Jump to content

Talk:State of Palestine

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sumostorm (talk | contribs) at 10:23, 23 June 2013 (→Confusion in Background Section: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on November 17, 2007. The result of the discussion was redirect to Proposals for a Palestinian state.

Template:Pbneutral

"State of Palestine" also can refer to the state declared in 1964

"State of Palestine" also can be used to refer to the state of Palestine declared by the Palestine National Charter adopted in 1964 which became the proposal for a "Single Democratic State" and which was the position of the PLO until 1974. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Edit request on 23 March 2013

50.1.65.208 (talk) 18:33, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's the first time I have seen an edit request from an IP to place a POV tag on a semi-protected page! Please explain exactly why and where you think this article is biased, and how you suggest remedying this. Otherwise, please excuse me for failing to take seriously such a request from an IP whose only other edits appear to be drive-by tagging. RolandR (talk) 18:57, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: Please start a discussion here on the talk page about the POV issues. Then, if needed, someone can tag the article. RudolfRed (talk) 19:26, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see why you have to be rude. You can do your own research on the 1964 PLO charter, or you can ignore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.118.56.158 (talk) 06:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 9 April 2013

I thought it interesting to note the withdrawal of funding from UNESCO by the USA after Palestine achieved membership. Could add text at end of UNESCO section.

The United States cut its funding to UNESCO in protest of Palestine's successful membership. [1]

P-Stackz (talk) 09:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. As it stands, I see WP:NPOV issues. In a quick internet search of major news articles about this, this Reuters article is the only one using the word "protest". All other articles are referring to this as a required legal response based on US legislation. Also, I'm not sure this belongs in this article at all - it's more an issue of US-UN relations than of anything relating directly to Palestine. --ElHef (Meep?) 04:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

"Largest city Jerusalem(proclaimed)[Gaza]](de facto)" From the infobox. Gaza needs another square bracket in front of it (I don't have clearance to fix this myself) 82.6.34.227 (talk) 20:25, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 20:51, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Palestinian territories

