Jump to content

Talk:Plan Dalet: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Tags: Reply
Mowster (talk | contribs)
Line 58: Line 58:
::::::As the editor tagging this article, it's rather up to you to produce some sources furnishing the unrepresented side of the narrative, not simply badger other editors to do so. Provide the sources you have read that might furnish the article with counter-narrative; don't leave it at a vague handwave at sources out there somewhere in the ether. [[User:Iskandar323|Iskandar323]] ([[User talk:Iskandar323|talk]]) 08:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
::::::As the editor tagging this article, it's rather up to you to produce some sources furnishing the unrepresented side of the narrative, not simply badger other editors to do so. Provide the sources you have read that might furnish the article with counter-narrative; don't leave it at a vague handwave at sources out there somewhere in the ether. [[User:Iskandar323|Iskandar323]] ([[User talk:Iskandar323|talk]]) 08:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
::the article if anything is biased towards the Israelis [[User:Gamerwierdo100|Gamerwierdo100]] ([[User talk:Gamerwierdo100|talk]]) 01:29, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
::the article if anything is biased towards the Israelis [[User:Gamerwierdo100|Gamerwierdo100]] ([[User talk:Gamerwierdo100|talk]]) 01:29, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 October 2023 ==

{{edit extended-protected|Plan Dalet|answered=no}}
The intro paragraph speaks of some historians calling Plan Dalet an "ethnic cleansing" and this has been flagged for a citation.

Suggest this news source be added, citing Israeli historian Pappe, who says:

“Depopulating Palestine was not a consequential war event, but a carefully planned strategy, otherwise known as Plan Dalet, which was authorised by [Israeli leader David] Ben-Gurion in March 1948,” Pappé wrote. “Operation Nachshon was, in fact, the first step in the plan.”

While it's true that Pappe doesn't explicitly say "ethnic cleansing" it's clear that his opinion is that it was a deliberate pre-meditated plan to achieve, essentially, ethnic cleansing through planned strategy.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/4/9/the-deir-yassin-massacre-why-it-still-matters-75-years-later [[User:Mowster|Mowster]] ([[User talk:Mowster|talk]]) 21:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:15, 22 October 2023

Unreliable source

It says: From 1945 onwards, the Haganah designed four general military plans, the implementation of the final version of which eventually lead to the creation of Israel and the dispossession of the Palestinians The source is from an organization for the displaced Palestinians, it either needs a more reliable/neutral source or for the text to be removed. Jake pres (talk) 12:54, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral tone

I’m trying to be be fair, but it’s been very difficult reading this and related articles due to the complete lack of a neutral tone. Labeling sources or scholars Zionist or Israeli serve what purpose, other than implicitly saying “you can ignore everything they say”? Artificial Nagger (talk) 02:04, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tombah's breach of 1RR

Tombah, please stop edit-warring in breach of WP:1RR. You should self-revert.

In your second revert, you noted we cannot base an entire article dedicated to a hotly debated subject, based solely on the writings of one scholar usually identified with a very specific POV. This not the case, and what you propose is not how Wikipedia works. You can't simply delete cited, WP:Verifiable material you disagree with or dislike. If you want to add an alternative POV from a respected historian, balanced for WP:Due weight, the WP:ONUS is on you do so with the support of WP:Reliable sources.

Also, when you add a neutrality dispute tag, you are supposed to start a discussion on the talk page explaining why. إيان (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where exactly is this edit warring you're talking about? I reverted your contribution, you reverted mine. Then I added the tags, and fixed a mistake I did with the first paragraph. This is NOT edit warring. Tombah (talk) 17:20, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tags

@Tombah: Please explain here the reasons for adding tags to the article.Selfstudier (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we can all agree that this is a delicate subject with many competing views and analysis. However, with إيان's recent additions, this article has turned from a kinda balanced Wiki article into a completely pro-Palestinian essay, adopting Khalidi's claims as a truer than true, undoubted historical reality, with every single operation now described as an effort to destroy Arab villages. إيان's own user page, where he proudly states he is here for "the empowerment of oppressed people and in dismantling oppressive structures", makes me wonder if he is really qualified to be involved in such an article, but for now, let's stick to the specific issue we're facing here. We all know that many aspects of this plan are strongly debated. Khalidi offers a valid point of view it's a very specific one and should be properly credited and balanced with other point of views from other historians. The tags should stay until someone steps in and fixes that. Until then, our readers should know this article is not balanced. Tombah (talk) 17:30, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Causes of the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight has material on this subject and the associated euphemism "transfer". Selfstudier (talk) 18:10, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this is complicated to resolve, we have two opposing positions, "defensive" (not intentional) (Morris, Gelber, Karsh) and "ethnic cleansing" (intentional) (Khalidi, Pappe, etc). We should reflect the sources and be consistent across articles. Selfstudier (talk) 18:25, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since this is not a WP:FORUM, we won't have a debate here. The key point is that there are several, strongly contrasting points of view, one is terribly misrepresented now. Read the section of the article titled "Controversy about Intent". The operations table not only favors one POV over the other, it completely ignores the other! There are now almost no objectives that don't begin with "Destroy Arab villages." This doesn't quite seem like a list of military goals, does it? This is Khalidi's perspective, and of course, not one or two historians completely reject it. Tombah (talk) 18:34, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I restored my earlier comment that was deleted by yourself. Please be more careful. Selfstudier (talk) 18:47, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that. Seeing this comment, I cannot agree more. The tags should remain, though, until the issue is resolved, both in the "Operations" section and in the lede. 18:56, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Tombah's conspiracy theories and personal attacks on me aside for now, the section had ZERO citations before my edits. I had access to Khalidi's article and updated the section conforming closely with the Oxford historian's article. There are other POVs, but content needs to be developed with respect for WP:Verifiability. It's on an editor seeking to make a change to show up with reliable sources. إيان (talk) 18:49, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Conspiracies? talking about personal attacks. Watch out, my friend. I wasn't the one shouting to the world that I was here to advocate some groups over others. Anyone interested with ARBPIA articles should be aware that this topic is sensitive and that any new material should be introduced with caution, making sure that each position is represented. You provided reliable sources from one point of view. Please do this platform a favor and make sure the opposing viewpoint is represented as well; otherwise, it is only a half-job. Thank you. Tombah (talk) 18:56, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As the editor tagging this article, it's rather up to you to produce some sources furnishing the unrepresented side of the narrative, not simply badger other editors to do so. Provide the sources you have read that might furnish the article with counter-narrative; don't leave it at a vague handwave at sources out there somewhere in the ether. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
the article if anything is biased towards the Israelis Gamerwierdo100 (talk) 01:29, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 October 2023

The intro paragraph speaks of some historians calling Plan Dalet an "ethnic cleansing" and this has been flagged for a citation.

Suggest this news source be added, citing Israeli historian Pappe, who says:

“Depopulating Palestine was not a consequential war event, but a carefully planned strategy, otherwise known as Plan Dalet, which was authorised by [Israeli leader David] Ben-Gurion in March 1948,” Pappé wrote. “Operation Nachshon was, in fact, the first step in the plan.”

While it's true that Pappe doesn't explicitly say "ethnic cleansing" it's clear that his opinion is that it was a deliberate pre-meditated plan to achieve, essentially, ethnic cleansing through planned strategy. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/4/9/the-deir-yassin-massacre-why-it-still-matters-75-years-later Mowster (talk) 21:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]