Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Siege of Jerusalem (1948)

Seems to be a developing dispute on this page. Ceedjee has tagged it for neutrality on the basis that he thinks the title is POV. A very brief discussion of the issues a few months ago resulted in "no consensus". Maybe a few people with some familiarity with this period could take a look? Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 13:46, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is important to be familiar with this period.

My point is that we must follow what wp:rs secondary sources (of academic level) use as title to describe the events.

I provided numerous of these and given the title has not been moved, I just wanted to use the pov-tag...

Ceedjee (talk) 18:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Background info and article for 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict

Concerning 2008 Israel–Gaza conflict, a background article for 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, additional info for it has been retrieved from an AfD for another article. That info needs to be summarized and incorporated into 2008 Israel–Gaza conflict.

Please see:

• Talk:2007–2008 Israel–Gaza conflict#2008 material for 2008 Israel–Gaza conflict

Help, editing, and additional input and comments are requested. --Timeshifter (talk) 13:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Al-Fakhura school incident

Since this is such an emotional issue for both sides, I'd like to add this page to the collaboration. The Squicks (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Arabian Peninsula Article

This is the main Wikipedia article for Arabia and the Arabian subcontinent. There has been a continual edit war over the inclusion of historical or geographical material about Syria and Palestine being part of Arabia or Ottoman Arabistan. A Request for comment is currently open on the talk page.harlan (talk) 14:02, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Israel Shahak

I've added Israel Shahak, however feel free to revert. PhilKnight (talk) 23:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

massacre

About 1 year ago, we discussed about the issue related to the use of the work massacre and one of the problem was linked with the massacres committed during the 1948 War. At the time, I had started a discussion on the talk page of the article that was never really followed.
I have just made the modifications I suggested and go on working on this. Any comment is welcome.

• Killings and massacres during the 1948 Palestine War

Ceedjee (talk) 14:30, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Six-Day War

There are a group of editors who are routinely deleting well-known quotes from Israeli leaders, historians, and material from published historical accounts about the role of the IDF in the path to war. harlan (talk) 05:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Arab citizens of Israel

User:Okedem is repeatedly reverting edits and removing sourced material, giving as the sole reason the fact that the source is Ilan Pappé, of whom s/he writes "Pappe isn't a source for anything but his own opinions. He is a political activist, and not an vaguely objective scholar". Perhaps other editors can also keep an eye on this. RolandR (talk) 21:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Occupied Territories section in Israel

Over at Talk:Israel there is a discussion about replacing the section header "Occupied territories" with "disputed territories". I think people can guess where I stand on this, but please go and say what you think..--Peter cohen (talk) 10:43, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

A_land_without_a_people_for_a_people_without_a_land and the denial of the exitence of a Palestinian people

Arising out of discussion at the above article, I'm wondering whether we're missing am article on the debate over Palestinian peoplehood. The article linked above focuses largely on the origin of the phrase itselfwith Christian pre-Zionists and the, apparently mistaken, belief that Jewish Zionists regularly used that phrase. However the phrase itself is emblematic of a view shared by Christian restorationists, the shapers of Western policy on the Middle East around w100 years ago who saw Palestine as an exception to the notion of national self-determiantion, Zionist and early Israeli leaders such as David Ben Gurion and Golda Meir, and advocates of a Greater Syria; the shared view being that there was no such thing as a Palestinian people, instead Palestinians were just inhabitants of one part of a historic Syrian province which provided their real national identity. I can't see any discussion of this view linked from Palestinian people. Is there an article of which I am unaware? Or do people agree that there should be one?--Peter cohen (talk) 20:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Peter cohen. wikipedia has many articles about national movements; an article on the rise and development of Palestinian nationalism is long overdue.Historicist (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

That's an example of a phrase and certainly some relevant Palestinian phrases should have articles. But it would seem this issue should be addressed in one or more of the articles at Palestinian disambiguation - especially Palestinian people. CarolMooreDC (talk) 23:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

POV quoting of Gilad Atzmon

Per the discussion in Talk:Gilad_Atzmon#Atzmon.27s_continued_controversial_writings

• User:Drsmoo opines that “plainly clear that Atzmon is an anti-semite more than he is an anti-zionist” and tries to prove that through selective editing of this recent Interview
• This diff (see last paragraphs) and also reproduced on talk page, shows my more NPOV summary of what Atzmon says which Drsmoo has replaced with a far more inaccurate and POV- pushing summary.

