Talk:Hassan Nasrallah

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

intro[edit]

Contracting "Hezbollah is a Lebanese Islamist Shiite organization and political party" (1) to "Lebanese political party Hezbollah" cuts it too short. "Islamist Shiite" is a qualifier for party too, arguably a meaningful one. "organization" and "political" is redundant - all parties are political organizations, besides "Islamist" covers that. Shiite Islamists are a Islamist variant, so:

Lebanese Islamist party Hezbollah

is IMO correct. --tickle me 01:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mention current war??[edit]

Hey-- even in the face of all the vandalism and POV-flinging this article needs some mention of the current war, which will definitely make or break Nasrallah as a leader. Anyone care to propose a sentence here? JDG 05:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that this is an article on Nasrallah, the person, not about the war, for which an article already exists. Although Nasrallah makes morale boosting appearances on Al Manar, I don't think there is much public information about his role in the current war. I therefore do not see what can be said about the topic in a Hassan Nasrallah article other than "He led Hezbollah during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict" -- not a very useful statement. --Asbl 05:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like somebody has obliged with your request, but as I wrote above, the sentence is essentially void of much useful information. --Asbl 06:05, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life, cleanup-date, July 30, 2006[edit]

Too much taken verbatim from aljazeera.com, too many {{fact}} tags. --tickle me 17:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Views section[edit]

Are the only views Nasrallah have related to hating Israel? This section consists of a bunch of out of context quotations and some analysis, much of it from Neocon types. It strikes me as pretty blatantly POV. Obviously a discussion of Nasrallah's views should include a discussion of his views on Israel, but the current section is clearly designed to advance a partisan POV rather than to actually inform. john k 19:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These quotes are out of context and incorrectly translated from Arabic. Thus these quotes are simply wrong.

These may violate Wiki's NPOV due to WP:NPOV#Undue weight. In any case I added some of his recent speeches in full such that the reader may decide what to concentrate in, "straight from the horse's mouth"... ApuNahasaminajustApu 16:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The views section (Nasrallah views on Israel) is laced with lies and out-of-context quotes. I urge the writer to supply us with primary documentation instead of propaganda sheets for the new-cons.

Is it typical to include hearsay, such as, "According to Joe Schmoe, Hassan Nasrallah said xyz"? I haven't noticed this in any other Wikipedia article, but several times in this one. 24.35.66.225 (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Sayyed (or Sayyid?) debate[edit]

First off, the wiki page spells it Sayyid, so is that perhaps how it should be written if it is to be kept? Second, the Sayyid page states that a Western equivalent to the term would be "Sir" or "Lord". I looked up a few of the latter-day people granted knighthood by the UK (e.g. Ian McKellen, Elton John, and on their wiki pages they are listed as "Sir".

So, if that is to remain, then my opinion would be that Sayyid is equally acceptable. Opinions? Tarc 21:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's fine. Muslims don't even consider it a title that is similar to "Sir" or "Lord" but just take it to mean that he is a descendant of the Prophet. BhaiSaab talk 22:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sayyid vs. Sayyed. BhaiSaab talk 22:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One might also suggest that an extremely uncivil anonymous (the above comment came from 84.94.3.9, which traces back to an Israeli ISP) person has little to contribute to the discussion. Tarc 04:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As an Israeli (no, not the one above) I am disgusted to see the "Lord" Nasrallah and would prefer a neutral name, with no prefixes. I am also in doubt that every Sayyid is a descendant of the Prophet; it seems to me that it is not a proven fact, but just a funny title that people use to honor this terrorist. But since it is used for the Khalifa bin Harub of Zanzibar and also some other Islamist leaders, maybe Nasrallah should regrettably be honored as well. --Gabi S. 13:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The true terrorists in this war are the Zionists, but thats quite unrelated. BhaiSaab talk 18:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not whether we prefer or not. I believe "Sayyid" should be mentioned as it the way he's being called in Lebanon. You may add a note explaining why he's called so. -- Szvest 19:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gabi, terrorist or not got nothing to do w/ this section. I respect your patriotism but it is irrelevant here. -- Szvest 19:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gabi and Bhai: talk pages are not battlegrounds. Please discuss the article, not the subject of the article. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 12:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was discussing the article. I said that the Sayyid prefix should be there, just like Khalifa bin Harub of Zanzibar. Wasn't it clear? Too bad BhaiSaab can't find a way to leave the terrorism section there. It's an important part of the article and it was unfortunately deleted. Maybe it's unrelated. --Gabi S. 21:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about? I never deleted any terrorism section. BhaiSaab talk 05:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A little trivia, Sayyed or Husainites is reserved for descendant of the prophet thru the grandson Husain and Sharif or Hassanie Hashemite for descent thru his elder brother the grandsom Hassan. For Shia, they are respectively the 3rd and 2nds Imams. Best Wishes.Will314159 06:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Sayyed is more accurate then Sayyid. by the way Sayyid means Mister, not lord/sir. 

