Talk:Israel/Archive 106

This is an archive of past discussions about Israel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 100

←

Archive 104

Archive 105

Archive 106

Archive 107

Archive 108

Tel Aviv

@האופה: What is factually incorrect about Tel Aviv being Israel's "largest city as well as its economic center"? Levivich (talk) 06:34, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Tel Aviv is simply not the largest city in Israel, Jerusalem's population is double its size. HaOfa (talk) 06:38, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

West Jerusalem is not larger than Tel Aviv and East Jerusalem is not in Israel. I'm reverting your edit. Levivich (talk) 11:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

@האופה: East Jerusalem is not part of Israel. We had this discussion about the scope of the article multiple times already. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

You are working against the great majority of WP:RS, check online for "Largest city in Israel" and see what you receive. Sources generally describe Tel Aviv as the second most popoulous city in Israel. Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, not on synthesized calculations, or personal opinions of editors. So its either we describe Jerusalem as the largest - as the majority of RS do, or we don't say anthing about that at all, as the article generally did for at least the last couple of years. ABHammad (talk) 12:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Jerusalem is not in Israel, West Jerusalem is. And Tel Aviv is larger than West Jerusalem, these are just facts. Describing said facts as "misinformation" is tendentious. Selfstudier (talk) 13:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Tendetious is pushing a POV when obviously there is no consensus and no sources have been shown to support the claim. ONUS and on. I'll be waiting, once again, for your self-revert to show you are ready to engage in good faith discussions instead of forcing others to accept a challenged version. ABHammad (talk) 13:34, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Please explain how stating a fact (provably true) is POV pushing? It is describing facts as misinformation that is POV pushing. Selfstudier (talk) 13:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Describing facts as a POV seems like the kind of thing that reduces the chance of a good faith discussion. Sean.hoyland (talk) 13:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Not sure how international law is "personal opinions of editors". This has been discussed multiple times already, the geographic scope of this article is 1948 Israel. East Jerusalem is part of the occupied West Bank, Israel's annexation of it doesn't change that fact. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

So now we have another revert, right out of left field. Selfstudier (talk) 08:36, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

@2018rebel: Why haven't you provided an edit summary for the revert, or at the very minimum participated in this discussion? Makeandtoss (talk) 12:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

In 2020, there were 220,200 Israeli citizens in East Jerusalem, while there were 349,700 Israeli citizens in West Jerusalem. Together, they total 569,900 Israelis within the municipal borders of Jerusalem, making it de facto the most populous municipality in Israel even if we exclude Palestinians from East Jerusalem. Tel Aviv is only the largest city in Israel if we consider its metropolitan area. Different sources may claim that Jerusalem or Tel Aviv are the largest cities depending on the criteria used, whether municipal or metropolitan area. The claim that Tel Aviv is the largest city in Israel is not consistent with other Wikipedia articles and the rest of this article: the infobox and the 'Demographics' section place Jerusalem as the largest city. See also here and here, perhaps relevant for the discussion. Mawer10 (talk) 15:22, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Anywhere that WP specifies or implies that Jerusalem is a part of Israel is POV. We had two major RFCs on the matter at the Jerusalem article already. I don't really care how it is dealt with in this article as long as this principle is maintained. Selfstudier (talk) 15:32, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

What definition of the word 'in' is being used here precisely? The State of Israel is a closed spatial object with an inside and an outside. This fact should help resolve matters. Sean.hoyland (talk) 15:36, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Jerusalem is in Israel both de facto and de jure (under Israeli law, of course). Annexed or disputed territories often are treated differently in articles; for example, in the article about Russia the population of Crimea appears in Russia's population data with a note making it clear. Mawer10 (talk) 15:48, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

The two RFCs at Jerusalem say otherwise. Jerusalem is not in Israel on WP, Israeli law is irrelevant and so is nonsense about municipalities, flags and all the rest. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is also irrelevant. Selfstudier (talk) 15:54, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia should not state that something is the case when it is not the case. For Wikipedia, it is not the case that locations across the green line are in Israel. This is the approach Wikipedia takes with respect to Israel given the constraints imposed by the WP:NPOV policy and after many discussions. And the Wikimedia Universal Code of Conduct is a useful guide here as it explicitly prohibits "Systematically manipulating content to favour specific interpretations of facts or points of view". Sean.hoyland (talk) 16:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

