Talk:Kanah

in Samaria

Arminden, per WP:WESTBANK you may not use Samaria as a modern location in Wikipedia's voice. The location of Wadi Qana cannot say it is in "southern Samaria", we use modern names for modern locations, and WP:WESTBANK is clear on this. Kindly self-revert, and if you dont I will do it for you. nableezy - 14:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

That's where we're getting silly. The article is about biblical Kanah, as in : Hebrew Bible, Old Testament. There was no "West Bank" back then. Stop crusading in the wrong place. This was the freaking border between two Israelite tribes - or must they be now called "pre-Palestinian proto-Occupation entities"? Btw, I didn't think you'd end up hounding me & my edits, I had a different opinion of you. Arminden (talk) 14:34, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

You may not use Samaria as the location of a modern location. I dont care even a little bit about your view on crusading or any other such nonsense. You may not use the term Samaria as a modern location. Read WP:WESTBANK, a result of an arbitration case. Here, since you are seemingly incapable of clicking the link and following the guideline yourself, Ill quote it for you:

• As of the time these guidelines were proposed (in March 2009), given the references which had been examined, some editors were not convinced that there was a proportion of nonpartisan usage in reliable sources of the terms "Samaria" and "Judea" to refer to places in the context of events in modern times sufficient that the terms could be used without qualification while conveying a sufficiently neutral voice. The terms "Samaria" or "Judea" cannot be used without qualification in the NPOV neutral voice; for example, it cannot be asserted without qualification that a place is "in Samaria". Any uses of the terms must be in one of the situations described below:

• The terms are used inside verbatim quotations from sources, or
• When discussing physical geography using the terminology that appears in international expert journals, for example as part of a proper name ("the Judea Group aquifer"), or as an adjective qualifying a term ("The Samarian hills"), or
• The term is being mentioned rather than used, as in "Samaria is a term used for ...", or
• The term is being used within the article about itself, where its meaning and usage has already been explained to the reader; although additional qualifications may be needed for some uses even there.

Get it this time? Or do you want me to use your same dismissive tone? As far as hounding, you placed a link to this page in the infobox at Wadi Qana. I clicked that link. I had a different opinion of you too, but that isnt all that relevant here. Follow the guidelines or be reported for violating them. Dont really care which you choose, but thats the choice. And since you seem to enjoy making things up about the dispute, this is not about the biblical Kanah or when there was no West Bank. It is about saying a current wadi is currently in a place known as Samaria. That is not acceptable per WP:WESTBANK and you are not exempt from following our policies and guidelines. nableezy - 15:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)