Talk:Israelis

photos of Israelis

Why are all of the photos of Ashkenazim? There should be photos of mizrachim, sephardim, and other Jewish ethnic divisions. There should also be photos of the Arab minority of Israel if not other minority groups! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.207.30 (talk) 18:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Please add photos of them then. Fipplet (talk) 19:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

ADD

SHAUL MOFAZ BOAZ MAUDA DALIA ITZIK SHLOMO MULA ESTI MALMO \ tht should add diversity to the pictures —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.156.21.217 (talk) 22:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

someone should delete this article

israelis are NOT an ethnic group, being "israeli" is simply being citizen of state of israel, its not an ethnic term! there i no any senese of kinship among the arab, jewish, christian, druze or muslim populations of israel!!! Varcety 23:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Who said they're an ethnic group ? The category you mean ? Btw, the fact there are muslim, christian and Jews doesn't mean they don't have any sense of kinship. Many non jews hold the flag dear to their hearts (many druze for example that you mentioned). Amoruso 00:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the usage of {{Infobox Ethnic group}} in this article can be misleading. It's only supposed to be used in articles about ethnic groups, and "Israeli" is a nationality. Khoikhoi 10:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see any agreement with you here, and your attempt to removed it from the Palestinian refugee article was reverted by somebody else. As they said... "removal of information shall not be tolerated"! lol Anyway... I'm going to do the same here and restore the infobox that you removed. Mathmo ^Talk 15:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

It's inappropriate to have an ethnic group infobox in an article that's not about an ethnic group. Khoikhoi 19:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Not sure how this is different than French people or italian people, Israelis are a people, and can be classified as ethnic group also by the wiki article - which only says usually by ancestry etc. No problem with it here. Don't remove stuff without any consensus please. I agree that ethnic group doesn't describe it well but why remove the box ? Maybe change it like in French people and still include the information ? Amoruso 01:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

"Israeli" is a nationality, not an ethnic group. Here's what the CIA Factbook says:

Ethnic groups: Jewish 76.4% (of which Israel-born 67.1%, Europe/America-born 22.6%, Africa-born 5.9%, Asia-born 4.2%), non-Jewish 23.6% (mostly Arab) (2004)

According to this, Israel is home to many poeples, not just one. Khoikhoi 01:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah this is like trying to define Americans are an ethnic group which few would support. The Israelis aren't an ethnic group, but a multi-ethnic nation with various religions dominated by Judaism, Islam, Christianity etc. "Ethnic" varies as there are Georgian Jews, German Jews, Persian Jews etc. so how are all of these people an ethnic group? Not to mention Israeli Arabs and the Druze. It's not a tenable position at all. Tombseye 06:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, the French and Italians have an established cultural position in their respective homelands. The Israelis are mostly new arrivals who came from Europe, other parts of the Mideast etc. Their names vary, mother tongues vary (they all learn Hebrew now true) so this is still more analogous to Americans, Canadians, Argentines etc. Tombseye 06:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Shift its purpose to talk about the people of Israel the ethnic divisons more indepth that in the article about demography.

Israeli Jews

Shouldn't we have a separate article Israeli Jews (Israeli Jew is now a redirect to Religion in Israel)? --Koryakov Yuri 16:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Demographic table

The following table was inserted into the demographics section:

Israeli Jews by country of origin (2005)	5,488,000	100.00%
Israeli-born, born to an Israeli-born father	1,716,900	31.28%
Israeli-born, born to an Israeli-born father	1,716,900	31.28%
Jewish immigrants and first-generation Israeli Jews	3,771,100	68.72%
Former Soviet Union	1,171,300	21.34%
Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia	744,700	13.57%
Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia	520,600	9.48%
Iraq, Lebanon, Syria	277,900	5.06%
UK, North America, Oceania, South Africa	185,800	3.38%
Iran, India, Pakistan	181,100	3.30%
Yemen	143,500	2.61%
Turkey, Bulgaria, Greece	136,500	2.48%
Ethiopia	97,500	1.77%
Austria, Germany	80,100	1.46%
Argentina	62,000	1.13%
Europe, other	61,500	1.12%
France	52,700	0.96%
Latin America, other	39,700	0.72%
Asia, other	18,800	0.34%