For reference, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jerusalem and Talk:Jerusalem/Archive_28#Should the infobox contain this flag and emblem? Selfstudier (talk) 16:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Adapting the meaning of 'in' for Jerusalem has unintended consequences. It becomes possible to ask a question like 'What is the largest Israeli settlement in Israel?' and expect Wikipedia to provide an answer. But this is not a question Wikipedia can answer. Sean.hoyland (talk) 16:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I know all this, I've read it. But Jerusalem is still de facto in Israel, despite the de jure non-recognition. The city is mentioned explicitly or implicitly in several sources as being in Israel and appears on several maps as being in Israel, such as the second map in the infobox. International law does not change the reality on the ground, only military actions or agreements between two or more countries do. The city's status in Israeli law is also important; if Israel did not claim any part of Jerusalem, this city would not need to be mentioned anywhere in this article. I am not suggesting changing the article to explicitly say that Jerusalem is in or is part of Israel, I'm just saying that we can't ignore the de facto reality completely. Anyway, it is inconsistent with this and other Wikipedia articles to say that Tel Aviv is the largest city in Israel, not even the article about Tel Aviv does this. Without specifying the criteria used is also misleading; a more precise statement would be "Tel Aviv is the country's largest metropolitan area and its economic and technological center." Mawer10 (talk) 16:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

The city is mentioned explicitly or implicitly in several sources as being in Israel and appears on several maps as being in Israel, such as the second map in the infobox WP:WSAW Selfstudier (talk) 17:07, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

A simple true factual statement like 'X is the most populous city in Y' should be possible because there is, as a matter of fact, a most populous city in Y. Is a statement like 'Tel Aviv is the most populous city in Israel' a true statement? Is it a misleading statement? It could be improved by including the fact that Israel counts things in a different way, but it should still be possible to make a statement like 'X is the most populous city in Y' where all of the words have their normal meaning. Sean.hoyland (talk) 18:03, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

1) "Airports at Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Eilat, Rosh Pinna, and Haifa serve the country’s domestic air traffic."

2) "The major urban centres inhabited by Arabs include cities and towns with both Arab and Jewish populations — such as Jerusalem, Haifa, ʿAkko, Lod, Ramla, and Yafo"

The excerpts above are from the article about Israel in the Encyclopedia Britannica, this source suggests/implies that Jerusalem is in or is part of Israel even without explicitly saying so. This also occurs here on Wikipedia. It's not because the sources are wrong, it's because there is a factual reality on the ground that cannot always be ignored. This my point. So if we are going to state in this article that Tel Aviv is the largest city, I strongly believe that it is necessary to specify that the metric used is the metropolitan area. Mawer10 (talk) 18:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I am not personally bothered about that edit, I only reverted it because the previous editor falsely said it was misinformation. The whole idea of a "factual reality" was argued again and again in those RFCs, and quite correctly ignored. Same would apply to "boots on the ground" arguments. To take one of your prior comments, Israeli fiction can be put in a note somewhere. Selfstudier (talk) 18:39, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

I assume the most viable solutions will be ones that avoid possessives and the word 'in' using wiki-voice. Jerusalem is not Israel's city and it can't be treated as if it is in Israel just like Israeli settlements across the green line within what Israel defines as Jerusalem can't be treated as if they are in Israel. We treat them as being in the Israeli occupied territories because of the constraints imposed by policy. Sean.hoyland (talk) 05:02, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

So the current version of 'recognition of Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem is limited internationally', makes sense. O.maximov (talk) 13:13, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

And per Mawer's argument, Jerusalem is still the largest city. Good explanation Mawer. In all cases, Jerusalem is still the largest per population. O.maximov (talk) 13:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Jerusalem is not the largest city. There are many cities larger than Jerusalem around the world. So, there is incomplete information. How would you phrase what you mean precisely in a way that is consistent with WP:NPOV? Sean.hoyland (talk) 13:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Map issue

can the globe map near the top be fixed to not include illegally occupied Palestinian land? 90.204.86.169 (talk) 19:32, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The current map is appropriate. The occupied territories are coloured in a lighter green, clarifying both the ‘67 line and the areas usually considered occupied. FortunateSons (talk) 20:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The green/light green map is terribly small. It is hardly visible! starship.paint (RUN) 14:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