NPOV comments welcome. CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Carol's edit here; and from the interview she quotes, I draw the conclusion that Atzmon is indeed an antisemite as well as an anti-Zionist. This, however, is my own conclusion, based on a synthesis of Atzmon's statements and writings. As such, I would not edit the article to state that Atzmon is an antisemite. If there are statements from reliable soutces making this assessment of his views, they could be quoted -- and attributed -- without offering this as Wilipedia's own assessment. In any case, Wikipedia readers are surely intelligent enough to read and understand what Atzmon writes, and what this means. We don't need to beat them into submission! RolandR (talk) 14:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Please tell Drsmoo that! I too just want to let readers draw their own conclusions, without unfairly biasing. But giving his side of the story is seen by some as bias. Of course, 1/3 the article remains a WP:Coatrack to prove that he is an antisemite. Need a good noninvolved editor to clean it out. CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 IDF T-Shirt controversy

I came across this page, shouldn't this AfD be notified elsewhere so more people would know about the voting? Thanks. Yamanam (talk) 13:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Responded and put in a plug for this project. Something we should do more often! CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Where to bring meta-issue of double standard on religions in wikipedia?

Editing the Gilad Atzmon article is a study in the double standard in the real world about exploring and criticizing the psycho-dynamics and politics of Islam/Catholicism/etc. and their adherents and doing so to Judaism/Zionism and its adherents. While Atzmon's provocateurish manner of trying to explore the issues certainly has its problems, even the calmest, most intellectually factual and precise professors who dare to approach the latter subject are trashed as antisemites.
The question is: Should this double standard be allowed to be propagated on wikipedia?? This should be a major Meta-level issue in Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration and somehow addressed constructively within the parameters of Request for arbitration on editing on Palestine-Israel articles - or some other forum. What's the best way to do that? CarolMooreDC (talk) 18:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Fatahland

Please help me save the article from removal. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 06:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Origina notice moved from project discussion page: AfD on Fatahland: Just recently an article on Fatahland was started. I posted a request for deletion.

Cheers, pedrito - talk - 26.03.2009 07:13

Palestine Think Tank WP:RS?

I put this up here, for specific article and in general since others might want to use in future. Opinions welcome: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Palestine_Think_Tank Thanks. CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Israeli legislative election, 1977

I am currently experiencing repeated difficulty on this page; differences of opinion have gone to 3RR, but not beyond, although I am well past my 1RR pledge. It generally revolves around the impossibility of finding proper NPOV WEIGHT between something/anything added and the opposing view that has allowed nothing to be added. Different editorial opinions and discussion are sought. Thanks, CasualObserver'48 (talk) 15:01, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hamas

The recently imposed sanctions on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/West Bank - Judea and Samaria are already bearing fruit: the article on Hamas is being torn to shreds. Can any of the non-sanctioned editors out there keep an eye on it?

Cheers and thanks, pedrito - talk - 06:20 14.05.2009

Edward Said

This page is currently protected and there is an RFC out. The issue is around Justus Weiner's claims that Said misled people on his background and what coverage, if any, these deserve.--Peter cohen (talk) 19:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Za'atar‎ etc.

One of our periodic food-fights has broken out. Za'atar‎ and its talk page seem to be the main focus. Some hummus-related activity too. New accounts often with foody names, talking about Israeli cultural theft mean that I suspect sock puppetry but results from my recent check-user request were negative. However an admin might want to take a look.

