. I agree that the precise date (21 November) isn't particularly important, but its again a matter of building context. I'd love to hear a third opinion though. Totalstgamer (talk) 20:48, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

You do realize that nothing in the lede mentions anything of the settler movement he championed as Israel's longest serving prime minister in the past 15 years? That is literally one of the most prominent things about his legacy. Instead we have countless of useless information about inner-Israeli politics, which are of no concern to the average international reader. Makeandtoss (talk) 21:50, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

That's a distinction you're making entirely on your own. Netanyahu isn't just (or arguably at all) a leader of the settler movement, he's also the longest serving prime minister in Israel's History, and has in many ways been the center of its politics since the nineties. To take the example of Al Jazzera (). The article first mentions his status as Israel's longest-serving leader, followed by a rundown of his Domestic Political History (not too dissimilar from our very own lede), followed by a recap of his corruption trial, then getting to the article's main subject, with fairly minimal focus on his support for settlements, which is a fairly widely-held view on the Israeli Right. An even better example is this BBC article (). Starts by mentioning his most recent comeback, then mentions his political longevity, his relationship with the Palestinians (without mention of the settler movement), then his corruption allegations, followed by another, very similar recap.

Wikipedia doesn't prioritize information based on its editors own analysis, but on the information conveyed by reliable sources, who have generally focused on Netanyahu's role in shaping domestic politics. I also don't see how the word 'useless' ties into all of this. Is information about his corruption trial useless? or his well-covered relationship with Trump? Even when we assign relevance, i'm not sure if we ever make any distinction based on usefulness. (we do, after all, have an entire page for Trump's nicknames). Totalstgamer (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes totally my own political hallucinations and completely unrelated to realities on the ground:

NYT article from 2015: Netanyahu and the Settlements:

• "An analysis of planning, construction, population and spending data over the past two decades shows that Mr. Netanyahu was an aggressive builder during his first premiership in the 1990s, when the West Bank settler population rose at roughly three times the total Israeli rate."
• "Mr. Netanyahu has taken several steps that make drawing a two-state map particularly problematic, and has declared: “I do not intend to evacuate any settlements.”"
• "But Mr. Netanyahu is also a focus of international ire because of the cumulative effect of decades of settlement growth"

This is only one example of a 2015 article. Makeandtoss (talk) 22:30, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not saying its unrelated to reality, or that its not a fact. I'm saying its not lede material. You've posted a 2015 NYT article called "Netanyahu and the Settlements", AKA, specifically about them. That doesn't denote how comparatively relevant the information is.

WP:Lede refers to ledes as such: "The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies. The notability of the article's subject is usually established in the first few sentences. As in the body of the article itself, the emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources. Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article."

AKA, the lede should summarize the article and emphasize the most important points. Both the body of the article and reliable sources attempting to denote the relevance of information focus on Netanyahu's domestic agenda, relationship with trump, and his various indictments for corruption charges. That's not to imply that Coverage of Netanyahu's settlement policy is irrelevant, but rather, that the emphasis is put on those other details. For clarity, i never implied that you were lying, or presenting fabricated information, just that you were prioritizing sources, albeit in good faith, through your own judgement. Totalstgamer (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

NYT is one of the most prominent newspaper in the world. The fact that it dedicated an entire article to talk exclusively about one Israeli politician and his settlement policy, that is more than notable (disregarding the tens, possibly hundreds of sources talking about the same thing). The body is filled with references to the settlements, but indeed requires a dedicated subsection; a subsection is dedicated for integration of the Bank of China and not of his settlements policy! I have added a too long notice for the lede until some of these issues are resolved adequately. To be fair, the lede is really good, perfect in fact, until this sentence "From 1984–1988, Netanyahu was Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations." Afterwards it becomes just one huge mess. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@Totalstgamer: I took the initiative to summarize a few sections of the lede. Please review these edits in good faith, as I do, for we all have a genuine interest in the betterment of this article. I think it looks much better now, the summerizations, and I look forward to some assistance from other editors as well. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I fundamentally disagree with some of the changes you've made.

"Netanyahu began his political career being elected as the chairman of Likud in 1993, becoming Leader of the Opposition" - Factually incorrect, Netanyahu began his political career in 1988 after being elected to the Knesset and becoming Deputy Defense Minister. Maybe a term like "rose to prominence" would be more accurate.

"After the 1996 election, Netanyahu beat Shimon Peres, becoming the first Israeli prime minister elected directly by popular vote, and its youngest-ever." Mostly good, but i'd replace "after" with "in".

"and Netanyahu chose to retire from politics entirely, entering the private sector. Netanyahu later returned to politics, and served as Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Finance, during the latter position initiating major reforms of the Israeli economy that led to growth. Netanyahu returned to the leadership of Likud in December 2005." This is where i think the issues start. This section should mention Ariel Sharon, since he's the man who both Succeeded and Subordinated Netanyahu in the 2000's. The formation of Kadima should undoubtedly be mentioned given its significance to Netanyahu's return to power. I do think the section mentioning Netanyahu's financial preformance is fairly notable. Similarly, his opposition to the disengagement plan should be mentioned.