The circle in the bottom right could be made much bigger to partly cover the Indian Ocean Alexanderkowal (talk) 21:09, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

It is really quite small. Most articles about European countries use offer locator maps for the continent they're on, e.g. United Kingdom has a globe map and a Europe map. Perhaps a request could be made for similar maps for the region around the Eastern Mediterranean and Arabian peninsula to be created. Other countries in the region, such as Jordan, Lebanon and Qatar have a similar problem to Israel, where they appear quite small in the locator maps and it's difficult to make out the detail. Adam Black ^{talk • contribs} 21:28, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I was looking through the pcitures of the smallest countries and the best pciture I got to after seeing about 10+ countries was File:Singapore on the globe (Southeast Asia centered) zoom.svg. I also saw that M.Bitton and Zero0000 have some experience with maps? Could either of you make the green/light green diagram in File:Israel (orthographic projection) with occupied territories.svg larger? We could cover the Indian Ocean. starship.paint (RUN) 03:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

If I have time this weekend, I'll create a new one. I'll ping you once it's uploaded to Commons. M.Bitton (talk) 22:26, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: what can I say? Three weeks felt like a week. Anyway, better late than never. Please have a look at the new map and let me know if anything needs adjusting or changing. M.Bitton (talk) 15:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

@M.Bitton: well, I can say that I love the improvement! Implementing it pronto. Thank you very much for your effort. starship.paint (RUN) 13:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

the map also includes the Golan Heights, and is inline with other pages such as Venezuela (which doesn't even occupy Essequibo), India, China, Pakistan, Russia, Sudan, North Korea Alexanderkowal (talk) 20:21, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 July 2024

This edit request to Israel has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Mynameisjules12 (talk) 23:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

because something has been written historically wrong on this page. Judah is older than palestine. it was never historically called palestine only within Arab communities.

please replace the saying historically as Canaan, Palestine, and the Holy Land to historically known as Canaan, Kingdom of Judah (which was founded in 930BC) and the Holy Land, within Arab communities and Islam it is a known as Palestine. :)

 Not done:It's pretty indisputable that it has, rightly or wrongly, been known as Palestine by more than just the Arab communities and Islam; particularly without giving a date range for "historically..." we cannot make this assertion. Please see, e.g. Palestine (region) which provides several examples that contradict your statement. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 01:31, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Timeline of the name Palestine Kowal2701 (talk) 14:09, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

POV tag

@האופה: By what right was my POV tag removed without consideration of the conditions outlined by WP? Makeandtoss (talk) 15:26, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@האופה: pinging one more time. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I think you've got to put reasons and problems on the talk page, otherwise it's WP:Drive-by tagging Kowal2701 (talk) 14:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I have already explained my reasoning in the edit summary as mandated by WP:DRIVEBY, so this is not true, and the lack of engagement in the talk page is all the more worrying. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

You don't need my opinion but I suggest just WP:Be bold, people will iterate on it and maybe be more incentivised to join discussion Kowal2701 (talk) 19:36, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Adding Romanizations

This edit request to Israel has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I recommend adding romanizations directly under the names of Israel in Hebrew and Arabic respectively. https://www.alittlehebrew.com/transliterate/ This site can help.

Using it and Google translate for romanizing Arabic, we’d get:

Hebrew: Medinat Yisra'el

Arabic: Dawlat 'Iisrayiyl Intichkanmi7378 (talk) 21:38, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

 Already done I see romanizations in the footnote. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: Change Israels capital to Tel Aviv in infobox

Tel Aviv is recognized as Israels capital by the international community.^[1] Maxsmart50 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 03:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

References

1. https://press.un.org/en/2017/sc13111.doc.htm

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 July 2024

This edit request to Israel has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Nakba

Why is the nakba doesn’t mentioned in its name on the lead? It is very important Add that 5.28.182.23 (talk) 18:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

 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. – macaddct1984 ^{(talk | contribs)} 20:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I want to understand why the Nakba is not mentioned 5.28.181.170 (talk) 21:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Because someone took it out. There is an ongoing discussion about this at #RFC: How should the Nakba described?. Levivich (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Request to edit antisemitic tone in Lead

Why are there 2 statements in a row that state Israel has lots of money in the lead?