Geez, what am I thinking? Actually carrying out this merge would be a nightmare even if we could all agree on it. But here's what I'm thinking: these articles describe the same subject. That's a perfectly good reason for merging. Look, I don't really have a dog in this fight. If anything, I'm more sympathetic to Israel. But the objective reality is that there is a Palestinian state, with a surprisingly high level of recognition. In practice, it gets messy, but we don't have separate articles on Abkhazia and Republic of Abkhazia. Besides, it's still up to the body of the article to explain the status of the government. Having separate articles on the geographic area and the government that claims it just doesn't make good sense. There are four options before us here, as I see it. Let me know what you think. --BDD (talk) 17:38, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Merge both articles under the title State of Palestine.
  2. Merge both articles under the title Palestinian territories.
  3. Merge both articles under a different title (indicate your preference).
  4. Don't merge the articles.
  • I vote to merge both articles under the title Palestinian territories. Good luck. --GHcool (talk) 18:26, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Super duper strong oppose. The articles do not describe the same subject, one describes, or should describe, the state declared in 1988 and has since been recognized by over 100 other states and the other describes the territory of the British Mandate for Palestine that has been held under Israeli occupation since the 1967 War. Until the State of Palestine actually exercises sovereignty over the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel then the two subjects are separate, and combining them in to one article is simply unworkable. nableezy - 18:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both articles cover different topics as explained by Nableezy. Pluto2012 (talk) 19:41, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose since the subject-matter is different. Land of Israel and Israel are similarly separate articles, even if wikipedia articles aren't sources. --Dailycare (talk) 20:20, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Point number one is fine. Both, if merged, should be merged to State of Palestine. Palestine is a non-observer state at the UN too. Faizan 09:33, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support option 1, and also merge with Palestinian National Authority (which has officially changed ita name to State of Palestine), with subarticles created to avoid losing detail. Nableezy has a point, but since the State of Palestine claims the Palestinian territories we are massively overcomplicating things for readers by keeping these topics separate. The one thing we can all agree on is that we want to help readers understand, and the current state of these articles is super duper unclear (to borrow Nableezy's term). To deal with Nableezy's point we should make very clear in the first paragraph that the state does not actually control most of the territory it claims. Oncenawhile (talk) 12:35, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If by "subarticles" you mean sections, that's an interesting point. The Palestinian territories article doesn't have a government and politics section, and it really should. The section could divided it into sub-sections for Palestine's "governments" (see my post bellow) which explain their roles (for example that the PLO handles the foreign relations). The problem with your approach (if I understand it correctly) is that a merge with both this and the PNA article would cause the government and politics section to overwhelm the rest of the article, even with a major reorganization of the merged page.
Here's another idea that might address the concern you've raised, it's more of a very rough draft of an idea tough. Perhaps this article's info on the political/legal status and recognition of Palestine (most of this article) could be moved to Palestinian territories and/or Political status of the Palestinian territories. This article could then focus on the State's government, and it's institutions (somewhat similar to Palestinian National Authority). Possibly then it could be renamed "Government of the State of Palestine" with "State of Palestine" redirecting to "Palestinian territories". Basically, a halfway point between merging this article, and keeping it separate. I'd imagine that allot of the opposers would oppose this idea tough, especially the part about renaming and redirecting. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Palestine however, is an highly unusual case, it's not as simple as "the geographic area and the government that claims it". Unlike other countries which consist of a single "government" (for lack of a better term), Republic of Abkhazia for Abkhazia, Republic of Kosovo for Kosovo etc., Palestine has three. The State of Palestine (SOP), Palestinian National Authority (PNA), and the Palestine Liberation Origination (PLO). The PNA and SOP (and to a partial extent the PLO) have have separate governments, separate heads of government (PNA President SOP President/PLO Chairman), and separate legislatures (PNA Palestinian Legislative Council, SOP/PLO Palestinian National Council), and separate institutions. PLO ensures smooth interaction and synchronous actions of the two. All three should have their own articles.
They have different roles, for example the PLO handles the foreign relations, and the PNA does most of the internal governing within Palestine such as law enforcement. If it helps, you could think of the PLO, PNA, and SOP as the three separate breaches of the Palestinian government.
I which Japinderum weren't an a wilibreack, he's far more kownigable about this then I am, and I don't think I doing a good job of explaining this. I used (and adapted) some of his words in my post. I'll invite hem here. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 13:06, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As an addendum my above post, to quote User:Soman "To be clear, the State of Palestine [...] and the Palestinian National Authority are not the same. The PNA is an organ for local self-governance, but not a state. It is subordinate to the PLO, and founded several years after the declaration of independence of the State of Palestine." Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 14:39, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I vote to merge both articles under the title [[State of Palestine], Palestine is a UN Observer state like the Vatican so why don't u use this name?? is it because most of it's land is occupied? Gaza is Free and Palestine is not the only state with occupied territories. 3bdulelah (talk) 01:46, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Gaza Strip is still under Israeli occupation. See Israeli-occupied territories#Gaza Strip. It's not the State of Palestine that controls Gaza, it's the Palestinian Authority. More specifically the Hamas government in Gaza. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That statement might be confusing so here something from the Governance of the Gaza Strip that should clarify it: "Hamas party won the Palestinian legislative elections [...] establishing a Palestinian national unity government with Fatah, which effectively collapsed when Hamas and Fatah engaged in a violent conflict. [...] Both administrations – the Fatah government in Ramallah and the Hamas government in Gaza– regard themselves as the sole legitimate government of the Palestinian National Authority." The point is that it's the it's the Authority's Hamas government, not the State, that controls Gaza. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 02:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There are a few problems merging this under the title "State of Palestine"
First of all WP:COMMONNAME. "Palestinian territories" (including the variant "Palestinian territory") has 74 times more Google results then "State of Palestine". "Palestinian territories" OR "Palestinian territory" -wikipedia has 74,200,000 results, vs "State of Palestine" -wikipedia mere 1,020,000 results.
It is my understanding that over the past few mounts some sources have swished to using the term "State of Palestine" instead of "Palestinian territories" or "Occupied Palestinian territories", many (if not most) have not, for example: The Guardian [1], BBC News [www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14630174‎], United Nations Human Rights Council [2], Huffington Post [3], the British Council [www.britishcouncil.org/ps.htm], Carter Center [4], Amnesty International [5], the Germian goverment's GIZ [6], the Brookings Institution [7], the British goverment's UK Trade & Investment [8], the UN's World Health Organization [9], Médecins Sans Frontières [10], Doctors Without Borders [www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news/allcontent.cfm?id=60], The Washington Times [11], The UN's UN News Centre [12], Bahrain News Agency [13], Prensa Latina [14], Kuwait News Agency [15], Gulf News [16], the Chicago Tribune [17]; well that's a much bigger collection of sources then I meant to gather, but I think you get the idea.
As I pointed out above, the The State of Palestine (SOP), Palestinian National Authority (PNA), and Palestine Liberation Origination (PLO), are not the same thing. While "State of Palestine" can be used as a synonym of "Palestinian territories" or "Occupied Palestinian territories", it would be confusing to use "State of Palestine" as our main term for Palestine (which would encompass the SOP, PNA, and PLO), especially in a context where we would want to talk about the State of Palestine specifiably. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment in response to EHC's post of 16:54, 13 June 2013 (UTC), "single top level summary article": I like your thinking. Below is the table of contents of how the articles are currently organised.
Palestinian territories State of Palestine Palestinian National Authority

