Jump to content

Talk:Israel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 173.74.22.141 (talk) at 06:57, 11 April 2012 (→‎Common name). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Former featured articleIsrael is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 8, 2008.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 16, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
May 25, 2007Good article nomineeListed
September 4, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
September 30, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
June 23, 2010Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Water technology

I would like to insert a short paragraph in Science and technology about Israel's notable water technology industry. AnkhMorpork (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This template is for requesting specific changes to the article--Jac16888 Talk 18:21, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, you need to make a concrete and specific suggestion of what you want to add to the article, including reliable sources to back it up and preferably the exact language of your suggested addition. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 18:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BE

I don't think British English makes much sense for this. The British left decades ago and Israel is a close US ally. Opinions? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:48, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Opinions? Here's one. This topic is contentious enough already, and this has got to be the most ridiculous thing to start another argument over. Still, whatever... AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:01, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non neutral sentence

It says in the lead: "Portions of these territories, including east Jerusalem, have been annexed by Israel, but the border with the neighboring West Bank has not yet been permanently defined."

This implies that East Jerusalem is Israel and is so permanently. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are splitting hairs. At least as it reads to me it states simple facts that Israel has annexed portions of the west bank (which includes East Jerusalem) but nothing has been set in stone because of world wide opposition. The sentence specifically states that nothing has been "permanently defined", so I am not sure how you think it implies that East Jerusalem is permanently part of Israel?

While the pre-1967 borders are commonly mentioned by various interest groups, I think a fair number of organizations and governments agree that the status of the borders of the west bank and even all of Jerusalem have yet to be determined. Like the CIA world fact book says: "The current status of the West Bank is subject to the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement - permanent status to be determined through further negotiation". This is just my thought on the issue.

Thanks,

Theo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theotokan (talk • contribs) 23:56, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This phrase is poor and should be removed or changed. The phrase implies that east jerusalem is permatently defined as part of Israel, which is a breach of neutral point of view. I did not see anything claiming that nothing has been "premantly defined" as you claim. meitme (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Vandalism

all links here with vandalism. פארוק (talk) 17:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you care to expand that to a meaningful English sentence? Fat&Happy (talk) 18:56, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
my english is not so good. but i see that now it is fixed. פארוק (talk) 07:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph 2

The article's second paragraph reads like so, in reference to the Israeli War of Independence: "Neighboring Arab states invaded the next day in support of the Palestinian Arabs. Israel has since fought several wars with neighboring Arab states"; sentence one holds an incredibly biased view of Arab motives, which at the time and ever since have always been publicly declared to be "the elimination of the Zionist entity," and not "support for Palestinian Arabs." Proof of this lies partially in the many recorded & written sources declaring such motives, and also partially in the fact that the War ended with Jordan annexing the West Bank instead of establishing there a Palestinian state, which could easily have been done by allowing the thousands of Palestinian refugees who'd left instead of staying to return to the West Bank and set up a state.

Secondly, Israel has a history of being invaded by its neighboring Arab states, in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973. Only in 1982 did Israel engage in an offensive action, and although it went horribly wrong due to the actions of Christian Phalangist massacres of Palestinians, which Israel was not wise enough to guard against but by its own admission takes as its own indirect fault, the action was a necessary attempt to eliminate the violence caused by PLO terrorists that had been attacking civilian targets throughout Northern Israel from bases in Lebanon. All this needs to be pointed out; defensive wars are quite different from wars of aggression, and the expression of anti-Semitism formerly directed at Jews by European Christians in the form of violence must not be allowed to define Israel now that there are few Jews left in post-WW2 Europe, as it continues in the European press's attempts to label any and all Israeli defensive maneuvers as war crimes, but to cheerfully legitimize Palestinian murders of Israeli citizens. Palestinians have had numerous chances to seriously negotiate with Israel and establish a state for themselves, but have constantly refused to do so, believing the ENTIRETY of the Palestinian mandate to be Arab lands, a "waqf" given to them to rule "until Judgment Day." This appears in Palestinian charters, but always is ignored by the European powers who would be just as happy with no Israel.