I don't understand why it combines people born in Israel with those born elsewhere, and why it only lists origins of fathers. It appears to give a distorted view of Israelis, which concerns me. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

It is taken from the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics[1]. As to why they lists only the origin of the father: "Continent/country of origin for persons: born abroad - continent/country of birth; for persons born in Israel - father's continent/country of birth"[2]. The Israeli CBS holds data for Jews who either immigrated to Israel or were born to an immigrant father (together they make up 68.72% of the Jewish population), but not for Jews who were born in Israel to an Israeli-born father (the remaining 31.28%). Finschonnd (talk) 08:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

It would seem to make more sense to include tables that divide Israelis into native-born and immigrants (with country of origin); the CBS has those numbers too, does it not? Jayjg ^(talk) 18:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Israeli British. Badagnani (talk) 04:09, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I have deleted the references (and the sentence) that read that "Los Angeles is home to the largest population of Israelis outside of Israel." The references (in the LATimes and on Market Watch) mentioned celebrations put on by the Israeli Consulate General in Los Angeles, with no mention at all that Los Angeles constituted the largest population of Israelis outside of Israel. That is, the references were completely false. I am not sure why anyone would bother to say this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.84.195.210 (talk) 02:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Layout

The layout of this article was totally wrecked by someone who didn't bother to look at the effect of having a very short intro teamed with a very large box and large photo, resting directly above another photo that was not floating but had a fixed position between a heading, and the text that it pertained to. The effect, which anyone with eyes could see, was to orphan the heading and create a great gap in the substance of the article.

If you put the pics back, it won't work. Look before leaving. Amandajm (talk) 13:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

The images of prominant Israelis in the infobox is missing an Israeli Arab

The Israeli society needs to be represented more accurately in the infobox (Nowadays the Israeli-Arab population is around 24.3 % of all Israelis). which figure should be chosen? maybe Mohammad Bakri ? (unfortunatly there is no free image of him in wikicommons). any other ideas? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 04:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC) the arabs israelis are more like 18% of all israelis.. 24% is the precent on all non-jews israel.. but not all of them are arabs.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nadave (talk • contribs) 11:00, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

The Arabs, including East-Jerusalem, are 20% but the Arabs of East-Jerusalem are "permanent residents" not Israeli citizens. So the Arabs are closer to 17% and all non-Jews around 20% in Israel. Among Israelis abroad, 80% are Jews, 20% non-Jews mostly former USSR immigrants - according to the ICBS. Anyway, yes, we have to include some pics of Israeli Arabs. Benjil (talk) 11:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

The changing of the info box to 100% Ashkenazi Jewish must stop, seeing that Ashkenazim are only 33% of Israelis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.230.141 (talk) 20:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand, putting pictures of stupid pop singers is not exactly better. Benjil (talk) 21:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

First of all, the percentage of Ashkenazi/Mizrahi Jews in Israel is unknown (The "Data" we have is unsourced and is probably fabricated). But it's reasonable to believe Ashkenazis make up at least 40% of the population, if not more.

Let's see:

• Boaz Mauda, Shiri Maimon, Liel Collette and Eyal Golan all together don't share the level of popularity Shlomo Artzi does.

• Tzipi Livni and Szaul Mofaz over the founding father Ben Gurion, or even Rabin? ridiculous.

• Omri Caspi? If we're talking sports, Shahar Peer, Dudi Sela, Erlich/Ram and Berkovic are internationally known. Casspi is too, but to a much lesser extent.

• Ovadia Yosef over Yisrael Meir Lau? Again, makes no sense.

• Why is there a photo of an unknown Ethiopian soldier? People are already aware there are Blacks in Israel, so I really don't see the point.

• Dalia Itzik shouldn't be there either, but I can let this one go.

I think the old infobox was perfectly fine. It offers a politician, a Zionist leader, a musician, a national poet, a contemporary writer, a Rabbi (and the chairman of Yad VaSzem), an actress, an astronaut, a model and a well respected singer. But I guess they're not nearly as important as Mr. Mauda, after all. Too bad they're of the wrong race.

