This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Civil recognition of Jewish divorce until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Concern, reason or rationale: It is an original research largely by its creator as part of his series of work also of original research on the theme of the subject of the Conflict of laws; only an Israeli Jewish (religious) divorce can be recognized by civil authorities overseas, and that is only an automatic legal right in domestic law in the United Kingdom and in the Republic of Ireland; the article is unnecessarily, unacceptably and unreasonably hypothetical and legalistic, and ought to be merged with the main article, being Get (divorce document). 212.50.182.151 (talk) 10:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
An IP is changing a lot of articles with the edit summary "The international community considers Arabian settlements in Judea illegal under international law, but the Muslims dispute this". I don't think this is OK, but I am not familiar enough with the topic and Wikipedia's practice here to make a call myself. Iselilja (talk) 23:48, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
No, it's not ok, it's a childish riposte to the boilerplate text that has been added to the introduction all Israeli settlement articles. Number5700:01, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
I have committed an act of hubris that may cause my early retirement on Arab-Israeli conflict articles on Wikipedia. You may read (and perhaps comment) on the ongoing discussion here. Before I go on, I must say a word about my victor, User:IRISZOOM. In my roughly eight years of editing, I had not come into contact with IRISZOOM very much, but in our brief encounters with him, I've found him to be someone respectful of Wikipedia guidelines and ruthless in his pursuit of editors he disagrees with, even slightly. This is what makes him a great editor, indeed, a greater editor than I when it comes to disagreement on talk pages; for I have the former quality, but not the latter.
In my eight years, I've made Wikipedia a less anti-Semitic, more intellectually honest place. I can go on and on about the animated discussions I've had, most of which I won, but instead, I'd rather discuss my major contributions I've made to articles:
Before I got to it, much of the Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus article was a collection of anti-Israel half-truths cited only to a handful of sources. The article has been unstable for years, but its been much calmer in the past year or so. Its a great article.
I've written and rewritten articles about Hezbollah dozens of times. Believe it or not, there are Hezbollah sympathizers out there who try to stop any material unsympathetic toward Hezbollah to appear on Wikipedia! Once Hezbollah began fighting for Assad's Syria, those people largely disappeared.
GHcool my friend. Before responding to this requiem, I must say something.
I recently came across your name on Wikipedia, can't remember how and where. I then clicked on your user page and began reading its content. Despite the fact that we naturally have a lot in common, something very strange happened right after. On the the section "Views on Israel", what you wrote is exactly what I would've said if I were (and when I am) asked to answer those questions, and I felt as if I was reading my own thoughts and words there. I then began looking at your editing style and contributions, and again I could imagine they were my own.
GHcool, I want to tell you that your contribution to English Wikipedia has done so much, really, and you have no idea how greatly it is appreciated by me and others who for various reasons aren't here to thank you too. I see that you're going to get topic banned for a year now. I would like to discuss some things with you on private if you will, but it's up to you - email me here.
To be totally honest an editor making statements like, "I proved that Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions was both unsuccessful and anti-Semitic" are showing that their involvement with these articles is entirely inconsistent with the policies and purposes of the encyclopaedia. Having said that I hope that you continue to contribute to the project, perhaps in areas in which you don't hold such strong convictions. Dlv999 (talk) 09:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Dlv999, I doubt you should be saying such things to him. Even if you never officially stated it your opinion about this subject (the BDS and other related topics), your edits on Wikipedia are clearly anti-Israel. It's okay that GHcool expressed his (and many others') opinion - everyone's view is welcomed on Wikipedia talk pages, after all this is what they are for. -Yambaram (talk) 19:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
I added this film's page recently but am having trouble finding references other than IMDB and Amazon. It started life as a 170-minute, two-part TV miniseries and was edited down to a 114-minute "made for TV" (ha!) movie - viewable on YouTube. And 'yes,' it has a very big Israeli angle.
It's an excellent production, still topical after 19 years (espionage ethics, lack of; politics, ditto; nuclear warheads; Iran), and I'd like to see it through. I know it was broadcast on the IBA when it came out because I saw it. Would someone see if they can find anything about it in Hebrew media? I wouldn't know where to look. Any new references or suggestions would be highly appreciated. Cheers! Shir-Eltoo17:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Your last edit was a 1RR violation by the way. If someone reports that you will almost certainly be blocked. The reverting at that article needs to stop. It should have stopped after the very first revert of your edit at 2014-02-16T02:14:41 per WP:BRD. No one should be making edits in the WP:ARBPIA topic area based on what they think is the case about a real world issue. The talk page is there to resolve disputes using RS and policy. Sean.hoyland - talk06:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).
Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.
If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Invitation to User Study
Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2014 (UTC).
An incident occurred recently at template:Location map Israel, when user Sepsis II modified a long-standing version of Israeli map into "1949 borders" version without any discussion, suspiciously naming it File:Neutral Israel location map.svg instead of File:Israel location map.svg. Further, upon resulting edit-warring, an administrator protected that template, but perhaps mistakenly, without restoring the stable version prior to Sepsis II edits. Interestingly, there has already been a comprehensive discussion at Module_talk:Location_map/data/Syria, with an accepted solution regarding Syrian and Israeli map issues, but some editors apparently fail to acknowledge it. An administrator raised the issue at ANI, but there was not attention. There is a discussion going on to return to previous status quo before alleged system gaming by Sepsis II, but the undiscussed change shouldn't have happened in the first place. I invite editors to discuss the incident at ANI thread.GreyShark (dibra) 18:36, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I had no time to address this (or indeed anything else on Wikipedia), but this is causing me great distress as well, not because the colors are different (not as important), but because of the removal of all the detailed maps in favor of one uniform map. This should be reverted, but there was little interest in the WP:AN thread. Is there an ongoing discussion somewhere that I am missing? If so please let me know. —Ynhockey(Talk)10:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Just to give the reason why others are distressed with the original maps. Presenting non-Israeli territory (that is under Israeli military occupation) as Israeli territory, either by colour scheme or through international boundaries is a gross WP:NPOV violation. I agree that the ideal solution is to create detailed neutral maps that do not present non-Israeli territory as Israeli. In the meantime however reverting to the maps that are totally inconsistent with RS is not an viable option. Dlv999 (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I asked Ynhockey to remake the zoomed in maps with EJ outside of Israel but he refused. Until we can find a map creator, we will have to make due with what acceptable maps are available. Sepsis II (talk) 17:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Dear Israel experts: Here's an old abandoned AfC submission that will soon be deleted as a stale draft unless someone takes an interest in it. Is this a notable person, and should it be kept and improved instead? —Anne Delong (talk) 13:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
I've noticed the |distict field doesn't recognize central but rather center. Seeing as the correct name for the district is Central District, with the article at Central District (Israel), is there any way this can be changed? Zarcadia (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
I've fixed it (and the links displayed by entering "Center"). The issue arose because the article was moved a few years ago without many people noticing. It's a bit odd, because "Center District" is the correct translation, but the commonly-used name is indeed "Central". Number5716:09, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in Asia may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! --Another Believer(Talk)21:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
1920s image set from Jerusalem, categorizing needed
Hi, I have uploaded some Jerusalem-themed postcard scans that I made, along with online sourced pictures for the missing parts of the set. At the moment, they aren't very categorized and they have not yet been integrated into Wikipedia articles. Here's the link, if anyone is interested in doing something with the material:
Bigdoul and I have had a disagreement over whether Yoram Marciano should be in Category:Moroccan Jews. Marciano was born in Israel to a family of Moroccan emigrants, and is already in Category:Israeli people of Moroccan-Jewish descent. Bigdoul thinks that Marciano should be the Moroccan Jews category as well, claiming that being of Moroccan Jewish descent makes him a Moroccan Jew. I disagree, and think that the Moroccan Jews category is only for Jews who were born or lived in Morocco, and that the current categorisation is what is appropriate. Opinions please! Thanks, Number5721:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
--
Indeed, Moroccan Jew is an ethnicity. The Moroccan Jews are the Jews who lived or who recent ancestors lived in Morocco. Moroccans have their own culture, their own tradition, their own ritual, lithurgical system. It's not because they are born somewhere else that they are not Moroccan anymore. Moroccan is not just a citizenship, it's an actual ethnicity, with all its cultural package. To categorize all the Moroccan Jews in the same category, it's useful because it shows in one click all the Moroccan Jewish diaspora.
Number 57, you are absolutely right. bigdoul claim is false. "...or who recent ancestors lived in Morocco...", this claim was made up by the user himself, without any sources to support it. Moroccan Jews do not share all the cultural elements the Moroccan Arabs preserve, and Israeli "Moroccans" do not share NONE of them. Moroccan Jews is not an ethnicity, Jews are the ethnicity. I have also had issues with bigdoul, the user ignored my massage and explanations and have proceeded with the false editing. I think the user is deserved to be reported. Infantom (talk) 08:51, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
---
Israeli "Moroccan" share NONE of them? What about Mimouna? What about Arabic language? What about Hennah? What about Moroccan music? What about Moroccan food? What about Hiloulot? You speak out of ignorance. Moroccan Jewish culture is a very specific ethnicity with a very specific culture, it has nothing to do with Arabs, it's a subgenre of Moroccan culture. Your explanation are baseless. Basically you deny 2400 years of history. Miri Bohadana, Yoram Marciano and Orit Shitrit are Moroccan Jews, children of Moroccan Jews. It's a matter of ethnicity, not of citizenship (beside as sons of Moroccans, they are entitled to Moroccan citizenship automatically). You can report me I don't mind.
Yes, Israeli "Moroccan" share NONE of them. You have no idea what you are taking about. I provided you well sourced articles about Jews and ethnicity but you decided to ignore them, probably out of national pride.
Israeli "Moroccan" language is not Arabic but Hebrew. Mimouna is a north African Jewish holiday and has nothing to do with other North African people or Arab Moroccans. Hilula is a general religious Jewish habit and has nothing to do with Morocco.
Hena(Hina) is a general middle eastern ritual shared by many other non Moroccan people.
Jewish "Moroccan" food is also shared by other north African Jewish communities and most of it is unique to them and not shared by other north African people. nowadays Moroccan music is barely part of their culture and Israeli oriental music is not "Moroccan music".
" It's a matter of ethnicity "- yes, but Moroccan Jewry isn't an ethnicity but a Jewish community of the Jewish people. Their ethnicity is Jewish. After we'll reach a consensus you will be reported. Infantom (talk) 12:12, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
---
What articles did you give me? Beside recklessly removing my contribution, what else did you do ? There is no national pride whatsoever, you are the one who is being obnoxious about it. I am sorry but saying that Israeli Moroccan don't speak Arabic is stupid. Watch movies from Ronit Elkabetz or Hana Azoulay Hasfari if you want to make a point. Mimouna is a Moroccan Jewish party after Pessah, and it spread amongst other North African Jews. Basically what you are doing is merely an attempt to destroy an identity and a cultural background. Moroccan Jews and Moroccan Muslims share the same culture, with each group having specific things related to their faith. But Moroccan Jews are an actual ethnicity (group of people belonging to the same cultural group), in certain communities they don't even mix with Jews from other countries, not even Algerians or Tunisians. You can play the Jewish hegemony all you want; but you won't change the fact that they are a group of their own. And telling me that I don't know what I am talking about is stupid. I am Moroccan and I have many relatives in Israel. So report, you wont change that fact.
I provided 3 well sourced articles: Jews, ethnic group and ethnoreligious group. In addition, i contradicted all the examples you listed (you decided to ignore most of them). Unlike you that just keep reciting the same arguments, up to now you haven't provided even a single source to support your claims. "I am sorry but saying that Israeli Moroccan don't speak Arabic is stupid." - Please prove it (and not just the elders). "Watch movies from Ronit Elkabetz or Hana Azoulay Hasfari if you want to make a point "- It doesn't prove anything, The vast majority of Israeli "Moroccans" do not speak Arabic, that's a fact. and "Moroccan Jew" doesn't fit the definition of ethnicity that's a community. Infantom (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Comment - Moroccan Jew is of course an ethnicity, but since Marciano is a living human being it is up to him to define his identity rather than Wikipedia editors defining it for him. Israeli people of Moroccan-Jewish descent is a factual, accurate and uncontroversial category. Whether Marciano is a Moroccan Jew is up to him. If he has described himself as a Moroccan Jew in an interview, fine, if not, that identity can't be imposed on him. There is no point discussing this further without evidence that Marciano self-identifies as a Moroccan Jew. Sean.hoyland - talk19:27, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Why? It's ethnicity. If it were that he has AIDs, or VD, or any of the age-long "slander" categories it would be enough for an RS to have supported it. Why, then, for ethnicity should more be required? Plus, if his parents are alive, and ethnicity descends from them, there's no difference. I don't have a !vote on the general issue, but this seems incorrect as a "reason." Epeefleche (talk) 20:09, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Jewish is an ethnicity, Moroccan is not - Morocco is a country shared by several different ethnic groups, and there is no Moroccan one. To me it's fairly obvious that any [country name]+Jews category is specifically about nationality, not ethnicity, and as Marciano does not have Moroccan citizenship, he is not Moroccan. Number5721:18, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Moroccan Jews is not an ethnicity. They share more ethnic and cultural elements with other Jewish communities. The issue here is "Moroccan Jews" in Israel, and they are definitely not part of that definition. Infantom (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
@Epeefleche - Why ? Because in this case an RS that described him as a Moroccan Jew would, I think, be wrong, at least according to a straightforward reading of the meaning of the term. As far as I can tell, an editor wants to assign membership of an ethnic group via the category Moroccan Jew, to a living person when that membership is at odds with a straightforward reading of the meaning of the category name and without sources. In the unlikely but not impossible event that Marciano has self-identified somewhere as a Moroccan Jew (among other identities he may assign to himself) despite not being Moroccan, I think that categorization would be consistent with policy. But without self-identification it looks like miscategorization.