Looking forward, might a well-sourced article on the influence of Arab culture on Israeli cuisine be useful in dealing with these episodes? Not that I'm offering to be a main author.--Peter cohen (talk) 10:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Hummus is not an Arab invention. This food in different version is common in the Middle East and the Mediterranean. Israel and the Israeli people is part of this region, and naturally it is also part of its culinary culture. DrorK (talk) 18:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Look at the talk page there and the sources that User:Macrakis identified placing the earliest record of the dish in or near Damascus.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Israel and Mount Hermon

There is a possible edit war brewing over the inclusion of a picture of Mount Hermon. User:Supreme Deliciousness and I argue that the picture should not be included as none of it lies within Israel's internationally recognised borders. User:Drork argues that it should be included because some of it lies within the part of the Golan Heights annexed by Israel.--Peter cohen (talk) 16:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

How is this related to the Israeli Palestinian conflict? The Golan Heights have nothing to do with the Palestinian people. DrorK (talk) 18:19, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The project does work on related issues, and Israeli occupation of another group's land is certainly related. Just like articles on pro-Israel lobbying or critics or supporters of Israel are related. CarolMooreDC (talk) 22:20, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh and the argument (with slightly different line-up) is moving on to effectively whether the religious monuments in the Old City are in Israel. See my [1] and subsequent revert.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:34, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Jews deletions and general issue

All month people have been deleting a number of various Categories: Jewish ___. For example Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 June 11‎ they are trying to get rid of Category:Jewish American models,Jewish shutterbugs, Jewish conductors, Jewish chess players, Jewish astronauts. All various entries under Category:Jews by occupation. (I first got involved cause they got rid of Jewish libertarians while leaving Jewish anarchists, though that might be on the chopping block at some point.) I'm for inclusiveness myself, but more importantly for a consistent policy - including for Category:Muslims and Category:Catholics and others. Can anyone familiar with categorization explain what is going on? Is this a serious issue or not we should pay more attention to? CarolMooreDC (talk) 22:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Some may argue that Jewish people are a race in which some individuals follow a religion known as Judaism. I'm not familiar with any similar arguments regarding Muslims or Catholics. Perhaps this should be kept in mind and/or explored further, when making a final decision in regards to Categories. --Nsaum75 (talk) 00:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Two examples:

• Category:Jewish fashion designers deletion discussion: Nominator's rationale - This is one of two "typed" subcategories of Category:Fashion designers — the only other is currently Category:LGBT fashion designers. The occupation naming convention is by nationality. Combining with ethnicity (for example, Category:Jewish-American fashion designers) would require: "The heritage may be combined with the occupation, replacing the nationality alone, where this heritage is thoroughly documented as essential to the occupation." Decision: no consensus.
• Category:Jewish economists deletion discussion: Nominator's rationale - Without opining on the legitimacy of the Category:Economists by nationality category, I would point out that this one is not a nationality, and is fundamentally racist. There is no category for other races or religions, nor ought there to be. The intersection of "Jewish" and Economist is not a matter of encyclopaedic interest. There is no encyclopaedic relationship between Judaism and practising economics. Decision: Speedy delete

Questions:

1) is it WP:attack to say racist? It's certainly tempting to do it if one doesn't like a category. (For example, why have Jewish anarchists if Jewish libertarians was deleted?)

