| Revision as of 08:33, 9 August 2006 edit69.196.164.190 (talk) →No 'israel' ...← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 12:13, 22 November 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,292,631 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive 14) (bot |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{limitedgeographicscope}} |
|
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Article history |
|
|
|action1=GAN |
|
|
|action1date=13 March 2015 |
|
|
|action1link=Talk:Palestine (region)/GA1 |
|
|
|action1result=listed |
|
|
|action1oldid=651254734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|currentstatus=GA |
|
|
|topic=places |
|
|
|dykdate=23 March 2015|dykentry=... that the first clear use of the name "'''Palestine'''" was in the 5th century B.C. by Ancient Greek historian ]?}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=GA|vital=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Palestine|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Asia|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Western Asia|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Jewish history|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Israel|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Former countries|Ottoman=yes|Ottoman-importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject British Empire|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Limited recognition|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Geography|importance=top}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{press|author=Haviv Rettig Gur|title=Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Rages on Misplaced Pages|org=]|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100519111756/https://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=175660|date=16 May 2010}} |
|
|
{{ARBPIA}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
Note: We need to keep this article written from a Neutral Point Of View. An ideal article on this topic should avoid statements which either Israelis or Palestinians would disagree with, unless it is clearly identified which side makes these statements. |
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 200K |
|
|
|counter = 14 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 5 |
|
|
|algo = old(90d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive index |mask=Talk:Palestine (region)/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== "]" listed at ] == |
|
Previous discussions may be found here: |
|
|
|
] |
|
|
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 == |
|
To see older commentary that was here look in these archives. |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
*] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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? ] (]) 10:36, 10 September 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 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
]. The Jordan River is on the right, and the Mediterranean Sea is on the left.]] |
|
== Palestine means the WB and GS, not the history == |
|
|
|
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. |
|
] 20:39, 30 June 2006 (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) |
|
No it doesn't, who said? --] 22:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== "Greater Palestine" redirect == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
] redirects here, but where is the merged content? It's not at ], either, where the AfD decision originally said to merge the content to. |
|
Palestine does NOT exist as a country!! It NEVER was a country! Before Israel captured the Gaza Strip and West Bank, those areas were part of Egypt and Jordan respectively!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Map == |
|
Ermmm, neither did hundred of countries that nowaday exists. Countries are (or should be)the reflection of the people's will. That there was no modern state called Palestine doesn't change the fact that that land was called palestine and was inhabited by arabs since hundred of years before the Aliyah. {{unsigned|62.101.171.15}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 1750 map did not gain consensus per the various comments above, so I have added back the original svg map. |
|
: Palestine is a historical geographic region. It is not a country and never has been. If you suggest to discard its rich history (that goes millennia before the Arab conquest in the 7th century) and start with today's situation on the ground, that would be completely unworkable idea. But even if we follow it, I suspect that you won't like the result. ←] <sup>]</sup> 00:59, 1 August 2006 (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) |
|
== Sanremo == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
: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: |
|
] is the Italian city where the conference was held, at least according to Misplaced Pages. If this is incorrect please post here before reverting. ] 01:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:1- ancient Palestine (Palestina I + II in green) |
|
|
:2- modern Palestine (Mandatory Palestine in red) |
|
|
:3- official Palestine (1967 borders in blue). ] (]) 11:05, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:: Agree with Make&toss. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 14:43, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Palestine has NEVER been a country == |
|
|
|
] |
|
|
:::{{ping|Makeandtoss|Zero0000}} How about this? ] (]) 15:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Perfect, an improvement despite the small risk of OR for the green line. ] (]) 16:12, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
Palestine does NOT exist as a country!! It NEVER was a country! Before Israel captured the Gaza Strip and West Bank, those areas were part of Egypt and Jordan respectively!!!! |