"In December 2020, the coalition collapsed and a new election was held in March 2021. In his penultimate government, Netanyahu led Israel's response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2021 Israel–Palestine crisis. In June 2021, Netanyahu became opposition leader for the third time, before returning as Prime Minister again after the 2022 election." I think this specific shortening isn't very useful. I like the original phrasing more: "In December 2020, this coalition collapsed and a new election was held in March 2021. In his penultimate government, Netanyahu led Israel's response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2021 Israel–Palestine crisis. In June 2021, after Naftali Bennett formed a government with Yair Lapid, Netanyahu was removed from the premiership, becoming opposition leader for the third time, before returning as Prime Minister again after the 2022 election." Since the lede is supposed to be a summary, it should provide limited context for Netanyahu's actions, most especially more recent events which people, if you truly insist on focusing on reader interests, would legitimately care about.

I'm more than cool with what you added about the settlements. Its short, concise, and reasonable. As for the section on Netanyahu's criminal trials. "In 2019, Netanyahu was indicted on charges of breach of trust, bribery and fraud., following a three year investigation, Duedue to the indictment, Netanyahu is legally required to relinquishwhich he relinquished all of his ministry posts other than the prime minister position." I have one, mostly unrelated issue with this. I think it might need an update, since, for example, his Trial began in 2020, and Witness testimony began in 2021.

I don't think, frankly, you should have taken the initiative given this dispute. I think we should've worked the changes out in the talk section before implementing them. Regardless, I'm going to take the liberty of implementing most of my proposed changes, then we'll keep it as is until we agree on any additional changes that should be made. Totalstgamer (talk) 11:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Too late, it was the only way of forcing some momentum for change. Anyway, the point is not to cater to readers' interest, but to summarize the body. One quick example: a reader will be interested in knowing in the lede that Netanyahu is facing corruption charge; and not that he was accused in 2016, investigated in 2020, witness testimony in 2021. Really, no one cares; in the lede, at least. Same thing I would argue to how was Kadima formed, or why he resigned, etc.

I would propose the following restructuring:

First paragraph: a quick recap on notability - already present and perfect.

Second paragraph: a quick recap on education and career - already present and perfect (Born in Tel Aviv ==> ..was Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations.)

Third paragraph: a quick recap on political career starting from rose to prominence, highlighting timeline of roles in opposition and prime minister, etc. Needs major summerization.

Fourth paragraph: a quick recap on policies, legacy, etc. Needs rewriting away from mostly Trump content. Maybe economic aspect of being finance minister could be included here along with elaboration on his committment to free markets. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:54, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

First things first, you're not supposed to create momentum for change, you're supposed to discuss it in good faith and create consensus for your proposals. Secondly, i think the version that now exists is pretty much perfect. After all, if we want to summarize the body, we do need to provide basic context. I entirely agree on the 2016 date, and the way it was rephrased is good, but it does seem strange to cut an ongoing case off in 2019. As for the whole Kadima issue and why Netanyahu resigned, they're important pieces of information. I'm pretty sure the Al-Jazzera and BBC sources even outright mention them in their own summaries. The fourth paragraph should absolutely not be rewritten any further. Netanyahu's relationship with Donald Trump is firstly, and especially by your own standards, of interest to foreign readers. Secondly, its frequently mentioned in reliable sources, and Thirdly, it was a big deal in its own right during Trump's tenure. I don't think Netanyahu's financial policies need elaboration in the lead, since they're rarely given particular prominence, or are even that consistent. To Summarize, I think we should avoid making further changes on most fronts, and i'll revert any changes you make without consensus. I would like to discuss a way to 'update' the sentence about Netanyahu's trial. Totalstgamer (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but if anything, the lede is worse than before now. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:47, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss: I entirely agree. @Zeex.rice: made some changes to the lede that i think made it longer than it should be. Zeex, why'd you expand the lede? Totalstgamer (talk) 11:00, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I honestly don't see a reason to keep tag as of now. See the introduction of articles on Putin and Xi Jinping for further reference, also WP:LEAD: "...a lead section should contain no more than four well-composed paragraphs." This lead has literally four well-composed paragraphs.--Shuvam Koleyri (talk) 04:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/יניב_הורון - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

The paragraph are not well-composed, and they do not reflect article length; they often reflect unnecessary recounting of many details that are of no particular importance and could be removed from lede and placed in body. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Netanyahu campaign poster.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:07, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

new portrait File:Benjamin Netanyahu, February 2023.jpg 42.116.126.137 (talk) 06:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done ^Clyde!_Franklin! 00:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

The main section is a bit out of date, and also there's no mention of the Judical Reform having passed under the "Sixth Term" subsection. It could use an update like this:

"In his sxith term, Netanyahu championed the passage of highly controversial judicial reform, and responded the to 2023 Israel–Hamas war by forming an Israeli war cabinet." Noahop3000 (talk) 16:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

This article on Netanyahu states that he was shot in the shoulder during the Sabena 571 hijacking; however, the Sabena 571 article states that he was shot in the bicep:

"...the rescue of the hijacked Sabena Flight 571 in May 1972, in which he was shot in the shoulder."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabena_Flight_571

"The bullet passed through her and penetrated Netanyahu's bicep." 68.146.152.236 (talk) 04:56, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

