Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:55, 18 February 2008

This page in a nutshell: Should the post-1967 Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem be principally titled as "neighborhoods" or "settlements"? What do the reliable sources say? What is the predominant usage?

• I created the Neighborhoods of the Ring, Jerusalem. Except for the footnotes and the second paragraph in the Demographics section (section header added), I translated it word-for-word from שכונות הטבעת. Perhaps the participants would wish to give their opinions about this more central article, to avoid fragmentation. (comment in the Discussion section/s below, please). Thx. El_C 12:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Refactored from AE

Jewish Neighborhoods versus Israeli Settlements of Jerusalem

For excessive reverts on related articles (Pisgat Ze'ev, Gilo, Ramot, Har Homa, Neve Yaakov), Colourinthemeaning (talk · contribs), ILike2BeAnonymous (talk · contribs), Robertert (talk · contribs), Gilabrand (talk · contribs), and possibly other users upon examination (needless to say, anyone else reverting on this set of articles, is at risk of being added), are, for the next month, placed on a one-(talk page obligatory)-rr on any Jerusalem-related entry. We are not going to have this multiple-entry revert war go on, indefinitely. I gotta step out now, but I will give this formula further thought later. Comment below, but please keep them brief. Long winded debate will be aggressively redacted. Many thanks. El_C 23:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, please do take action against User:Colourinthemeaing, who went ahead and did a blanket revert well after you sent this message. In fact, this person should be blocked from Misplaced Pages altogether for the disruptive and aggressive nature of his "editing," which is to go from article to article and insert his personal views, and promptly set off an argument with people who have long contributed to the page before he parachuted out of nowhere and decided that he is God's gift to Misplaced Pages (if not mankind).--Gilabrand (talk) 16:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

1)Fairness: Colourinthemeaning has violated the 3 revert policy 3 times on Gilo after unsuccessfully trying to block another user, resulting in two protections to his new version while I've let his changes to the original version stand a number of times while continuing the discussion. ILike2BeAnonymous hasn't joined the conversation at all. Colour also namecalls (vandal, nationalist) and as I showed below contradicts his sources. Treating us all the same is not fair.

2)Discussion: The summary above (Jewish Neighborhoods versus Israeli Settlements of Jerusalem) is not correct. I restored the original version of the pages that said these places are neighborhoods that are widely considered Israeli settlements, while Colourinthemeaning is arguing that not only do many people say that these places are Israeli settlements, but that the same people say they "aren't" neighbourhoods.

3)Sources: His own sources Globalsecurity and Peace Now]], contradict him and all refer to them as neighborhoods, as does even Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat]. Erekat and Peace Now believe the neighborhoods are also settlements while Globalsecurity mentions that their status is disputed. No one says they are independent cities or towns instead of neighborhoods.

I wish someone could put in some time to read through all this. I know that it isn't the most simple dispute but it is straightforward. Most of the discussion is here --Robertert (talk) 10:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The Settlement side is urged to provide reliable sources that demonstrate usage of the word "settlements" with respect to these neighborhood as the predominant term. Please be specific, citing entire passages, when needed. El_C 07:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

My solution is my version of the page that Mr. Color keeps blanket reverting. It makes sufficient mention of both terms. I have nothing further to say on the matter except that I will not let agenda-pushers write history and disseminate misleading information on Misplaced Pages.--Gilabrand (talk) 13:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

And we're off on a friendly note! Links? El_C 13:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I am honestly insulted that you think i am an agenda-pusher, when I have no agenda to push except that of fairness, NPOV and the general enhancement of wikipedia as an encylopedia based on facts. My reverts were made because of excessive reverts made by Gilabrand, Robertert and annonymous IPs which severly degraded the content and white-washed the facts pon the page on Gilo, as well as others. One such example was replacing the header 'Shooting Incident' with the incredibly loaded term 'Palestinian Violence.' Further, a long list of problems I had with the articles, including removed content were ignored. Please see Talk:Gilo.

Now, the articles you cite Robertert, which you claim contradict me do nothing of the sort. The article from Global Security in fact calls them 'disputed neighborhoods.' I linked the article because you cant seem to understand that they are disputed. The second, from JPost, refers to Gilo and Ramot as BOTH settlements and neighborhoods. I linkd this article because you seem to think that the neighborhood term is more legitimate, and were as such removing the term settlement from the first sentence, as well as minimising the viewpoint that it is such.

The very large International Consensus that these places are settlementsm settlements in all reality should be the leading and exclusive term while noting the position of the Israeli Government, who is the only government in the world to hold the position that these places are not settlements. Otherwise, this would be giving undue weight to one, very miniminally held perspective. Here are just a few sources . However, in attempting to come to a consensus on these articles, i attempted to lead with both terms, however, this was apparantly disliked and quickly censored, replaced instead with simply the position of the Israeli Government. This is a really ridiculous fight, I am not attempting to write history, i am simply trying to include it, and both sides of it. They have only attempted to remove and/or minimise the side of the international community while leaving the viewpoint of the Israeli Government. This is just not Wiki. I really wish Gilbrand and Robertert could accept that. As Robertert himself in Talk:Gilo admitted, both the term neighborhood and the term settlement are ultimately decided by Governments. Both are political terms, and it just so happens in this case, the only government in the world that views Gilo and these other establishments as neighborhoods is the Israeli Government. Further, it is my opinion that the term 'neighborhood,' is in this case being used as the anti-thesis for settlement, to imply a nice friendly place that has a legitimate legal founding, when in fact that founding is in question. But I have tried to compramise, and be fair to both viewpoints, each attempt has been reverted.

Ultimately, I think the argument seems to be about their view that the term settlement is disputed. Yes, i will admit it is disputed, but it is only disputed by the Israeli Government. Yet from their reverts and edits, it seems they think this viewpoint is not of merit enough to be included, especially in the leading sentence or even paragraph. Yet, somehow, the viewpoint that it is a neighborhood, which is held only by the Israeli Government is not only included and reinforced throghout, but the leading descriptive term in the opening sentence of this article. This ultimately leads to incredibly nationalist pages which I think are a discrase to wikipedia generally and make their version the definitive Wrong Version. Colourinthemeaning (talk) 14:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)