      - I disagree.  Every transliteration standard I've seen recently categorically excludes the use of the letter "e", along with "c", "o", and "p".  I do, however, agree with your second point.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.140.116 (talk) 05:41, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we should use whatever the reliable sources use. If the title/honorific is disputed, maybe we should discuss that. Thoughts? Tom Harrison Talk 00:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are not bound by the Manual of Style; we are. It is certainly acceptable to mention that some call him Sayyid, and why.
Re the anonymous claim above, Sayyed and Sayyid are merely different transcriptions of the same Arabic word; Arabic draws no distinction between i and e, or between u and o.Proabivouac 01:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A quick search shows his name appearing without any honorific, with 'Sayyed', and with 'Sheikh'. I don't have a strong preference. We might use it once with a footnote, and after that just use his name. Tom Harrison Talk 01:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure. Paul McCartney, Ian McKellen, Elton John all use "Sir" in the bolded first mention, but I'm not sure I like it there, either.Proabivouac 02:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tom, what kind of "quick search" did you do? I googled for Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and come up with 64,000 hits. Less than the 800,000 of just Hassan Nasrallah but certainly not an insignificant number. Perhaps it does not need to appear in the quantity that it does currently, but it should certainly remain in the lead and in image captions. Tarc 13:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did a Lexis/Nexis search of major newspapers. Tom Harrison Talk 14:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Would it be acceptable to mention it in the limited fashion I suggested above? Tarc 16:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Which, 'Sayyed' or 'Sheikh' or both? Tom Harrison Talk 16:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sayyed. Tarc 21:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why that instead of 'Sheikh'? Tom Harrison Talk 22:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Because it seems to be more proper in respects to his status than a simple "respected old man" (i.e. sheik) would be. I now see that it was quite overused throughout the article, so one mention in the lead plus an image caption would be an aceptable compromise, don't you think? Tarc 14:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do it and see what people think. I don't have a strong preference at this point, though I note that some sources say 'Sheik' instead, and I wonder what basis we are using to decide. Tom Harrison Talk 21:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The prefix "Sayyed" or "Sayyid" (however spelled) should be included, not to honor or gratify him, but to clarify that he is a descendant of Hussein, the third Imam in Shiite Islam, and grandson of the Prphet Mohammad, (should I have left out the prefix "Prophet" when referring to Mohammad?) This distinction is important in identifying his lineage, his social status in the muslim nation. Maybe we should also mention that he wears a black turban rather than a white one because of his lineage to Hussein, which makes him a so-called "Sayyed" or "Sayyid" whether we like it or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.130.15.189 (talk) 03:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict[edit]

In the article, the section titled 2006 "Israel-Lebanon" conflict should get a new title..."Israel-Hizb'Allah" conflict. With very few exceptions, Israel's bombing campaign targeted Hizb'Allah targets--not "Lebanese" military targets. I know Hizb'Allah is part of the government, but it would still be more accurate to describe the conflict as one between Israel and Hizb'Allah (Lebanon as a whole was largely caught in the crossfire). (CSSELL)

That section makes it look as if his part in the conflict was just getting his home and office hit, as though he's an innocent spectator. Also, the quote again makes it appear as though he's just defending against Israeli aggression, which is, again, untrue. okedem 06:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You state your opinion as though it were fact. There are other points of view, and the article should not take sides. 69.214.180.253 05:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, what I just said was fact - his role in this was not just getting his house hit, just as Olmert's role in this wasn't just sitting by his desk, watching the news.
Also, Hezbollah did initiate the current aggressions, as recognized by most of the world. okedem 06:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another view is that Israel itself violated Lebanese sovereignty on a continuous basis, then used an isolated border incursion as a pretext to destroy the infrastructure of Lebanon and to kill over 1000 Lebanese civilians. You do not have to agree with this, but a compelling case can be made, and both views should be reflected in the entry. I do agree that the section on the 2006 war is much too brief and should include the Israeli view, but I do not believe that this view should be presented alone or as fact.69.212.215.248 23:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First off - if you want to indent your comment, use colons (":"), like I do now.
If you can find a reliable source that makes that case, it can be presented here. However, one would also have to be clear on the fact that Israel withdrew to an internationally recognized border, and that Hezbollah attacked Israel afterwards, by kidnapping 3 Israeli soldiers in 2000, by firing at Israeli towns, and by this current attack. The case for Israel violating sovereignty would be that Israeli aircrafts flew over Lebanons airspace (since Israel did not enter lebanon on the ground).
BTW, the claims about Israel destoying the infrastructure of Lebanon are quite unbased. For example, Israel did attack Beirut's airport, but did the minimal possible damage - bombed a runway intersection, and the fuel tanks. It did not bomb the terminal, the hangars, the control tower. It did the minimal damage that would prevent the use of the airport. Also, if Israel wanted to destroy Lebanon's infrastructure, why did Lebanon continue to have electricity?
But I digress - the point is - the current section gives a completely false picture of events. okedem 07:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another view is that Hezbollah violated Lebanese sovereignity by attacking Israel and then hiding in Lebanon. Likewise Syria has certainly violated Lebanese sovereignity. No country can tolerate rockets being fired into its schools from nearby towns. Sept 1, 2006