|
|
|
: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 == |
|
Prore to the establishment of the Irish free state there was never an indepented country of Ireland this does not mean that people recondised it as a seperate country to britian. The suitwhich of northern Ireland is the excat same as Palestine a mase expsermension of on enthinic group so it can be replaced with a nother and a fictional country created and people live the lie for so long the belive in it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit extended-protected|Palestine (region)|answered=yes}} |
|
Prier to the establishment of the Irish Free State there was never an independent country of Ireland this does not mean that people recognized it as a separate country to Britain. The state of northern Ireland is the exact same as Palestine a mass expsermension of on ethnic group so it can be replaced with a another and a fictional country created and people live the lie for so long the believe in it. |
|
|
|
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) |
|
::Can anyone provide maps showing Jewish immigration and settlement patterns in this region prior to the establishment of the country of Israel? Thanks! --] 23:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::Maps are available at passia.org. --] 02:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Eretz Israel== |
|
|
|
|
|
Have removed this from the intro and replaced with the Herbrew translation of Israel. "Eretz Israel" is not in any sense a translation of Palestine, and doesn't belong there. --] 16:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: Sure it is, for more than 3 millennia. Let's keep in mind that we are talking about the region here. If this is confusing, let's return this article its earlier title, ]. ←] <sup>]</sup> 09:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
What belongs in the brackets is direct translations of the title, not alternative names which have been used at one time or another. There seems to be a perfectly good Hebrew word for the which can be used here, so why should wikipedia prefer an alternative that so clearly come with an agenda (ie it is primarily (according to ]) a religious concept and connotes (an aspiration to) sovereignty by a religious group). |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think this issue shows up any confusion as to whether we are taling about a geographic region. "Palestine" is, in any language, a geogrpahic region. "Eretz Israel" is ideological, and should not be presented as a neutral translation. It surely ought to be obvious that if you're choosing to translate "Palestine" as (basically) "Israel" then questions of neutrality arise. --] 17:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: ארץ ישראל is not translated as ''Palestina''. —] 20:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::# The hard fact (vs. opinion) is that the Hebrew toponym for the region throughout long ] was/is "Eretz Israel". Serious encylopedias reflect facts, whether certain editors like them or not. |
|
|
::# See Hebrew interwiki. |
|
|
::# What about ] (Hebrew: Yerushalayim; Arabic: al-Quds...)? Are you going to argue for another "translation" of Arabic name? ←] <sup>]</sup> 06:58, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::According to this website I found, "Eretz Israel" is frequently used by Israelis in the context of arguments challenging Palestinian claims to nationhood and their right to land east of the Jordan River. . ] 07:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::: Like it or not, the ''fact'' is that since the times of ancient ], "Eretz Israel" is the Hebrew toponym for the region. ←] <sup>]</sup> 09:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
No, the fact is that it is ''a'' Hebrew toponym, and not a neutral one or a direct translation. "פלשתינה/Palestina" is clearly a more direct translation. "Eretz Israel" is no more a translation into Hebrew of "Palestine" than "Holy Land" is a translation into English. |
|
|
|
|
|
What's important here is the difference between a translation on the one hand and a synonym or euphamism on the other. What's not okay is to take the latter and present it as if it were the former. If you have a good argument for saying that an exception should be made in this case, then you should state it. --] 14:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I agree with Vjam. ] 14:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:I also agree with Vjam --] 19:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: One can spell in Hebrew (or any alphabet) anything, but that does not negate 3 millennia of history. The 3 points above are still unanswered. And this is not a vote. ←] <sup>]</sup> 20:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
The article links to the ] as part of the History section; how could "Eretz Israel" not be a toponym? Is "Eretz Israel" some different territory? ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 21:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Indeed, no amount of someone's dislike for a term can change the facts on the ground. "Eretz Israel" is not a "synonym", nor a "euphemism", but the Hebrew name for this region. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:13, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jayjg: What's not in dispute is whether "Eretz Israel" exists as a toponym, or to what land it refers. The issue is that it is not a translation of "Palestine", since it comes with additional political/theological connotations, and there exists a perfectly functional Hebrew word ("Palestina") which comes without this additional meaning. |
|
|
|
|
|
