Talk:2017 Hamas charter

:'''Support'''. Document is more in line with the sources presented. Not all sources describe it as a charter replacing the previous one. [[User:Nehushtani|Nehushtani]] ([[User talk:Nehushtani|talk]]) 09:27, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:'''Support'''. Document is more in line with the sources presented. Not all sources describe it as a charter replacing the previous one. [[User:Nehushtani|Nehushtani]] ([[User talk:Nehushtani|talk]]) 09:27, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

:'''Comment''' I have [[Talk:2017 Hamas charter#Naming of the 2017 document/charter - Updated analysis of sources|posted an update of the source analysis table]] fixing source errors in the Alaexis version and adding more sources including those he misrepresented and neglected to include despite being told multiple times. As you can see, the current title is the clear [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. Also, Alaexis says what the sources say about the significance of the 2017 charter versus the 1988 charter is irrelevant even though [[Talk:2017 Hamas charter#c-Raskolnikov.Rev-20250619072500-Alaexis-20250619064100|he cited]] as a legitimate challenge to the new title someone making that exact point, arguing the 1988 charter is more significant and hence the title is bad because it downplays that. Furthermore, the only way the WP:NPOV argument he made in the initial RM makes sense is per that argument. However, if you look at the table I posted with that information included, the overwhelming consensus in RS is the exact opposite, stating the 2017 charter is much more significant than the 1988 one. Hence it would be a gross violation of WP:NPOV and also of RS to downplay that fact.

:'''Comment''' I have [[Talk:2017 Hamas charter#Naming of the 2017 document/charter - Updated analysis of sources|posted an update of the source analysis table]] fixing source errors in the Alaexis version and adding more sources including those he misrepresented and neglected to include despite being told multiple times.

:The majority of RS call it a "charter" alongside the official title. Of the tier 1 RS this is 11 for "charter" as opposed to 6 for only "document", tier 2 is 27 for "charter" as opposed to 9 for only "document", and tier 3 is 24 for "charter" with 2 for only "document". This makes "charter" the clear WP:COMMONNAME.

:More importantly, the overwhelming consensus in the RS is that the 2017 charter is more significant than the 1988 one. Of the 79 sources in total, 63 say the 2017 charter is more significant than the 1988 charter in determining the views of Hamas as a movement, while only 8 say the 1988 charter is more significant (and 8 others do not express a view).

:As you can see, the current title is the clear [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. Also, Alaexis says what the sources say about the significance of the 2017 charter versus the 1988 charter is irrelevant even though [[Talk:2017 Hamas charter#c-Raskolnikov.Rev-20250619072500-Alaexis-20250619064100|he cited]] as a legitimate challenge to the new title someone making that exact point, arguing the 1988 charter is more significant and hence the title is bad because it downplays that. Furthermore, the only way the WP:NPOV argument he made in the initial RM makes sense is per that argument. However, if you look at the table I posted with that information included, the overwhelming consensus in RS is the exact opposite, stating the 2017 charter is much more significant than the 1988 one. Hence it would be a gross violation of [[WP:NPOV]] and also of RS to downplay that fact.

:Also the current title meets all the [[WP:CRITERIA]] for titles: "recognizability, naturalness, precision, concision, consistency" as I [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2017_Hamas_charter#c-Raskolnikov.Rev-20250611113700-Alaexis-20250610171400 explained], whereas the rename violates all of them.

:Also the current title meets all the [[WP:CRITERIA]] for titles: "recognizability, naturalness, precision, concision, consistency" as I [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2017_Hamas_charter#c-Raskolnikov.Rev-20250611113700-Alaexis-20250610171400 explained], whereas the rename violates all of them.

:The rename would therefore violate every Wikipedia rule, whereas the current one is in congruence with them.

:The rename would therefore violate every Wikipedia rule, whereas the current one is in congruence with them.