| Revision as of 21:08, 29 July 2024 edit77.137.71.241 (talk) →change state of Palestine from political entity to country: ReplyTags: Reverted Reply← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 12:13, 22 November 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,292,593 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive 14) (bot |
| (48 intermediate revisions by 21 users not shown) |
| Line 17: |
Line 17: |
|
{{WikiProject Jewish history|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Jewish history|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Israel|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Israel|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Former countries|importance=|Ottoman=yes|Ottoman-importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Former countries|Ottoman=yes|Ottoman-importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject British Empire|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject British Empire|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Limited recognition|importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Limited recognition|importance=mid}} |
| Line 35: |
Line 35: |
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive index |mask=Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes}} |
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive index |mask=Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== "]" listed at ] == |
|
== "Gaza's population is expected to increase to 2.1 million people in 2020" outadedness == |
|
|
|
] |
|
|
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 3#Israel and Palestine}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> <small>— ]<sup> (]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">])</sub></small> 07:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Misleading or incomprehensive context in the opening paragraph == |
|
It's 2024, we need to change the tense of that statement and/or verify whether or not the prediction came true. ] (]) 04:19, 9 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From the current version of the page: |
|
:This has been done, but a comment about the current conflict's mass casualties could also be useful in establishing context of Gaza's population |
|
|
|
"In the Hellenistic period, these names were carried over into Greek, appearing in the Histories of Herodotus in 5th century BCE as Palaistine. The Roman Empire conquered the region and in 6 CE established the province known as Judaea" |
|
:https://www.aljazeera.com/news/longform/2023/10/9/israel-hamas-war-in-maps-and-charts-live-tracker |
|
|
|
It would seem, reading this, that Judaea is a name made up by some Roman conqueror, while it's more likely the Romans conquered the region from locals who already refered to their homeland as Judea. Unless we are strictly European centered, in which case only what made it in European maps and history is what counts? ] (]) 10:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
:https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-says-gaza-death-toll-still-over-35000-not-all-bodies-identified-2024-05-13/ ] (]) 08:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:I think the point that is trying to be made is that the Romans called their province "Judaea", not where the name came from. Maybe say "... established the province they called Judaea"? ] (]) 14:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Help needed adding Map that better illuminates terminology of regions under discussion == |
|
== Main image == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
]. The Jordan River is on the right, and the Mediterranean Sea is on the left.]] |
|
Is the current main image really the best option, as opposed to, say, a medieval map showing Palestine? For me it seems to overemphasize the 20th century mandatory Palestine delineation, while the green lines are frankly a little bit hard to understand. Also, this is specifically not an article about the occupied territories, so why are those also on the map? I suspect that for a lot of newcomers this makes it altogether more muddling and confusing than a more simple image might. I'm not convinced this means it performs as the lead image (as what one expects to see for this topic, as in other tertiary sources) particularly well. ] (]) 14:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
This map should replace the satellite image in the modern boundaries section. It is taken from a different page and has explanatory information not in the other maps: it shows the names used elsewhere in context along with the terrain and political regions. |
|
: I don't think it is possible to understand the green lines from the information given. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 15:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Glad I'm not the only one. ] (]) 15:28, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:Note also that ] has colorblind accessibility issues. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ones showing the evolutions of the border lack labels, and would be worse for them as they show the change over time. The one showing the population as a dot map is great but needs this map to show how the reality of where people live corresponds to the political debate. |
|
== change state of Palestine from political entity to country == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
in the main article - it is defined as a country and not a political entity. can someone change it in the top section ] (]) 03:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