@Number 57, perhaps we are using words in different ways. I am using ethnicity and ethnic group interchangably and treating Moroccan Jews as a distinct ethnic group. I agree that any [country name]+Jews category is probably meant to be about nationality but that doesn't appear to be how the category is being used in all cases and the category description does not describe the inclusion criteria/decision procedure.
@Infantom
In that case, what about the article Yemenite Jews, that wasn't written by me, and that says exactly the same thing? Why Ofra Haza, Boaz Mauda and many others Israeli-born are classified as Yemenite Jews? I am sorry my friend but the Moroccan Jews are an actual ethnicity, and to say that they share more in common with other Jews is no-sense, and completely false. You don't know what you are talking about. The only thing that Moroccan Jews share with other Jewish communities is the religion. Their food, culture, tradition, clothing, wedding ceremony, etc.. are exactly the same than their Muslim counterparts (Moroccan culture). To say Moroccan is not an ethnicity, then you should check the article Moroccan people on Wikipedia. Moroccan people is composed by many elements (Arabs, Berbers, Moors, Moroccan Jews), but they are all from one people. And as a matter of fact, Israeli of Moroccan descent are reported and considered in Morocco as a part of the Moroccan diaspora. Besides who told you Marciano does not have a Moroccan citizenship? Moroccans as subject of the King have automatically the Moroccan citizenship, and it's automatically passed to their kids. It's clear that you are using his ideology to counter my claim, but he does not know anything about Morocco, neither Moroccan Jews. Moroccan is not just a citizenship and a passport. It's where these Jews lived for over 2000 years and were literally shaped by the country. Please reconsider my change. Kind regards
Exactly what i suspected, you don't even recognize Jews as a people and you are demonstrating, once again, your lack of knowledge about the Jews and their communities around the world. Jews are not just a religion. The Jewish people are a nation and ethnoreligious group, and all Jewish communities share in common ethnic and cultural elements as culture: Jewish culture, religion: Judaism, Jewish atheism; language: Hebrew and more Jewish languages; homeland: Land of Israel; ancestors: Israelites; history: Jewish history; literature: Jewish literature, Hebrew literature; poetry: Hebrew poetry; mythology: Jewish mythology; folklore: Jewish folklore; cuisine: Jewish cuisine; music: Jewish music. Jews can be also referred as a civilization. True, Moroccan Jews have more specific cultural characteristics as any other Jewish community around the world, but it doesn't make them an ethnic group of their own. Please read also Ethnic groups in West Asia. Read all the articles i gave you if you really want to learn and understand why you are wrong. Now, don't forget that the topic is about Israeli "Moroccans", they are very far away from being "Moroccan" and i have already gave you examples for that. As for the Yemenite Jews article - it's also inaccurate. ofra haza and the rest are descendants of the Jewish community of Yemen, that's why the "Israeli people of Moroccan-Jewish descent" category is legitimate, i think it is more accurate. Your citizenship granting claim is also irrelevant, otherwise we should classify all the Jews in the world as "Israelis". As for Marciano, it's irrelevant to me, i didn't say anything specific about him. Best regards Infantom (talk) 19:22, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
I am sorry, but since it does not cause an issue for the Yemenite Jews, I don't see why it would be an issue for Moroccan Jews. Moroccan Jews share culture, origins, rituals specific to them. They are a part of the greater Jewish people, but they also are an ethnic component of Morocco, as well as officially a part of Moroccan diaspora. You are not Moroccan, you obviously lack information and knowledge about how Judaism is related to this country, neither do you know the specificity of the Moroccan people. I don't want to argue your arguments, because they are pointless. Saying that Jews share a "Jewish cuisine" is silly. The only common ground is that the food is kosher, but they don't have the same culinary tradition at all, not the same spices, nothing in common. An Ethnicity is a group (and I am quoting the Oxford dictionary : "The fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition". So Jewish is an ethnicity, so can be Moroccan, so can be Moroccan Jews. So please stop removing my comments. Categorizing Marciano as "Moroccan Jews" alongside all the people of Moroccan Jewish descent is a way to see in one click all the members of the Moroccan Jewish diaspora around the world. Thanks
Well, we made a little progress. After demonstrating you don't even know what is a Jew, you now see them as a people. Your claim is so weak that from all ethnic elements(over 10!) i presented you rely on "Jewish cuisine" because they don't share an absolute "common ground". It's ridiculous. Moroccan Jews cultural characteristics are to minor to be considered as an ethnicity. You don't want to argue my arguments because you have nothing to say, you just keep reciting the same invalid claims over and over again. Your "origin" claim is also ignorant; There are Algerian Jewish families, Turkish Jewish families and even Dutch Jews(!), read here, that shared the same origin as many other Moroccan Jews before the Alhambra Decree. I have countered all your arguments with well sourced articles and examples. It seems you didn't even bother to read them. Take another example from the Iraqi Jews and Algerian Jews articles and see how it should be written. I don't really see any reason to continue this with you, and i don't have to be Moroccan in order to know that Israeli "Moroccans" are far away from being Moroccans. Keep in mind this is an open discussion and i'm not the only one that oppose your edits. Please don't edit on that topic until you reach a consensus(you've already been warned for that and not by me...). Thanks and best regards --23:07, 6 June 2014 (UTC)Infantom (talk)
Not really. There's an archive page at Portal:Israel/Quotes Archive, but the instructions there haven't been followed for years. I suggest you choose a quote, stick it on the page with its source, and keep the page on your watchlist. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The name Palestine refers to a region of the eastern Mediterranean coast from the sea to the Jordan valley and from the southern Negev desert to the Galilee lake region in the north. The word itself derives from “Plesheth”, a name that appears frequently in the Bible and has come into English as “Philistine”. Plesheth, (root palash) was a general term meaning rolling or migratory. This referred to the Philistine’s invasion and conquest of the coast from the sea. The Philistines were not Arabs nor even Semites, they were most closely related to the Greeks originating from Asia Minor and Greek localities.The name of the Philistines in their own language is not known; however, the Bible also relates them as the people of "Kaftor" (כפתור in Hebrew, see for example the Book of Jeremiah Chapter 47, Verse 4). "Kaftor" is not of Hebrew or Semitic origin, which supports the possibility that this word is similar to the name they called themselves.[1]"
The web-site for Hadashot Arkheologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il, seem not to have been working for the last few days (It was ok up until a week ago).
Does anyone know what has happend? Cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:37, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Leaflet For Wikiproject Isreal At Wikimania 2014
Hi all,
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
Hello, Israel experts. This old AfC submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft. I am unable to evaluate the references. Is this a notable person? Should the article be kept and improved? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
The text in each case mentions the individual that is the subject of the article having been voted one of the greatest Israelis in a poll of the Israeli public by Ynet. An example is here.
I think that, at the very least, each individual entry regarding this poll -- by a high-level RS -- is appropriate to reflect. And that the deletions were therefore not appropriate.
At the (curious) AfD 200 Greatest Israelis, there was confusion (by non-lawyers, I would guess, who were not familiar with Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service Co.) as to whether reflecting the entire list as a list might raise a copyvio issue. And some !votes were based on that. That's certainly a non-issue here, as in each article there was only one entry reflected, not the entire list.
As to Zero's assertion that the quality of the poll is low in his view, I would point to the comment of DGG in the Afd: "... some of the comments above are saying we shouldn't cover this because the quality of the poll is low. This is a non-reason. We do not decide to write articles on things based on our decision about the intrinsic quality--it would certainly make some interesting but interminable debates on musicians and some similar topics." And in closing the AfD Beeblebrox wrote: "... arguments about the methodology or the quality of the poll are, as was rightly pointed out, not relevant." Yet Zero deleted the text in question using that very assertion as a basis for his deletions.
The further background to this is that not only do other similar polls have mentions -- they (in the case of countries other than Israel) have entire articles devoted to reflecting the results of media polls (either TV or print media).
And all have the same precise focus -- each is a poll of the "best" from country x. Most were apparently spurred by the British poll, in 2002.
And "otherstuffexists" allows us to look at such similar lists, as long as -- as is the case here -- that is not the only argument for keeping the text.
The above lists of articles on similar polls appear to be articles about television shows, not about online surveys. The notability of television shows is different from the notability of online surveys.
Oh -- I now see that Yonideworst tag-teamed the deletions with Zero, of the same text and with the same reasons ... but in different articles. I've asked Yonideworst twice whether he has edited before, either as an IP or with a username, as his style of editing seems familiar -- and his editing is astoundingly impressive (or DUCKish) if he is indeed an editor with fewer than 300 edits. Another seasoned editor has made the same request. Yonideworst has failed to respond.
The above lists of articles re similar polls are all about parallel media surveys. There is no real-world distinction.
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS itself states: "While these comparisons are not a conclusive test, they may form part of a cogent argument; an entire comment should not be dismissed because it includes a comparative statement like this."Epeefleche (talk) 00:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
There are two separate issues being confused here. One is about the article on the Ynet poll, and the other is about the use of the poll results in articles about people. They are quite separate issues. About the article on the poll: I didn't even know about the AfD while it was open but would have voted only with reference to notability and coverage by secondary sources. Issues like scientific validity are irrelevant to articles on popular culture. The TV shows in Epeefleche's list are somewhat analogous to the Ynet poll article, but that article was deleted after the AfD debate and the correct way to continue the debate is Deletion Review.
My only concern here is the use of the poll results in articles about people. In this instance we need to consider if being ranked in the Ynet poll has significance and notability for a person important enough to have a Wikipedia article. My opinion is that it is a matter of profound triviality. Consider "Leah was voted the 152nd-greatest Israeli of all time". All that happened was that the newspaper listed Leah on their web page and some tiny tiny number of visitors to the page chose her as one of the 3 greatest Israelis of all time. A few votes from her family and friends would have been enough to get position 152 out of the 200 that were listed. This is worthy of being in an encyclopaedia article? The deletion of the article on the poll makes it hard to argue that the poll was itself of significance, so one can only argue that it has some scientific validity. But it doesn't; it was just a bit of ephemeral fun organised by the newspaper and didn't even pretend to follow rigorous statistical procedures.
The reliability of Ynet is irrelevant here, since nobody is questioning that they reported their own poll correctly. More important is what secondary sources wrote about it: apparently very little. Zerotalk13:49, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Zero that as to the (former) article on the Ynet poll issues like scientific validity are irrelevant. I also agree with Zero that the media polls in the above list are analogous to the Ynet poll.
As to the level of "significance and notability" needed for the one-sentence inclusions of text that have been deleted, that level is of course different than the test as to whether a subject deserves an entire stand-alone article. Obviously, it's not as though every sentence in an article has to rise to the level of significance needed to pass AfD -- if that were the case, we would delete most of the text in the Project.
Zero's personal opinion is that the sentence is trivial. I think (personally) much of wp is trivial; still, we cover it. And the number of editors reading that particular poll article on a daily basis, as referenced in the AfD, indicated interest by our readership far above the trivial level.
Zero's guesses -- and let's be clear, what he states after he writes "Consider" above is pure, made-up guesswork -- are simply non-substantiated musings. And we cover all manner of polls at wp, including those listed above, that ... if Zero's approach were taken ... could result in deletions based on POV guesswork of massive amounts of information resident on the project. Because editor x "assumes" the poll was "just fun," and editor b assumes it was not rigourous enough in its statistics. For an editor to make such a personal series of assumptions and engage in mass deletions on that basis in such a sensitive area is surprising, for a seasoned editor..
Plus, this is a poll of a top-level RS, Ynet. Such a poll of course has a higher level of notability than would be the case with a poll of a non-RS.
