Talk:1936 Tulkarm shooting

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on April 15, 2018, April 15, 2021, April 15, 2023, and April 15, 2024.

British Empire Low‑importance

	British Empire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palestine Low‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jewish history Low‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tag explanation

All or almost all of the sources provide a background for this, including violence in both directions. All or almost all of the sources refer to the perpetrators as "bandits". None of the sources, unless I missed one, says that the perpetrators came from Anabta. None of that is mentioned by this brazenly lopsided article. Zero^talk 00:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, You made me wonder how I knew that the perps came from Anabta, and as best I remember, I first heard of this while working on an AFD that led me to this page which read " On the night of April 15, 1936, in a prelude to the 1936–39 Arab revolt in Palestine, vehicles traveling on the road outside Anabta were attacked by armed villagers.[14] Two Jews were shot to death and a third later died of his injuries.[15]" [1].E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I cannot seem to call up the old Palestine Post article to which the assertion that the "bandist" camd form Anabta is soruced, although I do see it cited in several books. Can you find it?E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the New York Times article I cite calls the perps "brigands" and "bandits" but very specifically calls this a "political robbing". "Bandits" is just the terminology of that era.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:44, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Context is provided by links.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:44, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

The road runs between Anabta and Tulkarm, but the killings appear to have taken place closer to Tulkarm. Thanks to Zero for pushing me on this.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

This [2] State Department document is horrifying. Far more detailed than news reports. An excellent source that needs to be added to articleE.M.Gregory (talk) 19:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating this article for deletion

A POV-driven waste of time and also historically insignificant. If the person who created the article created a companion piece on Jewish terror targeting Palestinians during that period, in addition to illegal Jewish land theft from Palestinians, then maybe things would end up looking more balanced or objective. 70.27.162.84 (talk) 22:07, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense.50.111.41.216 (talk) 20:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. That does not deserve an article. Pluto2012 (talk) 17:10, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Zero0000: you contributed to this article and made comments on the talk page. Do you think this topic is notorious enough for an article ? Pluto2012 (talk) 17:12, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pluto2012: I don't think an AfD would succeed. However the article needs much more contexualisation. The article of Hughes cited in the last paragraph is one of those which describes this event as a key trigger for the 1936–1939 rebellion (let me know if you can't get it). Incidentally, Hughes also says that that the two Arabs killed soon afterwards (mentioned, but of course being Arabs they are not named let alone eulogized) were killed in a revenge attack at the funeral of one of the Jews. That should be sorted out. Zero^talk 13:23, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pluto2012 I would place your energies elsewhere. Like Zero, I am unsure whether it will succeed but not because there is no legitimate arguments for deletion. Perhaps more efforts could be placed on deleting articles like this, this, or this, where WP:NOTNEWS can be applied to a solid argument.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:04, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feed-back. I prefer staying away from contemporary topics when given the opportunity. Pluto2012 (talk) 01:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This entire section was a completely POV'd initiated waste of time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.63.192 (talk) 16:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]