I tried to replace the satellite image from the modern boundaries section but could not get the formatting to work. I would appreciate someone finding a good spot on the page or advising how to get the text flow to work. ] (]) 14:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== "Greater Palestine" redirect == |
|
:it is not a state officially, it is kind of politic action to write the State of Palestine. ] (]) 21:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
] redirects here, but where is the merged content? It's not at ], either, where the AfD decision originally said to merge the content to. |
|
== Map == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mergers that factually end up being deletions, against the explicit decision at AfD, because nothing ever ends up being merged at all (the merge target is never even changed in response to the decision), are a loathsome pattern in Misplaced Pages. --] (]) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
The map is inaccurate for the british mandate of Palestine. It should include Transjordan. ] (]) 12:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:because...? ] (]) 13:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Adding Sources == |
|
== Map == |
|
|
|
|
I do not have extended confirmed user status so I cannot edit the page, so if someone else can, that would be helpful. The introductory paragraph references Herodotos' The Histories. This is extremely important as there is a claim that has been repeated continuously that Palestine is a an invention of the Romans and did not exist in the ancient world, or variously that it has never existed. The reference is from Herotodos c 104, where he makes no mention of Judeans or Samaritans, but only refers to Syrians and Phoenicians of Palestine: |
|
|
|
|
|
"For it is plain to see that Colchians are Egyptians; and this that I say I myself noted before I heard it from others. When I began to think on this matter, I inquired of both peoples; and the Colchians remembered the Egyptians better than the Egyptians remembered the Colchians; the Egyptians said that they held the Colchians to be part of Sesostris' army. I myself guessed it to be p393 so, partly because they are dark-skinned and woolly-haired; though that indeed goes for nothing, seeing that other peoples, too, are such; but my better proof was that the Colchians and Egyptians and Ethiopians are the only nations that have from the first practised circumcision. The Phoenicians and the Syrians of Palestine acknowledge of themselves that they learnt the custom from the Egyptians, and the Syrians of the valleys of the Thermodon and the Parthenius, as well as their neighbours the Macrones, say that they learnt it lately from the Colchians. These are the only nations that circumcise, and it is seen that they do even as the Egyptians. But as to the Egyptians and Ethiopians themselves, I cannot say which nation learnt it from the other; for it is manifestly a very ancient custom. That the others learnt it from intercourse with Egypt I hold to be clearly proved by this — that Phoenicians who hold intercourse with Hellas cease to imitate the Egyptians in this matter and do not circumcise their children." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Greek is: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Φαίνονται μὲν γὰρ ἐόντες οἱ Κόλχοι Αἰγύπτιοι, νόησας δὲ πρότερον αὐτὸς ἢ ἀκούσας ἄλλων λέγω. ὡς δέ μοι ἐν φροντίδι ἐγένετο, εἰρόμην ἀμφοτέρους, καὶ μᾶλλον οἱ Κόλχοι ἐμεμνέατο τῶν Αἰγυπτίων ἢ οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι τῶν Κόλχων· νομίζειν δ’ ἔφασαν οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι τῆς Σεσώστριος στρατιῆς εἶναι τοὺς Κόλχους. αὐτὸς δὲ εἴκασα τῇδε, καὶ ὅτι μελάγχροες εἰσὶ καὶ οὐλότριχες. καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἐς οὐδὲν ἀνήκει· εἰσὶ γὰρ καὶ ἕτεροι τοιοῦτοι· ἀλλὰ τοῖσιδε καὶ μᾶλλον, ὅτι μοῦνοι πάντων ἀνθρώπων Κόλχοι καὶ Αἰγύπτιοι καὶ Αἰθίοπες περιτάμνονται ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς τὰ αἰδοῖα. Φοίνικες δὲ καὶ Σύροι οἱ ἐν τῇ '''<u>Παλαιστίνῃ</u>''' καὶ αὐτοὶ ὁμολογέουσι παρ’ Αἰγυπτίων μεμαθηκέναι, Σύριοι δὲ οἱ περὶ Θερμώδοντα καὶ Παρθένιον ποταμὸν καὶ Μάκρωνες οἱ τούτοισι ἀστυγείτονες ἐόντες ἀπὸ Κόλχων φασὶ νεωστὶ μεμαθηκέναι. οὗτοι γὰρ εἰσὶ οἱ περιταμνόμενοι ἀνθρώπων μοῦνοι, καὶ οὗτοι Αἰγυπτίοισι φαίνονται ποιεῦντες κατὰ ταὐτά. αὐτῶν δὲ Αἰγυπτίων καὶ Αἰθιόπων οὐκ ἔχω εἰπεῖν ὁκότεροι παρὰ τῶν ἑτέρων ἐξέμαθον· ἀρχαῖον γὰρ δή τι φαίνεται ἐόν. ὡς δὲ ἐπιμισγόμενοι Αἰγύπτῳ ἐξέμαθον, μέγα μοι καὶ τόδε τεκμήριον γίνεται· Φοινίκων ὁκόσοι τῇ Ἑλλάδι ἐπιμίσγονται, οὐκέτι Αἰγυπτίους μιμέονται κατὰ τὰ αἰδοῖα, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἐπιγινομένων οὐ περιτάμνουσι τὰ αἰδοῖα." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Text is from Godley's translation of Herodotos, Loeb Library, 1st ed, ISBN 9781296575090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 12:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:"where he makes no mention of Judeans or Samaritans" Not surprising. Either they were obscure in this era, or non-existent. ] is a term coined much later. ] (]) 17:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::The oldest inscription we have with the name of Jerusalem is only from the 1st c BCE. Gmirkin (2019) in "Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible" posits a terminus post quem for the Torah at 280 BCE; his evidence is convincing. Ronny Reich's excavations, together with those of Silberman and Finkelstein do not support an occupation consistent with a city on the site of Jerusalem before at the earliest late 700's, so 8th c BCE. The Biblical story has a grand city of David and the Kingdom of Israel in the 11th c. Archaeology shows that at the time Nebuchadnezzar sacks Jerusalem in 586 BCE, it was the size of a small town - with no Temple of Solomon. There was only ever one and the same Temple. |