You talk like if Hezbollah was a strange body in South Lebanon saying "They hide in Lebanon", wake up brother, Hezbollah is the people of the freed(2000) south Lebanon, they live there ,they grew there, this is their soilAhage4x4 21:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Clean Up[edit]

moved all the headers up to the top, and comments below. I shouldn't have lost any comments. Although a lot them seemed to be argumentative and not really wikipedia edit type comments. Best Wishes. Will314159 22:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

External links: CAMERA article[edit]

It seems that some quotes have been attributed to Nasrallah, quotes which are not by him at all. See Charles Glass in London Review of Books. Note the quote from the lebanese Daily Star (by Badih Chayban) in October 2002/10/23 ('If they [the Jews] all gather in Israel it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide') ..it has been used extensively (especially by neo-cons)..but there is no proof that this is a "real" quote at all (It has also been denied by Hizbolla spokesmen). The CAMERA article: "Hassan Nasrallah: In His Own Words" (where it is quoted) is therefore at least partly based on what I would call false propaganda; (it is not his own word at all): I will therefore remove it.

(This whole thing remindes me very much of the Ouze Merham "quotes" of Ariel Sharon ...perhaps there also should be an article about false quotes attributed to Nasrallah? ..with listing them where they first appear, and where they were refuted?) Regards, Huldra 02:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jurisprudence of the Guardians and Khomeini View of Ashura Ritual[edit]

I listened to a streaming video lecture by Professor juan Cole who explained the above topic. Nasralah subscribes to Khomeinis views and is his disciple. Amal suscribes to Fadallah who is close to Ayatollah Sistani of Irak. In the Khomeini view the clerics have the last word. Sistani and Fadallah's view is minimum interference. Even though Nasrallah is prominent politicaly in Lebanon, theologically he is much junior to Ayotollah Fadallah. On Ashura (Arabic for 10 which follows 10 days after first of year 1 Muharram similar to Yom Kippur about 10 days after Rosh Shannah) some Shiites self flagellate in memory of the martrydom of the 3rd Imam Husain at Karbala. The Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against the practice. If I am right, then Amal would do the bloody ritual on Ashura while Hezbollah members would not. I have to get a source for this before i incorporate this in article. If any lebanese Shia are reading this- would appreciate any insight. Best Wishes Will314159 06:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

anti-semitism and semitism run amok[edit]

the flip side of anti-semitism is semitism run amok. Anti-semitism is strongly condemmed wherever it appears. At the same time semitism run amok is the flip side. WP is an encyclopedia for everybody and all these negative comments about Nasrallah are bull. The PLO was delcared a terrorist organization. The U.S. ambassador to the U.N. gets called on the carpet for meeting with the PLO. Sharon starts a war to expel the PLO from Lebanon. Then guess what? Israel invites the PLO to the West Bank, and Yasser Arafat is a frequent guest at the White House. But then he won't roll over and then he's a terrorist again and becomes a prisoner at Ramallah. The Israelis can get any opponents of theirs declared "terrorists" by the U.S. Congress and then undeclared as it suits their purposes. This is a biography article of living person and there are guidelines. There is no call or excuse for calling the subject a "little shxt" as one so called "Editor" did above. It is just disgusting. But it is like this in every article having to do with the Mid-East in WP. There are very few Arab English speaking editors and are grossly outnumbered and out-articulated. The editors that are proponents of the other side are overwhelming in their numbers, with notable exceptions and those people are heroes, are not exercising balance and fair play. Best Wishes. Will314159 21:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

If they didn't blow themselves up with hundreds of people around them the US Congress wouldn't declare them to be terrorist's. It's not rocket science man.

