Talk:Keshet (Israeli settlement)

Israel Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel 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.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Project Israel To Do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles.
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page.
Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration.
Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005
Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel.
Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah
See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia.
Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data.
Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes.
Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention.
Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel.
NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries
Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel.
Stubs : See Israel stubs.
Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People
Other :
- Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary.

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!

Other meanings

Channel 2 (Israel) have a concessionaires named "Keshet" and the articles Reshet and Channel 2 (Israel) have link to here (but they need to link to the article of the concessionaires). see the hebrew article "שידורי קשת"

Settlement

Isarig, Keshet is an Israeli settlement. All Israeli communities in the occupied Golan Heights are referred to as "settlements" by the international community. What is your justification for removing this reference here?--Doron 15:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've given you my explanation. (1)They are not referred to as such in Israel (2)As the Golan is part of Israel today, they are not any different in terms of legal status from any other Israeli community. 1+2 means that the term is dispute and controversial, and WP should not use that POV designation. I further pointed out to you other WP articles about towns in th eGolan (Katzrin, Afik, etc...) do not use that designation. Isarig 15:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, you know very well this will not do. What you are given is an Israeli POV, which is not accepted internationally. We've been over this many times. Anyway, no matter what legal status they have -- Israeli settlements are communities that were established by Israel in the territories she occupied in 1967, and Keshet is one of them, so I see no reason why not to refer to Keshet as an Israeli settlement. This is consistent with the Golan Heights and Israeli settlement articles.--Doron 18:05, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this is an Israeli POV, then by definition, the international position is a different POV. Why should WP use one side's POV? Isarig 19:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, forget about POV, why is Keshet not a settlement? Or is it not Israeli? It fits the definition of Israeli settlement perfectly, and it is widely referred to as such (not specifically Keshet, but all of the Golan Heights settlement), so why the omission? This definition includes all Israeli communities established on territories Israel has captured in 1967, which are administered by Israeli civilian authorities and whose legal status is disputed. Keshet fits this definition perfectly. Is there any dispute about where and when Keshet was established? Is there a dispute that it is administered by Israel? Do you deny that Keshet's legal status is disputed?--Doron 05:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't deny that it's status is disputed - it is precisely becuase it is disputed that I don't see a reason to include a characterization which you concede is POV. I wonder why you did not quote the full description from Israeli settlement, which reads "Such settlements currently exist in the West Bank" - not in the Golan. Isarig 15:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I'm sure the Golan Heights settlements were also included in the past. I'll start with the Israeli settlement article and see if I can get consensus on this before proceeding to the individual Golan Heights settlement articles.--Doron 06:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

destroyed vs abandoned

Re: this edit, the source p145 says at Quneitra was razed to the ground. That is closer to destroyed that abandoned. If it was abandoned it would be intact. It isn't. Statements should comply with WP:V. Sean.hoyland - talk 03:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True, it should say destroyed. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It destroy so must say destroy. Ani medjool (talk) 20:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So if it says razed to the ground, why exactly do we see a need to rephrase? I'll go ahead and edit the article to reflect the source accurately, with no paraphrasing. PS: there is no prerequisite of being "intact" to qualify as abandoned. Breein1007 (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Status sentence

There has been long discussion at WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues about adding the illegality issue in all settlement article:[1] There is now consensus to have the sentence: "The international community considers Israeli settlements in (the Golan Heights/the West Bank/East Jerusalem) illegal under international law, but the Israeli government disputes this." in all relevant articles, but its not clear yet exactly where in the article, I have tried to open up a discussion at IPCCAI: [2][3] but I haven't gotten any replies to my latest posts. So now I'm just adding the sentence as I had explained at the IPCCAI discussion. If someone disagrees with the placement then we can discuss this. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:09, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[4] --ElComandanteChe (talk) 23:58, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]