This is a minor point but I believe Netanyahu's degrees at Sloan and MIT should be MS and not SM. In fact, he has Master of Science in Management from Sloan School, which is what other universities call Master in Business Administration, or MBA.

technically, MIT styles its degrees as Sc.B., Sc.M., and Sc.D. "scab scum and scud", as it were.

and MSM degrees are completely diff from MBA degrees! some schools have both.

in any case, the MIT one is a standard MBA. both in name and in letter order.

they also offer some variants, such as a Masters of Finance (MFin) and Masters of Business Analytics (MBAn), but i see no evidence of any MSM there. 2601:19C:527F:7890:150B:9833:C577:7330 (talk) 07:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

There's no explicit discussion here of how he was funding Hamas to thwart the two state solution. This is discussed and cited elsewhere on Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas?wprov=sfti1#Israeli_policy_towards_Hamas Hovsepig (talk) 05:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin laknat tullah has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Markis212 (talk) 00:16, 12 November 2023 (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. Liu1126 (talk) 00:24, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

There is a spelling mistake and its current form is an offensive word in a language SHREK lll (talk) 14:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Can you specify where the spelling mistake is? Liu1126 (talk) 15:26, 12 November 2023 (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. M.Bitton (talk) 17:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "israeli prime minister" to "israeli prime minister and notorious war criminal"

^[1] 82.3.196.157 (talk) 02:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done. Please read the WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. Netanyahu has not been convicted of any crimes, and Wikipedia never describes any living person as a criminal without a conviction. Cullen328 (talk) 02:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

please note that his original surename was Mileikowsky but his father changed it to sound more indigenous 146.241.218.137 (talk) 11:17, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

It's already mentioned, read the article. Cannolis (talk) 19:22, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Isn't there anyone updating the succession boxes? He has been PM again for nearly 11 months, the Opposition Leader has been Lapid for the same amount of time. 140.213.44.244 (talk) 10:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

as in other biographies of living persons, see Alexander Dvornikov, the inclusion of the moniker butcher of gaza should be included, the source to the moniker can be found here: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkeys-erdogan-says-israels-netanyahu-will-be-tried-war-criminal-2023-12-04/, if any coherence is left it should be included, or is it that we just demean people we don’t like? Juanriveranava (talk) 16:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

LGBT portion of personal views states "LGBT persons" where it should be "LGBT people". The word "persons" does not exist. 24.202.14.159 (talk) 15:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: "persons" is a real english word, no reason to change it. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/persons RudolfRed (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

This is covered in the article topic, but but perhaps the lead should also describe Netanyahu as a "Holocaust revisionist", who has falsely alleged Palestinian responsibility for the Holocaust, claiming Palestine "convinced" Hitler to exterminate the Jews. These facts and the resulting controversy surrounding Netanyahu's repeated claims are presented later in the article, so might be worth including in the lead, which is supposed to cover all controversies related to the article topic. 67.82.74.5 (talk) 17:31, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

On 20 December 2023 Anshel Pfeffer Haaretz columnist declared Netanyahu will not succeed casting Biden the way he did to Obama https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-12-20/ty-article/.premium/netanyahu-is-trying-to-cast-biden-as-a-second-obama-it-wont-work/0000018c-8722-dd96-a78f-ff7b93d00000 Itamara2000 (talk) 01:20, 21 December 2023 (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. Cannolis (talk) 03:10, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

"is an Israeli terrorist and child killer". This certainly does not seem neutral and objective and ought to be removed. Joshua D. Muthi (talk) 13:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Joshua D. Muthi That line is egregious how may I help strike it out? 2A06:C701:7338:5500:A0C3:45C4:F359:C9B8 (talk) 13:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I unfortunately don't have the power to edit this article but if you can please change it to "is an Israeli politician" like it was previously. Thank you. Joshua D. Muthi (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

make it say hes cool Chumdung (talk) 03:18, 25 December 2023 (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. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change in name to include real name from Benjamin Netanyahu to Benjamin Mileikowsky “Netanyahu” at the start of the article. This is normally the case for all other people wiki writes about. 203.30.15.48 (talk) 11:58, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

•  Not done. Not the WP:COMMONNAME, no need to include his former surname in the lede. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 16:54, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I came here specifically to learn what kind of legal charges or investigations Netanyahu is facing and I find it kind of suss that the information is not available on his Wiki page. I have heard many times on the news, maybe as far back as five years, that he was caught in some scandal and there was prosecution. In the fall I heard that his trial achedule had been slowed because he claimed to need more time to oversee the "war" in Gaza. But I found no information here. This makes me think someone is doing a whitewash for Netanyahu. Eemstewart (talk) 04:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I was unable to find an English definition for the word, "pediatricist". Following the link to the Herman Berkovits page, it looks like the word should have been pediatrist. Can someone fix please? Danindenver (talk) 08:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

The article states his name is pronounced [binjaˈmin netanˈjahu], but the audio following the IPA in this article sounds more like [bɛnjaˈmin].

The IPA currently in the article suggests his name is pronounced like “bean-ya mean” instead of “ben-ya mean”

I recommend changing the IPA in the article to [bɛnjaˈmin] for a more correct transcription of the name.