Now, what you're suggesting here is what *I* call racism. We should choose people who are well known and influential, regardless of their ethnic heritage. But if you insist on including other ethnicities there in the name of political correctness, make sure you choose people who actually mean something for the country and its people, and not some unknown silly pop stars.Rstin18 (talk) 23:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC) Infoboxes must be demographically representative you

No, we must people who ethnically represent the stae, YOU ARE WITH YOU INFOBOX PROPAGATING MYTHS SUGGESTING THAT ALL ISRAELS ARE EUROPEAN JEWS, WHY DONT YOU GO TO THE FORGOTTEN REFUGEES WEBSITE WH

iF YOU WONT LISTEN TO ME SCROLL UP THE PAGE AND SEE THAT IM NOT THE ONLY ONE OUTRAGED BY YOUR DOWNLPLAYING OF THE IMPACT OF mIZRAHIM ON iSRAELI SOCETY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielBarzelay (talk • contribs) 00:10, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Re.Let's see:

• Boaz Mauda, Shiri Maimon, Liel Collette and Eyal Golan all together don't share the level of popularity Shlomo Artzi does.

- No In Israel today Shlomo Artzis influence as a singer is certainly much less than someone like Eyal Golan who is probably Israel’s most popular singer, Ofra Haza certainly was bigger than Artzi ever was, even Zohar Azgov

• Tzipi Livni and Szaul Mofaz over the founding father Ben Gurion, or even Rabin? ridiculous.

-I actually agree with you here,

• Omri Caspi? If we're talking sports, Shahar Peer, Dudi Sela, Erlich/Ram and Berkovic are internationally known. Casspi is too, but to a much lesser extent.

-This is a matter of opinion and it is really of no consequence, but Casspi is in the NBA so…….

• Ovadia Yosef over Yisrael Meir Lau? Again, makes no sense.

- This a matter of opinion and of no significance, your Ashkenazi, im Mizrahi that’s why we disagree here

• Why is there a photo of an unknown Ethiopian soldier? People are already aware there are Blacks in Israel, so I really don't see the point.

- This is needed, as is the Arab priest, infact more arabs should be included in the infobox, (instead of people like Liel, and so on….

• Dalia Itzik shouldn't be there either, but I can let this one go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielBarzelay (talk • contribs) 00:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

When people come to this page they must see a representative image of Israeli society, not of who is more influential, save that for the greatest Israelis page not Israelis, think page should disprove, not incurage stereotypes about the demographics of Israel, and to the data being false,it certainly is not (although I think it should be deleted anyways because there's no source). —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielBarzelay (talk • contribs) 00:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The old infobox was here for a good a couple of months before you came along. How about showing some respect? When we'll get to an agreement, then feel free to change things. Until then, have a little patience.

• How can you be so sure it's not false, if there's no source? The Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics doesn't public ethic data regarding third-generation Israeli Jews.
• It is a matter of influence and importance. This is true for any other Wikipedia article discussing ethnic/national group.
• According to your logic, out of the 12 people there, 4-5 should be of Ashkenazi descent. But the only one I see are Ramon and Livni. Why is that? And why stop there, anyway... Why don't you put a South American Jew? They do make up 2% of the population, same as Ethiopian Jews. And what about an American Jew? Lithuanian Jew? and let's not forget, there are no Sephardic Jews here. See how idiotic that is?
• Again, if you insist on Mizrahi Jews, at least pick someone worth mentioning. The current choices are an insult to Mizrahi Jews and Israel, especially if it's over the ones who were there before. Golan doesn't belong here. Einstein, Alberstein, Artzi, Hanoch and even the Yemeni Damari are all considered to be musical legeneds in Israel. Golan is not, and never was. It's not even a matter of opinion. Same is true for Maimon and Collette.