Zero's malignment of the poll, again by making up assertions that this was "just a bit of ... fun", and that it "didn't even pretend to follow rigorous statistical procedures", is simply empty POV conjecture meant to support his position. Though he presents it as fact, which I again find surprising for a seasoned editor, deleting text from 150 articles, in a senstive area.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:01, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I stand by my claims, which are not guesswork at all (and wouldn't be guesswork even if I didn't have professional expertise in statistics). Online "polls" like this are a dime a dozen and lots and lots of newspapers and online sites run them all the time. Enjoy them by all means, just don't take them seriously. Zerotalk01:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Ynet is the online portal for Yedioth Ahronoth, consistently one of Israel's most widely read newspapers. The poll is in a reliable and verifiable source and it belongs in these articles, period. End of discussion. Listing such a ranking in an article about a notable individual is pretty much how Wikipedia works. There is no need to show that an article or survey is statistically valid or random, nor is there any obligation to show that an article or survey is covered by other media. These arguments have zero validity as excuses to remove sourced content. Alansohn (talk) 15:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
The survey is notable within the article of Ynet, and there is a section devoted to it in that article. Just because the survey is notable within the article of Ynet does not mean that it is notable in the 200 biographical articles that the survey mentions. Yonideworst (talk) 15:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Completely false. What you are insisting is that a published article can only appear in the Wikipedia article for the publisher. So an article published by Ynet / Yedioth Ahronoth could only appear in the Wikiedpia articles for Ynet / Yedioth Ahronoth and an article published by The New York Times could only appear in the Wikipedia article for The Times, which is complete nonsense. Wikipedia works by including coverage from reliable and verifiable sources in our articles and this survey meets that standard. The notability standard has no relevance here. Alansohn (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
The Ynet article says that "[d]ue to the nature of the poll used to select and rank the Israelis, the results do not pretend to be an objective assessment". Therefore, there is really no reason to include the results of the survey in the biographical articles. It was published for fun. It has no bearing on the biographies of the listed people. Yonideworst (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
To address the secondary source issue, newspapers are secondary sources for news they report. In the case of this survey, Ynet is not reporting news, but generating news. Hence, that makes Ynet the primary source for this survey. Had other news organizations reported on this survey, it would have given this survey more notability. As it currently stands, this survey has no notability outside of Ynet. Yonideworst (talk) 16:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
It doesn't need to be objective, nor is there any means of ranking that is not entirely subjective. "Fun" is not an obstacle either. It is an article published in a reliable and verifiable source that is directly relevant to the persons involved. Alansohn (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have to disagree. If the survey was scientific, it would have been valid to add a "public perception" section to all those biographies and place the information in that section (in many cases the survey was placed into an honor and/or rewards section, which was not appropriate). However, since the survey was not scientific it is not even worth mentioning in a "public perception" section of the biographies in question. Plain and simple, the survey is irrelevant to the 200 biographies.
Let me add that a WP:UNDUE argument could be made regarding the way this survey is presented in the Ynet article because a single survey is not worth an entire section on a news web site. If there was an Entertainment section to the article, the survey would be worth mentioning in a sentence or two in such a section. But given that the article is so weak, and it does not have an Entertainment section, I suppose that leaving the Ynet article the way it is would be OK. Yonideworst (talk) 17:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
This is a reliable and verifiable source, period. If you want to move it around in the articles in question, that may be appropriate, but removal is unjustified.It's a fairly broad survey and that's all it's presented to be. Given your limited editing experience, gaining greater awareness of fundamental Wikipedia policy will help here in the future. The relevance in the Ynet article itself is a separate issue and it's inclusion should be discussed at that article's talk page. Alansohn (talk) 17:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
For the last time, Ynet is a reliable and verifiable source for news. The survey is not news, and for the heavily detailed reasons provided above not notable outside of the Ynet article. Please do not re-add to the 200 biographies in question. Yonideworst (talk) 17:38, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
The Ynet survey doesn't even come close to the notability of the above sample of lists. Note that the above lists are not generated by non-scientific surveys. They are done by review boards and have received coverage by sources outside of the news organizations that created those lists. Yonideworst (talk) 18:06, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Alansohn, you seem to have a misconception. The fact that something appears in a reliable source does not imply that it should be in Wikipedia. The reliability of the source is only one of the requirements. There are also requirement like WP:WEIGHT, without which articles would fill up with megabytes of lightweight fluff that just happened to appear in reliable sources. An encyclopaedia article should be a brief and concise summary of the important reliably-published facts about the topic. Perhaps you can explain why it is important that Leah Rabin scored the 152nd fewest votes (meaning a mere handful) from a self-selected group of internet readers. Zerotalk00:16, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
It is especially true when the survey doesn't even appear in the news section -- it was in the entertainment section. Per WP:RS, "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact." This is why the survey is only notable within the Ynet article. Yonideworst (talk) 13:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I have started a short article about SiSense, the company I work for. I am working to stay well inside the boundaries of Wikipedia's policies, and have consulted a number of independent reliable sources, and have worked to keep the article neutral. If anybody has feedback, suggestions, or concerns about the article, please let me know, or improve the article as you see fit. I also expect to add short sections about SiSense's history and technology in the coming week. -82.166.16.70 (talk) 09:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
RfC: Should "Israeli–Palestinian conflict" and "Arab-Israeli conflict" be merged?
This article is racist and evidently biased towards the far-right. For example,
"In recent decades considerable efforts have been made of by many migrant workers from third world countries to immigrate to developed countries in order to improve their wages and quality of life. This is often done in contravention of immigration laws of the destination country, especially when seeking a better life into it, such as infiltration made to the United States from the Mexican border. Developed countries are trying to combat this issue in various ways."
First of all, this ignores the fact that in developed countries, there is a debate on immigration, and that not everyone is necessarily opposed to illegal immigration, such as, for example, many liberals in the United States. Referring to migration as an "issue" to be "combated" is a violation of WP:NPOV.
And I also have an issue with how the word "infiltration" is used? This is the key problem I have with this article. It was evidently written by an Israeli. In civilized non-fascist countries, immigration, particularly when done to seek asylum as the article mentions, is not referred 'infiltration'. What? This is a clear violation of WP:NPOV. They even have a section using that word (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_from_Africa_to_Israel#The_infiltration_into_Israel).
Furthermore, the language used is not of encyclopedic tone. "The situation undercuts the tension between two strong feelings in Israel. Israel was founded in the wake of the Holocaust and has provided refuge to Jews fleeing oppression around the world. On one hand, many Israelis feel Israel has a special responsibility to assist refugees in such dire conditions. (The government, however, maintains that most of the Africans are economic migrants and do not fit into this category.) On the other hand, many Israelis fear the influx could threaten the country's Jewish character". Using terms like "influx", for example, is rather biased.
This is written as more of a partisan blog post rather than an encyclopedic entry. It needs to be fixed immediately. JDiala (talk) 06:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't see any problems with much of your complaint. Whilst you are correct that there is a debate over immigration, it is a fact that the immigration referred to is in contravention of the laws of the destination countries. It's also a fact that the government in every country is trying to combat the issue; no country has a laissez-faire approach to the matter.
As for the use of the term "infiltration", it is used because (a) it almost always happens by people crossing the Egypt-Israel border by stealth (i.e. meeting the definition "The act of entering a physical location and/or organization secretly.") and (b) that is how the Israeli media (across the political spectrum) describe it.
However, I do agree that some if it may not necessarily be in the most encyclopedic of terms, although this may well be because it has been written by someone whose first language is not English. Number5708:49, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
No, this is incorrect. Mexican immigration from the United States is not legal under US law, yet there is nevertheless a debate over it. Asylum seekers are a special case. "Combating the issue" is not an encyclopedic statement. Combating implies _fighting_ the migration. There is a debate within the US as to whether or not the migration itself should be combated or stopped. Liberals and progressives generally believe the immigration in violation of current US law shouldn't necessarily ought to be combated. There is a debate within the country itself. The wording the author uses is implicitly anti immigrant.
I will alter the article myself. At the very least, I will eliminate usage of the word infiltration other than mentioning in the lead that the Israeli media uses the word, and substantially improve the tone of the article to something less partisan. This is racism. It is far from impartial. And dictionary definitions don't suffice; they fail to take into consideration the connotation and negative stigma certain words have attached to them. You cannot refer to intellectually disabled individuals as "idiots", even if they may meet that word's definition. The English language is riddled with terms that have a straightforward dictionary definition but are nevertheless inherently prejudicial, biased and are not encyclopedic. JDiala (talk) 09:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Well thank you for flagging that up so I can watchlist the article. Comments like this are quite illustrative of the point of view you hold. Number5709:54, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
User template wording
I have designed a template with the intended text:
This user supports a peaceable Israel XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
with the provisional "XX" text reading: "within an approximation of its 1967 borders."
This user supports a peaceable Israel within an approximation of its 1967 borders.
I've just had a look at the article on the 1948 Palestine war and noted the evacuated villages.
Are there alternate options of wording to consider that would provide a fair return to a 20th cent. or similar situation?
The sister template of the above is:
This user supports the existence of an independentPalestine at peace with its neighbours.
Just wondered if a standard format is or could be used. What's best?
I have done a bit of stuff like this: Way of the Patriarchs Way of the Patriarchs (Hebrew: דֶּרֶךְ הֲאָבוֹתDerech haʾAhvot Lit. Way (of) the Fathers), is an ...
Kfar Darom Kfar Darom (Hebrew: כְּפַר דָּרוֹם, lit. Village (in the) South),...
I think the word order translation will be of use for people familiarising themselves with Hebrew
The standard I used when writing all the kibbutz articles was something along the lines of Sde Boker (Hebrew: שְׂדֵה בּוֹקֵר, lit. Herding Field). However, I would avoid translating things for a second time like you did with Way of the Patriarchs, and I would also avoid putting prepositions in brackets. The Kfar Darom translation is also incorrect, as there is no "in the" in the name - a proper translation would be "South Village"; "Village in the South" would be "Kfar BaDarom". Number5708:27, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I would avoid translating ancient names, at least without a ref. In this example, we don't know, maybe it's "a village next to Darom", "village of the sons of Darom" or the like. Unless you do. trespassers william (talk) 10:29, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Help needed to improve language support in CS1 citations
I am looking for help to guide language support improvements to Citation Style 1 templates. For the time being, these improvements are limited to titles of reference sources, |title= and |trans-title= in CS1 citations that italicize these parameter values.
There have long been complaints that certain languages should not be italicized. A discussion at Module talk:Citation/CS1/Archive 11#non-italic titles regarding titles in Chinese with pinyin transliterations, and English translations just looked wrong. The commonly applied fixes that make the title look right end up damaging the citation's COinS metadata. So, a better way needs to be found.
A possible solution is hacked into Module:Citation/CS1. The hack creates a new parameter, |logogram=|script-title=, which for now is intended to receive titles in script that is not to be italicized. Here is an example of what a citation should not look like:
Wang, Li (1985). Hànyǔ Yǔyīn Shǐ 汉语语音史 (in Chinese). Beijing: China Social Sciences Press. ISBN978-7-100-05390-7. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)
and the same citation with |logogram=|script-title=:
Wang, Li (1985). Hànyǔ Yǔyīn Shǐ 汉语语音史 (in Chinese). Beijing: China Social Sciences Press. ISBN978-7-100-05390-7. {{cite book}}: Invalid |script-title=: missing prefix (help); Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)
Another improvement to CS1 language support that we are contemplating is better handling of right-to-left (rtl) languages. This arises from a discussion now in WP:VPT archive 129. Again, the workarounds necessary to make the citation render correctly corrupt the COinS metadata.
Another hack to CS1 that uses |logogram=|script-title= to hold the Hebrew title appears to correctly render that citation's title.
Tova Green (6 May 2010). 12 ימים (in Hebrew). Maybe So. Retrieved 15 May 2010. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help) – current live version of {{cite book}}
Tova Green (6 May 2010). 12 ימים (in Hebrew). Maybe So. Retrieved 15 May 2010. {{cite book}}: Invalid |script-title=: missing prefix (help); Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help) – current sandbox version
I don't know if titles in Hebrew should be italicized; I don't know if titles should be displayed <original language> <romanized transcription> [<English translation>] or in some other order.
Hello. I recently created Marta Domingo's page, and apparently he was a soprano for the Opera Company of Israel for three years before she went on to become a renowned opera director. I am unable to find an article about opera in Israel beyond the Tel Aviv Performing Arts Center, which is a building. I am working on several projects right now and I thought I would mention this here, if anybody else would like to create a page. I am not sure if there is just one company, or more. It looks like the Opera Company of Israel may be notable; it would be wonderful to have a section about its history (who started/patronized it); what operas they performed; who the main directors/sopranos/tenors have been. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 03:31, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Serial vandalism and distortion of statistics at Aliyah?