Stop. Breathe. Exhale.

I think it would add to the utility of this article for interested editors to really stop and think (remember to breathe and exhale) about why there are 2 redundant statements in a row dealing with Israel and money in the lead of this highly scrutinized article.

“Israel has one of the biggest economies in the Middle East; it is one of the richest in the Middle East and Asia”

Firstly, “one of the biggest” is misleading. Turkey and Saudi Arabia have the biggest GDPs in the Middle East. Israel’s is half of theirs. Generally, if something if half the size of the biggest in a set, one would not define that half-sized thing as being “one of the biggest”.

The next statement is the bigger problem. The sources define “richest” as GDP per capita. It’s not encyclopedic to claim that Israel is “richer” than China or India just because Israel has a much smaller population. It is true that GDP per Capita is a good measure for standard of living, but that information is already in the lead: ”It has one of the highest standards of living in the Middle East”. That part could be edited to say: ”It has one of the highest standards of living in Asia”

In the interest of keeping antisemitism out of this article, please remove “it is one of the richest in the Middle East and Asia”. The statement is bigoted, inflammatory, redundant, and not supported by facts. 2601:80:8600:EFA0:D192:E372:9BD5:2E6F (talk) 22:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Done, are there any other problems you see? Kowal2701 (talk) 19:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

GDP is not a good measure of the standard of living but of the value produced by an average resident. Discretionary income better reflects the standard of living. In this context, we should use precise language: Israel's GDP per capita is among the highest in the region. — kashmīrī ^TALK 00:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Israel is the third largest economy in the Middle East and among the highest places in the Middle East and Asia according to GDP per capita, it is true that GDP or not is a perfect index but today it is the main index by which a country's economy can be measured, also according to other indices such as wealth per adult number of millionaires per capita average wealth of a family Israel is in the highest place in the Middle East and among the top 10% countries in the world, so the sentence expresses it accurately. Qplb191 (talk) 06:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Also I don’t understand what is antisemitic in that, in other countries lead it is also mentioned that they are advanced/rich/ developed. Qplb191 (talk) 06:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

List of Asian countries by GDP (PPP) per capita 9th and 30th is among the highest places? Moxy🍁 17:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Because we're not supposed to link Jews and money I guess. Unlike our sources. Go figure. — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:22, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Economic facts are economic facts. If Israel ranks highly economically then it ranks high economically. So be it. Data is data. O.maximov (talk) 13:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: grammar

4th paragraph of lead reads: “It also has of the highest GDP per capita as well as standard of living in the Middle East and Asia.”

As written, I think the intent would be “It also has ONE of the highest GDP per capita as well as standardS of living in the Middle East and Asia.” 174.247.80.209 (talk) 14:44, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done, good catch! Wafflefrites (talk) 22:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: Richest country in the article

Thread retitled from "Edit request: Continued appeal to remove antisemitic tone from article". WP:TALKHEADPOV O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:28, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

The word “richest” does not appear in any other country’s lead. Why does that word appear in Israel’s lead when it doesn’t appear in any other article’s lead?

The sources linked define “richest” as GDP per capita.

A sample of wordings from the leads of other Asian countries:

Thailand - “It has the second-largest economy in Southeast Asia and the 23rd-largest in the world by PPP, and it ranks 91st by nominal GDP per capita.”

Singapore - “As a highly developed country, it has one of the highest GDP per capita (PPP) in the world.”

Qatar - “The country has the fourth-highest GDP (PPP) per capita in the world and the eleventh-highest GNI per capita (Atlas method). It ranks 42nd in the Human Development Index, the third-highest HDI in the Arab world.”

Saudi Arabia - “The Saudi economy is the largest in the Middle East and the world's nineteenth largest by nominal GDP and seventeenth largest by PPP.”

