Revision as of 19:41, 9 June 2010 editBreein1007 (talk | contribs)2,512 edits →"Palestine": new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:54, 9 June 2010 edit undoNomoskedasticity (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,755 edits →"Palestine": "error"??Next edit → | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
I will repeat for what feels like the hundredth time: it does not make sense to say that this snake is found in both Israel and "Palestine". If the author of that source said "Palestine" as in the geographic region, then it includes Israel and is superfluous. It is not encyclopedic of us to blindly follow his error and have misleading, erroneous wording in our article. If the author meant ] when he said "Palestine", then we should choose the terminology that is not confusing and ambiguous, and say "Palestinian territories". Another source in this article lists the region as "], Occupied", and I even went so far as to include the unnecessary qualifier of Occupied in this article, quoted, and sourced. Now user Nomosked has come back and attempted to refuel the edit war, going back to the erroneous terminology contrary to the recommendation of most people at the OR noticeboard. Several people there commented that if there is another source that uses better terminology, we should use it. ] (]) 19:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC) | I will repeat for what feels like the hundredth time: it does not make sense to say that this snake is found in both Israel and "Palestine". If the author of that source said "Palestine" as in the geographic region, then it includes Israel and is superfluous. It is not encyclopedic of us to blindly follow his error and have misleading, erroneous wording in our article. If the author meant ] when he said "Palestine", then we should choose the terminology that is not confusing and ambiguous, and say "Palestinian territories". Another source in this article lists the region as "], Occupied", and I even went so far as to include the unnecessary qualifier of Occupied in this article, quoted, and sourced. Now user Nomosked has come back and attempted to refuel the edit war, going back to the erroneous terminology contrary to the recommendation of most people at the OR noticeboard. Several people there commented that if there is another source that uses better terminology, we should use it. ] (]) 19:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC) | ||
:Darling, I understand it is hard for some Israelis to accept the notion that there is a place called Palestine, but your personal difficulties do not amount to an "error" on the part of others. ] (]) 19:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:54, 9 June 2010
Amphibians and Reptiles Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Palestine Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Geographical range
I noticed this dispute over the terminology of the geographical range of this creature. Looking at the cited source, it does clearly say "Western Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel and northwest Jordan". It's unclear whether the author is using "Palestine" in the political sense or as a geographical designator, or perhaps even in the neutral sense of "Israel/Palestine". However, I think changing the term to "Palestinian territories" is a bad idea for two reasons: it falsifies the cited source, and it risks being inaccurate if the author is referring to geographical Palestine, which is not the same territory as political Palestine. It's safer all round to stick to what the source says. -- ChrisO (talk) 17:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- No, it is not. The source goes against Misplaced Pages's NPOV policies. Therefore, since we are intelligent beings, we are capable of realizing the mistake and fixing it, rather than being robots and copying/pasting text including errors. The source lists Israel AND Palestine. If the author meant to reference the geographical region of Palestine, it would make no sense to include Israel in the list. This is superfluous. Clearly, the author incorrectly used the term "Palestine" interchangeably with "Palestinian territories". The error should not carry through to our article here. And it does not risk being inaccurate. Geographical Palestine is the same territory as political Israel and the Palestinian territories. You are unfortunately mistaken. Breein1007 (talk) 18:00, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- The problem with the approach which you're suggesting is that you are substituting one description - "Palestinian territories" - for the terminology which, as you're not disputing, is used by the author. This is a big no-no; it misrepresents what the cited source says. I suggest that we adjourn this discussion to one of the noticeboards to get some outside views on what to do about this. I've posted a message to Misplaced Pages:No original research/Noticeboard#Vipera palaestinae. -- ChrisO (talk) 18:15, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Surely there has already been some discussion on the use of the term "Palestine" in relation to the geographic area. If someone knows where it resides, could they point to it? Personally, I see no issue in using the term "Palestine" to refer to a geographic location. Furthermore I see no issue using "Israel, Palestine (in the geographic sense)" in the same sentence. If I say "This lemur is indigenous to all of Canada and the Rocky Mountains", the sentence doesn't imply the Rocky Mountains are a country. If the reader is not informed enough to know the political situation, they will likely be unable to use the reference to locate the area anyway.
- Bree is clearly attempting making an attempt to eradicate all mention of the term "Palestine" to make a political statement. The attempt is not just wrong and lacking in NPOV, but also counter productive to his cause. I'd suggest he stop. NickCT (talk) 18:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- The problem with the approach which you're suggesting is that you are substituting one description - "Palestinian territories" - for the terminology which, as you're not disputing, is used by the author. This is a big no-no; it misrepresents what the cited source says. I suggest that we adjourn this discussion to one of the noticeboards to get some outside views on what to do about this. I've posted a message to Misplaced Pages:No original research/Noticeboard#Vipera palaestinae. -- ChrisO (talk) 18:15, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to ignore users who have proven incapable of collaborating civilly without personal attacks. To anyone interested in maintaining an accurate and policy compliant encyclopedia, I encourage you to look at this source, already in the article. It lists "Palestinian Territory" as the geographic location. I am not going to breach WP:3RR by correcting the mistake. Breein1007 (talk) 21:13, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Oh Bree. You're so noble (in-line sarcasm-tag). One of these days you'll understand that disagreement isn't incivility. If anything, running around willy nilly crying "incivility" is in itself, incivil. NickCT (talk) 21:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
"Palestine"
I will repeat for what feels like the hundredth time: it does not make sense to say that this snake is found in both Israel and "Palestine". If the author of that source said "Palestine" as in the geographic region, then it includes Israel and is superfluous. It is not encyclopedic of us to blindly follow his error and have misleading, erroneous wording in our article. If the author meant Palestinian territories when he said "Palestine", then we should choose the terminology that is not confusing and ambiguous, and say "Palestinian territories". Another source in this article lists the region as "Palestinian Territory, Occupied", and I even went so far as to include the unnecessary qualifier of Occupied in this article, quoted, and sourced. Now user Nomosked has come back and attempted to refuel the edit war, going back to the erroneous terminology contrary to the recommendation of most people at the OR noticeboard. Several people there commented that if there is another source that uses better terminology, we should use it. Breein1007 (talk) 19:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Darling, I understand it is hard for some Israelis to accept the notion that there is a place called Palestine, but your personal difficulties do not amount to an "error" on the part of others. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 19:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
- Start-Class amphibian and reptile articles
- Low-importance amphibian and reptile articles
- Start-Class amphibian and reptile articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles articles
- Start-Class Israel-related articles
- Low-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- Start-Class Palestine-related articles
- Low-importance Palestine-related articles
- WikiProject Palestine articles