Restore

edit

Given my previously-declared COI, I note here that I have restored the article to its pre-November 2023 state, due to a lack of balance. Although I do some consultancy for HA, they did not ask me to make this edit, nor did I discuss it with them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:44, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

NPoV and Verifiability concerns

edit

[Note my previously-declared CoI]

It has been drawn to my attention that two consecutive, and contentious, statements in this article are wholly uncited:

In 2003, the FBI said Human Appeal had a "close relationship" with Hamas. The US state department, in leaked cables from 2003, also associated Human Appeal with Hamas and said that "members of its field offices in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Chechnya had connections to al-Qaeda associates".

Can they be removed? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: The source ([1]) later in the paragraph verifies it. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 15:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Tense relating to historic reporting

edit

[Note my previously-declared CoI]

Further to changes recently made in response to this NPOVN discussion, please change:

a UAE-based organisation which is related to the British Human Appeal according to the Telegraph has had ties with extremists.

to read "...which according to a 2010 article in The Telegraph was historically related to the British Human Appeal, had ties with extremists."

Also please remove the related paragraph from the lede, as it is WP:UNDUE, per that discussion.

There is no sourcing which supports the use of current tense in these disputed matters. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

What is the source for "historically related", a wording which is generally used when something is no longer the case? Also, the 2015 article makes it clear that the relationship wasn't over by that time. Alaexis¿question? 16:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
The date. It is no longer the case. the 2015 article is not current, but even then was historic; referring only to alleged events involving HA in 2003, and 2011. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
I've changed the tense as you've requested. I'm not sure about adding "historical" which would imply that this is no longer the case, unless there are RS using this word or saying that there is no relationship now. Alaexis¿question? 12:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you, but the paragraph in question still says "is related" in present tense; and one-third of the lede still refers to this allegation, in the present tense, and contrary to WP:UNDUE. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Further evidence against allegations of extremist ties

edit

The following are recently published retractions by organisations who have repeated the allegations:

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)Reply