Humus sapiens: I haven't answered your above points because they are really just assertions not raising much to be answered. The answers I would give are 1) No 2) Why? and 3) Al Quds is a translation of Jerusalem - if you were to use it in an English or Hebrew sentence, you would clearly be borrowing from Arabic for some reason, so this is not a parallel case. |
|
|
|
|
|
The claim that "Eretz Israel" is in some sense a translation (I assume this is a claim that is being made) needs standing up. --] 22:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: Where is the logic: Arabic:Al-Quds (and not Urusalim) is a "translation" of English:Jerusalem, but Hebrew:Palestina (and not Eretz Israel) is a "translation" of English:Palestina. |
|
|
: You are entitled to your POV but encyclopedias should reflect historical facts. A traditional 3+ millennia-old toponym ''Eretz Israel'' is not going to be replaced with ''Palestina'' (which is far from being politically-neutral) because of your political preferences. ←] <sup>]</sup> 22:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Al-Quds is ''not'' a translation of Jerusalem into Arabic; it is the Arabic ''name'' for Jerusalem. Humus, prior to 1948 Zionists spoke of a dream of ''Eretz Israel'' but they referred to the land as it existed then as Palestine. ] 23:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Humus, for your claim to be valid then the Hebrew word פלשתינה cannot exist historically yet it was in wide use prior to 1948. ] 23:12, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: Just as ''Al-Quds'' is the Arabic toponym for Jerusalem, ''Eretz Israel'' is the Hebrew toponym for the region in question. |
|
|
: Why are we suddenly limiting our scope to 30 years of the British Mandate and discarding 3+ millennia of the Jewish history? BTW, that ''Eretz Israel'' was used to disambig ''Palestina''. As a compromise, I'm going to add both. ←] <sup>]</sup> 02:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
By your argument, we should add ({{lang-ar|'''فلسطين'''}} ''Filastīn'' or ''Falastīn'') to the top of ]. Are you agreeable to this? I think I've presented a more reasonable compromise in my latest edit. ] 04:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I support this version. --] 08:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: I agree with Aiden who didn't like it. I think it should be within the paretheses, so I added that ''Eretz Israel'' is a ] term. See if this works better. ←] <sup>]</sup> 20:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I've given ] the same treatment since both articles should handle the question in the same manner. ] 21:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Not really. The issue is that it shouldn't be presented as a translation. Eretz Israel ≈ Palestine. Palestina = Palestine. So it shouldn't be parentheses, and it certainly shouldn't be first. Plus the way you've put it is as if being a Biblical term somehow makes it better. Will alter to something I think is more realistic. --] 21:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::: Mot only "amongst Jews". Let's think how we can improve this. ←] <sup>]</sup> 21:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Humus, should ] include a translation that reads: ({{lang-ar|'''فلسطين'''}} ''Filastīn'' or ''Falastīn'') ?] 21:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::: ''Eretz Israel'' is a historical & Biblical term. What does Arabic ''Falastīn'' (c. 7th century) have to do with the Hebrew Bible? But if other editors are OK with it, I won't remove it. ←] <sup>]</sup> 21:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Humus, either it's a historical and biblical term or its a general toponym, you can't have it both ways. And it seems to me that one-way translation is never possible, so I this goes a long way to proving my earlier point. And if it's not a translation then why do you want to put it ''first'' in the translation list? |
|
|
|
|
|
Also think "related concept" sounds a bit vague, but will leave it there for now since my brain is frying in the heat. --] 15:47, 18 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: Eretz Israel is a historical term, a Biblical term and a toponym. If 3200 years of history don't fit into some artificial frame, too bad for the frame. BTW, I feel that we are not that far apart, so let's work together to find a sensible compromise. ←] <sup>]</sup> 23:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
If A in one language is translated to B in another language, it must be the case that B can be translated back into A, or the original tranlsation was not accurate. That's not an artificial frame, it's just regular logic. |
|
|
|
|
|
Here's the main points of dispute, as I see it: |
|
|
|
|
|
:'''1)''' "Eretz Yisrael" is not an exact translation of "Palestine" (I get the impression we are agreeing on this part). |
|
|
:'''2)''' By convention, the reader is expecting to see, in the parentheses in the first sentence, exact translations in relevant languages. |
|
|
:'''3)''' So, it's my view that "Eretz Yisrael" shouldn't be in there. However, I don't think it's so serious if it is, provided steps are taken to ensure that no-one is misled into thinking that "Eretz Yisrael" and "Palestine" are translations of one another. This means (not necessarily an exhaustive list): |
|
|
::'''a)''' "Eretz Yisrael" should not come first in the list (I am still keen to know why you think it should) |
|
|
::'''b)''' The English translation "Land of Israel" should be included, - this makes it clear that the translation is not "Palestine". |
|
|
::'''c)''' Some (brief as possible) reference to it being a Biblical/Jewish/Religious concept should probably be included. Think the wording may need some discussion - does Biblical give too much of an impression of a kind of ceremonial usage?--] 16:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: Your wording is more or less OK with me. I made a minor edit, hope you and others won't find them objectionable. We are dealing with ] here, so the word "translation" should be used with caution. Cheers. ←] <sup>]</sup> 05:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