I am a Leaf (talk) 05:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Current term is not reflected.
Idyllic press (talk) 11:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

no mention of genocide in Palenstine, not very factual. Will stop using this Biased "source" of information. 82.9.125.177 (talk) 01:17, 20 March 2024 (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. Goldsztajn (talk) 21:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@User:82.9.125.177 have you read the lead? I added it there the day after you commented this, it’s in the 4th paragraph along with other controversies. It can’t be in the 1st paragraph due to Wikipedia policy and it doesn’t fit in the 2nd and 3rd. (The bit referring to trump is about to be replaced with a paragraph on his politics, see “ICJ case” below. As a general rule, instead of complaining about bias you should go to correct it and be constructive

Alexanderkowal (talk) 21:20, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Overwrought and incorrect inline Hebrew romanisation. Never would a Hebrew shva be transliterated as a macronised vowel. Please change Binyāmīn Nētanyāhū to Binyamin Netanyahu in accordance with WP:HEBREW. —Biolongvistul (talk) 14:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

@Totalstgamer I disagree with your reverting of my edit.

The two sentences about the ICJ case deserved the position they had in the article. If a government you are leading gets a case filed against it in the highest international court, that is extremely notable and relevant due to its recency. Also, on mobile it came underneath the info box which is appropriate in my view (it shouldn’t be in the first paragraph).

The reason I created a new section under ‘Biography’ is because this article is ridiculously long. Very few people are going to read all of it. A lead should be short and concise. It makes sense to have a shorter summary of his life first and then go into more detail below.

Please address these points when you have the time or I will add my edit again. Alexanderkowal (talk) 01:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

In retrospect, I can live with it being in the shorter version among context. Alexanderkowal (talk) 01:26, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps change the section to ‘Biography (summary)’ Alexanderkowal (talk) 01:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Beginning with the ICJ Sentence, the ICJ case is notable, hence its inclusion in the lede, but whether its more notable than Netanyahu's early life, political career and criminal indictments remains to be seen. If the lead is to be seen as a concise telling of the article, the location of content should be based on context more than our determination of notability. As for the creation of the new section, the article is Gigantic, and the general rule with leads as i remember it is roughly four paragraphs. We can without a doubt discuss a shortened lead (As has been done several times over the last few years), but this would include striking out parts of existing paragraphs rather than creating another section within the article.

Please do not alter the article any further until a consensus has been reached. Totalstgamer (talk) 01:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Totalstgamer I agree with your moving of the ICJ case, if his government were convicted then I would expect it to be in the first paragraph.

I do disagree with the length of the lead, I think it would be better organised into a new section called ‘Biography (summary)’. The four paragraphs are too long imo. I haven’t seen another article with such a long lead, usually a paragraph is two sentences. Alexanderkowal (talk) 01:46, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

They do exist though, especially for controversial individuals. Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Silvio Berlusconi, Boris Johnson to name a few people with four paragraphs, some longer and some shorter than Netanyahu's. Regardless, Any removals need to be made on the basis that the information is plain irrelevant, which doesn't really happen in this lead imo (since we cut that out a while ago). Feel free to propose a revised version and we'll discuss it tomorrow. Regardless, don't alter the lead until then.

Also, the government being convicted wouldn't automatically move it to first-paragraph status, since that's reserved for basic biographical details and it wouldn't necessarily fit with the flow of the lead Totalstgamer (talk) 01:58, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Totalstgamer I’m not saying we should remove any information, I’m saying we should move it to a new section and call it ‘Biography (summary)’, allowing the actual lead to be expanded, although given the convention I suppose the status quo is acceptable Alexanderkowal (talk) 02:12, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I think the lead should just be the first paragraph plus a second paragraph on his politics that is factual and balanced (not done by me, I’d be too biased) Alexanderkowal (talk) 03:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

There's no practical reason to do that though. The lead's size is appropriate for the Article's, and there's no real reason to introduce a new section. I say we keep the status quo Totalstgamer (talk) 12:55, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Totalstgamer I really think the first half of the paragraph on his relationship with Trump should be relegated to lower down in the article, and in its place have a paragraph on his politics and brand of Zionism which contrasts the polarising views people have of him. This would segue nicely into the bit summarising controversies. Alexanderkowal (talk) 13:16, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

The reason I say this is that the status quo means people are left to make assumptions on his politics based on his relationship to trump Alexanderkowal (talk) 13:18, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I accept that the length of the lead is conventional Alexanderkowal (talk) 13:17, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I think the part of the lead about Netanyahu's views and relationships is kind of poorly structured tbf. His relationship with Trump is probably not that important and his general views + criminal indictments matter more. I don't really want to write a new paragraph from scratch but id love to hear how you think it could be revised. Totalstgamer (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Totalstgamer I think “Netanyahu… Arab states.” should be scrapped or relegated to further down. In its place perhaps start with how his supporters see him, contrasted with how opponents see him, followed by a neutral sentence on his brand of zionism. This will then segue nicely into the criticisms on settlers that’s there already in my opinion Alexanderkowal (talk) 14:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea. Feel free to make those changes and i'll give my input Totalstgamer (talk) 15:11, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Totalstgamer I’m not really knowledgable about Israeli politics and society, I also think I’d struggle to park my bias. Do you feel able to write it? Alexanderkowal (talk) 15:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll write it within the next few days if i have time. Totalstgamer (talk) 17:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

This edit request to Benjamin Netanyahu has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change ..."raised in Jerusalem and Philadelphia..." to "...raised in Philadelphia..".