2) Is there a bias of, if it feeds into "conspiracy theories," take it out; if it's something to boast about, keep it? (I know from personal experience the guy who put up Jewish libertarians was boasting; I have a feeling the guy who put up Jewish bankers (deleted earlier) might have been a "conspiracy theorist" - and Jewish economists also could feed into that. Anyway, decisions just look very subjective. But not enough of an issue for me to obsess over - just in case someone else wants to :-) CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Arab Capital of Culture = Jerusalem

Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Capital_of_Culture

This year, 2009, the Arab Capital of Culture is Jerusalem (al-Quds)

Arabs who organize this event consider Jerusalem the capital of Palestine. Look here at their homepage: http://www.alquds2009.com/etemplate.php?id=5

"1st Floor Palestine Red Crescent Society Jerusalem Road P.O.BOX: 3637 Al-Bireh, Palestine Tel.: +970 (2) 2402009

       +970 (2) 2960277

Fax: +970 (2) 2960278

Mobile: 0598-092009 E-mail: info@alquds2009.org"

The problem we have here is that some people think Arabs see Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, which of course is ridiculous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arab_Capital_of_Culture&diff=297708453&oldid=294585734

also see this: http://www.alquds2009.com/einside.php?id=28 "Police disperse 'Palestinian Culture Festival' events" .. I think its pretty obvious that those who organize this event are seeing it as the capital of Palestine.

So should it be Palestine or Israel?--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 14:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the site you link there is a statement by an Arab League representative referring to it as the capital of Palestine and another statement which specifically talks about East Jerusalem bring the capital. My instinct is that we can treat this with a footnote in the same way that we treat the Jerusalem as capital of Israle business. In this case we can say that East Jerusalem has been designated as the capital of culture in its capacity as the aspirant capital of Palestine, then the footnote should record that interpretations of the status of Jerusalem vary and link the article on that.--Peter cohen (talk) 16:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The UNESCO website says Jerusalem is "defined on their page as: The Old City and Ramparts of Jerusalem is an inscribed site on the World Heritage List." direct link While acknowledging there is political differences of opinion to the land, it includes it under the entry for Israel. I could find no entry that lists sites in Palestine. Since the Arab Capital of Culture program is an initiative undertaken by the UNESCO, we should probably stick to how they definitively define the sites they've recognized. --Nsaum75 (talk) 16:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Please do not misrepresent the contents of that page. The item is listed as a proposal submitted by Israel for amendmant of the listing on the World Heritage List. On the page in question there is an asterisk next to Jerusalem and the note reads as follows:

"*: This concerns the property entitled “Jerusalem - the Old City and Ramparts to include Mount Zion” proposed by Israel as an extension to the “Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls” inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1981, upon proposal by Jordan. The Committee at its 25th Session (Helsinki, 2001) endorsed the recommendation of the 25th session of its Bureau (Paris, June 2001) “to postpone further consideration of this nomination proposal until an agreement on the status of the City of Jerusalem in conformity with International Law is reached, or until the parties concerned submit a joint nomination”. It should be noted that, the UNESCO General Conference in its Resolutions 32C/39 and 33C/50, affirmed that:

“ (...) nothing in the present decision, which is aimed at the safeguarding of the cultural heritage of the Old City of Jerusalem, shall in any way affect the relevant United Nations resolutions and decisions, in particular the relevant Security Council resolutions on the legal status of Jerusalem”."

If you look at the Unesco List by country, you will see that Jerusalem is listed separately from sites in Israel.--Peter cohen (talk) 18:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I stand corrected, I had not seen the listing. That said, there is no mention or listing of Palestine. However, in interest of balance, perhaps both flags should be listed. --Nsaum75 (talk) 20:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The organising committee is Palestinian and the award has been made in the capacity of being a centre od Arab rather than Jewish culture. Also Israel is hostile to the designation. Therefore, I think it should be deignated as an award to the Palestinian Authority with the note indicating that there are other views of Jerusalem. Sorry for my harsh wording about your description of UNESCO's views.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment on content dispute resolution

There's a Request for comment on content dispute resolution which could be of interest. PhilKnight (talk) 23:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Palestinian Land Law

Currently having some problems with this article, which has been proposed for promotion to the front page via DYK. More eyes would be useful, thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 17:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

RfC on the use of the word "Nakba" on Wikipedia

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Nakba. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 22:50, 20 June 2009 (UTC)