Then, shall we give the IDF credit for 'terrorising' a whole country killing a thousand of their people? The US can put anyone on their terrorists list, who cares Nasrallah is seen as a Freedom fighter for millions of Arabs, he is certainly much more respected statistically then the "strongest" man on earth, Mr Bush Ahage4x4 21:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't we just leave the term "Terrorist" out of the debate? Terrorism has become a highly subjective and stigmatized word since 9/11/2001. Where one person sees a "terrorist", another sees a "freedom fighter". US Congress and their declarations have no place in WP, and neither do the opinions of those at the other end of the political debate. Lets just stick to the facts, folks, and leave the subjectivity out of it ok? Nageeb 21:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sure. let's use the "objective" opinions of these people about the word "terrorist".. webster discussions
Wow, you know what would have been nice? If they actually cited a source of that definition (the definition kept expanding as the interview went on, incidentally). Simply claiming that Webster's Dictionary says something without actually showing it or citing an edition is useless. (Side note: There is no one "Webster's Dictionary", there are indeed many editions and versions, each having a different use and purpose.) What kind of garbage talkshow was that? Also, the Egyptian guy in the horrible shirt was a wanker. Nageeb 21:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
webster reality check: [1]
btw, what negative comment about nasrallah is bull exactly? Jaakobou 08:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NB: It is "antisemitism" without a hyphen -- check out the IHRA definition -- and the other spelling variety seen frequently, "anti-Semitism" is a result of MS Word spell-check which nobody bothers to correct. The second thing is that there is *no such thing* as "semitism". Dori1951 (talk) 19:42, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

National Compact with Michel Aoun[edit]

Many observors write this has kept lebanon from civil war. From the Xtian side it calls for the the 1)disarmament of HA upon return of the three remaining Leb prisoners in Israeli jails (yes back then it was 3 prisoners!!) 2) return of Shebaa Farms and 3) the repatriation of SLA refugees (South Lebanon Army) from Israel with pardons. From the HA side it calls for reform of the Taif electoral law perhaps with one man one vote. The speculation is tha the Sunni would then pad the vote by extending the franchise to Palestinian refugee descentants and the Xtians would try to gain numbers by extending the vote to overseas Lebanese. The compact is a signicant achievment for Nasrallah and Aoun because it has kept the country stable and unified even under the total war waged recently on the civilian infrastructure. When I get the citations lined up I" try to incorporate some of this in the article as well as the jurisprudence of the guardians material. Best Wishes. Will314159 21:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

You should also be aware that Future Movement leader, Saad Hariri, is very supportive and would like to allow the Lebanese diaspora to have voting rights from abroad, now keep in mind that 80% or so of the multi million Lebanese diaspora is Christian.
--Eternalsleeper 05:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Syria Iran Hezbollah support[edit]

He actually used the words "everybody knows it"? I'm sorry, but that is the single most hilarious thing that I have ever heard. VolatileChemical 07:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Holy cities[edit]

The question of whether Najaf and/or Qom are "holy" cities is not topical to this article. However, if for some reason we were to include it, it would have to be attributed and cited, e.g., "which Shi'a Muslims consider holy (reference)." It's not up to us to decide what is or isn't holy.Proabivouac 23:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All Shia Muslims consider the Cities of Karbala, Najaf, and Qom, Holy, what makes them holy is the burials of the 11 Imams, in these cities and more, its not up to you to decide, it's up to every Shi'ite Muslim to know that those Cities are holy.Ahmad Husseini 02:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go man. Here's an explanation of why Najaf is a Holy City: [2]

Who's running this joint?[edit]

How do you know that the "If all the Jews..." quote is not a fabrication, since its editors of the newspaper have questioned the reliability of the translations, and honesty of the reporter? Ahmad Husseini 02:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We do not know this to be the case, since our only source is a random third party claiming this in a letter to an editor of another journal.Proabivouac 18:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, your second source doesn't mention the quote. This isn't the place to be comparing Hezbollah to the Nazis (your source, is a blatant attack, otherwise it would have fit in), and I don't find that taking quotes from neo-con(respectively) websites is considered accurate.Ahmad Husseini 02:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV: 2006 Israel-Lebanon Conflict[edit]

This section of the article makes no mention of the fact that Israel initiated its bombing campaign in response to a Hezbollah attack on its army patrol. An attack of which Nasrallah was aware, because he later made the statement along the lines of (if I recall correctly) "I would not have allowed the attack to go ahead if I had known that these would be the consequences."

Will you provide a reliable resource for that please? If you can then it may be added.--SJP 00:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nasrallah in songs[edit]

I've added one song by Alaa Zalzali to the list, however there is no article about that artist or song. I may get to work on that. Andurz 02:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

درود بر سید حسن نصراله و رزمندگان مقاوت از طرف حمید رضا


Taif Section[edit]

How reliable are those sources? They seem to be heavily biased blogs. And i'm not sure about the translation offered there. Just suggesting better sources. Andurz (talk) 23:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References need cleaning up.[edit]

Reference #2, #9, and #11 ("Profile: Sayid Hasan Nasrallah")are redundant as they all point to, the same link, which no longer works and cannot be found via a search on that site. At the moment it also lists it as an Al Jazeera article, which is incorrect as aljazeera.com is a British magazine, not the same as the well-known media outlet of the same name. I'll fix that in a moment.
It seems though that this may have been the same profile that is also cited as reference #10, from the Council on Foreign Relations. If so, it can simply be subbed in for the three mentioned earlier, but it should be checked first that that CFR link covers or mentions what is being referenced by aljazeera.com before swapping.
Also, question regarding the PDF link in reference #7; can anyone else open this? It comes up as "unsupported/damaged" by Adobe. Tarc (talk) 15:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reference for this :

