Talk:Taybeh

Palestine Stub‑class Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal 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.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judaism Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles 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.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

christian - muslims

problems and issues happens all the time and every where, even within the very same family. I think that its not appropriate to mention any of these issues and give a bad reputation about taybeh and Palestine since it just happened only ONCE long time ago, and everything has been SOLVED now and back to normal.--213.6.11.49 (talk) 17:22, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it gives a bad reputation to anyone, exactly because conflicts happen all the time and everywhere. The inclusion of this matter is a question of it's notability. If we exclude it, we'd better do it for right reason. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 18:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

there is NO reason for mentioning it at ALL! if every problem happens has to be reported on wikipedia, then we should change the name from wikipedia to policedia!

this issue happened ONLY ONCE.... long time AGO, and everything is back to normal NOW, so there is NO reason to mention it at all. it's something from the past and the people of taybeh and others do not want it on their page.--213.6.11.49 (talk) 19:50, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i do not see why it has to be mentioned? --213.6.11.49 (talk) 19:50, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was apparently a notable event, mentioned by reliable independent sources. Wikipedia is not in the business of whitewashing history. And Wikipedia does not care at all what the residents want. Wikipedia is built on verifiable statements, not just the "good news" and not just how things are "now". DMacks (talk) 20:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

it was a one time event that happened long time ago, there is no need to mention it now. it sounds stupid to mention every problem happens between residents on wikipedia! --213.6.11.49 (talk) 20:11, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i still do not find any reason to post this issue on wikipedia; it is not related! wikipedia is NOT a website for police reports. this problem happened ONLY once long time ago. I do not think that we should report every problem happens in any city online, its ridiculous! it MUST be deleted--213.6.11.49 (talk) 10:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All Christian Village

i reinstated the edit about taybeh being the "only all christian village" as it is supported by the reference given and a number of other references found on google. cheers WookieInHeat (talk) 02:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't mind I'll reword it a bit. If you can find more solid source - please add a reference. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 09:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More lurking brings me to a conclusion that Taybeh is not the only all-christian village in Palestine. Others are: Beit Sahour with 80% Christian majority and Fassouta (or Fasuta) [1],[2] which seems to be all christian. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 10:27, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

neither Beit Sahour nor fassouta are 100% Christian places! yes they have a christian majority but not 100%!

taybeh is the only one left in Palestine to be 100% Christian village--213.6.11.49 (talk) 10:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we are going to need a WP:RS reference backing this information. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 10:54, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

just a little search on google will prove you wrong again and again; and if you have any problem with the 100% Christian village left in Palestine, maybe its your duty to prove this wrong, instead adding what you like and deleting what you dont like!--213.6.11.49 (talk) 11:27, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've searched and found none. Even Taybeh municipality site says nothing about 100%. It says "the last Holy Land Christian enclave for whom the Church has played a pivotal role". --ElComandanteChe (talk) 11:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

maybe you should do a better job at searching--213.6.11.49 (talk) 11:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please try to follow civility rules. Regarding the sources: none of the links you added is working. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 11:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

check them out now and let me know if they still dont work. thx--213.6.11.49 (talk) 12:00, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The links are working now, but I seriously doubt that the church site, the children's books author and the article about beer factory are reliable sources according to WP:RS. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 12:06, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

so now you are doubting the sources? why would the church promote a lie? why would a christian author and a resident and a wife of the mayor of taybeh lie? why would an internationally recognized and credible organization such as the HCEF lie?

you can keep on googling the issue, and you will even find hundreds of other sources--213.6.11.49 (talk) 12:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 12:14, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i did read it and found nothing wrong in the sources, especially because many of them are used all over this page and over pages! especially because the sources are the official website of a church, a municipality, a credible international organization and a credible newspaper and others --213.6.11.49 (talk) 12:23, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The last source you've added ([3]) contradicts your claim. Please read carefully:

You: the only 100% Christian village left in Palestine
Source: last all-Christian village in the West Bank ... is entirely Christian - apart from the Muslim pharmacist

--ElComandanteChe (talk) 12:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i do not see how that is contradicting? where is the contradiction?--213.6.11.49 (talk) 12:29, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we shall choose more careful wording, people are moving in and out, marry, change beliefs, etc.. 100% claim is just too strong. Also, can you tell West Bank from Palestine and 100% from 100% minus pharmacist? --ElComandanteChe (talk) 12:38, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

since Taybeh is a 100% Christian village, so all people who move in or out or marry are Christian only; changing belief is not common here, and it never ever happened in the history of Taybeh; and the 100% is from the sources not from me--213.6.11.49 (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

and if you read the rest of the sentence, you will find out that the Muslim pharmacist does NOT live in the Taybeh "But Taybeh is here, the last all-Christian village in the West Bank. The mayor, David (Daoud, originally ) Khoury, owner of the local brewery, returned here from Boston and takes pride in the fact that his village is entirely Christian - apart from the Muslim pharmacist who is married to a Russian woman. His pharmacy may be in the village, but he lives outside it."--213.6.11.49 (talk) 12:45, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

100%, never ever in the history are WP:PEA --ElComandanteChe (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ALL and ENTIRE is not the same as 100%?

stop deleting sources and references to promote your bias and propaganda!--213.6.11.49 (talk) 13:33, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaving this link to incident noticeboard here to inform other editors about additional aspects of the matter, for the IP user shows no intension to engage in constructive dispute resolution. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 13:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ur negative and biased role is not appreciated at all--213.6.11.49 (talk) 16:40, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

if u just have personal attacking to say then it does not belong here. WP:NPA. if u have some real policy base argument to contribute to wikipedia then that is what talk page is for. otherwise stop your disruption. LibiBamizrach (talk) 17:50, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

His disruption has been stopped for a(nother) week. DMacks (talk) 18:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Location

Let's start in 1964, when the area was under Jordanian rule. Jordan had no legal claim to the land, and still:

"THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL CHARTER" (Al-Mithaq Al-Kawmee Al-Philisteeni), Adopted in 1964 by the 1st Palestinian Conference

Article 24: This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area.

The Arabs there, who had never ever controlled the area, officially gave up all sovereign claims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanlan lanwan (talk • contribs) 15:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is simply not true. The PLO said it did not exercise "territorial sovereignty", they did not "give up" any "claims". Jordan at the time was considered "trustee occupant" by the Arab League. Its attempted annexation of the territory was not accepted by any state except for the UK and the Arab League explicitly denied that action had any legitimacy. Jordan has since ceded any claims on the West Bank to the PLO. The territory is recognized as occupied Palestinian territory by nearly the entire world. Israel does not even claim that this is in Israel. nableezy - 15:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is great, but let's first define the problem we are going to solve. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 15:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user has been changing "West Bank" to "Judea and Samaria". Based on the other edits and what I can decipher from the above argument it appears as though they wish to claim this village as being in Israel and to use Israeli-preferred terminology. nableezy - 16:38, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Please also note this small talk. However I'd like Lanlan to formulate the problem first, and then present the arguments. Hopefully, this way we can proceed without using telepathy. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 16:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Information the article is missing

I think an information about the emigration from Taybeh and about US Taybeh diaspora has to be added. Thoughts, links, etc. will be appreciated.
Also, the copyvio about Taybeh churches has been recently removed, it's worth addition also. --ElComandanteChe (talk) 20:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

do you any of those links?--213.6.36.81 (talk) 18:28, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]