How about David Ben Gurion, H.N. Bialik, Dalia Itzik, Natalie Portman, Amos Oz and Ilan Ramon for a start?Rstin18 (talk) 02:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

As a Sefaradi Jew, allow me just to say that I don't give a shit (sorry) about the percentage of Ashkenazim or Sefaradim or Mizrahim (this last group being an Ashkenazi invention by the way, that never existed before, there was Edot Hamizrah for the non-Sefaradi Eastern Jews but that's another subject). Anyway, if you want to reflect this issue on the pictures: take down Dalia Itzik, she is an insult to anything Israeli ; Add Shoshana Damari ; Add Ovadia Yosef. And that should be ok. Benjil (talk) 08:34, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

How about David Ben Gurion, H.N. Bialik, Dalia Itzik, Boaz Mauda, Ovadia Yosef, Amos Oz and Ilan Ramon for a start —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.233.190 (talk) 02:43, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Israelites

Why does this article mention that 'Israeli' should not be confused with 'Israelite'. True, the terms are not identical, but Israelis are, by and large, descended from Israelites. In fact, the Hebrew words for 'Israeli' and 'Israelite' are identical. Maybe this should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.35.163.3 (talk) 23:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Robert Aumann

With all due respect to Mr. Aumann and his achievements, I think we might be able to pick someone more notable than him. Any suggestions? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 05:21, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

If a Nobel-prize winner is not notable, then who is? How about a picture of yourself? Joking aside, the trouble is that many notable Israelis have no photo on Wikipedia. Haim Yavin comes to mind.--Gilabrand (talk) 06:08, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Indeed it is not simple to choose the most prominent, notable and influential Israelis:

• On the one hand, we should try to represent the different population groups in the Israeli society as best as we can (Ashkenazi / Mizrahi / Arab / etc…) according to their relative share (I do agree with the users whom have pointed out before that we should refrain from selecting mostly Ashkenazim to prevent the readers from thinking that the majority Israelis are Ashkenazim).
• On the other hand we need to present the most prominent figures in as many fields as possible.

Therefore I believe that:

1. We currently have too many singers – it might be better to replace Shlomo Artzi with a notable prominant person from a different field (I choose Shlomo Artzi because Ofra Haza and Dana International have gained bigger success worldwide than him and because Ofra Haza and Dana International together with Ovadia Yosef help us represent the share of the Sephardim and Mizrahim in the Israeli society much better.)
2. Don’t get me wrong, I do not underestimate Robert Aumann’s achievements. Nevertheless, in your opnion, is he really the most prominent, notable and influential Israeli scientist / Nobel laureate?
3. I could always try getting permission to use photos of prominent people whom do not have their image on wikicommons yet. Please do not let that fact prevent you from bringing up the suggestions.

TheCuriousGnome (talk) 22:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The selection of notable Israelis in the montage

I created the montage based on the selection of images which has been on this page for quite a while as well as the consensus reached in the article Israeli Jews (see discussion page). TheCuriousGnome (talk) 06:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Dom people

I've never heard of this group in my life. That is why I am suspicious of the data presented here. Please supply more relaible sources which would back up this data or else it would be removed. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 14:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Sounded bizarre to me, too, so I googled a bit and found this article (http://imeu.net/news/article004439.shtml), which states there were 200 Dom (gypsy) families living in the Old City in 1967. In the 1990s, the number dropped to 70, and who knows how many are left today. Does that qualify as a notable Israeli minority group? Good question.--Geewhiz (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Notice that it is also stated here that their population in Israel/Palestinian Authority is 7,200. I still couldn't find any relaible sources to back this claim up. If there is no objection I will go ahead and remove this section tommorow. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 01:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

The selection of notable Israelis in the montage

H.N. Bialik, the national poet should be here, or at least Nathan Alterman or Yehuda Amichai. Arik Einstein should be here (not eyal golan), or at least שלמה ארצי or חווה אלברשטיין, or מתי כספי. and too many statesmans יניבפור (talk) 23:08, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Please be more specific - whom do you think should be replaced with whom? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 23:42, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and Bialik died in 1934 - a long time before the state of Israel was established. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 23:45, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

1. still, Bialik is the national poet. but if not Bailik i would suggest Nathan Alterman (not one of my favorites, but consensus).

2. also, Arik Einstein, the most prestigious singer in israel (few will argue about it) instead of Eyal Golan.

3. I see here 8 politicians - that's way too much! we dont need Benjamin Netanyahu here, he's the Prime Minister, and we (and the rest of the world) hear about him all day long! I suggest put instead the winner of the 2010 Fields Medal, Elon Lindenstrauss. there are many great scientists in israel, and only 2 here (but 8 politicions)

4. also I suggest to remove Moshe Dayan (great person, but) and put someone from another area. my offer is Daniel Barenboim, the very famous conductor.