Looking at the article Aliyah, I was struck by the fact that the vast majority of the past 1000 edits, dating back more than a year, appear to have been made by a sequence of IPs, amending statistics while maintaining the original citations. This looks like deliberate vandalism, and is likely to take several editor's work to clean it up. Do others share my assessment of these edits, or are the edits legitimate? RolandR (talk)12:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
I wouldn't say it looks like vandalism at all (why do you think it is?) - I would guess that someone has access to alternative figures and has updated what they found on Wikipedia. The issue with the citations is probably because they aren't aware how that sort of thing works (I see similar edits on election articles all the time where IPs change the results but not the source because they don't know how to, or that they should). Have you tried asking the IP what their source is on their talk page (the edits seem to come from a fairly consistent set of addresses)? Number5713:33, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
I haven't asked because there have been dozens of IPs doing the same sort of edits for the past year. I suspect that it is vandalism because the figures have been amended, but the citations have not. Unfortunately, most of the sources I have tried to check have been either unavailable, or in Russian, making it difficult to confirm the figures. I note that another editor raised similar concerns in February; these have still not been addressed.RolandR (talk)16:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
I would recommend leaving a message at User talk:70.29.119.33, as this IP has been used for the past week. As I said, I doubt it's vandalism (it's very odd if it is), but just someone unfamiliar with our procedures. Number5716:43, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
I already have done. But I don't expect an answer. I have left the same message for User:70.24.68.152, who was making similar edits last week. I stroiongly suspect that the same person has used IPs 70.27.172.209, 76.68.84.106, 76.68.76.19, 70.30.147.210, 70.27.175.158 and many others, all of which have edited in the same manner over the past year, and none of which has ever made or responded to a talk page edit. RolandR (talk)16:57, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
It's strange that so many random sources are used when in theory the information should be available as a single dataset from the Central Bureau of Statistics or the Ministry of Immigrant Absorption. I have e-mailed both asking if they have a timeseries dataset of aliyah by country of origin. Fingers cross they do (there are a couple of examples, but really we need the whole set). Number5717:13, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Well, I asked the IP whether there was a source for these edits. Their only response was to delete my quewstion, and then to make more similar edits, using clearly invented figures which do not match the sources cited. I have reverted these and issued a warning. But since this behaviour has continued unchecked for more than a year, with several hundred similar edits, it is clear that a lot of work needs to be done here. As a result of this vandalism, all of the figures on this page should be regarded as unreliable until they can be checked. Can anyone suggest a way in which this article can be remedied? RolandR (talk)20:59, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't know if you missed what I said in my most recent response, but trying to get official figures from the CBS or MOIA is probably the way forward. Some are available (like the ones linked to above - which contain the total numbers since 1948), and I will post here if I get a response to the emails. Number5723:23, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I saw that. But the problem is that there would appear to be several hundred such deliberate errors introduced into the article. Tracing them all would be a massive task. Do you think it would be possible, and acceptable, to roll the article back to the state before this began (which would probably be some time in September 2013), and then trying to restore the few good edits from among the hundreds of bad ones? RolandR (talk)00:50, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
SiSense
I now completed short article about SiSense (mentioned here previously, see archives from July 2014). I hope I have succeeded in keeping the article neutral and well sourced. If anybody has feedback, suggestions, or concerns about the article, please let me know, or improve the article as you see fit. -Itayerez (talk) 09:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Holocaust comparisons
I recently raised an issue of comparing Arab-Israeli matters to the holocaust on WP:AE. An admin appears to believe my complaint has nothing to do with the comparison being insensitive and offensive, but is based on battleground mentality.[2] I'd appreciate the community's input on whether or not repeatedly comparing Arab-Israeli matters to the holocaust is considered proper conduct. (see also: "genocide") MarciulionisHOF (talk) 07:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Update: My retraction appears to be rejected. Nishidani admits "If I add the analogies made in Israeli controversies, it upsets people" (but I'll continue doing it because of Golda Meir).[4] I doubt any outcome would deal with that or the other point ("genocide"). MarciulionisHOF (talk) 12:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, need some assistance in order to replace the main photo on that article, as this is not Kibbutz Yehiam in the photo, it is Moshav Ein Ya'akov as seen from Yehiam's fortress. Thanks, Deere&Co (talk) 13:40, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
@Deere&Co: I have removed the photo. Was there one you wanted to replace it with? You can also do it yourself - just look at the edit history of the article for what I did. Number5714:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, thank you so much for your help. not really sure how to post a photo to that article, would appreciate it if you could add the photo of the Kibbutz's dining room which is in the article itself. Best regards, Deere&Co (talk) 08:50, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
User:Kigelim has requested the creation of the two following articles; here are his or her words on the matter:
Susya (Palestinian village) and Susya (Archaeological site).
Right now, information from the two above and the Israeli settlement are in one article. Please approve the additional articles so material can be transferred. In Hebrew there are three different articles and as a result, they are each more accurate and comprehensive. I can do much of the translation.
I think it would make more sense to split it into Susya (archaelogical site), Susya (Palestinian village) and Susya (Israeli settlement), as there are three distinct places with the same name (from what I can make out from the article, neither the village nor the settlement are at the exact same location as the archaeological site? If one is, then those two should be combined, but the village and settlement articles should remain split). As an example, we also have Merhavia (kibbutz) and Merhavia (moshav), adjacent villages with the same name but different types of governance. I will also notify WP:Palestine about this, as it also falls under their remit. Number5721:19, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Devolution is in, hence the 3 State solution in M.E.;
1] Egypt mandates Gaza,
2] Jordan administers some West Bank communities,
3] Israel, Jordan and possibly Egypt join the Commonwealth.
A canal can be built from the Dead sea which is 300 metres below sea level. With desalination plants, 1 million regional jobs are sustainable.
No apartheit Bantustan in Gaza and West Bank, as that sub-optimal solution has been rejected in the 2015 election.
For those who read the Hebrew press, in the event anything interesting arises there over the course of the next week as to David Blatt, you might consider adding it to his article. As he will be in the news a great deal, due to the NBA finals. He is already attracting 3,000 hits a day. Tx. --Epeefleche (talk) 09:04, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
User:Solntsa90 has been taking the location "Israel" out of a lot of article for places in Jerusalem, claiming that "As per wiki arbitration (as well as international law), the opinion that Jerusalem is in Israel is on the fringe." [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] (and many more). I can't find any mention of this on the arbcom page. Can someone help me out? Did ArbCom really decide this? If so it seems a strange decision so I'm curious to see it. --Bachrach44 (talk) 01:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
I could just about understand if he was doing it for neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem (it can be argued either way), but the fact that he's doing it for West Jerusalem neighbourhoods is pretty poor behaviour. Number5708:43, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
To remove a sentence that claims East Jerusalem is in Israel is totally in accordance with the policies of Wikipedia. I am not sure about West Jerusalem alone but Israel's claim is not recognized there either. From the RFC: "There was no consensus for any phrasing of Jerusalem’s location in either Israel or Palestine".
By the way, despite that the Palestinian territories or Palestine includes East Jerusalem, no Wikipedia article that I have seen about a neighbourhood in East Jerusalem have said it is in the Palestinian territories. --IRISZOOM (talk) 12:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't see anything in the arbcom decision that supports the edits in question. (Thanks Malik for finding it). After doing more digging I also found that the user was banned for edit warring on this exact edit, and the [who uphelp the ban] clarified this point precisely. Given this my feeling then is that this mass edit should not have happened. --Bachrach44 (talk) 13:16, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
International Law and the US position is clear that Jerusalem is neither in Palestine, or Israel. I have misread the arbcom discussion and won't be reverting the edits as vandalism, but this doesn't change the facts on the ground. Solntsa90 (talk) 23:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
You are confusing "IS" with "should be". There is no doubt that currently Jerusalem IS in Israel (that is located within Israel's borders, populated by Israeli citizens and/or permanent residents and is administered by Israel). Your statement that according to to many international organizations it shouldn't be so is quite correct, but it doesn't change the current de-facto status. “WarKosign”05:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
International opinion in line with the opinion of the Palestinians holds that territories to the East of the Green line are certainly not classified as being in Israel and this is something that WarKosign knows extremely well. The usual trick is to get the maps out that specify the situation extremely clearly. Repeat, the West Bank is not considered as being part of Israel. Jerusalem Law has been internationally declared null and void. GregKaye16:51, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Again, you are mixing law and reality. Nobody claimed that West Bank is in Israel, however for any practical reason Jerusalem is in Israel. “WarKosign”18:14, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
No, control is one thing and that the territory actually belong to one is another thing. Since the international community doesn't recognize it as in Israel, it is not and this doesn't change because Israel controls it. --IRISZOOM (talk) 12:08, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
But it does. WarKosign is quite right in saying that people here are mixing legality and reality; in legal terms, Abkhazia, Transnistria, Northern Cyprus and all the various other places like that do not exist. In reality they do, and we quite correctly write about them on Wikipedia in these terms, whilst also pointing out their (lack of) legal status.
It is a serious problem when editors ignore reality; saying East Jerusalem is in Israel and leaving it at that is not NPOV (as according to international law, it isn't); however, saying East Jerusalem is not in Israel and leaving it at that is also not NPOV (as according to Israeli law and (more importantly) reality, it is). Number5712:38, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
What you two are saying is that "the reality" is that the area is in Israel but no, the reality is that Israel controls it and no one disputes that. That is one thing but as they have not got any recognition for that, it can't be said "the reality" is that it is in Israel. To say that East Jerusalem is occupied by Israel is correct and NPOV. It doesn't stop one from adding that Israel claims it as theirs (though even that is disputed as for example Ian Lustick has written about). Similarly, for example it is true that Northen Cyprus claims to be a state but it is not recognized as such (except by Turkey) and viewed as occupied by Turkey and belonging to Cyprus. --IRISZOOM (talk) 12:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Again, you're confusing legality and reality; occupying or controlling an area is not the same as it being part of a country; Israel also occupies/controls large parts of the West Bank, but they are not considered (even by Israel) to be within Israel. E Jerusalem is different as it has been annexed and is under full Israeli government administration. As a result, if you go to E Jerusalem, you are effectively (but of course not legally) still in Israel. Similarly, if you go to Crimea, you are now effectively in Russia. Number5713:09, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
As long as Jerusalem was controlled by Jordan it was in Jordan. In the last 48 years it is controlled by Israel therefore it is in Israel, it's as simple as that. It doesn't matter if one considers this reality to be good or bad, legal or illegal - this is what currently exists in reality. Imagine an item or a person being transferred illegally from country A to country B. You wouldn't say that it's still in A because it's movement was illegal - reality is that it's in B. “WarKosign”13:16, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
I was very clear in my latest response about this "reality" thing. You could argue the whole day which steps Israel have taken for half a century in East Jerusalem to make it look like it is a part of the country but it does not change it is occupied territory, therefore the reality is can't be in Israel. That you may not think it is not in Israel if you visit it is irrelevant if it comees to if it is to Israel or not, which the whole thing about "it is in Israel" is about. At maximum, you can say Israel claims it as theirs and administers it like that. --IRISZOOM (talk) 13:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Of course, that is how the world define if it is in Israel or not. It doesn't change if Israel controls the area or not. --IRISZOOM (talk) 13:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
In legal terms yes, in reality no. I think we've reached an impasse here, so I'll leave it at that. Number5713:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
That is your own definition, WarKosign, but not one the world agrees with. Controlling something doesn't mean it is yours, which is also a response to your example above. Similarly, having the power to do something doesn't mean it is the correct thing to do. Again, no one disputes Israel controls the territory but rather if it is in Israel. So yes, the reality is that Israel occupies the area and claims it to be theirs, not that the reality is that "it is in Israel". --IRISZOOM (talk) 13:29, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
It's not my definition, it's the reality. Imagine that I stole a car and put it in my yard. It is in my yard regardless of any legal considerations. The fact that stealing the car was illegal doesn't change the fact that the car is in my yard. You can't dispute the car being there, you can only dispute the legality of the current state of affairs. “WarKosign”14:10, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
As of today, the Supreme Court has ruled that Congress has overstepped its boundaries passing laws declaring Jerusalem to be in Israel, reaffirming the US (and UN) position that Jerusalem is in neither Israel nor Palestine for the time being. Solntsa90 (talk) 00:14, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Arbcom for an official Wiki position on Jerusalem and her location
How can we get one launched? I think now more than ever we need one, although international opinion (as well as US) has already made many a decision on this, Wiki sometimes moves more slowly, so I think now more than ever we need to arbitrate on this issue to settle it once and for all. Solntsa90 (talk) 00:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Neurim, Israel is mentioned in some articles,[19] but we don't have a wp page on it. Is it alternatively spelled some other way? Tx. --Epeefleche (talk) 22:41, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I did a search for נעורים here [20] since I figured that would show it up under any english spelling. I do not see one - GalatzTalk01:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. That looks like it. I guess there's no English wp article to link to. I'm expanding Marharyta Dorozhon, with an eye towards DYK, which mentions it as the location of one of her recent competitions. Epeefleche (talk) 23:19, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure whether it is actually a recognised place. It is a youth village, but it is not a separate settlement, at least according to the CBS, who do not list it in their population figures, and it doesn't appear to fall under the jurisdiction of any regional council, which is standard for youth villages. Perhaps it is just a neighbourhood or complex within Beit Yanai? Number5715:35, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Tx!. It seems they have some sports competitions there. Mentioned in RSs. But for now, I'm not sure I see enough RS information to cobble together a page, so I'll leave it unlinked where I mention it in athletes' bios. Tx again. Epeefleche (talk) 21:27, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project
A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).--Lucas559 (talk) 15:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm working at WP:WikiProject Cannabis, and we're trying to expand our coverage of "Cannabis in (country)" articles, and I saw that we don't have one for Israel. Israel has a high recorded usage of cannabis, and a prominent role in medical cannabis research and legal issues, so it would really be a great country to add to Wikipedia's coverage.
