Talk:Salem, Ma'ale Iron

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Built before 1517?[edit]

Huldra added that the village was mentioned in the 1596 census of the Ottoman Empire but this seems odd to me. First of all, this is a very small village, it had a population of 44 in the days of the Mandate, so thinking it reached only 44 in 400+ years is weird in my opinion. To add to that, a source from Mapa says archeological findings reveal that the area was populated since Persian period but the current village was established in the 19th century by villagers from Umm el-Fahm (Hebrew). Any thoughts?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 10:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bolter21 not really, if you look at the other 1596-places, it is not unusual that a place has had it population varied during times (look at User:Huldra/HA). I cannot read Hebrew, but "Hadashot Arkheologiyot" articles here and here, (not added to the article, yet) say there are remains from Roman, Hellenistic, Byzantine, Mamluk and Ottoman eras. It look to me as if the place has had a continuous population. Huldra (talk) 21:55, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, the Mapa source says the 'current' village was established in the 19th century. Another hebrew source I found from the Davar newspaper says the villagers came from two clans originating in Rummanah. Another Arabic source, says some 15 families came to the village due to the 1948 war but doesn't spesify from where. Any thoughts? Also, if one of those sources you gave talks about remains from the persian period, feel free to remove the Mapa source.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 22:09, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the Hütteroth and Abdulfattah -source is specific, (it gives the grid-locations as 169/216) *this* is the "Salim" mentioned in the 1596 census. And I have seen that *lots* of times, that villages (say, on the West Bank) say they were "founded" in the 1800s or early 1900....(look at http://vprofile.arij.org) when they were actually ancient ...(Or just look at Alma, Safad: lots of sources said it was settled in the 1840 by Algerians, alas; it has an ancient history.) Even in "the Bible" for the -48-villages, (Walid Khalidi: All that remains), he writes that, say, Samakh, Tiberias was settled in the early 1800...but it is marked as a village on a map from 1799. Or look at Uzeir, as translated from Hebrew Wikipedia...and look at Uzeir, today. That the history is unknown does not mean that it did not exist! Huldra (talk) 22:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, shall we nominate any of these Ma'ale Iron-villages for DYK? Huldra (talk) 22:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it won't be problematic to say that the clans inhabiting the vilage came from Rummanah is the Hebrew source (not yet in the article) suggests, it doesn't contradict anything. I guess there also no problem in writing that in 1948-9 some 15 refugee families settled in the village, I"ll just exclude the part that says it was settled in the 19th century cause after all, an Ottoman census is more reliable than Israeli places-encyclopedia and as you said, many say villages were established in the recent history while they are acknowleged in much older sources.
About DYK, I don't understand the concept of DYK too much.. What is there about Ma'ale Iron villages to "know"?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 00:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
AS for DYK, I would suggest "Did you know, that Musheirifa, Musmus, Salim and Zalafa are 4 of the villages making up Ma'ale Iron?" (Musmus is perhaps too old, is, I will cut it out) Huldra (talk) 23:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What about Bayada?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 23:28, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bayada isn´t made yet. The nom is here, Huldra (talk) 23:59, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Now it is: Baiada. I am going to move the article to Bayada beceuase I saw "Baiada" in no source although it was suggested in the Ma'ale Iron article.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 00:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but if you look at the sources collected on Talk:Ma'ale Iron: Bayada was not a village in Ottoman time, nor mentioned in the 1922 or 1931 censuses. (Which means: I cannot get enough history in to make it DYK-worthy.) However......., Al-Murtafi'a (presently just a re-dir) was noted in records in Ottoman time, and was definitely a village by 1922 (had 203 inhabitants, see Barron, p. 30...same as the Pal.rem-site). I was not sure it was part of Ma'ale Iron, but Number 57 seems to think it was; ..... see: User talk:Number 57/Archive 6#Basma and Ma'ale Iron...? Huldra (talk) 02:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For Bayada as noted in the Musheirifa and the Bayada article, it was once a neighborhood of Musheirifa and later it splited into a seperate village (supposedly it means the village had it's own Mukhtar at one point, and today when driving to Musheirifa, there's a sign for both villages, even though Musheirifa and Bayada are listed in the same statistical unit in the 2008 census). About Al-Murtafi'a, it doesn't apear in Ma'ale Iron's website and in the 2008 census it apears as a neighborhood of Zalafa and technically it is connected to Zalafa, just the further most point in the village. I guess a section in the Zalafa article will be the best option.
Something else rose my concern, in the 2008 census data each statistical unit includes names of neighborhoods (unfortunately not in the English version). In the Musheirifa+Bayada unit there's another neighborhood called "Vradim (Musmus)" ("Roses" neighborhood of Musmus) and in the map, this neighborhood is to the northwest of Musheirifa, disconnected from Musmus.. If you find any data on it, it will be great.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 12:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am really excited I found this! Somehow I found a protocol of the Knesset meeting from 1981 (it is in hebrew but if you want it: link). In the protocol there's a section about a conversation between an MK (Member of the Knesset) to the Interior Minister about giving a municipal status for Zalafa. It says (i"ll try my best to translate):

