The current brouhaha is over this line at the bottom of the article:
"Correction: December 11, 2014. An earlier version of this obituary misstated the location of Alon Shvut, where Mr. Marks lived. It is in the West Bank, not in Israel."
I agree, the unnecessary correction does come across as insensitive, and would have better been left alone. However...
1) They probably got in trouble with some readers. I doubt they would have changed it without complaints.
2) Alon Shvut is in Gush Etzion, which, technically, is not part of the state of Israel, however much it feels like it and has been integrated. Yes, it was settled by Jews well before the state was established. Yes, in almost every proposed peace deal, it would be part of Israel. But legally, at least for now. it's an "administered territory" of Israel, since it's over the green line, and unlike the eastern parts of Jerusalem, or the Golan, has not been officially annexed by Israel.
3) The Israellycool article engages in hyperbole, equating stating a current geographical reality (though admittedly one fraught with political implications) with accusing the deceased and his family of being "illegitimate occupiers". Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.