My company has a business relationship with Conduit, so I have a WP:COI and won't make direct edits. I'd suggest that the project consider including the Ronen Shilo article because of his importance in Israel; and perhaps someone can find more sources in Israeli publications that I may have missed.
Perhaps someone might be willing to assist with the edit? And to weigh in on the deletion nomination. Thanks. BC1278 (talk) 21:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)BC1278
Anyone want to help?
An article in this project, about a prominent software company in Israel, Conduit (publisher network and platform is a giant mess. Admins have responded many times to attacks but it's slipped back to being a mess. I have a WP:COI since I have a business relationship with the company. But I've carefully gone through the article and proposed a revision that omits sources like online discussion boards, not WP:RELIABLE used to justify attacks.
I'm hoping someone quite experienced can help, since in depth knowledge of acceptable Wikipedia sourcing is required here.BC1278 (talk) 18:28, 23 August 2015 (UTC)BC1278
Good day! My name is Michael Rozhetsky and I'm an actor, I played Pavel Kovaleva in the Israeli serial "The Arbitrator"
In the Article, my name is written with mistakes in family name.
Please correct the mistake, the correct family name is "Rozhetsky"
I would like also to add the link from my name to the page about myself with my picture.
Please contact me to work this out,
Thanks in advance,
Michael Rozhetsky — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Rozhetsky (talk • contribs) 11:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
@Michael Rozhetsky: Please take no offense in my comments, I'm trying to do what is best for wikipedia.
It would be improper to link to some external web page promoting an actor. If the person meets the wikipedia notability guideline, it would be proper to create a wikipedia article and link to it, as is the case with Moshe Ivgy. Since most of the cast of The Arbitrator whom I assume (lacking any actual knowledge) to be as prominent actors as you do not have dedicated articles, I assume you do not meet the notability guideline either. If it is not the case, somebody other than you should create this article to avoid Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. “WarKosign”11:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
@Michael Rozhetsky: First, welcome to Wikipedia. Please feel free to contribute to any and all articles not about yourself or your own acting projects. Also, do consider contributing to Hebrew Wikipedia, too, under (more or less) the same rules.
Let me adjust the answer that @WarKosign gave just a little:
It is good that WarKosign found some outside sources with the correct spelling of your name. We are normally very strict about using only reliable sources here to verify information, so that is always the way we prefer to get information. For most purposes, you (or your personally controlled website) are not allowed to be a reliable source about you, because you are not "neutral" about yourself. (You're biased in your favor. You should be!) For certain limited things, such as the spelling of your name, you or your personally controlled website are allowed to be a reliable source. Even here, your website is really better than your coming here and making a statement. After all, how can we prove you're really you? (Don't get me wrong, I believe you're you. But you can see: that's hard to prove here.) It was entirely fine for you to come here and ask people to look into this, though. Thank you for bringing the error to our attention.
If it were determined (or is determined in the future) that you are notable enough to have an article here, then that article would be allowed to contain an "External Link" to one website that you control, as a courtesy to people looking for additional information. And you would be allowed to upload a picture here (actually, to Wikimedia Commons) to donate to that article, provided you are willing and able to release any and all copyright ownership and make it freely available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. None of this applies if you are not notable enough to have an article here.
In theory, someone notable enough for an article on one Wikipedia is usually notable enough for an article on other Wikipedias. In practical terms, it may be easier, and more obvious, for a first article on someone like you to appear in a place like Hebrew Wikipedia. If you are better known in Israel than in English-speaking countries, and if more reliable sources on you are in Hebrew than in English, it may be much easier to start there. You still should not write it yourself, because Wikipedia (in any language) is an encyclopedia, not a promotional platform. (See WP:NOTPROMOTION.) Once you have an article on any Wikipedia, anyone can add any reliably sourced information, including critical praise and critical damnation. (See WP:PROUD.) So even if you think you should have an article, think three times first. (See WP:AUTOBIOG.)
Tel Aviv, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. sovereign°sentinel(contribs)13:03, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
This WikiProject may be interested that, in the pending Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case, the evidence phase has been extended until 15 September 2015, the workshop phase has been extended to 28 September 2015, and the proposed decision due date has been extended to 2 October 2015. Comments on this are welcome at the case talk page. Thank you. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 11:32, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
@Cliftonian: It's too soon to close the RfC. It has only been a week, and now is a holiday season in Israel, so some editors who might have an opinion haven't been able to respond. Also, it's not quote obvious what the consensus is, it's wrong for someone as involved as you to call it. “WarKosign”11:39, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi WarKosign. Very few people seemed interested in discussing this over the week this RFC was open. Although those who commented differed on which final option they preferred—as you say, there was no clear consensus on the exact particulars—not one person favoured the status quo of many articles opening with a link to "Israeli Jews" under the word "Israeli", the issue that was the RFC's whole raison d'etre. It therefore seemed to me a snowball case we could just as well wind up so we could get on with the pertinent thing which is to remove these links. I apologise if you disagree. —Cliftonian(talk)15:41, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Recently I have had some difficulty maintaining what I consider to be the neutral point of view on the Sur Baher article. I feel like I am the only NPOV voice on that article and its talkpage. I ask my fellow editors to have a look at the recent history of this article, and voice their opinions. Maybe I am wrong, maybe I am right. If I am right, then please be aware that my voice needs support. In addition, any improvements to the article and its sources will of course be appreciated. Debresser (talk) 17:37, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
RFC: Is the One Million Plan relevant to the Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries?
List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, July–December 2015
In a wake of current wave of violence: has anyone a time & energy to check this and prev. Lists?
IMHO they should be either removed, or seriously edited taking into account NPOV requirements.
I've finally worked out a way to update the population figures annually without updating all 1,205 articles (the number of places the CBS do it for). I have created {{Israel populations}}, which contains all the populations (open an edit window, and you'll see - this is where we can update it annually). On each article, we then just need to add {{Israel populations|Placename}} (use the CBS name as listed in the template), and it will look up the single template. The year function can be done with {{Israel populations|Year}}, which looks up the same template. It can also be used in the text in the introduction. See my edits to Sde Boker.
Once it's rolled out, individual articles will no longer need updating, so hopefully this will save a lot of work. I'll look to start updating all the articles in the near future. Cheers, Number5716:23, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
@NawlinWiki: I assume the filter is intended to block some antisemitic troll. Will this filter block anyone anywhere from making an edit containing these words ? There are legitimate reasons to write "Jew" or "Hebrew"... “WarKosign”07:04, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
I am well aware of WP:VOTE, but at the same time, saying that the votes are not relevant, is plain stupid.
As I said, in this case, based on both the votes and the arguments of the discussion, I think there is definitely room for a deletion review. What you guys here want to do with that, is up to you. Debresser (talk) 12:03, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Votes are irrelevant. Arguments are not. Which arguments do you feel have major swaying factor that should have lead to another consensus other than the current one?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 18:47, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Since you repeat your point of view, so will I. Saying that the votes are not relevant, is plain stupid.
I posted this FYI. If you are interested, please look for yourself. If I were interested in doing this, I'd have done it already. I posted here only because I feel a deletion review is the right thing to do, and has a good chance. Debresser (talk) 19:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
That's great that you think it's stupid, that's also irrelevant, but still great. The number of votes are irrelevant. The actual arguments made are what is relevant. Again I say, Which arguments do you feel have major swaying factor that should have lead to another consensus other than the current one? FYI, I'm interested, that being the purpose of the question. Do you have an underlying position on the close other than keep got the most votes?-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 23:34, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
The Montefiore Windmill is standing with its sails in the St George's Cross position + at the moment. This is as a mark of respect because millwright Vincent Pargeter, who was involved in the restoration of the mill, passed away over the weekend. Are there any editors in Jerusalem who could take a photo of the mill with the sails in this position and upload them to Commons please? Mjroots (talk) 19:13, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Can an editor who speaks Hebrew please help Yoram Bucks assess the quality of the source they provided at their user talk page? Personally I'd say it's at the very best a case of WP:TOOSOON, but someone who can actually judge the source may be able to give more specific advice. Thanks in advance, Huon (talk) 20:15, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
I see some properly-referenced factual items edited out of this article (some four years ago) that seem unfair to me. (These pertain to evidence that the tomb is actually that of a Roman noblewoman.) I would post an item on the Talk section but I take it that must come through WikiProject Israel instead. I could just edit the article itself but, not understanding the purview of WikiProject Israel I thought I would ask for guidance here first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_of_Simeon_the_JustHerkiegrub (talk) 02:27, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
I have no recollection. But if this is properly sourced and not original research, you are welcome to restore it. Certainly the part about what street it is on seems to be OR. I have the book by O'Connor that suggests the tomb may be that of a Roman woman, Julia Sabine, which gives no address and focuses on the fact that it was a pilgrimage site for "Oriental Jews." While you are at it, why not restore the photos that someone deleted?Geewhiz (talk) 09:31, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Can someone please help with some image files in hewiki? The article Nahal Gerar needs some images, and in the Hebrew article there are some good images, but they need to be moved to wiki Commons first. I'd like to use these images in enwiki. Is it possible? Y-barton (talk) 18:51, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I created this map back in 31 December 2015, and i created this map to show the settlements and zones which the conflict is taking place. This map based on two components, these are the module and the template. This template belongs to List-class and Mid-importance (this can be added to WikiProject Palestine too). --SMB99thxXD (contribs) 12:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
RfC: Proposal to fix a long term structural problem in Palestine Israel conflict articles
Given the importance of the conflict articles to our project I had hoped for more feedback at this RFC, but I think I overcomplicated the description. Some editors may also be thinking "we've been just fine for 10 years so is there really a problem here that needs solving"? I would like to encourage more editors to contribute.
The core issue behind the RFC question is that most readers know very little about the conflict and therefore need one single summary article to read and begin their journey, and we need that single summary article to broadly match the picture that the 1,000s of books summarizing this conflict take. Instead we have sat for many years with three primary articles (IPC since 48, AIC since 48 and ICMP 20-48) which are fine but are missing something above them to thread them together into the 100-year-narrative of the conflict presented by the vast majority of books on the topic.
I recognize that many editors may find the question is a little more dry and boring than many of the debates around here, but its importance to the average Wikipedia reader can hardly be overstated.Oncenawhile (talk) 11:02, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
I am guessing that you are talking about the Tumashin school. But I don't think there is a story here. First of all, it is not the first Arab high school in Lod. The Lod-Ramle school preceded it, and, in addition there are at least two other Arabic speaking high schools in Lod - the Ort School and the Al'ul school, both of which are "hesder" schools, meaning they are privatized, and there are Arab students in other high schools that are Hebrew speaking. The Haaretz story (which is four years old) is correct in saying it is the first Arab high school in Lod, in a very limited sense - it is the first Arab high school that is entirely a part of the public education system; but privatized schools are quite common, expecially in the sectors of Israeli minorities (Arabs, ultra-orthodox).
While I doubt that there is a story here, it might be worth mentioning at Arab_citizens_of_Israel#Education, but only if you can find out the current status of the school and the building project. Incidentally, this is certainly not the only, and certainly not the most egregious, example of cancelled projects for Israeli Arabs. --Ravpapa (talk) 06:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
@WhisperToMe: Not that I could find. It looks like it has a name that is spelled in Hebrew "אלעולא" ("Alaola"). It's not a Hebrew word, probably transliteration of Arabic but I couldn't find the original name. “WarKosign”17:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Of course the school is in operation. It has been continuously. The article only discusses the construction of a new building for the school, not the actuall operation. The closest thing to a website is the page from the Ministry of Education bout the school, http://www.madlan.co.il/education/school/410001 . --Ravpapa (talk) 18:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
WarKosign|WarKosign is right, and that is not the only mistake I made. So here is the real story: The school is called "The New Arab High School" (תיכון ערבי חדש). It is one of 15 secondary schools in Lod, of which four at least specifically serve the Arab-speaking community. Here is a list of the schools, from the Lod municipal website.
Hi! I was wondering what anyone could tell me about Walla!. It's something I found while looking up sources for a band and offhand I'm not sure if it'd be a RS or not. I'm not fluent in Hebrew or really familiar with Israel news sites, so I don't really have a good way to check on this site as a whole. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)10:32, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Balfour Declaration 100 - a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature"?
I've opened a peer review here because I'd like to bring the article to Featured Article status prior to the 100th anniversary next year. By far the most challenging FA criteria is to ensure that the article represents a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature" (WP:FACR 1.c.), so this is the focus of the peer review.
Please could all editors who are familiar with the scholarship surrounding the Balfour Declaration kindly provide their input?
Should we make an article about fighitngs in Gaza after the 2014 war?
