Talk:Facts on the ground

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Palestine (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Israel (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Transliteration of the Hebrew[edit]

The transliteration (from the Hebrew) "Uvdot Ba'Shetach" is close, but still questionable -- specifically, the apostrophe, the uppercase "S", and ending "ch". In higher quality (i.e., scholarly) publications an apostrophe is used to represent a vocalized alef in the middle of a word, e.g., "ha'or" = the light. In lower quality (i.e., popular) publications, an apostrophe in transliterated Hebrew often indicates a moving schwa, e.g., "sh'ma" = listen. But neither of those apply here. Simpler "uvdot ba-shetach" (note all lowercase) makes more sense. But using "ch" for the letter het is also a hallmark of lesser-quality transliterations. Ideally it should be "h" with a dot below it. Isn't this possible in Wikipedia? Toddcs (talk) 15:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Why include Rashid Khalidi's quote?[edit]

The entire quote comes across as out of place and extremely biased/partial. Also, the article doesn't say anything about Rashid or who he is except for the one place where it quotes him, why would he be knowledgeable about this subject? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.191.33.255 (talk) 02:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)