Talk:Normalization of antisemitism

Everything

I removed Spiritually Israeli from See also because its sources report disagreement over the phrase; some Jewish and Israeli groups group it with antisemetic sterotypes, while other coverage associates it with anti-corporate or anti-israeli slang. None of the cited WP:RS discusses the phrase as an example of the "normalisation of antisemitism". Putting it here makes that connection in wikipedia's voice and risks treating criticism of Israel to antisemitism w/o a source supporting that conclusion (WP:SYNTH, WP:NPOV, MOS:SEEALSO) On the tone tag, it is much needed. This article generally consists of quotations and individual reactions put under headings such as "Responses from Jews", rather than a summary (WP:SUMMARY) of the supposed scholarship on the concept. It also draws conclusions in wikipedia voice, see ("demonstrat[e] the extent of normalization" when the cited material reports antisemetic incedents, not really normalization. The tone tag can be removed after claims are attributed w/o synth and the article is fit around the subject. With the rest of the See Also, it just reads as if some wikipedia editor was putting in wikipedia voice that criticism of israel=antisemitism. Reading from the article at "criticism of israel": "Counter-criticisms include the assertion that some critics and their criticisms are aimed at delegitimizing Israel's right to exist[7][8][9] which has led some to debate over the point at which criticism of Israel crosses the line into antisemitism. The term "new antisemitism" refers to criticisms deemed to have crossed this threshold." 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 20:11, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Template:Cherry picked is also justified: The article selects alarming figures and quotes while omitting important qualifications. See FRA survey, where the prose treats it as evidence of "normalisation" across Europe w/o mentioning its open, voluntary sampling or FRA’s caution about interpreting the results. It also conflates increased incidents and perceptions with social acceptance, this clearly warrants the tag 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 20:14, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm replying specifically in terms of Spiritually Israeli, because your edit reverted my having put it there. MOS:SEEALSO allows for a significant amount of editorial judgment in deciding what to include or not include in See also sections, but it does not require that sources be unanimous in placing the page subject in the same category as the see also page subject. Basically, it's a matter of whether readers interested in this page might also be interested in Spiritually Israeli. I think that there is more than enough sourcing to indicate that some readers would. Sources already cited at the Spiritually Israeli page quote people as saying that online use of the phrase is part of a trend that treats antisemitism casually and in a harmful way. This isn't the same thing as claiming that everyone who has ever posted the phrase is an antisemite, which would be plainly untrue. But it is entirely appropriate as a navigational aide. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:23, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I removed the tags. This is obvious drive-by tagging with a long, screed like assertion that "criticism of israel=antisemitism" which has nothing to do with the subject. Try again. Viriditas (talk) 23:28, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

What, no lol; This isnt drive-by tagging, and calling the explanation a “screed” is coping from the examples given. This page reads as a compilation of quotations, press reports, surveys and political reactions rather than an encyclopedic summarization of the concept. There are Sections devoted to a single exhibit or TV episode?, and the heading “Responses from Jews”, only brightens the clear structural problem. It also moves between scholarly use, reported incidents, survey perceptions and political claims without distinguishing them or explaining how each shows normalization, rather than just antisemitism generally, Thats my basis for the tone tag; The cherry-picking note is that the article dispropotionately chooses material supporting the premise of increasing normalization while giving limited treatment to contrary interpretations and methodological qualifications. those specific issues should be fixed instead of the presumed motives of the editor who raised them. 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 00:20, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

You are just posting extremely long replies to tire people out. There is simply no substance to them. Give me just one thing to fix, just one, and describe it in one small sentence with a diff or link. Do not give me 300-1000 words saying nothing. One thing, one link, one thing to fix. It's that simple. We go from there. Viriditas (talk) 00:34, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

It might help to go back to the beginning. Do you see a problem with this version? Viriditas (talk) 01:18, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

I'd like to hear why I should not revert the changes to the See also section. --Tryptofish (talk) 13:17, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

I said earlier that sources already cited at the Spiritually Israeli page support a relationship to this page. As a specific example, the text quotes one source as saying that the phrase represents: "old stereotypes dressed up in modern slang". That comes pretty close to being a definition of "normalization of antisemitism". --Tryptofish (talk) 22:05, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Having heard no rebuttals, I'm going to restore the disputed categories at the other page. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:29, 1 September 2026 (UTC)