No, I'm not happy with this because: |
|
|
:1) "transliteration" seems designed to give the impression that we are not dealing with an actual Hebrew word, which is false. |
|
|
:2) The impression is given that "Palestina" is a transliteration from English, which clearly can't be the case. |
|
|
:3) "Palestina" may have originated as a tranliteration from Latin (I'm guessing this), which isn't unusual for a word, so why mark this out as if it is? |
|
|
:4) This is not a usual place for etymological information, so unless you can give a compelling reason, this is extraneous. --] 09:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: I accept the current version as a compromise. BTW, there is nothing wrong with transliteration, it's a common practice for ]. ←] <sup>]</sup> 22:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Jerusalem is not directly translated to Arabic as al-Quds; it is the common name for the city in Arabic, which is why it is listed in the Jerusalem article. In much the same way, it makes no sense that we should translate a Latin word into Hebrew when the Jews already have a common name for the region they've used for 3,000 years. —] 22:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Aiden. No, it is a translation. "name for the city in arabic" (in this case) = translation. It's not a requirement that the two sound similar or have the same literal meaning (cf "Germany" <---> "Deutschland"). The difference with "Palestine" compared to "Ertetz Yisrael" is that the two do not mean ''exactly'' the same thing, which has been gone over above. |
|
|
|
|
|
Regarding your recent reverts, your premise is false. Misplaced Pages does not necessarily prefer the most commonly used name for a thing. See, for example ] or ]. In any event, in the present case, what is the most commonly used ''translation'' would be the question. --] 22:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:"Eretz Yisrael" is not just a "biblical term", but also a modern-day term. Also, what does a "related concept" mean? It's another name for the same territory. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 22:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Aiden - please discuss you proposed change in talk, since it goes against what has been settled here, and please avoid breaking ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jayjg - I agree, please feel free to try a more suitable formula. --] 07:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I have; it is simply another Hebrew term for the same area. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 15:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, that does fine for me. --] 15:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I do not know enough about this stuff, so I am coming to talk, but it seems strange to me to have Eretz Yisrael listed as the Hebrew word for Palestine in this article, but not corresponding Arabic or english word for ]. It should go both ways, shouldn't it? Either the foreign language sections for both articles should be basically the same, or if Palestine doesn't belong in ], I don't see why Eretz Yisrael belongs here. My 2 cents.--] 13:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Andrew, Eretz Yisrael is a historical and Biblical name for the region based on Torah, while Palestine is a secular name given by the Romans. "Filistin" is not an accurate Arabic translation of this Biblical concept. —] 23:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::I'm totally confused. If "Filistin" is not an accurate Arabic translation of the biblical concept, how is the biblical concept an accurate translation of "Filistin". If the word "Palestine" is not synonymous with "Eretz Yisrael", then there is no reason for "Eretz Yisrael" and ] to be included in the opening translation section. Here is a compromise proposal. Keep the opposing terms out of each article's translation section. Instead, replace with a see also link somewhere in the artlce, or a sentence that included the corresponding link and perhaps a little background (such as "A term to describe a similar region, but not identical region/concept is....) But as it stands, it boggles my mind that one thing can be a synonym for the other, but not vice versa. Including "Eretz Yisrael" in the translation section of this article is misleading if the information that Aiden provided is correct (that they are different concepts, and that the terms do not translate into each other).--] 18:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
The key to this argument lies in the first sentence itself "Palestine ... is ONE of many historical names for the region"... How could there be two Hebrew versions of ONE name. Yes, "Eretz Israel" is a name for the region... but it is a different name from "Palestina" and therefore irrelevant to the first sentence. This discussion bemuses me. ] 03:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
And there's another clue further down the page on the image of the stamp . The Hebrew text appears to say Palestina (or something very similar). Could someone confirm? ] 12:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Israel== |
|
|
Israel is a sovereign nation, and sections of this article imply that the palestinians claim to all of Israel is recognized by the world and the United Nations. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small> |
|
|