5. and remove Natan Sharansky and instead put Boris Gelfand, one of the best chess players in the world (and also emigrant from the former USSR)

6. without Benjamin Netanyahu, Moshe Dayan and Natan Sharansky, we have 5 politicians, and that's more reasonable.

7. best rank of Shaar Peer is 15. why not put instead Gal Friedman, the first israeli gold medalist in the olympics?

8. Esther Ofarim instead of Dana International (or Chava Alberstein). and if consist about Mizrachi, Ofra Haza. יניבפור (talk) 12:23, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

First of all, let me state that the current compromise is based on the consensus reached in the discussions we have had in this discussion page.

As I see it, the choice here is really between selecting the most world-famous Israelis (in this case we might end up with a list that consists mostly of Ashkenazim) VS selecting the most accomplished, talented and awarded Israelis (for example, having more notable Israeli scientists and international award winners than local singers and politicians) VS selecting a group of notable Israelis which would fairly represent the different groups in the Israeli society. As I see it, the selection needs to be a well thought of combination of these considerations.

Now here are my opinions of your suggestions:

1. Natan Alterman instead of whom? (By the way - we do not have a good free photo of Alterman in wikimedia)

2. With all respect to Arik Einstein, in my opinion we need to have one of the following singers in the list - Eyal Golan, Ofra Haza or Zohar Argov - since they are of the most notable representitives of their group. Since we do not have any free photos available to us of Ofra Haza or Zohar Argov in wikimedia, I think that we should at least keep Eyal Golan.

3. Benjamin Netanyahu is currently one of the most known Israelis in the world. In my opinion, when his term ends, we should replace him with the next Israeli Prime minister. The majority of the rest of the politicians are amongst the most widely known Israeli leaders whom through Israel's shorty history have had the most influence.

4. I consider Moshe Dayan to be part of the notable leaders I mentioned above. With all respect to Daniel Barenboim, in my opinion, Moshe Dayan is more notable.

5. Natan Sharansky, in my opinion, is the most notable representative of his group.

6. See comments above.

7. In my opinion we should keep only images of the current most notable athletes - therefore, in my opinion, Shaar Peer and Yossi Benayoun are our current best choices.

8. Dana International is more famous world wide and she is one of the most notable representatives of her group. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 15:08, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I tried my best to make it more cultural and intelligent... hope there are other people here will agree with me that this collection is provincial, politically correct and brain washed (8 politicians), while very successful and influencial israelies, artists, scientists, poets (not even one) etc. stay out יניבפור (talk) 15:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Why didn't you suggest replacing Emile Habibi (politician), Raleb Majadele (politician) and Salim Tuama (soccer player) with notable Israeli artists, scientists and poets?

Either way, each individual suggestion made here should be seriously discussed by many Wikipedians and consensus should be reached before any future changes would be made. Opinions made by other wikipedians on this matter would be gladly appriciated at this point. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 16:39, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Emile Habibi is a famous writer, and yes, its 9 politicians, not 8, and with Habibi - 10 (as I said - provincial, even more). and I dont care if Raleb Majadele and Salim Tuama will be replaced. I forgot to mention Nachum Gutman, the greatest painter of Israel. no place for him? 10 politicians, not even 1 painter, 1 poet, 1 mathematician etc. "keep the good work". exectly what the world expect from us. we dont need here all the knesset and all the founders. israel made alot of contributions in other areas, inside and outside. Alterman for exemple made huge impact at his time. יניבפור (talk) 17:13, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

You have just proven my point - if it was up to you, you would have probably removed all the notable Arab-Israelis and Mizrahi Jews from this montage. I have to state that I oppose this general proposal - this population consists of millions of people and and definatly deserve to have some representation. As I mentioned before, we do not have a good free image of Alterman. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 20:50, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

that was not my proposal. youre not listening. ומתעסק בטפל, ולא בעיקר. never mind. will wait to other wikipedians יניבפור (talk) 22:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Israelis population numbers for Israel

Israelis population numbers for Israel in infobox includes the settlers in the West bank and the Golan heights. But the regions that the settlers are located in is not Israel. Nothing is also said in the lead of the article that half a million Israelis and 20 000 Israelis live in the WB and GH. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:55, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Does anyone know the numbers for Israelis in Israel not including the occupied territories? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 01:26, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Israelis

