Talk:Attil

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Palestine 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

File:Governate of Toulkarem.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Governate of Toulkarem.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:14, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Attil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080414210538/http://www.un.org/unrwa/emergency/barrier/profiles/qalqilya.html to http://www.iaa-archives.org.il/zoom/zoom.aspx?folder_id=93&type_id=6&id=8373

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

jizya

Tombah, whats the source for that addition? nableezy - 16:19, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nableezy; Tombah has misunderstood: all citizens in Nablus Sanjak was subject of a poll-tax in 1596, as a noted here, NOT jizya. User:Tombah: your editing can be damn sloppy at times; I'm tired of "cleaning up" after you (Like here: making a "Etymology" section, quoting only Zertal! Seriously??) Huldra (talk) 21:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Huldra My editing is sloppy as yours is neutral. Or perhaps you don't enjoy the content I'm adding. Really, this is the first time I've heard that. But let's keep it professional, instead of being hateful. You and I both should continue to act in good faith. Tombah (talk) 11:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tombah you added " and jizya" [1] and sourced it to Hütteroth and Abdulfattah, when HA doesn't mention jizya for this place. That it was sourced to Zertal: how was anyone to know that? And yeah, IMO that is sloppy as heck. And an "etymology-section" which only cites 1 ref (when another ref is already in the article): that is cherry-picking. Huldra (talk) 21:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tombah: Only mild irony there, escalating your comments to casting aspersions of 'hateful'-ness while calling for professionalism and good faith. How about pledging to cut down on the melodrama as a further addendum? Iskandar323 (talk) 12:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with the etymology, exactly? Where does it state that all information presented in the literature on a certain topic should be included in a single contribution? I found that in the book I just finished reading and added it to the article. What's so wrong about that? Tombah (talk) 11:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nableezy, it's on Zertal's Manasseh Hill Survey, Vol. 3, p. 420. It's there, trust me. Huldra claims he misrepresented the original source he quoted, but somehow here she prefers to put the blame on me for believing a reliable source. Good faith and all.Tombah (talk) 11:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Again: how was I to know it was sourced to Zertal.....when you only sourced it to HA?! Sorry; I am not a mind-reader, Huldra (talk) 21:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We must remember that Zertal's source Hütteroth and Abdulfattah (HA) is also a reliable source, so we are entitled to examine it ourselves and look for consistency with Zertal. As Huldra has noticed elsewhere, HA say that for the Nablus liwa item #34 is not only for jizya but also for another tax called 'adat rijaliyya levied on Muslims. Looking through the table for that liwa, we find that almost every locality has a value in item #34 except for localities with no population shown either (with one exception I noticed). Since it would completely ahistorical to infer that almost all localities had Christians or Jews despite them appearing very sparsely in the population counts, it must be that 'adat rijaliyya is the main source of #34. Further evidence can be given: (1) locality Jubayl on page 129 shows a count of both Muslims and Christians and #34 says "1200 and jizya 3240", so jizya is at least sometimes specifically indicated. (2) On page 74, HA explain the amount of this tax. In the nahiya that Attil lies in, the amount was 40 aqja for family heads and 20 aqja for bachelors. I went through the 14 localities on the same page (p126) as Attil and found that this formula gives the exact amount shown in #34 in 12 cases and differing by one character in the other two cases: Ajja shows 320 but the formula gives 520, Dayr Saraf shows 1200 but the formula gives 2200 (note that in both cases #34 is lower than the formula so the difference can't be explained by an additional tax being included). In conclusion, the amount in #34 for these villages is 'adat rijaliyya beyond reasonable doubt. Huldra's use of "poll tax" in the article is a good idea. Zero^talk 03:42, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Zero, and Tombah I wasnt doubting your good faith here, I asked but did not revert since you added the material without adding a source. But I did find it mind boggling that a village with 100% Muslims would have an entry for jizya, conversion was always an immediate release from that obligation. If the source of Zertal's work shows no jizya then I dont think we should be copying that error over here. nableezy - 05:49, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since Zertal repeatedly cites jiziya for a locality without saying that any non-Muslims were there, I'm suspecting that he is using that name for any type of poll tax. I can't prove it, though. Zero^talk 11:12, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am a bit wary of using Zertal second-hand materiel, (ie when quotes/uses other peaoples's stuff); I have been that ever since the Nisf Jubeil mess (see Talk:Nisf Jubeil). Ok, ok; I also messed up there -back in 2009, but then I am not a tenured professor of archaeology....In short: when Zertal cites something, I believe it prudent to always check the original source, cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]