User talk:Monk of Monk Hall

Thanks for the revert. Apparently, the archived version of the article I had read was of a prior version of the article before it was updated. I re-archived it, and saw that the update had that info. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that makes sense! Thanks for archiving the source, that's important. :) Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 10:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		This is for your contributions related to Gaza war. Pachu Kannan (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 21:48, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Monk - for full transparency I work for Maersk. The reason we objected to your edit is the statement of fact that we ship arms based on and citing the ‘Democracy Now!’ interview with Francesca Albanese, which is highly biased and not credible. Also let me add that I am personally very concerned with the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the need for immediate relief.

A little background - ‘Democracy Now!’ is a well-documented biased news source according to all of the leading media bias monitors (AllSides, Ad Fontes Media, and Biasly).

Francesca Albanese has faced criticisms for being biased, antisemitic, and making legally unsubstantiated claims. Lastly, report “the Economy of Genocide” that is the basis for the DM interview and what she submitted to the UN OHCHR was mainly composed of research done directly by the Palestinian Youth Movement, an obviously biased source who have made patently false claims in the past.

Therefore, we object to the Democracy Now! conclusion as fact that Maersk is shipping ‘arms’ specifically when it is our stated policy not to do so. We do fully acknowledge that we ship military cargo and our role in the F35 supply chain, as stated and detailed on our website. The intention of including our website was to show our position, not to specifically refute DM's claims. We understand this is a very charged issue and there are many different points of view, but we respectful argue that it is unfair to show conclusions based on biased 'reporting' as fact. I am happy to chat more if you like. Phil at Maersk (talk) 09:02, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Phil,

It's typically more appropriate to discuss content disputes on an article's talk page, so that other editors can weigh in. I disagree with your characterization of Democracy Now! and Albanese. Per WP:BIASEDSOURCES, Wikipedia sources can be biased, and their bias is related to but not necessarily the same as their reliability. In the case of Democracy Now! which is an independent broadcaster with decades of award winning investigative reporting and news coverage, their bias does not necessarily make them unreliable.

I think there is some ambiguity as to whether "arms" in this context means weapons (as in small arms) or armaments, which is a term that includes military supplies and components. The full quote by Nadya Tannous from the Democracy Now! article which is used in the Maersk article is "Maersk is still complicit in the transshipment of arms and weapons components, of military cargo to the Israeli Ministry of Defense." I interpret the juxtaposition of arms and weapons components in this sentence as implying that Tannous is talking about armaments, not specifically rifles and ammunition. Either that, or she is talking about small arms components rather than fully assembled weapons. In either case, her statement does not directly contradict Maersk's. In any event, Tannous says in the following sentence that Maersk is "endemic to the supply chain of the F-35 bomber, which is one of the most expensive and deadliest weapons on the market." I think that her assertion that the F-35 is a weapon is fundamentally correct, and calls into question Maersk's assertion that it does not ship weapons. In any event, you need a secondary source for this claim. I am sure there are news articles that quote Maersk's statement, and if you send me some I'll be happy to add them.

In my subsequent edit, I will take your concerns into consideration and try to present the information from the Democracy Now! article in a way that reconciles it with the contrary information you presented. You should also familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's rules around conflict of interest editing, at WP:COIEDIT. You are strongly discouraged from personally editing articles about your company as a representative of it. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 19:41, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and fully understand that I do have an inherent conflict of interest posting for Maersk, and I try to avoid this as much as possible. And this situation is obviously very complex - for example there are heavy trucks which the IDF has chosen to equip with weapons systems and use in offensives, however these same heavy trucks, due to their robust frames, are one of the few vehicles suitable for transporting desperately needed water and fuel for humanitarian relief. Another example is Motorola, who makes security cameras that are used all over the world to help keep schools, hospitals and public buildings safe, are also being used by Israel to identify, mark and kill assassination targets with drones - straight out of the Terminator. And the reality of supply chains today is that they are very complex and you cannot simply say 'you can sell that here for this but not there for that' These dual use goods are a key focus of Albanese's report. The F-35 is actually one so the most complicated machines in the world, and over 1,400 companies and 16 countries are involved in its production and supply chain. Thank you for keeping the conversation going and active. If I can locate a article that reinforces are position, I will certainly cite it - the problem is that a lot of the media that normally cover our industry sit behind a pay wall. 80.160.65.212 (talk) 08:23, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit late but @Phil at Maersk, I would like to add that if you have access to media that are behind paywalls, many editors here would be happy to accept proposed changes using those media that provide useful information. I imagine that a lot of what editors have written about dual-use technology right now relies on older journal articles and news releases that can only provide so much detail for a broad audience - many of the sections in that article are very short, and that's just one topic. -- Reconrabbit 16:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment, my understanding was that it is a violation of copyright to cut and paste anything from behind a paywall (from the publication side, not Wikipedia). It is a challenge that the information is very lopsided, as the Palestine Youth Movement report (which is what Albanese's report to the UN OHCHR is based) identifies many different items as dual use, beyond the 'traditional' military definition, in an effort to cast a broad a net as possible but there is little media coverage to dispute the report. For example companies like Volvo and Caterpillar have been targets since their construction vehicles have been used to demolish Palestinian homes in disputed settlements, and industrial robot makers have been targeted because some of their robots are used in Lockheed Martin factories. I completely get this approach given the unimaginable tragedy and suffering taking place in Palestine right now, but it can also create very complicated discussions around what is or is not complicity. Thanks for chiming in. ~2025-31240-52 (talk) 07:42, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

nice catch. :) Rainsage (talk) 20:34, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 15:04, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Samuel Davis Wilson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian invasion of Ethiopia. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you're working on this subject (as in your subpage) I'd be happy to add to that by translating from es:Miriam Lewin. -- Reconrabbit 16:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that would be great! I appreciate your help. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 17:35, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's OK to put in mainspace around now, I'll keep working on it in a little while. -- Reconrabbit 22:00, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks for your help! Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 15:20, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]