|
|
::A German excavation on Mt Gerizim in Nablus, the Samaritan temple, established it two centuries older than Jerusalem itself. The inscription of Yahweh at Kuntillet |
|
|
::Ajr- our oldest one - names him as Yahweh of Teman and Samaria, Teman being Yemen. He is therefore clearly the god of the Samaritans before he is the god of the Jews. In the ensuing years as the Judeans and the Samaritans fight, the Judeans would prevail, and in first century they convince Herod to annex Samaria into the Roman province of Judea. The irony here is that the Roman-allied Judeans were erasing the culture and history of the local Samaritans using the power of the Roman state. You can see Yaakov Ben Aaron, "The History and the Religion of the Samaritans," for more. |
|
|
::ud |
|
|
::That Judeans were seen as "Syrians" and "Phoenicians" in many contexts of the ancient world is clear to those of us who know this part of the world. And that what is frequently conflated as "the Kingdom of Israel" or "Northern Kingdom" - was never called by either name, and was always Kingdom of Samaria. The Samaritans are therefore simultaneously erased - by having their ancient identity conflated to give Israel a claim of antiquity, and not considered Israelites at the same time. There is even a story in the New testament of Jesus meeting a Samaritan woman who is surprised that he speaks to her "since Judeans have no dealings with the Samaritans." The racism is obvious - the Canaan woman is compared to a dog by the gentle Jesus meek and mild. One of the most convincing bits that Jesus was a real person is precisely this - a fictional character would probably not have racist slip-ups. |
|
|
::So, you're very correct. All of the claims of ancient Israel, are actually, about Samaria. Misplaced Pages is full of such conflations. The earliest mention of Israel - in the Amarna letters - look into it more - is actually a mention of the House of Omri, after whom Samaria is named - not Israel. The Bible itself calls the language as Canaan or Judean, never as Hebrew. And "paleo-Hebrew" is another made up idea - it's literally the Phoenician script. ] (]) 02:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::"The Biblical story has a grand city of David and the Kingdom of Israel in the 11th c." So what? The Biblical narratives are little more than ]s. ] (]) 20:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::That was my point. ] (]) 07:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Philistines - Missing connections - Wiki == |
|
|
|
|
|
In reference to the below, there should be the mention, and link to the ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
The first written records referring to Palestine emerged in the 12th-century BCE Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt, which used the term Peleset for a neighboring (neighbouring) people. |
|
|
|
|
|
It is also clear from archaeology & DNA testing that the Philistine community was indeed European migrants. |
|
|
<ref>Who Were the Philistines, and Where Did They Come From? - Biblical Archaeology Society</ref> |
|
|
<ref>Ancient Philistines Were Likely of Greek Origin, DNA Study Shows - GreekReporter.com</ref> |
|
|
<ref>Ancient DNA reveals that Jews' biblical rivals were from Greece | New Scientist</ref> |
|
|
|
|
|
It would be appropriate at the encyclopaedia to include a revision with ] after the people. |
|
|
|
|
|
*Note: Unable to log in using public PC to sign. D.Cardo. |
|
|
] (]) 13:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't understand this request, what is it you want to add and where, ] ? ] (]) 14:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
{{reftalk}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Palestine is a semi-presidential country == |
|
|
|
|
|
why does it say Palestine is a semi-presidential country. what does that mean? ] (]) 12:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Where? ] (]) 12:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Ups... its in ] -> Government and politics ] (]) 12:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Requested Withdrawn == |
|
|
|
|
|
] → {{no redirect|Land of Palestine}} – Since Palestine is also known as Land of Palestine - im proposing this change. Please see ] |
|
|
Its official name may be Land of Palestine ] |
|
|
] (]) 05:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:'''Strong oppose''' I have never heard of the term "Land of Palestine" in RS. Google search results linked prove that whenever the term "land of Palestine" was used, it was used as an adjective not as a common name. This is not analogous to the ], as ]. While Palestine is simply the name of the region. Clearly, "Palestine" is the ]. ] (]) 07:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::proposal withdrawn ] (]) 07:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:'''Oppose''', not a common name. This proposal is a non-starter. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 07:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Image == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 1750 map did not gain consensus per the various comments above, so I have added back the original svg map. |
|
{{ping|Iskandar323}} I think we need to find a better/more modern map; this one gives off mythical vibes to it. ] (]) 10:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:I'm a sucker for a ye olde map, but perhaps there's a less mythical one somewhere. I don't think we want anything too modern either though. This is about historic Palestine. ] (]) 17:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