Please, let's eliminate this biased reading. Remember, the Arab states who surround her (with the exception of Jordan and pre-Arab Spring Egypt) have still refused vehemently to recognized her very right to exist, frequently call for her destruction, and still say "the Jews are our dogs" when speaking in Arabic to their peoples. This although Israel has been there for over 60 years. (I say "pre-Arab Spring Egypt" because the Muslim Brotherhood in that country holds a majority in its parliament, and has sworn to annihilate Israel despite the Sadat/Begin peace treaty. Were the military of Egypt to submit to civilian control, its parliament would obviously, according to a majority of its members, therefore void said peace treaty, and leave Jordan as the sole Arab state recognizing her right to exist. BarakZ (talk) 22:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page is not the appropriate forum to promulgate your particular point of view and expound upon historical events. Please specify the text that you object to and what you would rather it was replaced with, and supply a reliable source to support this viewpoint.
Best Wishes AnkhMorpork (talk) 23:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

QRpedia

QRpedia is a WikimediaUK project which uses QR codes to deliver Wikipedia articles to users, in their preferred language. We need versions of the article about it, in Hebrew and Arabic. Can anyone oblige, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 19 March 2012

Extended content

israel terrorist Israel seized Palestinian state Israel savage israel what kind of creature that? --120.166.18.211 (talk) 08:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)--120.166.18.211 (talk) 08:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

120.166.18.211 (talk) 08:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be an inflammatory statement rather than a request to make any edit. I have collapsed per Behavior that is unacceptable. --Fæ (talk) 08:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Acceptance and rejection of 1947 Plan of Partition

In the talk article of the article on the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, I got into discussion on the extent to which the Jews accepted rhe Plan. On balance the paragraph Jewish reaction now seem satisfactory.

In the current article it is stated quite baldly that the Jews accpted the Plan. That is clearly too simplistic.

My second problem is that the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not in any event an appropriate reference. Has anyone any suggestions on what to do?Trahelliven (talk) 05:26, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, remove the information as unsourced political statement by a contender in the conflict.Biraqleet (talk) 20:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's sourced and correct. The Jewish Agency, which was the recognized representative of the Jewish community, accepted the plan. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 21:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

Since this article is protected, I can't edit it, since I don't have an account. However, the second paragraph of etymology needs to be modified a bit. The changes that need to be made are underlined.

The name Israel has historically been used, in common and religious usage, to refer to the biblical Kingdom of Israel or the entire Jewish nation.[29] According to the book of Genesis, the name "Israel" was given to the patriarch Jacob (Standard Yisraʾel, Isrāʾīl; Septuagint Greek: Ἰσραήλ; "struggle with God"[30]) after he successfully wrestled with the angel of the Lord.[31] Jacob's twelve sons became the ancestors of the Israelites, also known as the Twelve Tribes of Israel or Children of Israel. Jacob and his sons had lived in Canaan, but were forced by famine to go into Egypt for four generations until Moses, a great-great grandson of Jacob,[32] led the Israelites back into Canaan in the "Exodus". The earliest archaeological artifact to mention the word "Israel" is the Merneptah Stele of ancient Egypt (dated to the late 13th century BCE).[33]

96.242.163.228 (talk) 12:59, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Common name

Is there any objection to beginning this article, "Israel, officially the State of Israel,..."? This is what similar articles do, and WP:PLACE supports it. As this is a sensitive article, I figured it was better to err on the side of caution and ask here before changing it. Joefromrandb (talk) 20:16, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As no one has objected, I went ahead and changed it. Please let me know if anything is amiss. Joefromrandb (talk) 20:53, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Since the article on Palestine found it necessary to indicate that it is “also known as Land of Israel“ in both English and in Hebrew among the names of Palestine, wouldn’t it be fair to add “also known as Occupied Palestine ‘filistin al-muhtallah’” to the glorious names of the state at the beginning of the article? Hundreds of millions of people know it only with that name.173.74.22.141 (talk) 06:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Israel article

Hello, The first line of the "Israel" article should be edited. Israel is a "Nation", not a "state". It should read the "Nation of Israel". Thank you, 12.192.177.117 (talk) 22:51, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the modern State of Israel. There are several articles about the nation of Israel, including Israelites and Jews. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:06, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could this picture be added?

To the tourism section?, it's an img of Ein Bokek, currently the only hotel resort in the Israeli coastline of the Dead Sea, as for 2012, the resort becomes more invested.[1] thanks. 79.183.0.47 (talk) 16:29, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Israel&oldid=486769211"