There is an article in Hebrew which is generally a list of incidents but I can think we can make an article, maybe a Stub or Start leveled with the major points after the 2014 operation. There was recently an escalation in early May which according to sources within the Hebrew article, some 20 mortars and 2 rockets were shot at this time which is a big thing and it deserves a section. The article should also talk about the recent involvment of ISIL-linked Sheikh Omar Hadid Brigade group which claimed responsibility for most rocket shootings. A section can be created also about the two tunnles found in May and April which is also a major development. The article will be linked to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict article as well as to the 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict, and the Gaza–Israel conflict. The work on this article might bring valuable information to those three articles and overall cover a phase in the conflict barely showcased by Wikipeida.
They don't go in depth to the Gaza Conflict. Although I tried to push it, Nishidani refused to make it a timeline rather than a list and he also refused to include incidents with no casualties. The article I proposed willnot be a list. It will showcase developments in different factors: ceasefire violations, Israeli bombings, continuation of the tunnle construction and the two tunnles found recently, The May escalation as well as maybe the enlargement of the fishing zone in Northen Gaza and the talks with Turkey and what I think might be most interesting is the ISIL group there --Bolter21(talk to me)22:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Sounds more like a newspaper or magazine article rather than an encyclopedia entry. The subject of a wikipedia article has to be covered by notable sources as a single topic, lists however do not. Sepsis II (talk) 23:17, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
What?Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
When?June 2015
How can you help?
1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
The largest section in the Modern Hebrew article describes the language as "non-semitic"
The largest section in the Modern Hebrew article describes the language as "non-semitic". This view is WP:Fringe, as confirmed by reliable sources, yet this view currently occupies the largest space in the article, going into extreme detail including a table for individual opinions, while everything else is presented at a broad/high level. In my opinion, and in the opinion of the majority of editors on the talk page, this is WP:Undue. Over the past year, six editors have expressed their view that the section should be removed or minimized, while only two have supported it. Despite this consensus, the section remains in the article in its current state, likely due to the slow nature of the subject. Any editors wishing to contribute are welcome. Talk:Modern_Hebrew#Bulk_edits_to_be_discussedDrsmoo (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello.
A request was raised in the talkpage of the Modern Hebrew article, asking to replace the current photo used in the infobox of the article, which is currenty the word שלום ׂׂ(Shalom) with Niqqud, which is something you have a better chance finding in the Old Testement rather than in Modern Hebrew writings. There is indeed a need to find a photo that represents Modern Hebrew for the article. Another user offered to put the words of Hatikva, but the Israel national anthem is not written in Modern Hebrew and same with the works of the National poet, Chaim Nachman Bialik. Therefore I"ve offered the words of "Atur Mitzchekh" which is a poem written by Avraham Halfi and is popular in Israel due to the cover made by Arik Einstein, or the children song Pizmon LaYakinton which I belive a generation of non-Yiddish speaking kids grew up with it (including me) and both written in Modern Hebrew (Although not in slang, those are high language, but in Modern Hebrew).
Of course we are open to all sorts of offers to find a photo that will best represent Modern Hebrew. Any suggestions?--Bolter21(talk to me)14:07, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
I think a better illustration would be real use of Hebrew, rather than a synthetic sample. How about this ? Entrance of Beit Sokolov, house of the Israeli Journalists Association“WarKosign”16:56, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
I already suggested that at the Modern Hebrew talk page :P I think Bolter is going to take a better pic of it. Number5721:25, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
I'll be on the lookout while outside. If I see some scene with a lot of different texts - I'll snap a picture. “WarKosign”06:47, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I was next to a billboard yesterday - should've taken a picture. I should be there again on Friday, will try to remember to photograph it. “WarKosign”06:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
I have seen that editor make quite a few good edits, and in this case too his request for a source is legitimate. So, anybody? Debresser (talk) 12:35, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
So for all who probably heard, Israel and Turkey signed a reconciliation deal. I invite all members of the project to contribute to the article.--Bolter21(talk to me)18:29, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Comment: I actually think it warrants its own article. Many international agreements have their own articles, but also in this specific (practical) case, the Israel–Turkey relations article suffers from severe recentism. I think we can spin off at least the article about the agreement, or even better, make an article about the crisis as a whole. —Ynhockey(Talk)08:11, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Can someone at this project make sense of, and provide at least one source for, Amit Amal? It appears to be a secondary school in Israel, but the article is so confusing that I can't make sense of it. Does the article even have the right name? Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:48, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
If you happen to be an Hebrew speaker, sources exist in the Hebrew article. Also, the man who created this article stated he translated the Hebrew article.--Bolter21(talk to me)19:08, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
I can't edit this article but I explain how its biased here. I'd appreciate help making it more complete, talk to me on the talk page if you're interested.--Monochrome_Monitor22:18, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering if any of you could help me find some free (or compatible licensed) maps of Israel that show Israel as the Israeli government views it. Specifically, I want to see the Golan Heights represented the same as any other region in Israel, and the same with Jerusalem. I want serious-looking political maps, not tourist maps. Sole Flounder (talk) 20:24, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Monochrome Monitor I"ve actually tried it and it is not that simple. Too lazy to explain. Any way there's this one: . There is also this map that I"ve created long ago. If you want to use it, just put my name as tha author.--Bolter21(talk to me)21:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
It's occurred to me that we have categories for people of X-Jewish descent, Y-Jewish descent etc for just about every country on Earth, but no categories for people of Israeli-Jewish descent. Now, I understand why this probably is—Israel is a majority-Jewish country, therefore people in the "of Israeli descent" categories would be presumed to be of Israeli-Jewish descent unless stated otherwise. However, because it is possible to be of non-Jewish Israeli descent, the "of Israeli descent" categories are not put into the "of Jewish descent" parent categories—and the result can be seen at Category:British people of Jewish descent, for example. The anomaly is that subcategories for a whole raft of Jewish origins are listed, but not the subcategory for Brits of Israeli descent (Category:British people of Israeli descent).
Now, what might the best fix for this anomaly be? In my opinion it would be unwise to simply bung the straight "of Israeli descent" categories into the respective "of Jewish descent" categories, because as mentioned above it is possible to be of non-Jewish Israeli descent. Should we go through and make "of Israeli-Jewish descent" categories, to slot into the "of Israeli descent" and "of Jewish descent" categories like Category:British people of Austrian-Jewish descent does into Category:British people of Austrian descent and Category:British people of Jewish descent? Or has there been some prior decision against this kind of thing that I am not aware of?
I think we should have two categories: People of Israeli descent, and People of Jewish descent. They are independent of each other. Sir Joseph(talk)18:35, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
I agree with the general statement that "we should have two categories: People of Israeli descent, and People of Jewish descent". And we do. Making a "Israeli people of Jewish descent" and another "Israeli-Jewish people" will be a lot of work, including a lot of cases in which it will be necessary to decide in which of the two category to place a person. Debresser (talk) 19:34, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Right, which is why having two independent categories is the way to go. You can be Jewish and not Israeli and the same is true with the opposite, you can be Israeli and not Jewish. Sir Joseph(talk)20:25, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
I feel that under people of Israeli descent there should be several sub categories. Jews, Arabs, Druz and Christians for sure should each have their own. The main category can be used still for those who dont fit into one of those, unless there is enough to justify its own. - GalatzTalk20:27, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
No. It would just be a mess. You'd then have a category of Jewish Descent for those outside of Israel, and then a subcategory of Israel, being Jewish descent? Just have two independent cats. An American is listed as American Descent and if he's Jewish, he'd get the Jewish descent. The same should be with Israel. If someone is Jewish/Muslim/Druze, they'd get their religion cat, and they'd also get their geography cat. Sir Joseph(talk)20:30, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
There seems to be some confusion above regarding what I'm getting at—I'm referring to categories for non-Israelis of Israeli descent, not categories for Israelis themselves. Isn't it strange that at Category:British people of Jewish descent, Category:German people of Jewish descent, Category:Canadian people of Jewish descent, etc etc you have all different kinds of Jewish descent listed—French-Jewish, Hungarian-Jewish, Russian-Jewish etc etc etc—but no equivalent nested subcategories for people of Israeli-Jewish descent? It's true you can just put them in both the Israeli descent and Jewish descent categories, but then by the same logic why bother having the categories for French-Jewish, Hungarian-Jewish, Russian-Jewish etc etc? —Cliftonian(talk)20:49, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
I misunderstood you as well.
Just to point out the obvious: Jewish descent is a matter of ethnic descent, while Israeli descent is a matter of nationality.
I think the main reason we don't have such a category, is because the state of Israel is so young that there aren't many people of Israeli descent who aren't Israeli themselves. Debresser (talk) 22:59, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
It might be a new country in comparison but there are plenty. Dean Kremer comes to my mind, and I notice he is tagged as neither. He is an American Jew of Israeli descent. - GalatzTalk13:09, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
A user has completely reworked {{Navbox Israeli railways}}, to remove most of the articles it covered. I believe this is wrong, but don't really want to start an edit war. Basically there are only a few railway lines in Israel, and even fewer that have their own articles, so there is little point in having a navbox for them unless you include the stations (through which there is no easy way to navigate outside of categories, which readers don't use as much). Additional opinions are appreciated. —Ynhockey(Talk)10:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
I was reading them and I realised something is really broken here.
First of all, the first article seems like it should be removed. It has many unsourced areas and by reading it, it seems hilariously biased. For example, the background section begins with Ben Gurion's plans to "build up Jewish defence". From all I"ve read and learned, the roots of the war can be traced in World War I, the 1930s Arab Revolt, the Jewish insurgecny in the 40s, the Jewish migration in generall.... The whole place is poorly sourced, using a two doccumentary movies as source, when the latter links to a deleted youtube video. Then the section continues, to describe the partition plan, saying a generally POV claim that "The Jews were the minority but recieved the majority" while very poorly explaining that the majority of the Jewish State was an undeveloped and barely populated desert. I saw that while half of the section is poorly sourced, most of the sources are the Palestinian ones, i.e. Illan Peppe, Benny Morris and Mohammed El-Nawawy, with one quote from the Jewish Virtual Library and one by Dore Gold. But I wouldn't complain that this section is really biased while not AGF, becuase it is generally poorly sourced and containes very little information. In brief: the section on the first stage of the war is tiny, with half of it focusing on Plan Dalet, with very little sources (too many [citation needed] templates), the second stage is also very very short, but starts with US and Soviet support of the Jews (as if the first thing you need to know about the Arab invasion is that the Jews were supported by the US and USSR) and the rest of the article follows the same path.
I say, we should delete the first article, which is a poorly sourced, quite biased unrepresentitve summery of the other two articles, and merge the other two into a single article about all of the war. If you go and say "hey!, the article will be very long you deepshit", I respect that, but if you look at World War II, whose size is 230,000 bytes, merging the two articles about the two stages, will make it 270,000 bytes, if we merge all of the information, but in the merge, we will have to remove a lot of duplicant information, so I guess the final article won't be larger that the WWII article. In this opertunity, we can extract information from the article and create or expand articles about the different fronts and battles and so we could make the article even shorter, while retaining all of the information. Either way, having a large article, will help the readers to better understand the war.
If that didn't convince you, here is another thing that made me think we should merge the two: The views the articles get (in the last 30 days):
As you can see, the article about the second stage dominates in views. My speculation is that people simply search for "1948 Arab-Israeli war" more often than "Civil War" or "Palestine war". The war is known by most [English] sources as "Arab-Israeli War". Personally, I never heard anyone calling the first period a "civil war" and I don't really know if there is a source to support that (although I believe there is) and "Palestine War" is also a very unpopular name. Another problem that you see from this, is not only that only one stage of the war gets the big majority of the views, also the summery, gets more views than the first stage of the war, which is a shame, because the first stage of the war is a stage not less important than the second and the article of it is quite a good one.
I'd delete the first one on the basis that it's needless duplication of the other two topics. However, I think the other two should be kept as separate as the internal civil war was a different thing to the post-Mandate war. Certainly in the books I've read they are treated as separate conflicts. However, I think some of the content of the civil war article should be moved over (i.e. anything after 14 May). Number5717:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
The Israel War of Independence should be redirected to the 1948 Arab Israeli War. The other remaining article doesn't really fit in with that. 🔯 Sir Joseph🍸(talk)14:52, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
My apologies, Bolter21. I see that you did notify the WikiProjects of all the warring states as well as WikiProject Arab World and MILHIST. The two I notified are the only ones on my watchlist, so I hadn't seen your notifications. Again, I'm sorry for the snark. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk18:00, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
FWIW, that article structure was a result of discussion we had a few years ago either on one of the article talk pages, or perhaps on the Nakba page (too lazy to dig it up). If I remember correctly, the "Palestine war" article is supposed to correspond with the timeframe of the War of Independence (also one possible interpretation of Nakba) and the other two correspond with how historians sometimes split up the war to a civil war and a war between countries. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 23:59, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Help?
Hi. Can someone help with Hebrew sources? The draft submission of Draft:Amos Gilad - an Israeli runner - is being considered. But running into problems.