I understand that the svg map is preferred as it illustrates various periods, but could be simplified in certain areas and the color differential made clearer. Perhaps others could comment here, and once we have a clear set of changes agreed, we can improve the map further. ] (]) 09:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
::The map added as lead image a couple of days ago is the worst possible type of map for this article, as it is a Biblical / imaginary map. See ] for an explanation of the difference between those maps and the contemporary depictions that the cartography article focuses on. |
|
|
::The boundaries of the region of Palestine changed over time, and in all periods had undefined borders on the south and east. The cartography article shows this well. Mandate Palestine was the first version of Palestine with known and clearly delineated eastern and southern borders. The Mandate Palestine borderline is also what defines today’s Palestinians. |
|
|
::] (]) 18:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I see I kicked the hornet's nest. That's all well and good. I was always interested in a discussion. That's what ] was for, but it received little response. The prior image was unclear, had a broken key, and was an obvious issue for the colour blind. That was three strikes. As for the image I replaced it with, I did think there might be a tad too much myth, though the history of Palestine surely reaches back into myth. I do not, by contrast, think that the should be undue emphasis on mandatory Palestine. That may define Palestinians, but it does not define historic Palestine. For much of its history, Palestine was taken to include northwestern Jordan, for instance. Mandatory Palestine is a mere 30-year snapshot out of thousands of years of history, and this is not the page on mandatory Palestine. ] (]) 19:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I made ] back in 2012. Then I built the ] article in 2019-20. Agree it’s time for a fresh discussion. ] (]) 20:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Thanks for taking me to ]. The map is gorgeous. I actually think something like this, slightly abstract, better reflects how the region of historic Palestine has been somewhat fluid in nature. ] (]) 19:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Personally I am not a fan of the Ziegler map because, while a milestone in the cartographic history, it doesn’t depict a contemporary period – rather it is a mishmash of various older sources. ] (]) 20:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::The is also a rather joyous blend of German and Arabic, and also fairly accurate spatially. ] (]) 19:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I'm also liking its co-location of names like Esdud and Azotus – it aggregates names across several eras. ] (]) 20:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Agreed. |
|
|
:::::If we want the purest “classical” definition, the Ptolemy map is the place to go. It is also the only one with a boundary. It therefore bring huge educational value. The downside is that it is in Greek. |
|
|
:::::In terms of modern maps, Jacotin was the big milestone. ] (]) 21:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Bachiene's map is good without the folds, but personally I found the previous map in WP template to be better, namely because it is spatially accurate and serves an exclusively informational purpose in showing just the region; while I find historical maps also have a (distracting) artistic side to it and also gives off a ] vibe to the topic. ] (]) 10:27, 5 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::I'd say it's more Tolkien than Narnia, although I think that's a little of a discredit to the map maker, who I'm sure was trying their best with the information available. Incidentally, one issue with the previous map that I didn't mention is that I believe it got the Syria Palaestina boundaries (or those of its successors), slightly wrong. It also ignored the Islamic, including Ottoman Palestine, period, which, while somewhat ill-defined, is obviously a notable period. ] (]) 19:49, 5 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::I also struggled to properly comprehend the old map. Also, no offense at all to the map maker, it is not about the map as much as it is about the map choice for a WP article, if you know what I mean. ] (]) 11:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
], where dashed green line shows the boundary between Byzantine ] (later ]) and ] (later ]), as well as ] (later Jebel et-Tih and the Jifar)}} |
|
|
{{legend|border=darkred solid|white|Borders of ]}} |
|
|
{{legend|border=blue dotted 2px|white|Borders between ] and the ] (] and ]) which are claimed by the ] as its borders}}]] |
|
|
{{ping|Iskandar323}} do you think your concerns with the svg map could be addressed with specific improvements? |
|
|
We could produce a list of proposed changes and then request help from the experts at ]. |
|
|
] (]) 22:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:I will repeat my proposal here then to remove the dashed green lines and keep everything else as is. This way we will have three definitions: |
|
:Potentially. But where are we getting the information from? The sourcing notes on the current image file only appear to yield sources for the mandate period onwards. ] (]) 22:11, 6 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:1- ancient Palestine (Palestina I + II in green) |
|
::I think we start from scratch on the sourcing. Misplaced Pages editors' knowledge of this topic has increased very significantly since the map was first created in 2012. ] (]) 23:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:2- modern Palestine (Mandatory Palestine in red) |
