Misplaced Pages

Talk:Golan Heights: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:47, 15 March 2022 editZero0000 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators41,823 edits →Was Golan ever part of Palestine?← Previous edit Latest revision as of 16:26, 25 December 2024 edit undoMakeandtoss (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions31,079 edits →Lede too long: new sectionTag: New topic 
(318 intermediate revisions by 56 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|search=yes|archive_age=14|archive_bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}} {{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{Vital article|class=B|level=5|topic=Geography|subpage=Countries}}
{{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement}} {{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement}}
{{Gs/talk notice|scwisil}}
{{Calm}} {{Calm}}
{{On this day|date1=2017-12-14|oldid1=815426750|date2=2021-12-14|oldid2=1060066201}} {{On this day|date1=2017-12-14|oldid1=815426750|date2=2021-12-14|oldid2=1060066201|date3=2022-12-14|oldid3=1123868011}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|1= {{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Israel|class=B |importance=high}} {{WikiProject Israel|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Syria|class=B |importance=High}} {{WikiProject Syria|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Volcanoes|class=B |importance=low}} {{WikiProject Volcanoes|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Western Asia|class=B |importance=high}} {{WikiProject Western Asia|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Geography|class=B|importance=low}} {{WikiProject Geography|importance=low}}
}} }}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
Line 20: Line 18:
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K |maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 15 |counter = 16
|minthreadsleft = 4 |minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(14d) |algo = old(14d)
Line 26: Line 24:
}} }}


== Proportion occupied by Israel ==
== duplicate content in "Israeli settlement " section ==


Almost the entirety of the first paragraph of the Israeli settlement section is repeated information. As this page is protected I'm unable to change it. I propose deleting the majority of the first paragraph of that section. Its very well stated previously that Israel is violating UN law by occupying the Golan heights sothis redundancy adds nothing. ] (]) 00:46, 1 October 2020 (UTC) The article says 2/3 occupied by Israel. The accompanying map, with its thin line just east of the occupied area, seems to show a tiny strip remaining under Syrian control and around 90% occupied. Either the map is misleading, or it is wrong, or (I suppose less likely) the 2/3 is wrong. I hope someone can fix the map. ] (]) 04:38, 7 December 2024 (UTC)


To add to my original post, I believe the article should start with the already written sentence "The continued Israeli control of the Golan Heights remains highly contested and is still regarded as belligerent occupation by most countries." ] (]) 00:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC) :I was just going to post about this since we see this, "Following the 2024 Syrian opposition offensives Israel occupied the remaining one third of the area." The map needs updating to reflect the full locations with Israelis present. ] (]) 19:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)


== Period of last vulcanic activity == == Lede too long ==


Lede is a summary of the body and should be ideally four well-composed paragraphs. The recent additions, especially to the last lede paragraph, has turned it into a bloated live blog instead of an encyclopaedic entry. ] (]) 16:26, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
In the article it says there is still active vulcanism in the region, correctly labelled as dubious. According to this article https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00445-013-0712-7 vulcanism has stopped there some 100.000 years ago. Can't correct it myself, but perhaps anybody with enough status can correct it, using this link. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:53, 20 February 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: {{Re|Codiv}} This is not my specialty, but I'm not sure that source is sufficient. It seems to only concern a particular location over a particular time period. Please disagree if that's not correct. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 02:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Zero: You can be totally right, I do not have acces to the original article, so I only have the summary to go on. However, the present Wikipedea article states that activities have gone on until recent, but if I look at areal photo's I see absolutely nothing that looks like recent, vulcanic activity, unlike the connected area's in Syria and Saudi-Arabia. So this amount of time since last eruption seems much more likely than the recent statement I was triggered by. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 18:11, 25 February 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: {{Re|Codiv}} If you send me mail I will send you the article. Meanwhile I think "continuing to this day" is unbelievable and was cited to a travel guide so I removed it. It would be nice to have a better source with a summary of the volcanic history. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 04:12, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

== short description ==

First, this article says explicitly that ''Since the Six-Day War of 1967, the western two-thirds of the Golan Heights has been occupied and administered by Israel'' and in the infobox it says ''Internationally recognized as Syrian territory occupied by Israel''. This is by consensus, and making us have the same argument over the short description is tendentious. This is already a settled issue here, and if you want to change the super-majority view to the Israeli POV of "disputed territories" you should not be doing so by edit-warring. {{u|Dunutubble}}, kindly self-revert your contested change. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 14:37, 16 February 2022 (UTC)</small>