One cannot be raised in two different places halfway across the world in the first 19 years of their life. He was raised in Philadelphia before going to Tel Aviv to join the IDF.

Also please site the reference for his birthplace. There is no objective evidence showing he was born in Tel Aviv. 45.48.132.107 (talk) 07:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done Kindly provide sources to establish the reason to change the subject. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 17:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Please do not remove the lede too long tag before addressing this issue. Clearly, the lede is overdetailed and needs a good trim. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

You said: "him for imprisoning journalists in a tweet". Surely, that should read: "him in a tweet for imprisoning journalists" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.80.209 (talk) 20:47, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

MOS:FIRSTBIO states that the opening sentance should be "avoiding subjective or contentious terms". I furthermore states that one should "try to not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject; instead, spread relevant information over the lead paragraph." As such, calling him a "fugitive under international law" seems out of place. Nehushtani (talk) 05:54, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

It is neither subjective nor contentious to state that he is a fugitive from the ICC warrant against him- that is just a fact. It can be disagreed with(as he and others do) but that doesn't change the fact that it exists. As a relatively few humans are subject to ICC arrest warrants, it seems important to place in the lead. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Context

• For those reading, see the contested change here:
• Original comment on change in revision history: Added "and fugitive under international law" to lead sentence per ICC arrest warrants according to hundreds of documents meeting WP:RS criteria - highly relevant and WP:NOTABLE information (discussed elsewhere in the article) that is deserving of inclusion in the lead sentence due to its significant political significance. To contest this change, please begin a discussion in the talk page explaining your reasoning.

Summary:

• Should fugitive under international law be in the lead sentence?
• Fugitive means "a person (such as a suspect, witness, or defendant) involved in a criminal case who tries to elude law enforcement especially by fleeing the jurisdiction" per the Merriam Webster Dictionary

Response to Nehushtani's claims

Avoid subjective terms

• Subjective means "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions". It is not a personal feeling, taste, or opinion that Netanyahu is a fugitive under international law. There is an ICC arrest warrant for him and he has not been arrested (the article cites 148 WP:RS sources corroborate this claim). Thus he is a fugitive per the word's definition. The arrest warrant article refers to him as a fugitive 4 times, as does the ICC investigation article. Calling him a fugitive is not WP:SYNTH because he has been referred to as such by the following WP:RS articles and experts:
  • Human Rights Watch
    • https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/04/01/hungary-arrest-dont-welcome-icc-fugitive-netanyahu
    • Arrest, Don’t Welcome ICC Fugitive Netanyahu
  • Amnesty International (see WP:RSPAI)
    • Article
      • https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/04/hungary-withdrawal-from-icc-does-not-absolve-hungary-of-its-legal-obligation-to-arrest-fugitive-benjamin-netanyahu/
      • Withdrawal from ICC does not absolve Hungary of its legal obligation to arrest fugitive Benjamin Netanyahu
    • Letter to government officials
      • https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/concerns_over_repeated_and_systematic_restrictions_on_the_rights_to_freedoms.pdf
      • The decision by Hungary to invite and host the Israeli Prime Minister, despite him being an ICC fugitive, raises significant questions...
  • Haaretz (see WP:HAARETZ)
    • https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-11-21/ty-article/.premium/is-netanyahu-now-a-fugitive-icc-arrest-warrants-over-gaza-are-turning-point-for-israel/00000193-4f6b-d58a-abdf-cfff191d0000
    • Is Netanyahu Now a Fugitive? ICC Arrest Warrants Over Gaza Are Turning point for Israel
  • Reed Brody
    • https://www.democracynow.org/2025/9/29/nyc_protest_against_netanyahu_at_unga
    • I’m an international war crimes prosecutor. Benjamin Netanyahu has been indicted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, crimes against humanity, for using starvation as a weapon of war. He is a fugitive from justice.
  • Al Jazeera (see WP:ALJAZEERA)
    • https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/21/what-are-the-icc-countries-where-netanyahu-and-gallant-may-face-arrest
    • Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant are now fugitives from justice after the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants against them over suspected war crimes in Gaza.

Avoid contentious terms

• Since there's not many reliable methods to reliably assess the emotional salience of a word, I resorted to the least bad method: giving this prompt to an LLM (ChatGPT) using all example words in WP:CONTENTIOUS except for "-gate" and "pseudo-" and sneaking "fugitive" in the middle:
  • Rate each of the following words based on their emotional saliences on a scale from 1 to 10, assuming this word is being used as a label for an individual: cult, racist, perverted, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, sect, fundamentalist, heretic, fugitive, extremist, denialist, terrorist, freedom fighter, bigot, myth, neo-Nazi, controversial
  • The average of all salience ratings except "fugitive": 7.33
  • The salience rating it gave "fugitive": 6
  • So fugitive is a term below the average of the salience ratings. I think this makes sense at face value considering the example contentious terms provided. This means fugitive is arguably on the outer fringe of contentious labels, which we should factor into our discussion.
• Per WP:CONTENTIOUS, [contentious terms are] best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject. We have already shown "fugitive" is widely used to describe the subject (Netanyahu), so WP:CONTENTIOUS does not apply.
• Finally, in this case "fugitive" is a legal term. There is no better term to describe Netanyahu insofar as he is avoiding arrest.