|
:::Three questions come in mind and are all related to the pre-modern period since the Mandatory period and current borders will necessarily have to stay: |
|
|
|
:3- official Palestine (1967 borders in blue). ] (]) 11:05, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::1) Were the three Palaestina Roman provinces ever considered one geographic territory; if not, is it possible for us to combine them and just simply say the three Roman provinces of.., instead of showing each? |
|
|
:::2) Do we need an exact political boundary or can we use a geographic one similar to the ones used in Ottoman, or more preferably, older Greek maps, instead of the Roman provinces? |
|
|
:::3) Were there any province in history that had the name Palestine in it over the past 2,000 years, other than Jund Filastin and the Roman provinces (the older the better)? ] (]) 08:38, 7 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::{{ping|Makeandtoss}} historians have pieced together the classical provinces using the available fragments, without total clarity on the ever-changing borders - this is as true for Palestine as it is for all classical regions. For Palestine, we list the primary sources at ] - some give reasonably clear boundaries, such as Herodotus, Pliny, Plutarch, Pausanias, Ptolemy, Pomponius Mela. ] (]) 20:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::: has a very unusual boundary for Syria Palaestina. It's rather curious. Not sure how credible. ] (]) 20:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: is the 1865 book that the map accompanies. See "XXVI. Phoenice, Coelesyria, Decapolis, Iudaea Herodiadarum tempore". It doesn't explain the borders shown, but it is clear throughout that it is building on earlier 19th century scholarship. Those works were chronologically listed by Edward Robinson in 1841, Titus Tobler in 1867 and Reinhold Röhricht in 1890 (see the intro to ]). ] (]) 22:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Yes, the carving out of Scythopolis is presumably based on something tangible – especially as it is consistent between the Roman Judaea (as a part of Decapolis) and Syria Palaestina (as a part of Arabia Petraea)-era maps. ] (]) 04:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Okay, interesting. Actually, maybe I overcomplicated this. Maybe there’s an abstract of a general Palestine region borders over the millennia in RS that we can use for the map? Or is it better to have something political and specific like a province? ] (]) 20:23, 7 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:: Agree with Make&toss. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 14:43, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
: I've stated my problem with the svg map before. Namely, I don't think that the information provided is enough to decode the green lines. That is, one cannot unambiguously label the regions based on that description. For example, is "Syria Palestina" the part inside the solid green lines or the whole region enclosed by any type of green line? On the other hand, I don't think we should start with a biblical myth map that extends even further north than Beirut. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 09:35, 7 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
] |
|
::@] @] @]: This has somewhat stalled hasn't it? Anyone have any suggestions on how best to progress? Do we want just a better, possibly less biblical old map, or do we want something bespoke from the graphics people? ] (]) 19:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:::{{ping|Makeandtoss|Zero0000}} How about this? ] (]) 15:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::It has; I am more in favor of something with the WP template; but as we were discussing, the issue remains on the borders of Palestine prior to the British mandate; the older the reference the better. ] (]) 09:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I liked the previous map that Oncenawhile made in 2012 showing the approximate borders of the region from the 1st to the 11th century AD. Its main problem, besides the colors, was that it included ] whose territorial extension goes beyond what the map shows. By excluding Salutris from the map and changing the line colors, this map could be used alongside the map from the Ottoman period in the infobox. I don't think we should use a map from the period before Christ since Palestine as an administrative unit did not yet exist. ] (]) 22:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Perfect, an improvement despite the small risk of OR for the green line. ] (]) 16:12, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Historic Palestine == |
|
|
|
:It's good. The fine blue line could be made more prominent but it isn't necessary. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 01:19, 5 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::I just realized I have been confusing two things together; the Roman province of Syria Palestina and the Byzantine provinces of Palestina I and II. I thought they were the same thing. Since they are different, wouldn't it make sense just to have Roman province of Syria Palestina, as this would eliminate the OR risk when combing the Byzantine provinces I and II? Also how sure are we of the eastern borders of Syria Palestina, ] (]) 08:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::This is a good question and the heart of the challenge. Looking at the detail within ], you can see that Misplaced Pages's suggestion that the Roman province was formally called "Syria Palestina" - as opposed to just "Palestina" - has no primary evidence, as both names were in use at the time. I suspect the SP name in scholarly works came originally from ]. |