"There is no solution to the conflict in this region except with the disappearance of Israel," said Nasrallah.[1]

and this :

"I am against any reconciliation with Israel. I do not even recognize the presence of a state that is called 'Israel.' I consider its presence both unjust and unlawful. That is why if Lebanon concludes a peace agreement with Israel and brings that accord to the Parliament our deputies will reject it; Hezbollah refuses any conciliation with Israel in principle.".[2]

are broken. Kromsson (talk) 21:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Markus, Andrew (July 15, 2006). "Little choice for a defiant Israel". The Age. Retrieved 2006-07-30. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  2. ^ "Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah Q&A: What Hezbollah Will Do". The Washington Post. February 20, 2000. Retrieved 2006-08-08. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

Sayyid[edit]

The using in this honorific title in the personal life section is improper. It opens this section with out any explanation while wikipedia rules forbid this kind of glorifications. It is equal to open the Jhon Do persoanl life section in this manner: Ph.D/M.D/DR Jhon Do was born...--Gilisa (talk) 11:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. I find no specific WP policies forbidding this, and furthermore the link itself serves as explanation. Mnmazur (talk)
I agree with Gilisa's statement. Even Queen Elizabeth's page only refers to "Elizabeth II". I am going to edit this article accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.76.163.245 (talk) 20:53, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citation of Israeli sources[edit]

I've noticed that many of the citations on the section regarding Nasrallah's views on international events are from CAMERA and other pro-Israel organizations. Why is it that it is frowned upon to cite Al-Manar or similar sources on articles, but it's okay to quote blatantly Zionist and pro-Israel organizations and sources in articles, especially articles condemning someone for being anti-semetic? I'd like these citations removed and, where they were indeed valid, replaced with references that are not biased. Mnmazur (talk)

I don't see the problem. CAMERA was cited four times in the article, and three of those four times it was explicitly stated that it was from CAMERA (I changed the fourth instance to reflect this as well). As long as the source is explicitly mentioned for the claims, Al-Manar can likely be used too. ← George [talk] 04:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the September 11, 2001 attacks and the United States[edit]

The second paragraph of this section does not talk about Hizballah's stance on the September 11 attack itself but rather talks about the conflict with the US in general. In the mentioned quote, Nasrallah did not express his point of view of this attack but rather mentioned it as a historical inciden . Hence I suggest that it must be removed from this section.--Atmleb (talk) 17:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CAMERA links[edit]

The links for CAMERA point to camera(disambiguation). I have changed the links that I can find to point directly to the wikipedia page of that specific organisation that is titled "Committee_for_Accuracy_in_Middle_East_Reporting_in_America". Any future links should be done in the same way Example: CAMERA.

--Atmleb (talk) 17:59, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Protection[edit]

I don't speak Arabic/Farsi/Persian, whatever, but today's revert war without edit summaries, doesn't give me much confidence. Accordingly, I have protected this article until and unless the parties provide acceptable translations for their edits. This is the English language Wikipedia, and if there is going to be unresolved conflict about the natural language version of this person's name, it will just be deleted as unnecessary and the article will have to endure continued protection. Rodhullandemu 00:31, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'terrorist'[edit]

Picking up on one of the points made in the 'anti-semitism and semitism run amok' discussion above, I think it is a clear breach of NPOV to open this article with the term 'terrorist' to describe Hezbollah. Using such an extreme value term is bad enough in an article, but especially so if it's done in the opening line and with no explanation. As you will see on Hezbollah's own article, there is much debate over the use of the term, and only three countries consider the group to be an outright terrorist one. Instead, I propose that it's called 'a political and paramilitary organization' and let readers navigate to the Hezbollah article for a full discussion on who considers them to be terrorists etc. Zackery the Fence (talk) 01:31, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It is entirely inappropriate to put in the lead of the article, and it is unnecessary POV. Readers can look at the Hezbollah article for more information.
Imagine if, on the article for George W. Bush, it said, "The United States in its entirety is considered a terrorist government by Nicaragua, Chile, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Palestine." Is this acceptable? InverseHypercube 05:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with both above. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 05:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Or imagine if, on the article for Hitler it said that Hitler was "commonly associated with the rise of fascism in Europe, World War II, and the Holocaust." Silly civilized people. They think their position is the "neutral" position. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. Those are things he actually did. Putting in information about who considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization in the main paragraph of an article about a Hezbollah leader is a clear violation of WP:NPOV. "Terrorist" is a contentious and emotionally charged label, which has no clear definition. It is not Wikipedia's job to take sides, which this article is clearly doing. If you want to include this, then per WP:Balance also include viewpoints that contradict the claim of Hezbollah being a terrorist organization, which are certainly prominent.
I'm not taking a position on the claim, as you have accused me of doing, I'm simply trying to maintain neutrality. InverseHypercube 07:25, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did not mean you, I was being rhetorical. The analogy to Hitler was to point out that there isn't necessary an "other side" that has to be given proper weight if proper weight is not given by reliable sources.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:11, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

