Talk:List of Arab localities in Palestine 1948

Palestine High‑importance

	Palestine portal This redirect 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
High	This redirect has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This list is terribly, terribly flawed. Not only does it not contain any of the Jewish (or Druze) localities existing at the time, it also doesn't contain any Arab localities in what later became the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. As it stands, it's better to have no list at all than having this list. uriber 18:52, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

This page is missing significant numbers of Jewish localities in Palestine 1948. - User:209.135.35.83

Why was this line moved out of the article? If an article is fundamentally flawed (as this one is), readers should be alerted to this fact -- uriber 21:32, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Discusion does not appear in articles. If there are localities missing feel free to add them to the article or discuss their absense here. - Texture 18:44, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It's not a discussion, it's a statement about the article which is very important to anybody reading it. When one comes accross an article with a title such as this, one naturally assumes that all localities are listed (or perhaps that only the larger, or more important ones). This assumption is completly wrong in this case, and the reader should be alerted.

Even if I can find a list of all localities in Palestine 1n 1948 (which I haven't yet), it is unlikely to be sorted by districts. And, it would be a lot of work to put in (the article as it is now probably contains less than 50% of the localities). Locating the information and putting it into the article, is, as I explained on VfD, just not worth it. -- uriber 20:06, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This is why the disputed messages are on the article. To indicate that the article may be incomplete or slanted and to see the talk page. As for not worth it, I think it would make an excellent addition to any encyclopedia. - Texture 21:07, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Jewish and Palestinian localities

Should this be divided into two sections of Palestinian localities and Jewish localities? That would make it clear that there are Jewish sections that need to be added to the article. - Texture 21:12, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

That would be confusingly anachronistic: in 1948 the term 'Palestinian' did not have the modern sense, denoting the nationality to which Arabs living in the area believe they belong. Rather, it was widely used to describe all peoples resident in the area. Thus 'Palestinian Jews' and Palestinian Arabs'. Nomist 12 Jan 2005

What I would like to see (though obviously it would be hard to achieve) is a table with the name, the district, identification as Arab/Jewish/mixed, and population. There is a way to get such a list for 1931, namely the census report, but it is not available in electronic form as far as I know. Updating it for 1948 (except for population) would maybe not be immensely difficult because there were not all that many new settlements established in that time. I guess there might have been 20 (?), mostly Jewish. An advantage of a table would be that the most basic information would be provided without the need to write a separate article. --Zero 09:05, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I like that idea. Give it a try. Leave some placeholder for information that is incomplete so that no one can make any claim that something is intentionally left out. The format you suggest sounds like it would make that easy. - Texture 18:42, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Renamed

This paged used to be titled List of localities in Palestine 1948. Since no attempt was made for the article match its title, I at least attempted for the title to match the article. -- uriber 19:37, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Merge

I suggest a merge with that other list. We don't need two lists, one having destroyed villages, and one having all of them. They are almost identical. Also, the final result should be heavily edited and rid of incorrect entries, etc. -- Ynhockey || Talk 13:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's clear we have too many lists that are similar. They should be combined somehow. I suggest one list in tabular form, containing both Arab and Jewish localities, containing a column giving their fate in 1948. The label "destroyed" is too black and white to tell the story properly. Some were partially destroyed, some were destroyed then rebuilt, some were not destroyed but the whole population was permanently expelled. --Zero 00:07, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I already moved the other list to List_of_villages_destroyed_during_the_1948_Arab-Israeli_war and added a 'Jewish villages' section. All that remains is to decide what happens to this particular article. -- Ynhockey || Talk 09:47, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since you haven't replied (hopefully you will this time), is it OK if I wipe this page and make it redirect to that other list? Because, really, this list serves no purpose other than POV pushing, it's nearly identical to the other one. Also, please check the other one and state your (dis)approval. -- Ynhockey || Talk 14:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand your plan correctly, localities that weren't depopulated will be lost altogether. That would unfortunate as it could be useful information. It would be better to have a list of all localities categorised according to what their fate was. Don't you think so? --Zero 04:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, we could then have a list of localities in 1967 too... any year actually. Besides, considering this current list already has just the ones either depopulated or claimed to be depopulated, we won't have a list of all Arab localities that existed in 1948. Moreover, if we're going to have Jewish localities as well (not just depopulated ones), we might as well start compiling a list of some 1,000 or more. But if you think it would be useful to have the localities on this particular list remain (that aren't on the other list), maybe we should have a section titled 'Arab localities claimed to be depopulated'. Would that be OK? -- Ynhockey || Talk 08:08, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the problem is the difficulty in making the list sufficiently comprehensive and accurate. Soon I will look to see if I have a copy of the 1945 village statistics compilation, as that is probably the most complete document apart from the small number of Jewish localities established 1945-8. I don't think the "claimed to be depopulated" category is necessary, but if these names can remain visible (say as an "undetermined" category) then they can be looked into one at a time. I have sources to look up, but it takes time and looking up a given name is much easier than searching for what is missing. --Zero 11:31, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a while, so I bring up the issue again. I'm bringing it up now since in 1 week I'm going away for a while, and won't be able to do anything. Have you checked your sources or come up with a different suggestion? My suggestion of wiping this article and redirecting to the other one still stands, since this article in its current state is still just a big POV push. -- Ynhockey 12:35, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Again

I forgot about this article but remembered now because of Talk:Machsom Watch. Do you have any suggestions to improve this article or should I wipe it and redirect as suggested? -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 08:44, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]