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Israelis's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "jewishvirtuallibrary.org":

• From Israel: Jacqueline Shields. "Jewish Refugees from Arab Countries".
• From Mizrahi Jews: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/mejews.html

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 10:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

RS contradiction

:For lack of a more specific template, I have tagged the article with the primitive "POV" -DePiep (talk) 20:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC) See this edit. So two sources give numbers of Israelis for the U.S.: 106.000 -- 6.500.000 (&tc). That is way too extreme, I call this contradicting RS for now. Now if they are both RS, we should have a section that describes both numbers by background (say definition, or research method). If one is non-RS, that's clear. -DePiep (talk) 19:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

The vandalism that replaced numbers of Israelis in the U.S., etc. with the numbers of Jews has been removed, and the previous sourcing restored. Hertz1888 (talk) 02:35, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Location of Israelis

User:AgadaUrbanit removed WB, EJ and GH from places where Israelis can be found, and claimed "WP:POINT," and "also not consistent with the rest of the sentance". I don't understand this, what is the reason for bringing up "WP:POINT"? and how is it not consistent with the rest of the sentence? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for raising a discussion.

1. It appears that Supreme Deliciousness introduced this content here
2. The addition was partially reverted here, without explanation.
3. Supreme Deliciousness reverted.

We're temporarily removing it while we come to a consensus on what to include. That's how Wikipedia works most of the time: one person makes a bold addition, someone else says, "Hmm, that's not quite right," and then reverts that addition, then everyone goes to the talk page and discusses the section until a consensus is reached to determine exactly what to include. That is called WP:BRD. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

You have not replied to my post above, which means that you have not provided a valid reason for your revert, so I guess it can be reinstated. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:04, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Wrong, I've provided rationale, though I'm open to suggestions about how to integrate the content in the article. Please do not edit war. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 22:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

You made claims when you removed the content, but you have not explained your claims as I asked you. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Wrong again, the content was removed here by IP, without explanation, my point #2. I gave rationale, you did not hear that. Please stop Wikipedia:Disruptive editing. 22:26, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The sentence is about Israelis living in places outside of Israel, how does it not belong there? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:29, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

This is your POV, please stop pushing it. I personally do not know if mentioned places are in Israel or not and that's what I have to say about location. Anyway it besides the point, the question raised by my edit summary still persist. I'm going to sleep now, good night. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 22:34, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

What is my pov? The content showing Israeli settlers living in these places are sourced to the BBC and United Nations. Since you acknowledge that you do not know if the places are in Israel or not, then why are you reverting this edit and editing an issue you don't have knowledge in? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Same argument, different article. Ugh.

Regardless of international opinion, the heights function as part of Israel. Your edit disregards that. PLease find a way to reword it for clarification so that the reader understands the content.Cptnono (talk) 00:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Now that I look at it closer, ax the whole line. The line after it summarizes it fine. I have already removed part of the line but the rest doesn't even have enough commas.Cptnono (talk) 01:02, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

How come you showed up to this article? Israel has extended its laws to EJ and GH, and this is internationally unrecognized. To follow the view of one country instead of the world view is pov and not neutral. And my edit does not contradict that Israel controls the occupied territories. The line after does not summarize it fine as Canada, US and UK are mentioned while not WB, EJ and GH where even more Israelis live. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 01:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Does it matter? Either it was on my watchlist due to previous concerns I have seen or I took a look at your contributions since I see a concern. Either way, as long as I am not harassing you or trying to give you a hard time it does not matter.

The part of the line that means anything is that there are large populations in US, Canada, and the UK. The political dispute didn't appear to be the focus until you made that change. So if you want to discuss populations in the territory Israel controls then simply spell it out clearly and in a NPOV manner.Cptnono (talk) 01:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

And there are also large populations in the occupied territories. I added other places where Israelis live. How is this not clearly and in a Npov manner [3] ? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 10:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

You have mixed the places under Israeli jurisdiction and the places that are not, making the whole paragraph an unreadable mess. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 11:08, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