South Korea - “It is considered a regional power and a developed country, with its economy ranked as the world's fourteenth-largest by nominal GDP and the fourteenth-largest by GDP (PPP)”

China - “Making up around one-fifth of the world economy, the Chinese economy is the world's largest economy by GDP at purchasing power parity, the second-largest economy by nominal GDP, and the second-wealthiest country”

Japan - “A highly developed country with one of the world's largest economies, Japan is a global leader in science and technology and the automotive, robotics, and electronics industries.”

Turkey - “Turkey is an upper-middle-income and emerging country; its economy is the world's 18th-largest by nominal and 11th-largest by PPP-adjusted GDP.”

UAE has the 5th or 6th highest GDP per cap PPP in the world and this is how it’s described in its lead - “The country has the most diversified economy among the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council. In the 21st century, the UAE has become less reliant on oil and gas and is economically focusing on tourism and business. The UAE is considered a middle power.”

United States (for reference) - “the United States has had the largest nominal GDP since about 1890 and accounted for 15% of the global economy in 2023. It possesses by far the largest amount of wealth of any country and has the highest disposable household income per capita among OECD countries.”

Even the actual richest country in the world (by the GDP PPP metric), Luxembourg, does not use the word “richest” in its lead: Luxembourg - “Luxembourg is a developed country with an advanced economy and one of the world's highest GDP (PPP) per capita as per IMF and World Bank estimates.”

Israel - Israel has one of the biggest economies in the Middle East and is one of the top ten richest countries in the Middle East and Asia, depending on various rankings.

I request we edit the sentence to conform to the standards of style in every single other country. Remove the word richest and add the universally used GDP per Capita (PPP). According to the sources, it has the 8th highest GPD per capita (PPP) in the Middle East and Asia.

174.247.81.139 (talk) 19:54, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

 Partly done Rewritten a bit differently. It's absurd to argue that the term "rich" is antisemitic. However, the term is also too vague and too poorly defined (rich in what? Natural resources? Human capital? Bank reserves? etc.) to be used in this manner in the lead. — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:19, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, "richest" isn't encyclopedic, as mentioned – too vague. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@Kashmiri Actually, it's not absurd. Don't underestimate the cliché of the rich Jew, from Shakespeare's Shylock to the supposed bankers behind the "International Jewish Conspiracy". It's a pretty potent motif. Doric Loon (talk) 11:35, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Doric Loon: Ethnic stereotypes are not the same as ethnic hatred. Conflating the two is absurd. — kashmīrī ^TALK 11:53, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Kashmiri This particular ethnic stereotype has a long history of being used hatefully. The recommendation to use more thoughtful language is good advice. Doric Loon (talk) 13:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I guess you'll have hard time to convince many editors that Israel is a rich country amounts to hate speech. EOT for me. — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:47, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Invasion

@Nableezy: As far as I remember the phrasing that Arab countries "invaded" Palestine in 1948 was discussed here previously and decided to be dropped from the lede. I think the previous version was better and more concise. The events of 1948 are generally termed the 1948 Palestine war, of which the 1948 Arab-Israeli war was a subset; and not the other way around. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Invaded was already there, I just specified it was Palestine and not Israel that was invaded. nableezy - 11:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Never mind, rusty memory. @Nableezy: Would you support this phrasing: "By the end of the 1948 Palestine war, which also involved neighboring Arab countries, Israel was established on most of Mandatory Palestine, and saw the expulsion and flight of the majority of the mandate's predominantly Arab Palestinian population. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: neutrality

The wording in the lead for the article for Palestine is “Its proclaimed capital is Jerusalem while Ramallah serves as its administrative center and Gaza City was its largest city until 2023.”

No mention of West Jerusalem or any disputed territory there. The info box for Palestine says limited recognition next to Jerusalem as the capital and the info box for Israel says limited recognition next to Jerusalem.

In the interest of neutrality, I recommend we match that wording here as much as possible and change:

”Israel's governmental seat is in its proclaimed capital of Jerusalem, though Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem is not recognised under international law and only has limited recognition internationally.”

to: ”Israel's governmental seat is in its proclaimed capital of Jerusalem.”

The third paragraph of the lead already contains the exact same content I recommend removing from the first paragraph: ”Israel has established and continues to expand settlements across the occupied territories, which is widely considered illegal under international law, and has effectively annexed East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, which is largely unrecognized internationally.”