WP:FIRSTBIO says to try to not overload the first sentence by describing everything

• This is silly. The full sentence was "Netanyahu^[a] (born 21 October 1949) is an Israeli politician, diplomat, and fugitive under international law who has served as Prime Minister of Israel since 2022." This does not read like overload.

Additional justification

• MOS:FIRSTBIO repeatedly states the sentence should include reasons why the person is WP:NOTABLE (The first sentence should usually state... context (location, nationality, etc.) for the activities that made the person notable). Having entire Wikipedia articles written about "the first arrest warrant against the leader of a Western-backed democratic country for war crimes" in history certainly meets the threshold of WP:NOTABLE. Searching the NOW Corpus (requires university credentials or subscription for registration), I found 281 news articles with the specific search term "ICC arrest warrant" following their issue date (November 21 2024) and 40 between October 7, 2023 and their issue date. This indicates perceived significance of these warrants by various news agencies.

I have created a WP:RFC for this discussion.

Per this reasoning and current support from 331dot, I am re-implementing this change until the discussion is closed.

Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 07:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

I am adding to this discussion that Nehushtani is accusing me of violating WP:ONUS per User talk:Alexandraaaacs1989#Your recent edit. Others are welcome to chime in to voice support or opposition. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 10:32, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

I see a discussion has opened up so I'll go over the various points brought up and present my opinion on each one. In all, I disagree with the use of the term "fugitive" in the first sentence:

- Subjectivity: The description doesn't seem subjective, its backed by ample sources and is a reasonable way of putting things

- Contentious: I'm not particularly swayed by ChatGPT's assessment. The term contentious means "likely to cause disagreement or argument". There's no arguing the accuracy of the term, but a term like "fugitive" is undoubtedly going to cause a lot of arguments about the subject and the righteousness of the motivations behind the issuing of the warrant, which seems to be more accurate to the point made at FIRSTBIO. No argument is going to stem from the descriptions "Politician" and "Diplomat" in the same way They're bound to from "Fugitive".

- Notability: The page is supposed to include activities that made the person notable. The arrest warrant is not a primary reason why Netanyahu is notable. The Vast Majority of reporting and sources on Netanyahu, both past and present, discuss his political and diplomatic career. Alexdandraaaacs1989 mentions that he found 281 news articles with the term "ICC arrest warrant". I unfortunately don't have access to the NOW corpus, and I'm sure people more experienced with this sort of search could provide more accurate statistics, but a search for "Benjamin Netanyahu" on Google's news section (with the time set to "All Time") returns 50,000,000 results. Setting the time to Oct. 7th returns 28,400,000 results, and setting it to the issue date returns 4,360,000 results. Assuming that the number of sources referring to the warrant is 10 or even 100 times higher than the mentioned result would mean a fraction of a percentage of sources address the warrant (searching "Benjamin Netanyahu ICC Warrant returns a few thousand results)

- I will also note that a similar discussion (not an RFC) was held over applying the term to Vladimir Putin. The discussion was inconclusive but determined that the term fugitive is inadequate per WP:ASTONISH, I don't know if I agree with that sentiment but I think it warrants a discussion. Totalstgamer (talk) 10:49, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

I reverted the inclusion of the sentence until we close because you voiced support.

Contentious can also mean "involving heated argument", which is kind of what I was getting at with the emotional salience thing. Regardless, I think the "likely to cause disagreement or argument" interpretation is resolved by how Netanyahu being a fugitive is an incontrovertible fact according to multiple WP:RS sources, per my prior reasoning.

"fugitive" is undoubtedly going to cause a lot of arguments about the subject and the righteousness of the motivations behind the issuing of the warrant - Such hypothetical arguments are not backed by WP, as Wikivoice policy relating to the Gaza genocide changed to using "there is a genocide" language because there is consensus among experts. If Wikivoice supports claiming genocide, then it certainly supports the much weaker claim of war crimes, which are similarly documented in multitudes.

The arrest warrant is not a primary reason why Netanyahu is notable - Hmm, well even assuming this is true, it certainly implies his controversial nature in modern discourse, which is true to the spirit of his notability. That said, he is literally subject of "the first arrest warrant against the leader of a Western-backed democratic country for war crimes", which is historical and undoubtedly notable.

There are many methodological issues with using Google queries as your basis for querying this type of issue. One is that the nature of Google's query is ambiguous. Google themselves talk about how they "Search uses context to improve results" meaning your search is tailored to your user data, and it's not clearly defined what qualifies an article for inclusion in that number. Even so, 4 million out of 28 million results relating to the ICC warrants (assuming that's what you were saying, since it wasn't exactly clear to me what your query consisted of) is a high ratio.

WP:ASTONISH is interesting. If others agree "fugitive under international law" is too bold of an opening, perhaps we could soften the language to say "...is a politician, diplomat, and the subject of an ICC arrest warrant for war crimes". But I do feel like the "under international law" part softens the word "fugitive" quite a bit because it offers more specific explanation that do not leave the reader shocked, surprised, or confused by what they read.

Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 11:10, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

- On the term fugitive causing arguments - I think the question of whether something should be presented / presented as true is different to the question of including it in the first sentence (Especially given the difference between biographies and other articles). "Likely to cause disagreement" isn't necessarily resolved by the statement being narrowly true, since the point is that the first sentence should be as basic and uncontroversial as possible. This is also why i don't understand the argument that its a hypothetical statement. Is "fugitive" not obviously a more argument-prone term than "politician" and "diplomat"?

- On the reason for notability - Implying is controversial nature in modern discourse is the inverse of what the first sentence is typically supposed to do in biographies, and has absolutely nothing to do with "the spirit" of his notability. Netanyahu is notable for holding political office and for his actions while in office, had they been completely uncontroversial, it would still be the primary reason for his notability

The reason i used google searches is to provide some sort of numerical backing to what is ultimately a pretty foregone conclusion in terms of coverage of Netanyahu. The result i found was not 4 million out of 28 million, it was about 3000 out of 4 or 28 million (depending on how you set the date), which is a very small fraction of overall coverage. Maybe a search of Netanyahu in NOWSearch would provide a better numerical estimate but the scope of coverage of Netanyahu is likely orders of magnitude larger than hundreds or thousands of articles in the last year. Regular coverage of Netanyahu rarely if ever touches on the warrant, and usually only in events inextricably tied to it (such as his recent flight to the united nations), and that is ignoring the overall history of Netanyahu's coverage from before the warrant was issued.

On ASTONISH, i prefer the alternate phrasing you provided, which I think is clearer, but I'm not particularly opposed to fugitive to begin with. Totalstgamer (talk) 12:12, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

When I referenced "hypothetical" arguments, I was saying that while some might contest "fugitive" (like has already happened), it is well-documented by WP:RS and should therefore be included because such claims that it is subjective or controversial are objectively ungrounded in Wiki policy. Marjorie Taylor Greene's lead sentence correctly calls her a conspiracy theorist, which you could oppose on the same grounds, even though this label is objectively true and emotionally salient.

I am just a bit surprised more commenters aren't considering Netanyahu's notability attributable to him being a perceived war criminal by the public. When people think of Netanyahu, I feel that's most people's first instinct (at least here in the US), and speaking to his controversial nature through a short, unprecedent historical fact ("The warrant against Netanyahu is the first against the leader of a Western-backed democratic country for war crimes.") that carries significant weight under international law certainly seems justifiable.

Still, I advise against using Google queries to generalize claims. More, news outlets don't really re-report events that already happened. You could argue Donald Trump losing the 2020 election and contesting it no longer really being talked about by news outlets means that it is not notable, even though this isn't true (not that I'm saying this should be in his first sentence). Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 21:24, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

• Don't Include "Fugitive" in Lead Sentence - It's obvious including "fugitive" in the lead sentence would be inappropriate for a variety of reasons in addition to the MOS:FIRSTBIO that Nehushtani cites. There's WP:ONUS, WP:DUE and WP:RECENTISM for starters. Bibi may certainly be a criminal from both an international and domestic perspective, but calling him out as "fugitive" in the lead sentence would be like calling Donald Trump a "convicted felon" in his lead sentence. Both things are true, but simply not what the subjects are most notable for. NickCT (talk) 13:54, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

  Trump case is compelling (if we ignore that potential lawsuits by Trump against the WMF are a possible factor in this decision), but then there's other cases like Marjorie Taylor Greene's article where they refer to her as a "conspiracy theorist", which I feel you could criticize under the same grounds. More, being a convicted felon does not carry the same weight as the ICC warrant from a historical standpoint. WP:RECENTISM's lead paragraph states it refers to writing without an aim toward a long-term, historical view, which does not apply because this is one of the most notable long-term historical events that will be remembered in the future ("The warrant against Netanyahu is the first against the leader of a Western-backed democratic country for war crimes."). I don't see how WP:ONUS applies outside of this discussion, as that's more of a meta policy. As for WP:UNDUE, is the first leader of a western-backed country for war crimes being subject to arrest under international law really not WP:DUE? MOS:FIRSTBIO states to include One, or possibly more, noteworthy positions, activities, or roles that the person is mainly known for, avoiding subjective or contentious terms, and Netanyahu is well known for being a war criminal—in fact, that's the first thing most people think upon hearing his name, and that's the essence of what the warrants get at. If not including "fugitive" (even though I strongly recommend use of this word), perhaps something else hinting at his controversial nature should be added to the lead sentence, like "...is a politician, diplomat, and the subject of an ICC arrest warrant for war crimes". Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 21:10, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

  re "Greene" - The difference between Greene and Trump/Netanyahu is that Greene's political position (i.e. US representative) is substatntially less notable than Trump/Netanyahu's (i.e. President/Prime Minister); hence, Greene's other roles (i.e. conspiracy theorist) are more notable relative to what she's primarily notable for.

  re "this is one of the most notable long-term historical events that will be remembered in the future" - I think you may be missing the point of WP:RECENTISM. You have no idea what will be remembered in the future. Neither do I. Neither does anyone. We don't have crystal balls. Stuff that happens today/recently usually seems more notable than it will in future.