: That statement you are adding is a gross oversimplification of a complicated issue. I think this article and the ] article already cover the points you mention. <b>] ]</b> 06:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::According to Jewish accounts, the kingdom of Israel lasted about one hundred years from around 1030-1020 BCE until approximately 930 BCE-920 BCE when it split into the independent kingdoms of Israel and Judah. These independent kingdoms (lasting about two hundred years) were destroyed around 720 BCE by the Assyrians. So the independent kingdom of Israel (according to their own accounts which are not substantiated by archaelogy or reliable historical records) lasted for 300 Years. |
|
|
|
|
|
::2668 years later they come back and claim it is their land ..... |
|
|
::sounds perfectly reasonable to me .... |
|
|
|
|
|
::The Europeans were criticized for establishing colonies in Africa, Asia, the Middle East etc. |
|
|
::and they eventually left all those places ..... but somehow it is okay if Jewish people colonize ::land... |
|
|
|
|
|
::The only other country that still has colonized regions (China stills occupies Tibet, Eastern ::Turkestan, etc.) is strongly criticized by most people for continuing its imperialistic policies... |
|
|
::but if your Jewish you are given a free pass.... to steal land... |
|
|
::sounds perfectly reasonable to me .... oops Oh My God.. what am I saying...am I criticising ::Israel? Isn't this anti-Semetic? GASP!] 13:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== coming to talk regarding Eretz Yisrael == |
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know why editors have been mentioning talk in their edit summaries when I posted yesterday about this with no response. It seems to me that either Eretz Yisrael is a synonym for Palestine or it isn't. If it is, then the corresponding terms should be in both this and the ] articles. If it isn't, then neither should be in either article. As it stands, Eretz Yisrael is in this article, but Palestine is not in ], which to me seems extremely biased. So how can we fix this? I made some suggestions above. I think the best thing is to not say that the terms translate into each other in the opening sentence, but instead, further down the paragraph, mention the relation of each term to the other in BOTH articles in sentence format. How does that sound as a compromise? Another suggestion would be to simply remove both terms from the opposite article, however, efforts to remove Eretz Yisrael from this article have been reverted (though I'm not sure why), and efforts to put Palestine in ] have been reverted as well. So what gives? Can we talk this out.--] 20:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
: This has been already discussed, pls. see above. ←] <sup>]</sup> 22:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Ok, I am very stupid. Can you please hold my hand and show me where on talk this has been discussed. I cannot find it anywhere. Thanks--] 22:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: I do not believe that you are stupid. Please see the section ] above. Also, reading both articles would help to get familiar with the subject. BTW, ''synonym'' does not mean ''equal''. Cheers. ←] <sup>]</sup> 23:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Hi Andrew. As you can see above, my position is similar to yours. A compromise which I find basically acceptable has been reached. This was only between a few users and, of course, nothing on Misplaced Pages is necessarily forever. Nontheless, I feel that any further changes should be done through talk and address why that compromise is not acceptable. I'm not immediately sure what I think of your proposals above - will get back. |
|
|
|
|
|
:Humus (and others): I still think a more satisfactory formulation than "a term for the same area" is needed. "Hebrew", "religious" and "historical" all seem to have hit opposition. But what's there currently seems to me to as good as putting nothing - it doesn't really shed any light for the reader. Any formualtion should also be as short as possible. --] 16:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, let me see if I get this right. "Eretz Yisrael" is a term with 2 different meanings. One) for Israelis, it refers to the same basic region as what we often call in english as Palestine (and what this article is addressing) and Two) it refers to a biblical concept described by the article ]. Therefore, because of the common usage of the phrase in Hebrew, it can be seen as a synonym for Palestine because they both refer to the same basic area. However, Palestine, being a diminutive phrase given to the region by the Romans in the 2nd century, does not equal the biblical concept because the history of the term "Eretz Yisrael" predates "Palestine" by a millenium. So therefore, it seems strange to me that the english article ] is wikilinked in the opening translation section. I still think the best solution is to explain all this in sentence format. Point out that "Eretz Yisrael" often is used to refer to the same region as Palestine in contemporary Hebrew culture, but the phrase also has a more historic, biblical meaning, as described by the ] article. I think this still needs a little work, but thanks everyone who slowed it down and notch and reviewed the past debate for me. I honestly appreciate it.--] 18:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==new section for Monowiki== |
|
|
|
|
|
This requires citation; also weasel wording needs scrapping or backing up here: |
|
|
|
|
|
"...as an insult to the now conquered Jews. In what was considered a form of psychological warfare, the Romans also tried to change..." |
|
|
|
|
|
Who considered this a "form of psychological warfare" ? When did they consider it?<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 21:03, 31 July 200.</small> |
|
|
|
|
|
== No 'israel' ... == |
|
|
|
|
|