It is redundant and against policy to repeat information in a lead in this manner. Previous discussion of this sentence has not addressed comparative neutrality or redundancy of content 2601:80:8600:EFA0:45B2:601A:EEAA:9D4E (talk) 15:41, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Arabic in infobox

Wikipedia articles on states that have languages of lower status than official language do not generally list the names of the state in those languages. For example's China's name is only presented in its official language of Mandarin Chinese, despite other languages having legal recognition in China. This is just one example, but feel free to take a look at countless other examples of this. It's also in line with the essay on style presented at WP:COUNTRIES.

In the same way, because Arabic is not an official language of Israel, it should not be in the infobox of the English language Wikipedia's article. I understand that Arabic was formerly an official language in Israel. However, given its current status, it should be removed. JasonMacker (talk) 12:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

It's still an officially recognized language Iskandar323 (talk) 17:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

That's not the standard. "Officially recognized language" and "official language" are two different things. Moreover, as the Arabic language in Israel article notes:

The 2018 Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People declared Hebrew as the "state's language" and Arabic as a language that has "a special status in the state" whose use "in state institutions or by them will be set in law."

In fact, Arabic is not even an "officially recognized language." Instead, it is simply a language that has "a special status in the state." The Israeli government's sole official language is Hebrew, with some laws mandating that in addition to Hebrew, Arabic (and English) is used as a supplementary language for street signs and other limited situations. However, as was made clear in the 2018 Basic Law, Arabic is explicitly NOT an official language or co-equal language to Hebrew in any way. For this reason, the infobox of this article misrepresents the status of Arabic by having the country's name in Arabic. In fact, as noted in Official_language#Israel, other languages besides Arabic are also granted certain special statuses, such as English, Russian, Amharic, Yiddish and Ladino. The Germany article, for example, only uses the German language for the native name line, despite the German government recognizing several regional and minority languages. In contrast, the Belgium article, in recognition of the country's three co-equal official languages, uses all three for its native name. So then that brings us back to the main question: why is Arabic, which is explicitly NOT an official language in Israel, used for the native name line in the infobox, while Russian, Amharic, Yiddish, and Ladino are not? There should be consistency here. JasonMacker (talk) 20:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

And you want to take as our guiding star here the very nation-state law that has been castigated as being straight up racist? One in every five people in the country is Arabic; and that's ignoring the millions more who ultimately live under Israeli apartheid. Show me the policy or guideline that prohibits significant minority languages with "special status" being referenced in the infobox, or let's end this here, thanks. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:54, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

My concern is that using Arabic for the native name gives a false perception of inclusiveness, when in fact it's an apartheid state (as you've pointed out) that discriminates against both Arabs themselves and the Arabic language. Of course, the nation-state law is racist. Including Arabic in the native name downplays the racism in the state of Israel, especially since the actual native name in Arabic for the land is Palestine. JasonMacker (talk) 03:36, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I’ve changed “Recognized language” to “Special status” to reflect the language in the footnote, body paragraph and reliable sources. Yes, there is an Arabic word for Palestine. There is also an Arabic word for Israel: And there’s a Hebrew word for Palestine Wafflefrites (talk) 04:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: info box Establishment

In the Establishment section of the info box, for Basic Laws, it says “1958-2018.”

This formatting might be interpreted as saying that the Basic Laws existed from 1958 through 2018. But it’s actually that the first was passed in 1958 and the most recent Basic Law was passed in 2018.

This may not be the most perfect of solutions, but maybe it would be more accurate to change the date range to a list of the years each Basic Law was passed: “1958, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1975, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1994, 2001, 2014, 2018”

source for years is https://m.knesset.gov.il/en/activity/pages/basiclaws.aspx 174.247.80.94 (talk) 22:13, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I did this: First Basic Law passed in 1958. Most recent Basic Law passed in 2018

Hope you are good with that. Thank you for your contribution. O.maximov (talk) 07:08, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Nakba lede

How does the cited quote align with the text?

The majority of Palestinians were expelled or made to flee due to various causes. Slater: "It is no longer a matter of serious dispute that in the 1947–48 period—beginning well before the Arab invasion in May 1948—some 700,000 to 750,000 Palestinians were expelled from or fled their villages and homes in Israel in fear of their lives—an entirely justifiable fear, in light of massacres carried out by Zionist forces."

