Talk:Al-Badhan
 | 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.
|
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Al-Badhan. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080207042016/http://www.pcbs.gov.ps/Portals/_pcbs/populati/pop06.aspx to http://www.pcbs.gov.ps/Portals/_pcbs/populati/pop06.aspx
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) 06:14, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Merging of old and new epithets edit
User:Zero0000, shalom. I noticed your contributions, and which, as usual, are mostly pertinent. In the case of "West Bank," I am not saying that we should never use it. Here, on Wikipedia, we do use it. In fact, it is used in the opening of the lede paragraph. But is this saying that if we use it, we cannot also merge in the general body of the text the old references (namesakes) for the place, namely, Judea and Samaria Area? In fact, we do find articles in Wikipedia where these appellations are also used. The two naming conventions, in this case, do NOT contradict each other.Davidbena (talk) 19:11, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- User:Davidbena, please read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (West Bank), Huldra (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Huldra. So, if we were to mention the place in a general historical context as "Samaria", with of course qualification, as stipulated in #6, then it can be used, in accordance with #1: "References for antiquity follow sources and use Judea and Samaria for the period up to the first century CE," seeing that it is indeed mentioned in Samaritan records as existing well-before the 1st-century CE. However, we cannot use Judea and Samaria Area, except when discussing specifically the administrative area of Judea and Samaria, such as is defined in #5.Davidbena (talk) 22:09, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- I believe that #5 is meant for Israeli settlements, like Ariel (city), etc., and not for Palestinian places, like this place (whatever their history was 2000 years ago), Huldra (talk) 22:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with you on that.Davidbena (talk) 22:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- User:Davidbena, what you are doing now seem excessive, though. It is after all mentioned both in the info box, and in the template at the bottom,Huldra (talk) 22:47, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- The info box also has West Bank, and West Bank is mentioned also in the lede paragraph. I see nothing wrong with doing this, as it gives greater clarity, in my view. But, as I said, I agree with you, that this should apply only to Israeli settlements in the West Bank.Davidbena (talk) 22:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- User:Davidbena, what you are doing now seem excessive, though. It is after all mentioned both in the info box, and in the template at the bottom,Huldra (talk) 22:47, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with you on that.Davidbena (talk) 22:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- I believe that #5 is meant for Israeli settlements, like Ariel (city), etc., and not for Palestinian places, like this place (whatever their history was 2000 years ago), Huldra (talk) 22:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Huldra. So, if we were to mention the place in a general historical context as "Samaria", with of course qualification, as stipulated in #6, then it can be used, in accordance with #1: "References for antiquity follow sources and use Judea and Samaria for the period up to the first century CE," seeing that it is indeed mentioned in Samaritan records as existing well-before the 1st-century CE. However, we cannot use Judea and Samaria Area, except when discussing specifically the administrative area of Judea and Samaria, such as is defined in #5.Davidbena (talk) 22:09, 1 February 2018 (UTC)