|
|
:::Equally, the borders moved around over time, and there are no fixed lines. The best we can do is identify the best scholarly sources with these borders in them across all the available periods. ] (]) 14:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::We can go with the used at the ]'s article, i.e. the Jordan River. Updating the green borders to these ones should be the last improvement possible and the best outcome of this lengthy discussion. ] (]) 20:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 October 2024 == |
|
Historic Palestine is an alt name for the collective history of pre-1948 Palestine in all is vicissitudes and variations that is obviously used for natural disambiguation purposes vis-a-vis the modern Palestinian state (as exemplified in ). Is this then perhaps a better name than the current parenthetically disambiguated title? (Also bearing in mind that ] favours natural disambiguation.) Just throwing this out there informally at this point for input. Thoughts? ] (]) 19:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit extended-protected|Palestine (region)|answered=yes}} |
|
:Tricky, this and (historical) are a bit troublesome, I mean I get it, but use is likely to lead to argument imo, especially if the pre 48 part (and I guess back to Herodotus) is not spelled out. We have SoP, Mandate and Roman links, maybe should be an Ottoman and such as well? ] (]) 19:36, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Yes, Ottoman Palestine is a bit of a gap, but for sure on the to-do list. ] (]) 19:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
Could you please just modify “The holy land of israel” and you make it seem like israel is a country but not Palestine.🇵🇸 ] (]) 01:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done''': it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a ] and provide a ] if appropriate.<!-- Template:EEp --> ] • ] • ] 03:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::Agreed. ] (]) 20:45, 4 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:While indeed often used in RS, it is less used than the more common name of just "Palestine". Also, this name would become to be used as it is, i.e. changes will be made to all articles linking to this one from to '''''', which would be redundant. But I understand the reasoning behind this proposed move, so maybe we can add Historic Palestine in the opening paragraph or other lede paragraphs instead? ] (]) 10:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::I've already added it as an alt name. Perhaps that's enough for now. Not convinced on the merits of the move myself either. Might cause search trouble, and get confused with the history page. ] (]) 19:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
From the current version of the page:
"In the Hellenistic period, these names were carried over into Greek, appearing in the Histories of Herodotus in 5th century BCE as Palaistine. The Roman Empire conquered the region and in 6 CE established the province known as Judaea"
It would seem, reading this, that Judaea is a name made up by some Roman conqueror, while it's more likely the Romans conquered the region from locals who already refered to their homeland as Judea. Unless we are strictly European centered, in which case only what made it in European maps and history is what counts? Gezellig~hewiki (talk) 10:36, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
This map should replace the satellite image in the modern boundaries section. It is taken from a different page and has explanatory information not in the other maps: it shows the names used elsewhere in context along with the terrain and political regions.
The ones showing the evolutions of the border lack labels, and would be worse for them as they show the change over time. The one showing the population as a dot map is great but needs this map to show how the reality of where people live corresponds to the political debate.
I tried to replace the satellite image from the modern boundaries section but could not get the formatting to work. I would appreciate someone finding a good spot on the page or advising how to get the text flow to work. Mrflip (talk) 14:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
Mergers that factually end up being deletions, against the explicit decision at AfD, because nothing ever ends up being merged at all (the merge target is never even changed in response to the decision), are a loathsome pattern in Misplaced Pages. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
The 1750 map did not gain consensus per the various comments above, so I have added back the original svg map.
I understand that the svg map is preferred as it illustrates various periods, but could be simplified in certain areas and the color differential made clearer. Perhaps others could comment here, and once we have a clear set of changes agreed, we can improve the map further. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Could you please just modify “The holy land of israel” and you make it seem like israel is a country but not Palestine.🇵🇸 Sam9472 (talk) 01:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
.svg)
The redirect Israel and Palestine has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 3 § Israel and Palestine until a consensus is reached. — GodsyCONT) 07:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
_v2.svg)
.svg){kind=link}
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Kline • talk • contribs 03:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)