  re "UNDUE" - We don't determine whether something is WP:DUE based on how important we feel it is. "DUENESS" is a measure of how often something has been talked about in reliable sources. You want to argue that there are an equivalent number of sources talking about Bibi being a fugutive, as there are talking about him being an "Israeli politician" and "Prime Minister of Isreal"?

  re "in fact, that's the first thing most people think upon hearing his name" - I guess you've polled "most people", huh? Citation needed I think. NickCT (talk) 13:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

• My instinctive reaction is don't include in lead sentence, because it's not what he is best known for. It feels a bit subjective, but then it is a term used in a lot of RSs. It should probably go in the lead paragraphs, just not the first sentence. Yr Enw (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

  Netanyahu is well known for being a war criminal—in fact, that's the first thing most people think about upon hearing his name. Does a fact hinting at his highly polemical nature on the international stage really not deserve inclusion in the lead sentence? Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 21:15, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

That's the first thing most people think about upon hearing his name. That's a pretty bold claim, and I'm curious to know how you drew that conclusion. Also, even if he is primarily known for war crimes rather than his status as prime minister, the same can be said for Adolf Hitler, whose crimes (and therefore indirectly his status as a war criminal) are not mentioned until the 4th sentence. Vladimir Putin's status as a fugitive of from the ICC isn't mentioned until the 4th paragraph of his article. I know these are technically WP:OTHERSTUFF examples, but I don't believe there is any precedent for including Netanyahu's status as a fugitive in the first sentence. - ZLEA ^TǀC 22:43, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

You are right to call out that what I said was a very strong, contentious, and arbitrary claim, but I think you understand what I'm getting at—he's an extremely controversial figure, and this very quickly comes to mind, vis-a-vis constant news about Israeli warcrimes.

Wiki policy is constantly changing, and this discussion can establish new precedent. Even so, regarding Hitler, Hitler's article's first sentence talks about him being dictator of Germany during the Nazi period, which certainly establishes his controversial nature. That's the essence of what I'm getting at—establishing early on that Netanyahu is not just another world leader, but is subject of censure from the international community for his role in war crimes and genocide (we obviously wouldn't have to say all this explicitly). I am fine using a softer sentence instead like "...is a politician, diplomat, and the subject of an ICC arrest warrant for war crimes", I mainly just think mention of his controversy is undoubtedly WP:NOTABLE enough for his lead sentence. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 23:26, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes he is a war criminal, but I think the cases of Hitler and Putin are instructive here, and we should follow them. A new consensus on how we frame those articles is completely unnecessary because the fact that those things aren’t mentioned in the first sentence doesn't take away from the fact we still know they are important. Yr Enw (talk) 06:13, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

ALTERED PROPOSAL:

It seems like there is consensus against using the word "fugitive" in the first sentence. A user suggested moving the arrest warrant sentence to later in the first paragraph. Therefore, I propose appending the first paragraph like so:

Having previously held office from 1996 to 1999 and from 2009 to 2021, Netanyahu is Israel's longest-serving prime minister.

->

Having previously held office from 1996 to 1999 and from 2009 to 2021, Netanyahu is Israel's longest-serving prime minister. Netanyahu is also the first leader of a Western-backed democratic country subject to an ICC arrest warrant for war crimes.^[2][3][4]

Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 17:12, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose alternate - I don't think this should get mentioned in the lead sentence or the lead paragraph. The way we have it now (i.e. with the mention in the last paragraph of the lead) seems like the appropriate place. NickCT (talk) 17:49, 3 October 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose alternate for the same reason. I just don't think the warrant is first sentence material. Totalstgamer (talk) 18:22, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

It is clear that 'fugitive' should not be present in the lead sentence. While it's certainly relevant, if you went up to people on the street and asked 'who is Netanyahu?', they wouldn't say 'he's a fugitive', they'd say 'he's the Prime Minister of Israel'... Aesurias (talk) 06:15, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Alright no problem, I removed the RfC and will go with consensus against. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 07:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Include recentism isn't towards things that are very notable. Very few people become prime minister and very few people become ICC fugitives, both should be mentioned. If we had to choose between which is more notable, well less people have become ICC fugitives than the number of people that have ever served as prime minister/president/chairman of any country.List of people indicted in the International Criminal Court is very noticeably shorter than List of current heads of state and government and a theoretical all-time head of state would be longer. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 20:34, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

RfC has already been removed as there was overwhelming consensus against what you've said, but regardless I'm sure you're aware that your message makes little to no sense -- comparing the lengths of Wiki lists is not a valid argument, otherwise why couldn't I say that he's the only man to serve as Israel's PM across multiple decades, and therefore as he is the only one on the list, that's more notable? Aesurias (talk) 20:37, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

While we are on the subject, someone loaded the lede with an assertion that he committed genocide. This is BLP, so it needs a conviction (Israel itself is a separate issue, which consensus has determined that there is global consensus for, whether that is actually true or not). And further down, there was an awkward construction that seemed to intend to say that he is accused of genocide, but the word accused or alleged was missing. Im not even sure thats the case on the basis of the warrants, which specify other alleged crimes, but I would have to look again. These words are all getting bandied about so much they are losing meaning. Metallurgist (talk) 19:58, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I second this entire paragraph Aesurias (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2025 (UTC)