"Following your response to request no.2372 on the subject of creating a local council for Zalafa from 16 Jaunary 1979, I learned these facts : residents of Aqada and Swisa [two small villages south of Zalafa] whose population togather is 250 reject the attempt to unite them with Zalafa and see themselves as part of Umm el-Fahm. The Al-Murtafi'a neighborhood is part of the village [=Zalafa].

Becuase of the new situation What steps will the interior ministry take to allow the residents of Zalafa to have a Local Council?

Response of the Interior Minister:

A. The progress in the estalishment of a Local Council in Zalafa paused becuase of the lack of clarity in the matter of land ownership in the area of the village. Contacts in that matter are being made between ILA and the residents of Zalafa.

B. Al-Murtafi'a neighborhood borders Zalafa indeed and is almost a single unit with Zalafa. Aqada neighborhood is c. 800 meters away from Zalafa and Swisa neighborhood is c. 1,400 meters away from Zalafa and c. 4km from Um el-Fahm. The access routes from Zalafa to these neighborhoods are more comfortable than the access routes from Umm el-Fahm and the residents of those neighborhoods are receiving water and education services from Zalafa. Today three of those neighborhoods are in the municipal boundaries of Umm el-Fahm.

C. The Zalafa villages registeres today some 1,700 residents and doubts it will be able to bear the financial and administrative burden of having a Local Council. Even if the three neighborhoods will be incorporated into Zalafa as offered, the three neighborhoods togather encompass some 400 residents, the future Local Council will be established for a low number of residents.

D. The Interior Ministry still consideres establishment of a Local Council for Zalafa, Al-Murtafi'a, Swisa and Aqada from hope that the ownership problems will be solved soo.

I think those bits of information can be used in the article of Zalafa, the article of Umm el-Fahm and if will be, a future article for Al-Murtafi'a.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 13:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but in order to move Baiada to Bayada, you have to get an admin to delete the present Bayada, first. (Bayada is presently a redir to BAYADA Home Health Care) Huldra (talk) 23:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics section[edit]

Since both Al Ameer son and Huldra are editing such villages I want to ask you for you your opinion on the Demographics section I made for Salim. How can it be improved? I want to know before I make the same one for the rest of the Ma'ale Iron articles.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 14:48, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bolter21: I think it is good, but I would prefer that the Demographics section was after the History section, Huldra (talk) 20:27, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Although I think the present form should be first (Just like when you visit a village in real life, you first see the village and only then you learn it's history) it seems most articles about localities put history before.. So I"ll move it down. Except for that, anything else can or should be added? By the way the census data is available in English.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 20:38, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That census data in English is excellent. There is one thing that ought to be changed: the sentence: ...."and 97% of the adult females are unemployed" is not really correct. (I assume most are *quite* employed; at home). The census put it more correctly, they are: "not in the annual civilian labour force". The sentence could possibly be changed to ".....and 97% of the adult females are not employed outside the home," (Actually, the census say that the number is 99.1%) Huldra (talk) 20:57, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah.. during the work I realised I used the census data from Musheirifa and Baiada so I changed the population and ages but the labour slipped through my mind. Saying "not employed outside the home" sounds wierd to me.. It should be either "not in the annual civilian labour force" or something else.. And thanks for mentioning that, I should"ve double-checked all of the data after realising my mistake.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:12, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I wrote 97% becuase the Haaretz source said 97% are unemployed, but that was in 2001 and the census is from 2008, as well as being a census. So I"ll remove the statement and add a Labour section real quick - which is probably what was missing in the article.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:18, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

...Also, we don´t need Musmus, Musheirifa, Zalafa, Baiada in the "See also"-section now, do we? Not when they are linked from the template below? Huldra (talk) 21:50, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am originally from the Hebrew Wikipedia and WP:REPEATLINK is accepted fondly there.. I don't know, the template might be missed out under the references, the bibliography and the external links.. I added the template only so if someone sees the Haifa template, he could also see the other villages becase I didn't want to add them to the Haifa Template. I am a person of accessibility and I like having links in the right locations, that's how I used Wikipedia long before I started editing it.. It seems to me that it is ok per WP:REPEATLINK. What do you think?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 22:14, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think that makes the article look a bit messy...but this is not a big deal; if you want to keep it, then do so, Huldra (talk) 22:29, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Salem, Ma'ale Iron. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 20:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Salem,_Ma%27ale_Iron&oldid=1205165057"