What about after the line, something like this: "Israelis also live in settlements in the occupied territories, which includes, East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights" ? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd omit the specific territory names and include the population numbers: "About 490,000 Israelis live in the territories occupied by Israel", in addition of source. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 11:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Why omit the specific territory names? What is wrong with the sentence I suggested? We can included the population numbers at the beginning of it. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Because "Israeli-occupied territories" says more or less the same with less words, which is great for lead. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 22:15, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Gaza is also part of the OT, but no Israelis live there, to name the specific OTs by name is therefore needed. My suggestion is also only one sentence, so there is no problem with the length. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:05, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I reviewed the the relevant sources. In the discussed change Supreme Deliciousness had taken sources (mada2006-06-28, CBS, BBCPT, UNGolanHeights) and combined them to say what was not originally there. With Supreme Deliciousness edits from couple of month ago double counting ( of settlers ) was introduced and created more Israelis than there are, according to sources, introducing factual error also in the infobox. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 12:29, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I have not combined any sources. I only introduced the sources for the occupied territories as they were not represented in the article, as can be seen in the infobox, only numbers for Israel were there.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

According to my understanding 750,000 from mada2006-06-28 does not include settlers, and from other hand CBS 7,602,400 does include settlers. So Supreme Deliciousness edits from couple of month ago double count settlers. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

The CBS source in the infobox is currently only sourced to "Israel", if it is in fact so that it also counts Israeli settlers in the occupied territories, then that part of the infobox should of course say "Israel, East Jerusalem, West bank and the Golan Heights", per npov, as to only say "Israel" would be to claim that the occupied territories "are Israel", which would be pov.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

CBS source provides 7,602,400 which does include settlers, so double counting happens now, we multiply Israelis. Maybe Che's "Israeli jurisdiction" wording is appropriate or maybe we could style political clarification as footnote, similar to one clarifying whether or not NI is a country, however double counting is plain wrong, I'm going to remove it. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 13:01, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Removed the doubling of the numbers, and added the names of all the regions it counts to the same section. Also removed the Israeli flag as it can not represent the occupied territories, as they are internationally recognized as Palestinian and Syrian lands. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:18, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

No, this is not appropriate. Supreme Deliciousness last edit is out of consensus. Number of options were discussed, Supreme Deliciousness ignored it. SD, please self revert and discuss, to reach consensus before performing an edit. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 13:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Is there consensus that we should have double numbers? Is there consensus that we should call occupied territories "Israel" ? My edit could be temporary until something better is suggested. And there were no major changes in my edit from how it was before, I removed the doubling of the numbers and changed placement of the locations to the section that contained their numbers. And the flag per explanation above. You acknowledged before that you do not know if the occupied territories are part of Israel, so why are you continuing to discuss this issue you don't have knowledge in? You also said "POV pushing edit" in your edit summary, what were you referring to? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

SD, I reverted your edit and then added the tag "{{dubious - discuss}}". First, the edit you made did not reflect the outcome of this talk -- there is no outcome yet. Second, having read this thread, your behaviour and reactions in this whole thread are not constructive. So it is not this single edit I am talking about. You have been pointed to crisp WP:policies and guidelines, which you did not use or hear. Third, the whole solution & clarification is quite straightforward, and it is strange that it has not arrived there within a breathe (my hint: sweeping the occupied territories together with Israel is not NPOV, and unnecessary vague). I invite you, SD, to propose an improvement here that can easily satisfy you, the other editors here, and the facts, all within policies &tc. -DePiep (talk) 15:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

What WP:policies and guidelines did I not use or hear? There has not been any suggestion from Cptnano or ElComandanteChe about the infobox, and AgadaUrbanit acknowledges he doesn't know if the occupied territories are part of Israel. I doubt no one would object to the removal of the double numbers, and the occupied territories have to be moved somewhere, and since we now know the "Israel" section also contained the numbers for the OT it it was only natural to move them there. The occupied territories were already together with Israel in the numbers, so I only corrected what the numbers represented. The best thing would be to have separate sections for the locations, the problem is that the source used for the numbers for the "Israel" section has merged settlers outside of Israel together with Israelis in Israel. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

What WP:policies and guidelines did I not [...] hear Q.E.D. -DePiep (talk) 20:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

But seriously: what is your proposal, SD? -DePiep (talk) 21:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

As I said above: "the best thing would be... " --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:05, 18 March 2011 (UTC)