User talk:SlimVirgin/Lydda3

Review

Sources

I have started the review of the sources :

That seems globally good and I don't see any obvious or major issue. Anyway, I will proceed paragraph by paragraph in the coming days and as suggested by the professional reviewer (PR), I will try see if the information is still the same in the most recent sources.
Maybe the article relies too much on Morris ?
Some information are not sourced. I will try to source them when possible.

Noisetier (talk) 07:46, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, N. I've been checking to make sure everything's sourced, so if I've missed anything, please let me know. I've removed a few instances of Morris 1986 for the reasons the PR suggested. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 07:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References to The Birth... Revisited

Note 1 refers to p.425 ff. Why ff ? The information is on p.425.

Fixed.

Note 2 : "Benny Morris suggests up to 450 Arabs and 9–10 Israeli soldiers died.[2]" Sources are correctly quoted but they don't state "up to 450 Arabs died" but rather "at least 450 Arabs died".

Morris 2004, p. 426: 11 July—"dozens of Arabs (perhaps as many as 200)" and Morris 2004, p. 428: 12 July—On the Arab side, 250 dead ..." That's up to 450.

Note 3 : "From where the Arab Legion—Transjordan's British-led army—helped them reach a refugee camp" - I didn't find where the source talk about "a refugee camp". I suggest to write that "From where the Arab Legion—Transjordan's British-led army took some them in charge".

Fixed.

Note 4 : 3 different books of Morris are quoted : Morris 1989, pp. 204-211 ; Morris 2003, p. 177 and Morris 2004, p. 433. They all globally say the same (the lattest being the more precise). I would only keep Morris 2004 as suggested per the PR.

Will look at where 1989 and 2003 are used.

Note 5 doesn't source what is written before this but only a very small part (that the exodus of Lydda and Ramle (70,000 people) corresponds to 10% of the total exodus (725,000). A source is not needed for this and Morris 1986 could be removed. But there is an issue for the remaining of the text : it is quite pov-ed and should be sourced.

It is sourced: Golan 2003; Morris 2008, p. 308; and Yacobi 2009, p. 45.

Note 8. Morris is known to have developed the idea that Ben Gurion was responsible of the exodus. We should attribute these comments ("obsession" is a strong word and he doesn't fully justify this). I also suggest to add what he writes p.452 note 62 : Ben Gurion referred to the 'two horns' - and added a further comment that ISA officials saw fit to censor (perhaps he had explicitely called for expelling the town' population).

Morris does use the word "obsession." I think the rest of it is there, as you suggest (two thorns and the missing lines are in the footnote).

Note 12 : it is not clear at all what is sourced here. Among the two references to Morris, only the second should be kept ('two horns'). For the first part of the paragraph that I assumed sourced by Golan in the same footnote, what is said is false and pov-ed : The Jewish traffic was blocked at Bab al-Wad / Sha'ar HaGai before 15 May and at Latrun after (see Battles of Latrun#geography)

Noisetier (talk) 08:48, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's sourced. I'm not clear which part is false or pov-ed, so I've removed some details. [1] I'm hoping not to have to add more to the background, because I worry it has already reached the eyes-glazing-over point. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 12:59, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

George's comments

Hi SV, got your mail. I'm going to try to start taking a look and commenting. I'm going to try to focus more on phrasing and neutrality, or things I find confusing. I'm not going to really be looking at the sources, or if they actually say what they're being quoted for; I'll leave that to yourself and others more knowledgeable than I. Was hoping to get to this a bit earlier, but real life is hectic lately, so it may take me a while to go through. I'm also going to look mostly at this version (instead of the current article), in case it changes.

As always, these are just thoughts/suggestions - feel free to ignore any of them. ← George^talk 10:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Should the date in the infobox match the date in the first sentence of the lead?
In the second paragraph, I would change the word "caused" in "The harsh conditions of the exodus caused deaths among the refugees..." Admittedly it was the cause, but I think some might take issue with this, arguing that the "expulsion orders" or "forced march" were the "real" cause. What about "The harsh conditions of the exodus led to deaths among..."? Also, is "as a result of which it became known as" better grammar than "which resulted in it becoming known as", or just "became known as"? Your grammar is undoubtedly better than mine.
In the third paragraph, I might have missed it, but should al-Nakba redirect to 1948 Palestinian exodus? That might already be wikilinked earlier, I'm not sure. Is that a parent article to this one?
It seems odd to give the number of Jewish immigrants to Israel, but not the number of Palestinians fleeing during this event. It sounds like 725k fled Israel in 1948 (according to the other article), so one-tenth would be around 70k (my OR). I think that that number is more important in the context of this event (though it of course needs a source other than my OR). Also, while 700k Jews replaced the 725k fleeing Palestinians, most of them probably didn't replace the Palestinians who fled from Lydda and Ramle (which the current wording sort of implies).
In the fourth paragraph, should there be a comma after "1970s" & "1980s"?
Is it possible to get more specific than "their Arab leaders"? Were specific people or groups said to have ordered this? I'm not sure what the governing body would have looked like at the time (or if there even was one), or if this would be referencing military leaders, or tribal leaders, Palestinian leaders, British Mandatory leaders, leaders of the invading Arab nations, etc.

Israel's declaration of independence

Should there be a link under the header to an article about Israel's declaration of independence?
The phrasing "Several Arab states" sounds odd, when it's followed up by all of the states that attacked. Would consider either saying "Five Arab states", or just listing the five states withing prefacing it.

Thanks for this, George.

Fixed date in infobox.
I'd prefer to leave "cause," both for the writing, but also because I think it's more accurate.
Fixed "as a result of".
Linked 1948 Palestinian exodus, but just before Nakba to avoid Easter egg link.
Around 600,000 to 700,000 Palestinians left, and we say of 50,000-70,000 that it was one tenth, so that would seem to work out. I'd prefer not to repeat the figures in the same sentence: 700,000 left and 700,000 arrived, because it would look as though a point was being made.
Have tweaked the writing to make clearer that the 700,000 didn't arrive in Lydda/Ramle.
Commas after 1970s etc: these are optional, and I'd like to be consistent throughout the text, where I usually don't add them.
Not sure I can or want to be more specific than "Arab leaders," but I'll look to see what the sources say. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 11:17, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]