Talk:Wadi Ara, Haifa
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
mv?
[edit]Ok, I think all the 'En Esur stuff should be in the 'En Esur -article, then just a "main"-link (and one sentence?) in this article. What do you think, User:Arminden? Also, some of the sources there seen sub-par, ie http://forum.hagalil.com? Is/was this a forum? Anyway, it is now a dead link, cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Huldra. Yes, it certainly is far too much. Right now I can't volunteer to take care of it. I don't know much about forum.hagalil.com, judging by what I do remember and by what looks like a new or old attempt to revive it (here: https://www.hagalil.com/forum/), it seems to be a discussion forum on Jewish and Israel-related matters in the Germanosphere. The problem is, they were the one source criticising the medieval, repressive actions of the Israeli Rabbinate or whatever other circles (ministry, lobby groups?) who didn't just make the human remains disappear (reburial), but saw to it that they almost vanished from being mentioned online, as well. It's worth keeping, but in the En Esur article, not here. Finding academic papers on material DISAPPEARING from the Net? Good luck. Worth mentioning? Definitely. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 21:49, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, but User:Arminden; as you were the one that brought this into the article, then you, IMO, should be the one responsible for cleaning it up...
- Frankly, now I am very tempted to just reverting you.... (keepng the link to 'En Esur) Huldra (talk) 22:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Huldra, look, I said "right now I can't". I marked it on the to-do list. Not good enough? Set me a deadline. I can't remember, but I probably worked at the two articles at different times, not as one action. Arminden (talk) 22:50, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- User:Arminden You want a deadline? Ok, 10 March, 2022 :), Huldra (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Good. Knowing myself, it's not a joke, this works best :) Arminden (talk) 22:58, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- User:Arminden You want a deadline? Ok, 10 March, 2022 :), Huldra (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Huldra, look, I said "right now I can't". I marked it on the to-do list. Not good enough? Set me a deadline. I can't remember, but I probably worked at the two articles at different times, not as one action. Arminden (talk) 22:50, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Ein Esur/Assawir: does it belong here?
[edit]I realised that me or whoever put En Esur on that page probably didn't check if the ancient site is indeed on lands formerly owned by the village; maybe you can do that? It probably is, considering the water sources, but better make sure. Covid times are almost over and me hanging out on Wiki will get much less as well, thankfully. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 22:03, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Well, the "Tell el Asawir" is located about 1km NW of Wadi Ara, Haifa, so I think it is ok to have some info there. Huldra (talk) 22:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Huldra, I knew very well that the site is 1 km NW "from the mukhtar's house" so to say, but a) I hesitated to add that bit because I'm not sure it's included in the source indicated at the end of that sentence (technical, can easily be solved), and more importantly b) as you have written in dozens of village articles, the LANDS of a village are always seen as integral part of the village space, plus c) especially in the Middle East, but actually anywhere, the main water sources are not just essential, but the very core of why a village exists in a certain place - and the site in question is full of water, it has two springs. So 1 km means nothing. If the water rights belong to a Bedouin tribe, En Esur has no business being even mentioned on the village page (but that's unlikely). That's why I wrote that somebody should "check if the ancient site is indeed on lands formerly owned by the village". That matters. 500 m, 1 km or 10 km is almost irrelevant. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 11:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- En Esur and the adjacent tell were both on the village lands of Wadi Ara by the 1944 map. Zerotalk 12:30, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Huldra, I knew very well that the site is 1 km NW "from the mukhtar's house" so to say, but a) I hesitated to add that bit because I'm not sure it's included in the source indicated at the end of that sentence (technical, can easily be solved), and more importantly b) as you have written in dozens of village articles, the LANDS of a village are always seen as integral part of the village space, plus c) especially in the Middle East, but actually anywhere, the main water sources are not just essential, but the very core of why a village exists in a certain place - and the site in question is full of water, it has two springs. So 1 km means nothing. If the water rights belong to a Bedouin tribe, En Esur has no business being even mentioned on the village page (but that's unlikely). That's why I wrote that somebody should "check if the ancient site is indeed on lands formerly owned by the village". That matters. 500 m, 1 km or 10 km is almost irrelevant. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 11:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)