Hey, something popped up in the news feed today. I was randomly googling Wikipedia and this article came up about the deletion of a page about Dafna Meir on the Hebrew Wikipedia. ([22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29])
It looks like she's received some coverage for her death, but what interested me and got me researching a little was that her article's deletion appears to have garnered a bit of coverage as well. ([30])
I was just wondering if she wouldn't merit a page on here. I don't know what the notability standards are for elsewhere, but her death seems like it would probably pass NCRIME. The above sourcing was just from the first two pages of a general Google search and I got the impression that there's more out there, likely in another language. Anyone interested in writing a page on this or helping me to write a page? I'm not sure how to put the criticism of Wikipedia on the page, but it looks like it'd make for an interesting subsection. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)14:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
We had the same thing here, with the Murder of Hallel Yaffa Ariel, but here people wanted for some odd reason to retian the memorial page. Dafna Meir indeed has much much more coverege than Hallel Yafa Ariel, but I don't really know what would be written in that article. Her death wasn't a complicated significant terrorist attack like the one in Tel Aviv on June, it was just one with horrible consequences. The person it self is not significant, she wasn't a figure that deserves an article and apart from that, all of the information we could get about her is the memorials made for her. Her death stands alone and does not have much significance in other topics. She was just a loved person which got a little more attention that the other slained people in the last wave of terror. I"ve read the Hebrew article but I was not involved in the vote and I have to tell you, it has no encyclopedic value, only a emotio-nationalist one. This is something that happens a lot in the Hebrew Wikipedia. Many persons get an article because they are mentioned in some place's local history, with quite vague sources and no mention in mainstream media or scholary and then there are endless debates about wether the article should remain. I still think the article about Hallel Yafa Ariel is no more than an equivelent to a news report and a memorial site and seeing what a team of Israeli editors managed to create for Dafna Meir, I know I will oppose the creation of an article about her.--Bolter21(talk to me)17:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
I am not so sure she is notable for her own article, however there is a history of including these one off events. I wouldn't say she is any less notable than Shelly Dadon, Almog Shiloni or Eitam and Na'ama Henkin. If they have articles I am not sure she doesn't meet the criteria based on WP:OSE. Based on all this, I personally wouldn't create the article, but I believe we have a standard of her being notable and clearly based on this recent news coverage, it certainly can't be argued to be WP:RECENTISM, therefore if you decided to create, I would vote to keep if it was nominated. - GalatzTalk17:26, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
I don't see the notebility in creating articles for Shelly Dadon and Almog Shiloni. Great tragedies,I was even near of them when it happened, but they are not notable. Eitam and Na'ama Henkin on the other hand are very notable, their death marks the begning of a seemingly year old phase of violance, leading to the death of clost to 40 Israelis and clost to 220 Palestinians.--Bolter21(talk to me)18:43, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
It was created already and Shiloni survived an AfD, and Dadon's talk page twice talks about the notability/deletion, but neither went to an AfD. You can see my views on both there, and although I do believe its notable, its just barely. Getting back to the topic at hand, I feel if those two are, than Dafna Meir is. As a comment, I do not believe Dafna Meir is notable, however Murder of Dafna Meir is. - GalatzTalk18:51, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
I am working on an article concerning Israel's occupation of the Golan Heights and was wondering if anyone would be willing to help. It is not yet published and can be found here.
The "Golan Heights" refers to the occupied territory. The "Golan Heights" *is* the occupied territory. The article we are missing is actually an article about the geographical Golan, south to the Banias and east to the Yarmouk.--Bolter21(talk to me)11:26, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Well, I created the breakdown section based on Carta's Atlas, which cites the Hagannah Book, Chapter II, vol.1 (pages 301-340). The Atlas mentions dates of attacks, dates of evactuation and if the the evacuation was ordered by the British police. In Gaza it spesifically mentiones a British evacuation of the residents by train. In Beit Shean it mentiones major destruction to Jewish property. In Acre it mentiones an attack on a Jewish manufacturing facility and in Haifa it mentiones three days of attacks and riots. In Jerusalem it mentions which neighborhoods were atttacked by which residents. Anyway you have the Hagannah Book (I have only the first chapter in the 1954 version). I tried to search more information and added it in some parts to the breakdown section, moslty from the localities article's. I am sure that the Haganah Book it self is a much more detailed and reliable source than my Atlas.--Bolter21(talk to me)00:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Notice to participants at this page about adminship
Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.
So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:
We have a new article Cannabis in Israel, but it could really use improvement and expansion, especially from anyone who can read Hebrew sources. With a little polishing, it'd also be really useful to make a translated version for Hebrew Wikipedia since it's a topic of increasing interesting these days. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 03:01, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings WikiProject Israel/Archive 5 Members!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.
Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
There is a dispute on the Tel Dan Stele, Merneptah Stele, Mesha Stele, and Kurkh Monolith pages regarding the sentence in the lead describing them, which uses the phrasing "(x) is also one of only four known contemporary inscriptions containing the name of Israel". As I see it, the use of the word "only" has no place on Wikipedia and is very transparently putting a POV in the lead. The preferred version would have the same wording, but without "only". Other editors have removed this as well, but the editor who inserted it continues to bring it back, with the argument that the source he provided uses the word "only" in the same paragraph. This seems spurious, as the source is a biblical minimalist presenting his opinion, in contrast to the opinions of many others, so it is a cherry-picked source used to present a POV in the leads of four articles. I cannot see any justification whatsoever for using the qualifier "only" on Wikipedia. One wouldn't say "only hit x home runs". Wikipedia deals in facts and shouldn't be presenting POVs in leads (or anywhere). There is a talk page discussion here which covers the other articles as well. Drsmoo (talk) 23:09, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
It would be greatly appreciated if some of you could expand this stub and also help answer my query on the talkpage. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
I wonder if anyone with some subject familiarity might be willing to work a little on the above article? We currently have a picture of the band nominated at FPC, and it'd be great if we could see some article improvement. Thanks, Josh Milburn (talk) 23:55, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
When I found myself wandering the Old City on a recent trip to Jerusalem, one of the [many] places that made an impression on me was the long stretch of tightly packed merchant stalls in the alleys leading from Jaffa Gate to the Western Wall. As I started looking through some pictures I took, I set out to find the name of this market. I was first surprised that we didn't seem to have an article about it, but I think now that my biggest problem is lack of historical knowledge and/or familiarity with Hebrew or Arabic. As far as I can tell, it's most often referred to as just the "Arab Market", or "The Souq", "Souq Al-Bazar", "Old City Bazaar", or "David Street Bazaar". The only concrete name I could find was David Street, which seems to be the best known stretch, though it doesn't encompass the whole of the market. I'm thinking the trouble there may be that there's no clear dividing line between where this market ends and other commercial areas/businesses begin (again, I'm not familiar enough with the area to know better). It looks like we have a pretty well-populated Commons category for David Street, but, again, no article. So I started a draft: Draft:David Street (Old City). Given my aforementioned limitations, it seemed best to leave it as a draft and request assistance here. I'll go back to plowing through my glut of pictures for the time being. :) — Rhododendritestalk \\ 20:35, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
The Hebrew wiki has an article about Jerusalem old city market (translation), but it doesn't seem to have much sources. Still can be good for ideas on what to write in the article. “WarKosign”21:55, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
GAR
Jews, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:16, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Adding "Oslo," the play to the "Oslo Peace Accords" Page
There is a play opening tonight in New York City, on Broadway, entitled "Oslo." It is a fictionalized retelling of the events that led to the Oslo accords.
Lincoln Center Theater page
Reviews of the play have been exceptional [31]
and it will transfer to London after the run on Broadway.[32].
I write because the pages on ALL topics related to the Israeli peace process are locked (for good reason, I'm certain) but there should likely be a footer section at this page: Oslo_Accords which talks about "The Oslo Accords in Fiction" and references the following play WP page: Oslo_(play). But I don't know how to contribute this on a "hot topic" that has been locked down at Wikipedia. Ben BrooklynBen (talk) 10:36, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello, @BrooklynBen: Kudos for commenting here to solicit input. Based on what you've written, I've made several structural edits to the page Oslo Accords; I've retained the heading worded See also since this is the single instance; once further content is available the heading can be changed to Cultural references (per WP:MOS#"In popular culture" and "Cultural references" material and content added after the bullet and internal link. On the page Oslo (play) I added two Template notices for sections needing content, where you can continue editing without restriction (and proceed on your way to getting further WP editing credentials!). You're welcome to contact me if you'd like further assistance. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Comment. I've asked for help at WP:Palestine also. If the template might at some future time be useful, it'd be better to fix it rather than to take the drastic step of proposing to WP:TNT it. I'm holding back from WP:TFD for a day or two. Narky Blert (talk) 21:49, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
I'm failing to understand: on the Dablinks page you provided, I went to Template:Jewish and Arab localities in Israel, selected "EDIT" which opened the page "Editing Module:Israeli-Palestinian localities" (Note - which hasn't been renamed to match the renamed Template; is this proper as-is?). Checking at random half-a-dozen localities on the DAB list, in the module all of them have proper internal links with the exact names of the page. Why is this? I can't fix what's not broken... or I'm on the wrong page, or ?? -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:04, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
@Deborahjay: On that Dablinks page, click on one of the problem links, e.g. Arraba. It's a DAB page with two entries - Galilee and Jenin. There are two possibilities:
If the template says Arraba, without more, there's an error which needs fixing.
If the template correctly points to one or other of those places, you've run into a rare but known Wiki annoyance. Fixes to templates can take several days to work their way through the system. (Someone tagged a template for {{dn}} last week. The problem has been fixed, but articles which transclude that template are still showing up as having problems.)
Yes - in the half-dozen examples (evidently previously correct or corrected), the #2 situation has appeared over the period of week I've checked. I'll now tackle the task with your suggested systematic approach and report back here should there be persistent inconsistencies. Otherwise I'll note the resolved status on Module talk:Israeli-Palestinian localities which is the talk page for the module whose code requires the fixes. -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:30, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel/Archive 5/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Israel.
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Israel, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Your input is needed at Talk:Jewish diaspora regarding the question whether the diaspora was the result of "expulsion" or "mass expulsion", and whether those who disagree with that are "historians", "some" historians" or "leading historians". Debresser (talk) 15:54, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
See Talk:Shva § Shva-Na-Naḥ, or Shva what?. The article has four (or six or more) different spellings in English for the Hebrew terms for
"the resting Shva (naḥ / נָח)" and
"the mobile Shva (naʿ / נָע)".
Can someone with facility with Hebrew language maybe take a look at the article decline at Draft:Victoria Hanna? Perhaps the reviewer can't read Hebrew? The article has many full length refs in Hebrew as well as some in English that are devoted to the subject. And she sings in the Maccabiah Opening Ceremony today, so it would be nice to have her article up. Merci. --2604:2000:E016:A700:6C0D:E230:F6E4:397E (talk) 07:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Article is about the painting Yerusalem Wedding. It's completely unsourced, and has been tagged as such since created back in 2014. It doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG, but is there some more specific guideline that is used to access the notability of paintings or other works of art? Perhaps someone from this WikiProject can suggest where to find sources which might help establish the notability of this painting? -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:42, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: Put it up for AFD (Note it was up for PROD - was de-PRODed as the artist is notable (though that's perhaps borderline as well (created by same user )- but it is sourced, I bet it will be a borderline pass) - so you should AFD not PROD). I wasn't able to find any sources for this other than Wiki-clone spam. The artist is notable - but in the 100,000$ range for the best of his works. You've got my Delete vote. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Contemporary Art/Notability - which for some reason doesn't really cover this. However one would expect a painting to be notable if it received significant coverage or was unusual in some other notable respect.Icewhiz (talk) 06:19, 15 August 2017 (UTC) struck out wrong info.Icewhiz (talk) 14:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
I thought the same thing about adding the image to Hotlz - actually did so and then self-reverted after noticing it was removed from Holtz as it is a non-free image.Icewhiz (talk) 08:08, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
FWIW, artist probably survives notability; at least the English and German Wikipedia articles are decently enough sourced. I don't know enough about art notability per se to speak to the painting itself. I suppose if it has been shown widely in non-commercial galleries around the world that might be enough. But if you can't find sources for that, then AfD. StevenJ81 (talk) 12:37, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
I created the article on Itshak Holtz, who I feel is notable, but would agree that the painting is probably not notable enough to warrant its own article. I originally uploaded the painting to be on Holtz's page as an example of his work.--Bernie44 (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
First of all, thanks to everyone who responded. My post was only about the stand-alone article about the painting, and not a comment on the Wikipedia notability of the artist. Regarding the non-free use of the file, the file was being used in two articles, the one about the painting itself and the one about the artist, but it only had a non-free use for one of the two. Generally in such cases, per item 6 of WP:NFC#UUI, WP:NFCCP only allows the use in the stand-alone article about the work itself, unless it is specifically the subject of critical commentary in the artist's article so that the context required by WP:NFCC#8 is clearly evident. The artist's article, however, just briefly mentions the painting by name in pretty much the same manner as the other paintings mentioned in the same section and there is no sourced content discussing how this particular painting illustrates the artist's style. This is why I changed the non-free use rationale for the file so that it was for the article about the painting and then subsequently removed the image from the artist's page. If the painting itself is not Wikipedia notable for a stand-alone article, then it might be possible to re-add the file to the artist's page. However, I think there should be more content (preferably sourced) added specifically about the painting and how it is indicative of the artist's style to strengthen the justification for its non-free use. Otherwise, you could basically use any painting of Holtz to serve the same purpose which in turn means that the non-free use tends to be more "decorative" than contextual. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
You've handled everything completely correctly. Let me just add a couple of items:
You could use the image in the artist page as illustrating the artist's style, as you said. But if any other painting can do so equally well, and a free image (ideally), or a non-free image already legitimately used elsewhere (second best) is available, it would be best not to use this one at all.