There never was a land called 'israel' and there never will be. The situation at the moment is that The 'Abomination Of Desolation' that is mentioned in the Book of Daniel is what this shitty little zionist entity is. They will soon be eradicated (by 2012-2025? maybe!)to the rejoicing of the whole world and peace between mankind. The illegitimate state built on 'stolen' land by the racist neo-nazionists will not last - in the same way 'arpathied' disapeared from this world so shall this. Even True-Torah jews agree. They are going against G-d with this welfare state supported by the racist and murderous policies of the USA, the masters of terrorism. The whore of Babylon(US) will soon lose/be destroyed by divine/nature and it's serpent child; israel shall disappear from the face of this earth. the other serpent Britain shall also collapse. Remember nothing lasts forever not even the mighty empire you call the US (no more F16's or bombs)-without these the racist zionist vermin will not last a day. They cannot fight armies, they only can kill women and children from 20,000 feet in the air. Injustice cannot last - when the time comes they shall have nowhere to hide. The cuckoo land they live in may provide them with the foolish belief that they are G-d's chosen ones but in the real world they shall soon find out the Wrath of the L-rd upon their mischievous butts! There shall be no peace there while injustice prevails. Soon, very soon the Mahdi(A.S) and Isa(A.S)Jesus The son of Mary(PeaceBeUponHer), the Messaih shall descend from the Heavens and destroy this evil called zionism and its supporters. This is not a joke but a promise! Real Jews/Christains and Muslims will rejoice! While satan shall weep! |
|
|
Shalom,Peace,Salaam. {{unsigned|82.46.158.230}} |
|
|
: ] Please do not use article talk pages to post hate speeches like this. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox for propaganda of hate. There are many people who would find this very offensive. Please read ]. Thanks. ] <small>]/]</small> 13:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::Agreed. Go to Stormfront, I'm sure you'll feel better there. --] 15:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Hahaha... wow. —] 07:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry if I've offended anyone but thats the truth. I do not HATE anyone. And anyone offended should look at the actions of this tiny entity which billions of people do not recognise as a legitemate state(due to the fact it is an occupying force and an oppressor). To say Palestine never existed is just the zionists ignorance of the facts. Any land or entity known as 'israel' never existed (you see it's your perspective of history or events not mine.) 'Israel' was the name given to The Blessed Prophet Jacob(PeaceBeUponHim) and not a country or state but a people/tribe. Believe me when I say Jews(Children of Israel)have as much right to the Holy Land as any Muslim or Christian, but by force there never will be peace as was before zionism reared it's ugly head. The Three Abrahamic Faiths co-existed peacefully for over a 1000years in Palestine before the racist state came into being. If you call the truth hate then I can be guilty as charged. There a jews who oppose this state as much as any other fairminded person in the world who has not been brainwashed by the propaganda. |
|
|
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/ |
|
|
http://www.nkusa.org/ |
|
|
http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/ |
|
|
History shall judge and people shall see the truth. It is not Hate but pity that I feel for this minority entity that has made one of the greatest peoples(sons/tribes of Israel) into some of the most reviled people in the world(which is not really fair). But I think these people have to look inward and see what this 'state' is doing for them. If I have offended anyone I apologise but I will not hide behind propaganda or deceit. People need to wake up before they drag everyone into their hell! |
|
|
:], if you would like to contribute to the Misplaced Pages project, great. Please be sure what you submit is truthful with references. Misplaced Pages is not a ] or a place to broadcast personal beliefs. BTW, the last time I checked, ] was and is a sovereign nation. ] <small>]/]</small> 12:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Please look at this information; it has great relavance with the present situation in Lebanon== |
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of evidence is showing up that is saying that the Jewish Holocuast is not what it was made out to be. There were alterior motivations for the Zionists. It all connects together. |
|
|
|
|
|
This is some information to look over; it does challenge the conventional story. And before anyone starts making accusations of biase or anti-Semiticism...it is not I looked through it all. Zionists and Jews are not the same thing, neither are ISraelis and Jews. Just look at it to expand your horizons on the issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
These are all documentaries on Zionism, the Holocaust, and how portions of it were fabricated or adultered. The first two is just collected information and also claims that there is a link with Septmeber 11, 2001 and the third was is a full visual documentary with interviews and academic explanations. |
|
|
|
|
|
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-1984095615597363412&q=911+Stranger |
|
|
|
|
|
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-5382004121587104053&q=Germans+and+Zionists |
|
|
|
|
|
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=7272889307599304093&q=WWII+commentary |
|
|
|
|
|
This is the full text of Benjamin Freedman's speech...a Jew who was once a leading ZIonist who later left the movement and said it was behind the death of Jews and both World Wars |
|
|
|
|
|
http://compuserb.com/benfreed.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
69.196.164.190 |
|
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)