Makeandtoss (talk) 09:14, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I tagged this as vague previously, but one could argue that it's both vague and intentionally euphemistic. Either the sentence should just cut short before this vaguery (perhaps best), or it should provide some semblance of tangibility. Just having it exist purely as a peg to the separate causes page is not reason enough to retain it unless it provides some meaning and value. The causes page says that violence was the cause, so it should be "amid the violence" or nothing really, since readers can get to the causes page through the expulsion page in any case. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

"Various causes" is WP:WEASEL Selfstudier (talk) 09:36, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Agree with both that it should be removed. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:38, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, it's very WP:WEASEL, akin to writing "the US civil war was fought over various causes" instead of "slavery". Levivich (talk) 15:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

That bit had previously had consensus on this page about for and has been repeatedly been edit-warred in. nableezy - 15:07, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@Nableezy: did you mean to remove the Slater 2020 cite? Levivich (talk) 15:49, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Did not will restore it. nableezy - 15:50, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Levivich (talk) 15:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

@PrimaPrime your edit is not cleanup, it is putting in inaccurate material. The majority of Palestinian Arabs were expelled by Israeli forces or fled in what is known as the Nakba. is not true. A large number of them were expelled prior to there being an Israel during the civil war, the expulsions in Haifa for example were carried out by the Haganah in April 1948. Please restore the prior language, what you changed it to is just wrong. nableezy - 16:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Latest edit

@SPECIFICO: Why did you re-add demographics to the opening paragraph and delete the second lede paragraph? Makeandtoss (talk) 13:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@SPECIFICO: What is the rationale behind restoring demographic information to the opening paragraph? Makeandtoss (talk) 14:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Disputed Nakba content

This edit dispute needs to be discussed. Multiple editors have changed and reverted this wording now.

The version reading "Over both phases of the war, a majority of Palestinian Arabs were expelled or fled for various reasons" is Nakba denial, minimizing the expulsions by vaguely suggesting there were "various causes".

The version reading "Over both phases of the war, a majority of Palestinians were expelled by Jewish and then Israeli forces or fled from the territory Israel would come to control" is the more accurate. In fact, "or were forced to flee" would be more accurate than simply "or fled". IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 08:26, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

The various causes version has been restored with edit summary of simply "there is no consensus for this new change" -IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 09:19, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

This content has been edit warred over since at least June 23. I don't know which version was the "status quo" version but it really shouldn't matter that much. I'd like to point out WP:STATUSQUOSTONEWALLING and WP:Don't revert due solely to "no consensus". IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 09:25, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't have an opinion on which version, but your edits are highly problematic for two reasons. (1.) The sentence is based on a source, yet you change the sentence while keeping the same source. Can you point out which sentence in the source support your wording? If there's none, you violate WP:OR (whereas if there is, this first point can be ignored). (2.) You speculate on the motives of other editors, which violates WP:NPA. Jeppiz (talk) 22:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:OR? See the article 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight and all the sourcing there. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:33, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

My question was where in the articles by Ghanim, Stern, and Cleveland you find that claim. Jeppiz (talk) 23:46, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

This content continues to be edit warred over without being discussed. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC) @Alaexis, @Levivich. 20:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

There is a still open RFC since 9 June on this? Selfstudier (talk) 07:21, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

That is a good point. June 9 version, when #RFC: How should the Nakba described? was started, was this: The Palestinians were expelled or made to flee, by paramilitaries and the IDF, an explusion known as the Nakba. That's what it should go back to, and stay at, until the RFC is closed. I'll put it back myself in a couple of hours unless Alaexis or someone else beats me to it. Levivich (talk) 16:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

+1. Absolutely. Selfstudier (talk) 16:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I think that the version I reverted to is better as it wikilinks the Causes articles and gives the reader the opportunity to read more about it. However considering that there is a RfC is progress we should wait for its result, you're right. Alaexis_¿question? 19:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

OTOH if there are issues with the sourcing (see @Jeppiz's comment above) than we should remove badly sourced info without waiting for the RfC. Alaexis_¿question? 20:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I added the quotes from Ghanim and Cleveland, removed Haaretz and Nakba 60, and added Slater 2020, also with quote. I don't think there's any issues with the sourcing for the pre-RFC version (there are issues for the bold June 23 change). Also I've asked HaOfa to self-revert on their user talk page, because they reinstated a bold edit made June 23, during the RFC. Levivich (talk) 20:15, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Ideally there’d be a way to link to the causes article without mystifying what modern scholars agree was the primary cause Kowal2701 (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

This was never stable, the RFC was started, AFAI-can remember, due to constant changes. HaOfa (talk) 19:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

It was stable until a totally unnecessary RFC was opened, which was when all the trouble started. Selfstudier (talk) 09:37, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: economy in lead

There’s 2 versions of the economy sentence being discussed.

I think the problem we’re running into is with the term ‘advanced economy.’ That’s just a descriptive term assigned by the IMF. An economy can either be advanced or developing. But it’s not quantifiable, can’t be ranked.

I suggest we change this bit to:

”Israel has an advanced economy, has among the highest GDP per capita and standards of living in the Middle East and Asia, and has one of the most developed technology sectors in the world, spending proportionally more on research and development than any other country.

“technology sector” should be the link to Science and Technology in Israel. “Developed sector” is the language used there so I went with it.

Removed ‘size of its economy’ because that information is covered by GDP per capita. 174.247.80.74 (talk) 21:38, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Done, changed to the requested proposal. Qplb191 (talk) 20:22, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Lede summary proposal 1

From: "The State of Israel declared its establishment on 14 May 1948. On 15 May, the armies of neighboring Arab states invaded the area of the former Mandate, beginning the First Arab–Israeli War. The majority of Palestinian Arabs were expelled or fled in what is known as the Nakba. The 1949 Armistice Agreements established Israel's control over 77 percent of the former Mandate territory. Over the following decades, Israel received an influx of Jews who emigrated, fled or were expelled from the Muslim world. "

To: "The State of Israel declared its establishment on 14 May 1948. It was formally established over most of the former mandate territory following the end of the 1948 Palestine war, which saw almost half of the predominantly Palestinian Arab population being expelled or fled in what became known as the Nakba. The 1967 Six-Day War..." Makeandtoss (talk) 12:51, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

"almost half of the predominantly Palestinian Arab population"? 160k remained, certainly far more than half were driven out. DMH223344 (talk) 18:03, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

I think "almost half" refers to the Mandate as whole and "the majority" only to the parts of the Mandate that became Israeli territory. Mawer10 (talk) 18:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

My propose:

"On May 1948, Israel was declared as an independent state, which was followed by the First Arab-Israeli war. During the conflict, almost half of the Arab Palestinian population were either expelled or fled from the Mandate. In 1949, the armistice agreements formally ended the war and established what became Israel's internationally recognized borders. The following decades was marked by a massive increase in Israel's population as the country absorbed Jewish immigrants and refugees from the Muslim world." Mawer10 (talk) 18:57, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you think this summarizes the body and is representative of RS? DMH223344 (talk) 19:00, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mawer10: "In 1949, the armistice agreements formally ended the war and established what became Israel's internationally recognized borders." is just an overlcomplicated way of saying "It was formally established over most of the former mandate territory following the end of the 1948 Palestine war," Also "The following decades was marked by a massive increase in Israel's population as the country absorbed Jewish immigrants and refugees from the Muslim world." this does not summarize the body nor is due for the lede; Israel received more significant numbers of Soviet Jewish immigrants in 1990s, which neither this is due for lede. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:21, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

also, israel never declared its borders, so what is "internationally recognized borders" supposed to mean anyway. DMH223344 (talk) 15:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: Basic Laws in info box

The most recent edit to this is not grounded in facts.

The Basic Laws are just a set of laws. There are 14 Basic Laws that have been passed over the years. Each one is different. None have been repealed, so every Basic Law is “current”.

Options are to change the line from “current basic law” to “Basic Laws” and then include either a list of 14 separate years of passage:

“1958, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1975, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1994, 2001, 2014, 2018”

OR something to the effect of

“First Basic Law passed in 1958. Most recent Basic Law passed in 2018” 174.247.80.43 (talk) 12:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)