:First off, see ]. Keep in mind I said your edit was in good faith.
:Second, I would imagine that the Israeli POV would be that the Golan Heights is Israeli territory. Saying that this territory is Syrian would likewise be the Syrian POV. Neither of these are in anyways necessarily wrong; just two differing viewpoints. According to ], we need to take both these viewpoints into account. That's why I tried to help that - it is well established that Syria and Israel do not agree on who it belongs to.
:Third, I apologize if any of my actions seemed harsh. I didn't intend to make it appear that I was trying to push forward a particular viewpoint (rather, I was trying the opposite). I'm sorry if my edits made the situation feel stressful. ] (]) 14:52, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
::What personal attack have I made here? And no, that is not what NPOV says. NPOV says we give proportional weight to viewpoints. The view that the Golan is Syrian territory occupied by Israel is a supermajority view in reliable sources. Your edit gave equal weight to views that sources treat as distinctly unequal. That is not NPOV. NPOV requires we give supermajority views, eg the Earth is round, the Golan is Syrian territory, considerably more weight than minority ones. It is '''not''' the Syrian POV that the Golan is Syrian territory, it is the view of nearly every competent party on the planet. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 15:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)</small>
::] is implicit. The US position is peculiar, I really want to say farcical, since they are signed up to the relevant UNSC resolution in direct contradiction to their individual position. ] (]) 16:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

== Was Golan ever part of Palestine? ==

Korman' "Right of Conquest" says in a footnote on page 260: "Although originally forming part of British-mandated Palestine, in 1923 the Golan Heights were ceded by Britain to French-mandated Syria (see Ya'akov Meron, 'The Golan Heights 1918-1967', in Meir Shamgar (ed.), Military Govern­ ment in the Territories Administered by Israel 1967-1980: The Legal Aspects, i (Jeru­ salem: Hebrew University, 1982), 85)."