national pact and not national compact[edit]

the national pact and not compact (!) with Free Patriotic Movement of Michel Aoun....should read the section title! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.108.172.7 (talk) 11:08, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sayyed Hassan.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Sayyed Hassan.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 9 February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2014[edit]

insert this image as the main portrait http://hadialakhras.deviantart.com/art/Sayed-Hasan-Nasrallah-362573250 because it more accurate and it looks more formal. Thank you

Ahalawi (talk) 12:12, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Images found on the web are usually copyrighted, and cannot be used on wikipedia, which uses free content where possible (see WP:NONFREE. Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 15:25, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just For Laughs[edit]

In Russian his name "Насралла" sounds very unpleasant. About as "give a shit" in feminine gender. :)) Алессия (talk) 00:24, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2015[edit]

Addition to sub-topic "views attributed to Nasrallah" - Condemns Charlie Hebdo attack http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/09/us-france-shooting-hezbollah-idUSKBN0KI1OM20150109

- But also condemns Mohammed cartoon by Charlie Hebdo in their "survival" issue after the attack http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/09/us-france-shooting-hezbollah-idUSKBN0KI1OM20150109

213.35.153.122 (talk) 20:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox crash problem[edit]

For about an hour this morning attempts to open this page crashed Firefox. Other Wikipedia pages tested did not. Seems to be working now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.236.238.73 (talk) 16:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move 29 December 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Number 57 13:12, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah → Hassan Nasrallah – "sayyed" is an honorific, which should not be used in article names (per WP:HONORIFIC). The article was recently renamed without consensus to include the honorific, with an unsupported claim that 'sayyed' is actually part of his name, and not an honorific, a claim which is contradicted in the lead. Bad Dryer (talk) 17:52, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hassan Nasrallah/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article uses unreliable sources in describing Nasrallah views on Israel. Many of the sources are dubious and we do not see any primary evidence provided.

Substituted at 05:15, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hassan Nasrallah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:17, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Add some information[edit]

I want to add these informations to the article but it needs a consensus.Anyway i place it here for comments:

breif history

His complete name is Hasan Abdolkarim Nasrollah.He was born on August 31,1960 in a very poor area of east Beirut ,called Al Sharshabouk quarter near al khodr Mosque and the karantina. Sharshabouk is a quarter in which best house is ruin and whose inhabitants were a mixture of Shiites ,maslakh Arabs, Armenias and Kurds. He lived there with his family until 1974.[1]

  • On the thirteenth anniversary of Ayatollah khomeini’s death,Nasrollah presented a lecture. His speech is couched in overwhelmingly nationalist terms. He points to khomeini’s revolution as having suffered in the past in the same way the resistance factions in Lebanon are nowadays suffering and have suffered in the past. He adds that it is similar to the suffering the intifada and resistance in Palestine are going through at that time. Accordingly Nasrollah seems to invoke knomeini as more of a tactician to be admired and imitated particularly in terms of his steadfastness and intelligence. According to nasrollah Imam Khomeini and his movement was not a political one severed from its roots. Also nor was it Jihadi revival movement disconnected from its ideological background but the movement of Khomeini rested on very solid theoretical,intellectual,scientific and doctrinal basis. He also believes that the problem of imam Khomeini with Muhammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was not only domestic and internal problem but Also Imam Khomeini know shah as an instrument of repression and agent of the united states. Therefore the first conflict between imam and shah was the fact that the regime of Pahlavi was an American agent.[2]

I suggest you put draft version here on talk for review by other editors, once reviewed and okayed it can be placed in article at appropriate place.-m,sharaf (talk) 09:04, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Voice of Hizbollah:the statements of sayyed hasan Nasrollah. 2002. p. 116. {{cite book}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors= (help)
  2. ^ Ellen Khouri (2002). voice of Hezbollah:the statemants of Sayyed hasan Nasrollah. p. 267-268.

expat?[edit]

Is Hassan Nasrallah currently either a Lebanese expatriot or in Iran. Because both would need to be true for that category to be used. nableezy - 00:51, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. Reliable sources back up the fact that he moved to Qom for studies and remained there for some time. I added just two of these sources. No one talked about him being there right now; we're talking about 1989.
Furthermore, "Expatriate in X" categories on Wikipedia are literally everywhere used for those who have spent time in another country, for, e.g., studies, work, and/or soccer. Whether in the past, or in the present. So, I also don't understand where you got the notion from that someone needs to be an expat "currently", in order to be labeled with such category. In fact, this article also needs the category Category:Lebanese expatriates in Iraq, for he studied there as well for some time. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 02:11, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He isnt in Iran, he is in Lebanon. Whats there to huh about? An expatriate, definitionally, is somebody who lives outside of their home country. Lives, present tense. nableezy - 04:38, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Who told that he's in Iran right now? These categories may be added for anyone that lived at one time in a different nation, but did not hold its citizenship. It seems as if you are making this "rule" up by yourself, namely that someone "needs" to be living in the country in question, right now, in order for the category to be added. And that seemingly just because you define the word "expatriates" as being only able to refer to the present tense, which is wrong, especially in the way such categories are used on Wikipedia. Oh, no, wait, I guess Alexander Onassis is actually currently in Monaco, while George Best is actually currently living in Hong Kong, South Africa, and Australia -- even though both individuals died numerous years ago.
With all due respect, but unless you're able to cite a WP that backs up your claim (that such categories can only be added for people who are in the countries in question in the present time) or some sort of earlier established consensus, your arguments don't have any ground to stand on. Nasrallah was an expat in Iran in the late 80s, and he was an expat in Iraq prior to that, and this is simply verifiable by the reliable sources. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 05:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not defining the word, the dictionary does that for me. An expatriate is someone living in a country that he or she is not a citizen of. Living is the present tense of to live. Are you able to city any sort of consensus? Or is that a requirement only for me? With all due respect, WP:OSE isn't an argument needing a response. nableezy - 06:46, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links & Speeches and interviews[edit]

These sites "The Multilingual Website of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah"Archive; Interview on 11 August 2007; Interview with Al-Jazeera on 20 July 2006; Interview with Al-Jazeera; The Beirut File: An Interview with Hassan Nasrallah by Mahir Tan dont open.

These links Video Clip of Victory Speech on 22 September 2006; Nasrallah's Sun Video; Speech given on 26 May 2008; Speech on 3 August 2006; Speech on 31 July 2006; Speech on 14 July 2006; Speech on 8 March 2005 does not open correctly.--Samral (talk) 11:40, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

tenor vs tenure[edit]

In the first section, there is a simple linguistic error, which can be rectified by the replacement of a single word. Noting here so the next edit by a confirmed editor can correct it:

Under his tenor,

should read:

Under his tenure,

Feel free to remove this section from talk page after this has been done.

54.240.196.186 (talk) 23:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you are absolutely correct. Changed now, thanks for letting us know! Huldra (talk) 23:23, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Yemen war[edit]

He has made some remarks in interviews about the Yemen war. I will not cite any particular singular source but instead simply point this out. Some of the comments could be included in the main article, since it is fairly recent ~2 years old only. 2A02:8388:1641:4700:BE5F:F4FF:FECD:7CB2 (talk) 17:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:33, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:22, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

early life and education[edit]

I recommend correcting this sentence: "But there was no sources mentioned about his mother's name" with something like: " No references found for his mother's name".

Naming consistency - I recommend checking for consistency in the names Abbas al-Musawi (mentioned once as Abbas Musawi),and Sadr (mentioned at the end of this section without the full name Mohammad Baqir al-Sadr, and missing the hyperlink ) Elimarcus (talk) 07:36, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV?[edit]

Making Russia the only named ally of Hezbollah in the lede is garbage, conceived to tar the latter with the whipped-up frenzy over Putin (and Trump). Why no mention of Iran, who has certainly been a longer and more trusted ally of the Hezbollah movement? If you can't answer this, you should just go add it now. 174.115.100.93 (talk) 05:06, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 October 2019[edit]

Hi dear admin. i request for permissions to edit just the religion of hasan nasr-allah in the article. you can do it yourself, if i'm not qualified to have such access. thanks in advance. best regards.Sepehr.Sǎsǎni (talk) 02:28, 29 October 2019 (UTC) Sepehr.Sǎsǎni (talk) 02:28, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 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. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:44, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
hi again. i only want to add his religion in the infobox. i would be grateful if you do that, by adding the following characters in the infobox. thanks.@Jonesey95:Sepehr.Sǎsǎni (talk) 12:07, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

| blank1 = Religion | data1 = shia Islam

We don't put religion in infoboxes. As far as I can tell, this person's religion is mentioned at least ten times in the article, which is probably sufficient. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 December 2020[edit]

I uploaded these few photos with a license. Please add it to the article. Thanks

File:Hassan Nasrallah's speech in May 2000 (2).png · File:Hassan Nasrallah's speech in May 2000 (1).png · File:Hassan Nasrallah's speech in May 2000 (3).png · File:Hassan Nasrallah's speech in May 2000 (4).png

– Hoseina051311 (talk) 15:40, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: @Hoseina051311: Images are to help the readers understanding of an article, if you could note where the images should be placed in the article and a caption for the images. See WP:GALLERY & MOS:IRELEV for more. Thanks Terasail[✉] 15:54, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Terasail: I actually explained in the description of Wikimedia Commons... He speaks after the end of the South Lebanon conflict (1985–2000) and I suggest you put this in "Consequently, Nasrallah is credited in Lebanon and the Arab world for ending the Israeli occupation of the South...." thanks --Hoseina051311 (talk) 09:10, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: The images are blurry and the article already contains multiple high-quality images of Hassan Nasrallah. Since MOS:Images#Image quality states that blurry images should only be added when "absolutely necessary". They have not been added at this time. Terasail[✉] 14:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Death[edit]

Hassan Nasrallah died today 19 Jan 2021 in an explosion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8802:2300:9D1:807F:1B6:D868:D0EB (talk) 18:13, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zero evidence of such an extraordinary event exists. As such, this is currently Twitter chatter and not credible by any standard of wikipedia. 19:13, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 January 2021[edit]

He died 2.101.189.137 (talk) 20:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

I created a paragraph about his image in lead, and it needs expanding and cover more things. Therer is some ideas and sources in my sandbox. It has to be general, then we can add a "Public image"/"Legacy" § later. -- Maudslay II (talk) 09:01, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 June 2021[edit]

'Hassan Nasrallah (Arabic: حسن نصر الله [ħasan nasˤrɑɫɫɑh]; born 31 August 1960) is a Lebanese cleric and leader who serves as the 3rd secretary-general of political terrorist organization Hezbollah since his predecessor, Abbas al-Musawi Mayonnaise2001 (talk) 21:45, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dated[edit]

This article is extremely dated, possibly because it has been ptrotected. The last facts mentioned belong to 2013.--Reciprocist (talk) 07:38, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Nasrallah is described as a "national hero" and "icon" in Lebanon"[edit]

This is not true at all and portrays a false picture of Nasrallah. For a large part of the Lebanese population, Nasrallah is a terrorist and very bad person. He is assumed responsible, along with other leaders, for the large explosion in Beirut port on August 4th, 2020. He is accused of having his supporters attack protesters' camps in Beirut city during the October revolution. And just recently, his followers attacked several places in Beirut, killing 8.

He is regarded as a hero in the Hezbollah and Amal-run areas of Beirut, in the southern part of Lebanon and in the Bekaa Valley. But for the rest of the population, he is a nightmare. Please remove this information or phrase it more neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulschlag (talk • contribs) 19:42, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

not an icon, a terrorist[edit]

"Narallah is described as a "national hero" and "icon" in Lebanon and throughout the Arab and Muslim world" this is a sentence that I extracted from the article, this is not true. the truth is that hassan nasrallah is considered a terrorist in lebanon and the arab and muslim world. and a leader of a terrorist organization

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/1/3/hezbollahs-nasrallah-accuses-saudi-arabia-of-terrorism https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/us-designates-son-of-hezbollah-leader-sayyed-hassan-nasrallah-a-terrorist-1946977 https://www.dw.com/en/australia-to-list-hezbollah-as-terrorist-organization/a-59914150 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/27/saudi-arabia-hezbollah-lebanon-al-qard-al-hassan-terrorists

and there is many many other articles that you can find

 Not done for now: Can you please sign your name and put the changes in a change x to y format please. Zippybonzo (talk) 19:11, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not done period, NYT supports the icon in the Arab world phrasing. The sources provided are about Saudi Arabis designating Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. nableezy - 19:25, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 November 2022[edit]

His birth day: November 28 He is celebrating it today and many Lebanese television programs are celebrating too 91.240.82.50 (talk) 15:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 18:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 March 2023[edit]

Hassan Nasrallah is a named terrorist and militia leader along being a cleric leader in the Shiia community. 81.105.105.34 (talk) 13:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 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) 13:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

lacking information about Nassrallah's involvement in terrorist activity[edit]

In the Image section, I believe you should also considering his negative view in different country as an active terrorist group leader. Ajrdcth (talk) 21:20, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Caption for photo "Nasrallah in 2005" typo[edit]

Under 2006 Israel–Lebanon conflict, photo has caption with typo "Nashrallah in 2005", which is a misspelling of the name (Nasrallah). Avigl (talk) 15:34, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Views on homosexuals[edit]

I think we should add his views on homosexuals which aren't pretty like his views on Israel or Jews RickyBlair668 (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lede[edit]

I made a lousy attempt at summarizing the lede; as the body isn't comprehensive. It needs some further work still. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:26, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hassan_Nasrallah&oldid=1211856271"