1 Name
2 Boundaries
3 Future Palestinian state
4 East Jerusalem
5 Gaza Strip
6 Political status
7 Legal status
8 Demographics
8.1 Exodus
8.2 Language
9 Administrative divisions
9.1 Areas
9.2 Governorates
10 History

1 Etymology

2 Background
2.1 The McMahon–Hussein Correspondence (1915–1916)
2.2 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine (1920–1948)
2.2.1 The Arab League and the Arab Higher Committee (1945)
2.3 1947-1948 War in Palestine
2.3.1 Partition of Palestine (1948)
2.3.2 Arab–Israeli War (1948)
2.4 After the war
2.4.1 All-Palestine government
2.5 The Six-Day War (1967)
2.6 Rift between Jordan and Palestinian leadership (1970)
2.7 Rise of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (1974)

3 History
3.1 Declaration of Independence (1988)
3.2 Palestinian Authority (1994)
3.2.1 Split of the Fatah and Hamas
3.2.2 2013 change of name
3.3 Palestine in the United Nations
3.3.1 2011 United Nations membership application
3.3.2 2011 UNESCO membership
3.3.3 2012 United Nations observer state status

4 Institutions

5 International recognition and foreign relations
5.1 EU's position

6 Legal status
6.1 Statehood for the purposes of the UN Charter
6.2 Declaration and Act of State Doctrine
6.3 Consequences of the occupation
6.4 Decisions of international and national tribunals
6.5 State succession
6.6 Opinions of officials and legal scholars

1 Overview

2 History
2.1 Establishment
2.2 Second Intifada
2.3 Hamas–Fatah conflict
2.4 2007–present

3 Geography

4 Politics and internal structure
4.1 Officials
4.2 Political parties and elections

5 Law
5.1 Human rights

6 Crime and law enforcement
6.1 Violence against civilians
6.2 Violence against officials (2001–2004)
6.3 Palestinian measures to keep law and order

7 Administrative divisions
7.1 West Bank governorates
7.2 Gaza Strip governorates

8 Foreign relations
8.1 Palestinian Authority passport

9 Economy and budget
9.1 Corruption

10 International aid
10.1 Foreign aid and budget deficit
10.2 Economic sanctions following January 2006 legislative elections
10.3 Use of European Union assistance
10.4 US foreign aid packages
10.5 Payments to Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons
10.6 James G. Lindsay

11 Demographics

12 Communications

13 Transportation

A quick look through this illustrates how much overlap there is here. We need to simplify this if a reader is going to have any chance of navigating it all successfully.

Importantly though, to make this easy to understand, I think we need one of these articles to become a single "top level" summary article, so that a reader new to the subject can read just one article with summaries of all the key points and understand the modern political situation of Palestine. Once that is done, we can have create clearer scopes for each of these articles, so that they remain focused on their respective areas, providing more detail to support the summary in the top level article.

So question 1 is, which name should be the "single top level summary article"?