I don't think this is correct, per the detail at ]. What do others think? ] (]) 15:38, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:This has been discussed before. Garfinkle, Adam (1998). ''"History and Peace: Revisiting two Zionist myths"'' Israel Affairs. Routledge, 135–146, shows clearly that the claim is not based on real history and more of a repeated error, or as Garfinkle calls it a "Zionist myth". You can see the 1920 line in this map: . The majority of the Golan Heights within the French mandate for Syria including Syria connected to half the Sea of Galilee. So how do we go from this fact to the claim that the same line had GH as part of Palestine? I have the entire Garfinkle file, I can send it to you if you want. --] (]) 16:33, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
:: That map was drawn by user Doron (one of the best editors ever in the I/P area, whom I sorely miss) with help from me in tracing the 1920 agreement on a contemporary map and finding a British archival document with a pencil line drawn on exactly the same map. I've seen the correct line since then on printed maps but also some incorrect maps that show a bulging line where the agreement specifies a straight section. No maps, however, show more than a minority fraction of the Golan Heights on the Palestinian side. We should also remember that the 1920 agreement never intended to provide more than an interim rough border and a boundary commission to decide on a precise border. The northern part was under French control until approximately 1924. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 06:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
:::Thanks Zero and Supreme. That all sounds right. In particular Zero’s penultimate sentence is what I was thinking too – Korman’s “originally forming part of British-mandated Palestine” makes little sense alone, as there were no “original boundaries”. They were negotiated over three years and that was that. I assume she meant “originally forming part of <u>the Zionist proposal for</u> British-mandated Palestine”. ] (]) 10:36, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
:: My library has the book in which Meron's article appears. It isn't clear what language it is in but I'll take a look next week. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 07:04, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
:::{{u|Onceinawhile}} {{u|Supreme Deliciousness}} I have Meron's article. It only says that the 1920 agreement put the "northeastern part" of the GH in Palestine. The article is a lawyer's brief on why Israel should keep the GH and, in keeping with the genre, no tendentious ''non sequitur'' is off-limits. It starts with an argument that the UK and France were not entitled to adjust the 1920 agreement and goes downhill from there. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 12:00, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
::::Aha. Quality stuff then… Looks like they are bad at geography as well as history… The northeastern part! ] (]) 18:08, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
::::: Gulp, I have to plead guilty on that one. It says northwestern not northeastern. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 00:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::Aha! Ok that makes more sense, and is consistent with your map. From Biger p.147: {{tq|Here the report mentions the major modification that was made in 1923, because the 1920 agreement dictated the setting of an international boundary through the lands of Emir El-Fa’ur. Palestine lost any foothold in the Golan Heights as a result of this change, and its boundary was moved to the west, almost following the Jordan river.}} ] (]) 06:30, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
]
]
::::::And from the 1920 agreement: {{tq|…the Wadi Massadyie. It will then follow the course of this river upstream, and then the Wadi Jeraba to its source. From that point it will reach the track from El Kuneitra to Banias at the point marked Skek, thence it will follow the said track, which will remain in the territory under the French mandate as far as Banias.}} ] (]) 06:33, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::I have found some historical discussion on this: ]. {{ping|Zero0000}} you mentioned you had the map the British used. Which one do you think that was? I have been looking at Schumacher. I cannot find Skek on modern maps – I am guessing coordinates (33.16, 35.72)? And the two wadis are perhaps today known as ] and the Jilabun? ] (]) 06:44, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::I have just found another map from the CIA (see right). It shows all the depopulated Syria villages – should be added to this article. ] (]) 07:12, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::: I'll send you the two maps that I mentioned. The course is clear except that Wadi Jeraba forks a few times and which fork to take is unspecified. (It matters only a little bit.) However the archival map shows the boundary following the most straight-ahead fork so we used that. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 08:08, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::::I now believe the remains of Skek are at 33.173, 35.734. ] (]) 08:11, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::::: Schumacher's map has Wadi Jeraba with the spelling Wadi Dscheraba. That means his name for Wadi Masadiye is Wadi es Safa. You can trace Wadi Dscheraba up to Der es Saras. Then the boundary went to Skek, which is also on Schumacher's map. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 08:58, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::::::Excellent, thanks. I imagine other maps at the time followed Schumacher, as his was (I believe) the only detailed survey that had then been carried out.
::::::::::One question on your boundary map. The 1920 agreement says: {{tq|From it will reach… Skek}} I believe you interpreted “it will reach” (in the French version “elle atteindra”) as a straight line – I can’t see what else it could mean, but are you certain that this is the correct meaning?
::::::::::: What I actually think is that there was no intention to specify a precise path, otherwise one would have been given. It was left for the boundary commission. The Banias-Mediterranean part of the boundary was even more vaguely specified. We drew a straight line because that's what the British map has. Incidentally, I have a far higher res version of the CIA map and will upload it. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 09:15, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::::::Separately, it puts an onus on “where exactly was the source of the Wadi Jeraba”. It isn’t clear to me on the maps, and river sources can be disputed. ] (]) 09:04, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::::::: Until further information comes up, the British map is best source for the British intention. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 09:15, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::::::::Aha, ok. I didn't realize that that was drawn by the British - so that is Hardinge's line? It seems that the wadi source as they defined it is in the vicinity of today's Israeli settlement ]. Which would make sense given the Israeli strategy to build settlements at high points. ] (]) 09:30, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
::::::::::::: I assume it is the British interpretation of the 1920 convention, of which Hardinge was the British signatory. It would be interesting to see if the French interpretation was the same. I predict it is the same, because the two parties probably played together with maps and colored pencils before writing the text. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 11:47, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 16:26, 25 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Golan Heights article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16Auto-archiving period: 14 days 
Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

  • You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
  • You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
  1. Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
  2. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

  • Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
  • Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!
Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on December 14, 2017, December 14, 2021, and December 14, 2022.
This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconIsrael High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconSyria High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconVolcanoes Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconWestern Asia High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the WikiProject Western Asia, which collaborates on articles related to Western Asia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconGeography Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Geography To-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Proportion occupied by Israel

The article says 2/3 occupied by Israel. The accompanying map, with its thin line just east of the occupied area, seems to show a tiny strip remaining under Syrian control and around 90% occupied. Either the map is misleading, or it is wrong, or (I suppose less likely) the 2/3 is wrong. I hope someone can fix the map. Zaslav (talk) 04:38, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

I was just going to post about this since we see this, "Following the 2024 Syrian opposition offensives Israel occupied the remaining one third of the area." The map needs updating to reflect the full locations with Israelis present. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Lede too long

Lede is a summary of the body and should be ideally four well-composed paragraphs. The recent additions, especially to the last lede paragraph, has turned it into a bloated live blog instead of an encyclopaedic entry. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:26, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: