→Edit in the article "Beneberak": new section Tag: New topic |
|||
(429 intermediate revisions by 77 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<!-- {{Contentious topics/aware|a-i|blp|ap}} --> |
<!-- {{Contentious topics/aware|a-i|blp|ap}} --> |
||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
|counter = |
| counter = 55 |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
}} |
|||
⚫ | |||
}} |
}} |
||
⚫ | |||
__TOC__ |
__TOC__ |
||
==Bethlehem== |
|||
== Edit in the article al-Midya == |
|||
Before a revert-war is started in violation of [[WP:3RR|special revert conditions of Bethlehem]]. I suggest we discuss what is the best way to describe the area. شكرًا لك [[User:Sallicio|'''It's me... Sallicio!''']][[User talk:Sallicio|<sup><math>\color{Red} \oplus</math></sup>]] 17:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Nableezy, ''asalam aleikum''. With your permission, I wish to make a historical addition to the Wikipedia page [[al-Midya]], in the section that reads:'' History''. I wish to add the following paragraph, and which is to be placed directly before the current last paragraph: |
|||
:The ancient village of Modiʿin / Modiʿuth, described in the [[Madaba Map]] as {{Script/Greek|Μωδεειμ}}, ''Mōdeeim'', and once the dwelling place of the [[Hasmonean dynasty|Hasmoneans]], is thought to have been preserved in its Arabicised form ''al-Midya''.<ref name="Zaharoni1983">{{cite book |author-last=Zaharoni|author-first=Irit|title=Derekh erets |publisher=Ḳetsin ḥinukh rashi--"Ba-maḥaneh"|volume=1 |location=Tel-Aviv |year=1983 |page=75 |language=he |oclc=10375126|isbn=9789650500887 }}</ref>, and which village originally occupied the site (now ''Khirbet er-Râs'') directly to its south-east.<ref name="Zaharoni1983"/> In the Madaba Map, the site is marked by two towers having a single entranceway, and reads in Greek uncials: "Modiʿim, today Modʿitha, whence came the [[Maccabees]]."<ref name="Zaharoni1983"/>{{reflist-talk}}[[User:Davidbena|Davidbena]] ([[User talk:Davidbena|talk]]) 00:27, 7 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | |||
::Thanks, Nableezy. I have added the short edit.[[User:Davidbena|Davidbena]] ([[User talk:Davidbena|talk]]) 20:33, 7 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Your [[WP:Good articles|GA]] nomination of [[Israeli occupation of the West Bank]] == |
|||
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've [[Talk:Israeli occupation of the West Bank/GA1{{!}}begun reviewing]] the article [[Israeli occupation of the West Bank]] you nominated for [[WP:GA|GA]]-status according to the [[WP:WIAGA|criteria]]. [[File:Time2wait.svg|20px|link=]] This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. <!-- Template:GANotice --> <!-- Template:GANotice --> <small>Message delivered by [[User:ChristieBot|ChristieBot]], on behalf of [[User:AirshipJungleman29|AirshipJungleman29]]</small> -- [[User:AirshipJungleman29|AirshipJungleman29]] ([[User talk:AirshipJungleman29|talk]]) 16:01, 9 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Deprecation discussion == |
|||
:The best way to describe the West Bank is the way sources do, which is [[Israeli occupation of the West Bank|Israeli occupied]]. This is the super majority view on that. Also, multiple people reverting your attempt to force through non neutral material is not a revert war. You should not be attempting to force in a contested change. '''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;font-size:90%">nableezy</span>]]''' - 19:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Nableezy, I've been thinking about raising two deprecation related questions and wanted to know if you had any thoughts/suggestions. The first is what is the standard for deprecation. It seems that we have a rather clear idea what you can/can't do with a deprecated source but we don't have clear criteria where a source moves from generally unreliable to deprecate. Second, should we have a separate process for nominating any source for deprecation? Tied to this question is should the typical RSN RfC be changed from 1-4 to 1-3 (no deprecation option)? Finally, where is the proper place for this discussion? Thanks for your thoughts. [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 11:50, 15 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Hi Nableezy. I'm afraid smth went wrong after your last edit, the text disappears after "and as of 2021". Thanks, [[User:Arminden|Arminden]] ([[User talk:Arminden|talk]]) 21:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:There isnt actually any policy laying out deprecation, and any attempt to create one is stymied by the editors who have taken advantage of this situation to impose this standard. And now, for any number of topics, people are attempting to impose some sort of ideological purity test on sources. I actually hate the entire idea of RSN being filled with sparsely attended RFCs that purportedly rule out entire publications across the entire encyclopedia. RSN is supposed to be a board to answer a question of the form "is this source reliable for this statement?" Now its people trying to rule out sources they dislike followed by robotic implementations of "deprecation" that result in iron-clad reliable sources being removed by somebody who hasnt even attempted to read the sentence they are editing. What to do about that? Well there was [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Deprecated and unreliable sources]], which went absolutely nowhere, and you have absurdities like an editor [[Special:Diff/1062821482|claiming]] that what never had a proposal at VPP pass to create a policy now requires a formal VPP process to modify. We have somehow ended up in a place where the people who seek to enforce these blanket bans on sources they dislike but cant argue against particular uses of them have determined that a. they are unquestionably right and despite having no policy backing can enforce their position through reverts, and b. demand that what they never did, get a policy backing for their edits, is something you must do to revert them. Its insane tbh. Some of those sources on this list come from well-attended discussions and could reasonably be said to form a consensus of the English Wikipedia editorship on the quality of a source. Some of them come from 5 people with an axe to grind and cannot. Idk what to do, too many vested users with an interest in maintaining the status quo. A status quo that is bullshit based on nothing, but it is the status quo. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17">nableezy</span>]]''' - 12:54, 15 August 2023 (UTC)</small> |
|||
⚫ | |||
::I agree with what you are saying. When I have a bit of time I'm going to try to put together some sort of minimum concern list at least regarding deprecations. I feel like the need for it made more sense prior to the creation of RSP. While I think RSP and it's bucketing is flawed, it does seem to make deprecation redundant as with the list anything in #3/generally unreliable is unlikely to be used. Prior to RSP one would have to search through various archives to argue if Rolling Stone was OK for a particular topic. Now you can refer to the summary. That makes it much faster for both those who are checking if a source is OK and for those who are concerned about how a source is being used. If RSP were in place before Daily Mail was deprecated would we have even created the deprecate bucket? If yes, why do we still have it or argue over deprecating sources that are used rarely? Anyway, this is my line of thinking. Would you like to be kept in the loop? [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 04:16, 16 August 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Sure, <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17">nableezy</span>]]''' - 15:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)</small> |
|||
== genocide == |
|||
== Edit in the article "Beneberak" == |
|||
If it is determined that Israel and Hamas committed genocide, what will the articles [[Palestinian genocide accusation]] and [[Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel]] be renamed to? The first one is not only about the war in Gaza. [[User:Parham wiki|Parham wiki]] ([[User talk:Parham wiki|talk]]) 16:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Nableezy, with your permission, I wish to make the following edit in the article [[Beneberak]]: |
|||
:That isnt something I would decide, as Wikipedia has yet to anoint me to my rightful place of arbiter of all content. '''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;font-size:90%">nableezy</span>]]''' - 16:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== The great man == |
|||
The town of Beneberak (''Banaibarka'') is specifically named in the Aramaic stele ([[Sennacherib's Annals|Oriental Institute Prism]]) detailing [[Sennacheri]]'s military exploits in the country, along with the towns of [[Beth Dagon|Beth-Dagon]] and [[Jaffa|Joppa]], among others, as places subdued by him.<ref>{{cite book|last=Luckenbill |first=D.D. |author-link=Daniel David Luckenbill |editor=James Henry Breasted |title=The Annals of Sennacherib|volume=2 |publisher=The University of Chicago Press |location=Chicago |date=1924|page=33 (lines 68–77)|oclc=610530695|url=https://isac.uchicago.edu/research/publications/oip/oip-2-annals-sennacherib }} (Reprint 2005)</ref> (End quote) |
|||
[https://www.normanfinkelstein.com/genocide-in-gaza-why-isnt-the-world-doing-anything-to-stop-israel-norman-finkelstein/ speaking about his family], in case you missed it. Just 1 hr 15 minutes into it, the earlier part being of course quite familiar (even if his redeployment of the 'mowing the lawn' metaphor for 7 October was new to me). [[User:Nishidani|Nishidani]] ([[User talk:Nishidani|talk]]) 21:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I suppose that I'll also need to add a section heading, entitled "History". |
|||
{{reflist-talk}}[[User:Davidbena|Davidbena]] ([[User talk:Davidbena|talk]]) 22:04, 29 August 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:52, 20 May 2024
Bethlehem
Before a revert-war is started in violation of special revert conditions of Bethlehem. I suggest we discuss what is the best way to describe the area. شكرًا لك It's me... Sallicio! 17:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- The best way to describe the West Bank is the way sources do, which is Israeli occupied. This is the super majority view on that. Also, multiple people reverting your attempt to force through non neutral material is not a revert war. You should not be attempting to force in a contested change. nableezy - 19:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
genocide
If it is determined that Israel and Hamas committed genocide, what will the articles Palestinian genocide accusation and Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel be renamed to? The first one is not only about the war in Gaza. Parham wiki (talk) 16:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- That isnt something I would decide, as Wikipedia has yet to anoint me to my rightful place of arbiter of all content. nableezy - 16:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
The great man
speaking about his family, in case you missed it. Just 1 hr 15 minutes into it, the earlier part being of course quite familiar (even if his redeployment of the 'mowing the lawn' metaphor for 7 October was new to me). Nishidani (talk) 21:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)