Oncenawhile (talk) 08:40, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what you mean by "top level summary article". If you mean for Palestine in general, not politics specifically, but just in general, it should be "Palestinian territories" per my second 12:54 pm, Yesterday (UTC−4) post, and it already is. If you mean political/legal status, is it a state, is it occupied, that kind of thing, Political status of the Palestinian territories. If you mean internal politics, elections and appointments, powers of the PLO, SOP, AND PNA, that kind of thing the Politics of the Palestinian territories. As I pointed out the Palestinian Authority And the State of Palestine are two separate entities, so one should not be the main article for the other.
Part of my point in my response to your previous post what that this article focuses allot on the legal status of the Palestinian territories, when in my tentative opinion, after thinking about what you've said, that should be something for the Political status of the Palestinian territories and Palestinian territories articles. This article (under whatever name would be appropriate) should focus on the State's government (not the Authorty's government, the State's), similarly to the Palestinian National Authority article. Sense the Authority does most of the axueal internal governing within Palestine, and (if my understanding is correct) has many more institutions then the Authority, the Authority article would be longer then this one under the scope I propose. I'm of the Opposers, but I think my position is a middle ground between the Opposers and the Supporters. I think my position is closer to your's and BDD's then it is to the other Opposers. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to summarise all topics under "Palestine"

This is another can of worms I've tried to avoid, but what about Palestine itself? I think the SoP/PTs is the primary topic for that term, and the current article should be at a title like Palestine (region). Does it make any sense for that to be the top level article? I know, I know, not that this issue needed further complication... --BDD (talk) 16:41, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think this should be moved to Palestine, Palestine moved to Palestine (region), and the other two articles remain separate. The PNA has nothing, or close to nothing, to do with the establishment, history, or present status of the State. The territories could conceivably be in this article (the PNA article should really be a sub-article to that one), but both are big enough to deal with separately, and I see no overlap necessary between the two. nableezy - 06:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be fine with that too, although I wouldn't be so binary re the PNA or any other topic which has some overlap as the reality is a little more nuanced. A top-level "Palestine" article about the State of Palestine should provide readers with an entry level summary of every relevant / adjacent topic.

It's worth noting that this idea has been proposed before, but ran out of steam because there was no agreement re what the article would actually look like, and others viewed it as politically motivated. It would be a shame if that happened again. I think the success of the proposed move will depend wholly on the ability to show to the community that the article will achieve the goal of being a truly helpful introduction to what is a complex subject, which would be of real value for readers. That will need hard work, coordination and structured debate from all of us here.

If this makes sense to people, before we try to get broader community support for this, can i suggest we try to agree amongst ourselves exactly what the contents of this "Palestine" article would be? Oncenawhile (talk) 09:23, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand well Nableezy's proposal, I agree :
State of Palestine should be moved to Palestine
Palestine should be moved to Palestine (region)
Anyway, I also agree that this deserves a discussion.
We should find good clues (not to say evidences) that the word "Palestine" refers more today to the "State" than to the "region" in the minds of the majority of people.
That's not obvious. For Israelis and Palestinians, of course but in the Christian world, I have some doubt... And in any case, our mind doesn't matter, we need evidences...
Pluto2012 (talk) 14:45, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. From yesterday's Haaretz:
[Google statement to the Knesset committee]: “I wish to stress that as part of this process, we merely try to reflect the state of international naming standards. We have no interest in being the arbiter of political disputes. I want to make it absolutely clear that in making these decisions we are in no way taking a political stance.”
Hale read out Google’s official position, under which the selection of geopolitical names is based on decisions by organizations such as the United Nations, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers and the International Organization for Standardization.[18]
In summary, google's analysis, which they were prepared to defend in front of a Knesset committee, is that the name "Palestine" is preferred over "Palestinian territories"
Oncenawhile (talk) 07:02, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Queen of England is a Queen...

> The State of Palestine (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭin)[1][2] is a state that was proclaimed on 15 November 1988[3] by the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO's) National Council (PNC) in exile in Algiers which unilaterally adopted the Palestinian Declaration of Independence.

