| Revision as of 22:42, 31 December 2007 editJaapBoBo (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,766 edits →Topic and title← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:26, 1 January 2008 edit undoJaapBoBo (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,766 edits →POV-fork?????????: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| :I don't object to creating a page on Arab attitudes and linking v.v., although I think making an article on just 'Palestinian Arab attitudes toward Zionsim' would maybe not be the right way. As you point out the Palestinian Arabs were affected by the British too, and its's hard to see their attitudes towards Zionism and the British separate. Maybe it's better to start an article on the ]. --] (]) 21:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | :I don't object to creating a page on Arab attitudes and linking v.v., although I think making an article on just 'Palestinian Arab attitudes toward Zionsim' would maybe not be the right way. As you point out the Palestinian Arabs were affected by the British too, and its's hard to see their attitudes towards Zionism and the British separate. Maybe it's better to start an article on the ]. --] (]) 21:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::I decided to create the ] article anyway, because the ] article is already quite big. In ] there is space for the Arab attitudes towards Zionism. --] (]) 22:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | ::I decided to create the ] article anyway, because the ] article is already quite big. In ] there is space for the Arab attitudes towards Zionism. --] (]) 22:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == POV-fork????????? == | |||
| The definition of POV-fork according to ] is ''A POV fork is an attempt to evade NPOV policy by creating a new article about a certain subject that is already treated in an article, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts.'' | |||
| Since this article was created due to lack of space in the ] article it is not a POV-fork, it merely gives more information on the particular subject of the Zionist attitudes toward Palestinian Arabs. It gives pov's from both sides, e.g. Gorny, Teveth, Ben-Gurion, Shapira, Morris, Karsh, Katz and Bar-Zohar have a pro-Israeli pov, and from neutral sources, e.g. ] and ] are certainly not pro-Palestinian. | |||
| @JzG: | |||
| *you say its ''incomplete'', please indicate what is missing | |||
| *you say its ''inaccurate'', please indicate what is inaccurate | |||
| *you say its ''drawn fomr a very small number of individual sources'', yet I count at least 20 sources | |||
| *you say it ''violates numeorus policies especially WP:NPOV'', please indicate which particular policies are violated and in which way they are violated | |||
| --] (]) 09:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:26, 1 January 2008
Article structure
I made four sections, but I believe that with a little effort the last two ('1936-49' and 'transfer idea') might be combined. The break at 1917 is taken from the 'Zionism' article. The break at 1936 is somewhat before the one in the 'Zionism' article (19390. Maybe it should be changed to 1939. I haven't really thought it through well. In 1939 the Zionists changed their attitude towards the British (after the white Paper), but Teveth traces Ben-Gurion's change in attitude toward the Palestinian Arabs to 1936. --JaapBoBo (talk) 15:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Topic and title
First, the article sounds quite good and interesting !
Per my understanding, Zionist attitude toward Palestinian Arabs has also been linked to the Arab attitude (ie perception of Zionism goals and reaction versus Zionism).
- eg, in his History of Zionism, Laqueur refers to this as the unseen question that became more and more important with the Arab Anti-zionism and the birth and growth of their national identityIn his History of Zionism, Laqueur refers to this as the unseen question that became more and more important with the Arab Anti-zionism and the birth and growth of their national identity
- Tom Segev, in One Palestine, Complete also pictures the mutual interaction (focusing also on the British role)
I think it is also important to note that if finally Zionism expelled Palestinians, initially, Zionism attitude vs Arabs was theoretical and passive while Palestinian Arabs were the active party.
What about a : Zionists and Arabs in Mandate Palestine, refering to the sub-title of Tom Segev, One Palestine, Complete : Jews and Arabs Under the British Mandate or Simha Flapan Zionism and the Palestinians ... ?
That would give the step-by-step development of the events focusing of the way Palestinian Arabs and Jews/Zionists perceived them and reacted in connection with them.
Ceedjee (talk) 14:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that would be a good idea. I think it would diffuse the content and would make the article quite big. The main reason to make the article was space.
- I don't object to creating a page on Arab attitudes and linking v.v., although I think making an article on just 'Palestinian Arab attitudes toward Zionsim' would maybe not be the right way. As you point out the Palestinian Arabs were affected by the British too, and its's hard to see their attitudes towards Zionism and the British separate. Maybe it's better to start an article on the History of the Palestinian people. --JaapBoBo (talk) 21:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- I decided to create the History of the Palestinian people article anyway, because the Palestinian people article is already quite big. In History of the Palestinian people there is space for the Arab attitudes towards Zionism. --JaapBoBo (talk) 22:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
POV-fork?????????
The definition of POV-fork according to WP:NPOV is A POV fork is an attempt to evade NPOV policy by creating a new article about a certain subject that is already treated in an article, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts.
Since this article was created due to lack of space in the Zionism article it is not a POV-fork, it merely gives more information on the particular subject of the Zionist attitudes toward Palestinian Arabs. It gives pov's from both sides, e.g. Gorny, Teveth, Ben-Gurion, Shapira, Morris, Karsh, Katz and Bar-Zohar have a pro-Israeli pov, and from neutral sources, e.g. Flapan and Sternhell are certainly not pro-Palestinian.
@JzG:
- you say its incomplete, please indicate what is missing
- you say its inaccurate, please indicate what is inaccurate
- you say its drawn fomr a very small number of individual sources, yet I count at least 20 sources
- you say it violates numeorus policies especially WP:NPOV, please indicate which particular policies are violated and in which way they are violated