A different user questioned the notability of Holtz. I was responding to that, not to you, on the subject of Holtz. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:26, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Traditionally, we don't label people anti-Zionists (or antisemites) although we may put them in categories related to anti-Zionism (or antisemitism). I've nominated all the new categories for deletion and provided ARBPIA notice to the "new" editor. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk02:17, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Balfour Declaration 100 - Featured Article Candidate
Three months to go until the centenary of the declaration. Per Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Balfour Declaration/archive1, this article has now been put up for a featured article review. Comments, suggestions, and help in responding to feedback, would all be appreciated.
If this WP:FAR is successful, I believe it will be the first Israel-Palestine related article to reach WP:FA status for more than seven years, with the previous one being SlimVirgin's nomination of the Muhammad al-Durrah incident in early 2010.
There's a short article on Yoel Palgi, a Haganah member who parachuted into Yugoslavia in 1944 and co-founded El-Al. The biography section was only one paragraph long, but a second paragraph was recently added solely to accomodate a singular quote. The paragraph/quote added was as follows:
Palgi returned home in 1945, and was shocked by the impression he received on returning to his community:'There is a kind of general agreement that the Holocaust dead were worthless people. Unconsciously, we have accepted the Nazi views that the Jews were subhuman.’
The full quote, however, from Tom Segev's book is "Everywhere I turned, the question was fired at me: Why did the Jews not rebel? Why did they go like lambs to the slaughter? Suddenly I realized that we were ashamed of those who were tortured, shot burned. There is a kind of general agreement that the Holocaust dead were worthless people. unconsciously, we ave accepted the Nazi view that the Jews were subhuman."
It seems like the full quote would be more appopriate to give it some context (I also assume you mean Yoel Palgi). I see that the editor who reverted you has violated WP:ARBPIA3 ("If an edit is reverted by another editor, its original author may not restore it within 24 hours.") so should probably be reported at WP:AE. Number5721:35, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Lol, That is a brand new interpretation: the 24 hours goes from the editors own revert, not another editors revert! But please bring it to WP:ARCA if you don't believe me...Huldra (talk) 21:55, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
You can laugh all you want, but you seem to have a basic misunderstanding of the rule. Also, what you've said above ("editor's own revert") makes no sense. Number5721:59, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
OK, seriously, show me a single instance where the rule has been interpreted this way? Again, if you really think it is so, then please take it to WP:ARCA. And yes, that first edit shouldn't really be called revert, rather just first edit. Huldra (talk) 22:07, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
There's no other possible way that that sentence could be interpreted other than an editor is not allowed to restore an edit within 24 hours of it being reverted – it's a fairly basic sentence with little room for ambiguity. Your claimed rule would be worded something like "An editor may not restore a reverted edit within 24 hours of having originally made it". By all means raise it at ARCA if you have your doubts. I certainly don't. Number5722:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I can read it either way. I think ARCA is a good idea as this won't be the last time a disagreement on the meaning arises. Zerotalk01:09, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Regardless, the quote does not belong in the article. It's a cherry picked quote taken without context to prove a point of some sort. It has no bearing on the subject of the article other than a shock quote. Sir Joseph(talk)21:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
It isn't clear to me that Palgi meets notability guidelines, nor that there is enough reliable information for an article. thepartisan.orgdefinitely does not satisfy WP:RS. Also note that it is based entirely on Palgi's book "Into the Inferno". According to the Haaretz article, some key details changed between editions of the book, and when he was questioned about inconsistencies during the "Kasztner trial" he replied "I wrote a novel, not a history".[33] Why do we have a "history" article based almost entirely on a book whose author describes it as a novel? Zerotalk01:09, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Sir Joseph that the quote seems out of place. I think it might be appropriate in an article about Israeli views of the Holocaust, or as part of a section within International response to the Holocaust. I think Palgi is probably notable, but you wouldn't know it by reading the Wikipedia stub or looking at its (lack of) reliable sources. I found more than 1,500 English-language Google hits and a similar number in Hebrew (most of the Google hits are not reliable sources, but some are newspaper articles and books). Here's a copy of his obituary. If it was significant, his involvement with the founding of El Al should be mentioned in the lead section, not buried like an afterthought in the last paragraph. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk01:49, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
It could use a mild case of TNT to rearrange the article and put in the CAA and Kupat Holim which is notable (for a person, not necessarily that in totality is notable for Wiki).Sir Joseph(talk)01:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Drsmoo said he would go to a board and seek advice. I would have expected a recourse to a wider community of editors, rather than addressing the question here. On seeing his note, I went to all the boards and found no such request, and had to look at his contribs (something I rarely do on principle) to find this discussion. This choice looks like fishing for a more likely negative consensus in favour of his desire to cancel the material, preempting the less predictable outcome that might come from a disinterested board.
Number57. I don't know how Drsmoo found that obscure page. He had been reverting me consistently at Gilad Atzmon, where he was removing any material than might tone down the general hostility of RS to that person. Here he showed up and automatically reverted me for putting in material on a Zionist which, in his view, not mine, might be taken as reflecting negatively on Zionism or Palgi. The edit summary was false, as anyone can see. All you can see is possible evidence for an AE report: the context of poor editing that had me restore material is ignored.
If, as argued, there is little on Palgi so far, so little as to question whether we should have an article, how on earth does one get to a post-stub level if what little comes one's way in desultory reading is evaluated in terms of the 'shock' image it might give to some readers. I was doing background reading for Gilad Atzmon's remarks on sabra, that is his own background. In his 2011 work he analyses this tradition of contempt for diaspora Jews as part of the background he struggled against. Segev gives a substantial amount of material on this, and Alan Wolfe used it. I'm famniliar with the mainstream material, but Palgi's quote was new to me, so I went to his page and added the quote, word for word, I found in Wolfe. As I read it, Palgi's disconcerted reaction to that 'sabra' calculatedness was exceptional, and it did him honour to express his dissent from the views he found commonplace among his fellow Zionists on returning from the war theatre. He had been there - the murder of so many diaspora Jews - was for him a first-hand experience, it was not some news report of abstract figures, or of some horrible but distant image, as it was for many of those who, from Ben-Gurion to Apolinary Hartglas were, notwithstanding the apocalypse, thinking of what to do strategically in terms of the exigencies of getting a state in the making on a sound footing. Both views can be read as historically comprehensible, -hard-nosed pragmatism and moral outrage pleading for measures to help all (the divide between those who defend Rudolf Kastner's Sophie's Choice dilemma and decision, and those who deplore it.)
The Palgi quote belongs to the latter, and, as I said, marks his opinion as notable within the discursive drift of those intense arguments. You simply cannot build pages, or biographies, by keeping out material because it 'shocks' some. If anything, the addition of that material should be an incentive to built the Palgi article up so that, with further biographical details, the quote assumes its proper proportion. As the argument stands, it looks simply like catching at any argument in order to leave the article in an impoverished state, while maintaining only material that reflects only positively on a complex man, a very harsh period, and and an even more complicated movement. To adopt, as Drsmoo does, a hostile attitude to one bio, Gilad Atzmon's, removing whatever might attenuate the overriding impression given of a vicious man, while adding details only of onslaughts on his bona fides, and then going excising a quote from a 'Zionist' because it is 'shocking' is pure POV pushing, and I'm surprised this editorial incoherence over principles interests no one. Nishidani (talk) 10:14, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject
Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.
Mishmar HaEmek, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
I imagine there is -- in Arabic. In English, there are many ways to transliterate Arabic names (and names in Hebrew and other languages that don't use the Roman alphabet). We generally use the spelling found most commonly in reliable English-language sources, which sometimes means that people with the same name in their own language have slightly different spellings here. — MShabazzTalk/Stalk17:36, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Consistency would be nice, but as somebody famous once said "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Even with a single name, transliterations can vary quite a bit -- Muammar Gaddafi may be the worst example. The best we can do is to spell the name consistently within the article, which is sometimes a problem. — MShabazzTalk/Stalk18:06, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
In some cases each BLP chooses their own English spelling. The question here is if this a Wiki editor choice, a media choice, or the BLP's choice.Icewhiz (talk) 17:50, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
By default, an article's title is whatever the editor who created it called it. But articles are renamed (moved) all the time. The guideline I cited above, WP:UE, is the basis on which to argue that an article should be renamed because the transliteration is incorrect or not representative of what most reliable sources use. — MShabazzTalk/Stalk17:55, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
I agree with you both. Just wanted to point out that most Jewish-European names do come from languages that use Roman alphabet. Therefore, for both Haim/Chaim and Ezer, the name should end with "mann" as it is of German origin.--Eranrabl (talk) 13:04, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Edit-warring in The Times of Israel article over Infobox: newspaper vs. website
Today I stumbled on this list. I think the information there is useful, but creating and maintaining such a list for every party (even just those who are in the Knesset) in every election would be a nightmare. I suggest maintaining making it one list for each party for every election. For some parties we already have something similar in the party article, but for major parties it can be a separate list. Thoughts? —Ynhockey(Talk)10:59, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
The IDI also has lists for every election and is a great resource, although there are a small number of errors (I came across one list that was actually from the previous election). Number5712:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
I think the Central Elections Committee is the authoritative source on the lists, they should have a website for each election. We already have shortened lists for all parties on the elections article, so I'm not sure how useful an identical but more full separate list would be. Having party-specific lists might be useful though. —Ynhockey(Talk)14:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
They have had websites for the past few elections, but they often disappear after a few years. I'm not sure articles for each parties' lists would be better than having the Dutch style lists. Number5722:05, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Have you considered registering an account? The article is only partially protected, so you can make the edits yourself after editing some other articles and staying for a few days. —Ynhockey(Talk)13:40, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Assessment chart
Is anyone able to fix the WP Israel assessment chart so the statistics will update? It has been broken for a very long time.--Geewhiz (talk) 07:35, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
What I am going to do, is to move all vital information from both articles about the ancient settlement to Magdala, and only leave mentions to it. All mentions to Magdala in these article will only stay if they have any connection to the subject of these articles.
It sounds similar to a situation we had with Huqoq/Yaquq/Hukok. We ended up having 3 separate articles on the ancient settlement, the depopulated Arab village and the modern kibbutz, each linking to the other two. “WarKosign”11:09, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Yepp, that sounds ok. Some of the ancient pre Ottoman history in al-Majdal, Tiberias should possibly go into Magdala. I am trying to get some order into this....again and again I see the same as happened in the Migdal, Israel article...editors just copy the history from the Palestinian place...without even bothering to add the Bibliography section(!) ...or checking if it is in the same place (which it is sometimes..but definitely not always...and often is uncertain)
We have some of the same situation in Dura, Hebron, which apparently followed the biblical city of Adurim. Some editors are insisting that virtually all of the biblical story of Adurim should also be in Dura, Hebron...Heck, why do we even have a separate article on Adurim?? Comments? Huldra (talk) 21:13, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Please, one village at a time.
Anyway, I found some trouble while approaching Magdala over the ambiguety shown in the article. I might just re-write the whole thing, but I am too afraid to remove vital information.--Bolter21(talk to me)21:27, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, Magdala looks a mess. At the moment it just looks as some kind of depository for more or less random facts...no overview at all. That article needs "an owner"! Just go for it (...if you remove something someone finds vital, I have a feeling you will be made aware of it....) Huldra (talk) 21:56, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Categorization
I have noticed that most articles relating to wikiproject Israel do not get recategorized, for example, Otzma Yehudit is still a start class article despite having 55 citations, often multiple for each statement. Same goes for Yachad (political party) which is considered a Stub still. Another example is Likud..
Unrelated, I want to say that I am very thankful for User:Sokuya for developing and helping with the tables relating to election results and leadership on party pages recently. ShimonChai (talk) 17:26, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of state leaders in 2016#RfC: Inclusion of Palestine as a sub state of Israel. Could you please give your opinion on whether or not Palestine should be considered a separate sovereign entity from Israel? Many thanks Spirit Ethanol (talk) 13:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
. There is also this map that I"ve created long ago. If you want to use it, just put my name as tha author.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
