Talk:History of Israel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
July 31, 2008 Peer review Reviewed

Size split[edit]

This page is way long; it is about 2 to 4 times as long as it should be. See Wikipedia:SIZERULE and so forth.
While more should be done afterward... I propose we start by WP:SIZESPLITing the article into two. I am thinking the split point could or should be the occupation by the Ottomans (1517). That would be:
tahc chat 21:38, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
With no objections I am carrying out the split. tahc chat 21:14, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
This is not proper to wait "just 5 days" before deciding yourself to split. This is an important topic and you need to give at least one week for discussion and draw attention to hear more opinions.
There is not set time frame for such issues. I hope we can get Greyshark09's (your?) participation per below. tahc chat 21:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The article is about the modern state's history with glimplses to the past. Per se - there was no "mideval Israel" to split from here.GreyShark (dibra) 17:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

There should be a split. One article about the history of Israel, and one about the biblical Israel. As the article is right now, the sections on ancient history are almost entirely religionist, alternative, imaginary history with no sources except biblical texts the origins of which are dubious at best. This aticle is nowhere near being encyclopedic. ♆ CUSH ♆ 19:30, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Should someone who calls Jews' ancestors "imaginary" and claims that "Zionism is racism" be allowed to edit Jewish pages on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.36.11.131 (talk) 10:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Dear Greyshark09-- the article is too long. Way too long. Please address this fact in your comments if you want to be taken as a real participant in the discussion.
As it is, you claim is that the topic of the article only the modern state's history, with "with glimplses to the past." I don't want to put words in your mouth, but since the artcle size is the whole reason for the discussion in the first place, your comments suggest we just drop the "glimplses to the past" as both off-topic AND as necessary for lenght. Please concure or state some alternatives.-tahc chat 21:13, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The article is no different from Germany, Russia, China, Iran, France, India and other countries whose stories start from prehistoric times (and they are almost as long as this one... or bigger, see History of Germany and History of France). It's arbitrary to split the article from the Ottoman rule. This article needs a continuity. Those periods are very important to explain the history of Israel and they are not even explained properly (except for the British Mandate and the State of Israel). For example, many things involving different Hasmonean kings occurred in that region and there isn't a summary about them in this article. Furthermore, despite there may be a discrepancy between biblical and non-biblical records, those historical events – including the Babylonian exile, the Cyrus edict, the Seleucid period, the Maccabean revolt, the Romans, the Arabs, the Crusades, and so on – are documented by several sources and there's a general consensus among historians that those events happened. Splitting them confuses the reader.--Wlglunight93 (talk) 18:35, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - "As browsers have improved, there is no need for haste in splitting an article when it starts getting large. Sometimes an article simply needs to be big to give the subject adequate coverage." For the record the article cannot be split into "biblical israel" and "modern Israel" because much of ancient Israel was post-bible and because a significant section is neither biblical nor modern. Unfortunately making a split is a political decision and I assume it is no coincidence that this issue arises during a conflict. So for a start I would suggest that now is not a good time for such a decision. I think that too much space is devoted to the 1948 war of independence and the British Mandate and I would suggest cutting material out of those sections which are covered in other articles. I am happy to cut them down to readable chunks. Part of the size issue is the result of the fact that this page is controversial and everything has to be sourced, sometimes using multiple sources because of its controversial nature. The actual number of words is probably smaller then on many less sizeable pages. The article is designed so that readers can easily jump to the period that interests them while gaining an (usually lacking) overview of the very rich history of Israel. Telaviv1 (talk) 16:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I will remove the split and size tags in the next few days, since we clearly are not about to split the article and because none of those wanting to split it are editors of this page.Telaviv1 (talk) 18:46, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit request: The ethnic cleansing of Palestine by the Jews[edit]

As noted in The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine By Ilan Pappe, page 1926 states that in 1948, Jews began their ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, which continues to today. The article seems to ignore this fact, and instead includes some gibberish about old bible verses. Could an experienced editor look into it? Here is the link to more information about what the Jews have done in order to fulfill their storybook prophecies http://books.google.ca/books?id=se_XAAAAQBAJ&q=Between+1947+and+1949%2C+over+400+Palestinian+villages+were+deliberately++destroyed#v=snippet&q=ethnic%20cleansing&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.52.180.114 (talk) 23:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect use of the name Jews/Jewish[edit]

This change https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Israel&diff=688886341&oldid=688885762 was reverted on the grounds that Jews and Israelites are synonyms. This is not correct for the entire period covered by this article. The terms Jewish and Jew were not used until after the Babylonian exile, when they began to replace“Israelite”.

This has been accepted on other wikipedia pages, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Babylonian_captivity&diff=next&oldid=677107011 and https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Babylonian_captivity&diff=677047251&oldid=676673953

The following wording is more historically accurate, and should be restored. Although coming under the sway of various empires and home to a variety of ethnicities, the Land of Israel was predominantly Israelite, Judahite, and then Jewish until the 3rd century.Johnmcintyre1959 (talk) 20:21, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned references in History of Israel[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of History of Israel's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Economist":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 22:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)