Talk:Israel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article Israel 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 trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 8, 2008.
Toolbox

Antiquity[edit]

The last two sentences in the first paragraph in 'Antiquity' are repetitive.

The Israelites and their culture, according to the modern archaeological account, did not overtake the region by force, but instead branched out of the Canaanite peoples and culture through the development of a distinct monolatristic—and later monotheistic—religion centered on Yahweh. The growth of Yahweh-centric belief, along with a number of cultic practices, gradually gave rise to a distinct Israelite ethnic group, setting them apart from other Canaanites.

To author User:Jytdog – what's the point of it? Could it be shortened to one sentence? --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 21:17, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

sure have at it. thx Jytdog (talk) 21:18, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


User:Jytdog, I've noticed you added empty reference (H:CERNT):

As part of the Persian Empire, the former Kingdom of Judah became the province of Judah (Yehud Medinata) with different borders, covering a smaller territory.[1]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Grabbe355 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

--Triggerhippie4 (talk) 19:09, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Fixed here. Thanks for the careful review! Jytdog (talk) 19:22, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 September 2017[edit]

This part of the second paragraph in lead where it says "...During the Persian rule, the Jewish autonomous province, Yehud Medinata, had existed for 2 centuries until the conquest of Alexander the Great." should say instead the number in letters: "Yehud Medinata, had existed for two centuries until the conquest..."--181.95.225.187 (talk) 03:59, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

DoneIVORK Discuss 04:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2017[edit]

I know it's a controversial issue, but someone should decide between keeping Shmuel Yosef Agnon or Amos Oz. Because, as it is now, one of the two images overlaps with the section below, which is completely unrelated to literature. On the one hand, Agnon won the nobel prize. On the other hand, I think Amos Oz is more known internationally (his books were translated to many different languages), although his political opinions don't represent most Israelis. Since this is about literature rather than politics, I guess Amos should be the image staying. But I could be wrong, since Shmuel Agnon won the nobel after all. What do you guys think? In any case, one of the two images has to go. It ruins the format. Maybe we should put it to vote?--DarkKing Rayleigh (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Putting my money where my mouth is, my 50 shekels are for Agnon who got his own cash note. Some of Oz's contemporary peers may challenge him. I would probably place Nathan Alterman or Leah Goldberg before Oz, if going for 2 images (both for significance, and for different sphere of content).Icewhiz (talk) 06:33, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Why not move both images slightly up, into the Culture section? Literature is part of culture, so the images won't be misplaced there.WarKosign 07:18, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Because it would be ugly and still overloaded. We don't need two portraits. Both authors mentioned in the text already. Wikipedia is WP:NOTGALLERY.--Triggerhippie4 (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Agnon. The only argument in favor of Oz I've seen is that he is the most translated Israeli author. But Agnon is not far behind, his works has been translated into tens of languages as well. The specific number of languages is nonessential difference that can be attributed to the fact that Oz is more recent author, in the world that is more globalized. Agnon is venerated more than Oz inside Israel, anyway. What is more significant is that Agnon, unlike Oz, featured on Israeli banknotes and won Nobel. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Ok, it seems nobody else cares. Please remove the Amos Oz picture. If someone objects, they will come here. That extra image is messing up the esthetic of the whole section. It has to go. Amos is mentioned in article anyway.--DarkKing Rayleigh (talk) 03:17, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 02:40, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Amos should be included, as we have a consensus for. As I see it, the editor removing him is Triggerhippie4 (talk), who continuously forces this edit even with no-one else or at best (like here) a minority supporting him. Talk:Israel/Archive_57#Literature_picturesAvaya1 (talk) 20:43, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Nathan Alterman or Leah Goldberg should be in before Oz. More significant, and different subject area.Icewhiz (talk) 20:47, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
There's two other editors here in support and no oppose. Old discussion is outdated and lack arguments. Seems like they just wanted warring to stop without looking into it.--Triggerhippie4 (talk) 20:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm actually appalled at Avaya1's behavior. He claims I'm "continuously forcing" this, while, as you can see, it's DarkKing Rayleigh who opened this proposal. And he claims a "minority supporting" me here when, besides me, there was two in support, one neutral and no oppose.--Triggerhippie4 (talk) 21:17, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

At the time of your edits, there was one editor supporting you. We have a large consensus not to remove the image Talk:Israel/Archive_57#Literature_pictures. And Triggerhippie4 you spent hours stalking my edits in a somewhat sad way. There is no consensus yet for changing the images. Can someone restore status quo until a consensus is formed? Avaya1 (talk) 20:26, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Avaya1, Consensus was established on 14 September, with three was for removal, one neutral and no oppose. My first edit was on the next day, 15 September. Two weeks passed since then, there's nothing to wait for. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 04:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I have nothing to say about the relative inclusion-worthiness of these two authors, but I observe that Israeli literature has room for a picture or two, so suggest inclusion there as a ‘consolation prize’ for any that are removed from here.—Odysseus1479 21:43, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 September 2017[edit]

Haskalah as a "precursor of Zionism"? Excuse me, are you serious? I don't think this is the correct link for "national awakening", since the emancipation of Jews brought forth two opposing movements: On the one hand, cultural assimilation proposed by the Haskalah of Mendelssohn. On the other hand, Zionism proposed by Herzl, which basically was Jewish nationalism contradicting what the Haskalah sought: The integration of Jews into European societies. Zionism believed this assimilation wouldn't be possible, that's why it was necessary to create an independent state for the Jews outside of Europe. Haskalah and Zionism are two complete opposites. Somebody please revert that edit.--190.31.12.71 (talk) 15:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

I agree. This source explains it elegantly: Zionism#cite_note-LeVineMossberg2014-5. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
The Zionist movement is a consequence of the Haskalah movement, but i agree that 'Zionism' is the appropriate link for "national awakening". Infantom (talk) 16:06, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 17:09, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Notification of Arbitration Enforcement[edit]

A request related to edit-warring on this article has been filed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Avaya1. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 17:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding edit warring on this article. The thread is User:Avaya1 disruptive editing. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 08:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

GDP rankings[edit]

User:Avaya1, I added back GDP rankings that were removed by you again. Although the target lists are updating slower than infoboxes, they are still linked to in virtually every country's article, even if dates differ a year. Because it's informative, and the rankings are very similar in each update. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 14:14, 13 October 2017 (UTC)