Putting the words "is a state" in this sentence is not helpful. Chicago Style (without pants) (talk) 04:12, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, as it allows for wikilinking the article on state to enlighten those who are confused as to what the word means and therefore think it is pov to call this that. nableezy - 08:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Confused about what the word "state" means...
Why are you bringing up "pov"?
Try to approach this from a grammatical standpoint. As the title of this section shows, it is redundant to call it a state. Chicago Style (without pants) (talk) 00:57, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why am I bringing up "pov"? Because before you decided to try a different approach to achieving your goal of removing the term you claimed the inclusion of the term is "pov". As far as your most recent argument, state in the title is in reference to the long form name, it doesnt necessarily mean that the topic is a state (polity). So we include the term with a wikilink. And dont edit-war, you revert again without consensus Ill report it. Waiting two days to revert doesnt change that you dont have consensus for the change. nableezy - 06:35, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Stop with your posturing. The sentence is grammatically confusing. Additionally, the state declared in 1988 is different from the one recognized as an observer nation at the UN GA. It is pushing a point to say "The Queen of England is a human who..." because some people think she is a space-lizard. Chicago Style (without pants) (talk) 02:31, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody is posturing. And no the states are not different, try not to make things up, it doesnt make you look any better. And nobody besides you has found the sentence grammatically confusing, though kudos for moving on to a new argument. The sentence is fine, and another revert made without consensus will quickly inform you that I was indeed not posturing. nableezy - 04:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You still haven't made your case, only attacked my motives. Why is it good to say "The State of Palestine is a state..."? Chicago Style (without pants) (talk) 06:53, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have, it was in my first and second replies to you. If you cant be bothered to read it that aint my problem. nableezy - 14:02, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So your argument is that readers will misunderstand the word "state"? Chicago Style (without pants) (talk) 16:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Questioning the Nationalism on both sides

I think it's fair to say that these words are logically/politically impossible in today's UN World: "...competing nationalist movements, Zionism (Jewish nationalism) and Arab nationalism, as ...". I think it's also unwise to write Zionism as "Jewish Nationalism" when 1. Zionism can be interpreted in more ways than one, also the extremist 2. Can be intepreted to only the eternal defence of Israel and the Jewish people. Agree? 95.34.151.21 (talk) 23:31, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Under "See Also" are we to add: List of Palestinian Universities and Colleges?

Would it not be an idea to add the List of Palestinian Universities and Colleges, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_universities_and_colleges , under "See Also"?
I find that the official article is still lacking from the classical sections of "Culture, Transport, Politics" and possible other. You? 95.34.151.21 (talk) 23:40, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can we (also) have "State of Palestine (history)" and "State of Palestine", please?

Can we (also) have "State of Palestine (history)" and "State of Palestine", please? I think it may be important how the Palestinians would like to write about their "Culture, Transports, Economy, Domestics, Politics and the rest" of the topics we see under other nations and to keep these articles to some shortness if this is desireable, we may split them into two as I write here in the beginning of this text. Should we do it? Should we include these usual topics? It can be exciting now to see how development almost takes place "live". Agree? Best wishes, 95.34.151.21 (talk) 11:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You mean a separate history article? We'd probably want that at History of the State of Palestine (currently a redirect to History of Palestine (the region)). --BDD (talk) 15:10, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion in Background Section

The last paragraph in the section "background" introduces PNA, Area A, B and C without explaining what they are. I am a novice concerning the State of Palestine or the history of this region, so it didn't make any sense to me. I have put the parts that don't make sense to me in bold, below.

"As envisioned in the Oslo Accords, Israel allowed the PLO to establish interim administrative institutions in the Palestinian territories, which came in the form of the PNA. It was given civilian control in Area B and civilian and security control in Area A, and remained without involvement in Area C. In 2005, following the implementation of Israel's unilateral disengagement plan, the PNA gained full control of the Gaza Strip with the exception of its borders, airspace, and territorial waters.[iii] Following the inter-Palestinian conflict in 2006, Hamas took over control of the Gaza Strip (it already had majority in the PLC), and Fatah took control of the West Bank (and the rest of the PNA institutions)[citation needed]. Currently the Gaza Strip is governed by Hamas, and the West Bank by Fatah."

Sumostorm (talk) 10:23, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ UNESCO chief says U.S. funding cuts "crippling" organization, Reuters, Oct 11, 2012[www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/11/us-unesco-funding-idUSBRE89A0Q620121011]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:State_of_Palestine&oldid=561183989"