Talk:Aqraba, Nablus

Mentioned in the Bible?

Sharon, 1997, p. 110 says that Aqraba is not mentioned in the Bible, but this website say "MA'ALEH AKRABBIM" is. I´m removing it from the article. Huldra (talk) 22:20, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Sharon's obviously wrong or took the confusion over the placename Akrabbim as an indication that it never meant this location. Seems specious in light of Josephus and Eusebius. — LlywelynII 09:16, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

POV?

User:Shrike: please explain your revert.

How is what you removed a violation of WP:POV? The ref is this: Palestinian Mosque in West Bank torched in suspected arson attack. Awaiting your explanation, Huldra (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Easy to find more sources too. A similar attempted arson occurred in 2018. No reason to not mention it. Zero^talk 03:55, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

The attack clearly says its suspected it was omitted?Why?Also Why did you remove that it was annexed by Jordan? --Shrike (talk) 06:16, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Re Jordan, see closer comments at this RFC I added a main link to the annexation article.Selfstudier (talk) 12:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Selfstudier, RFC doesn't require removal of text. Shrike (talk) 13:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

It says a) we go case by case b) Easter eggs should/may be avoided and c) when we remove the easter egg, there is then no point in having "annexation" twice, right? In any case, Zarcademan, who added this text to begin with, said in his edit summary that whether it stayed should depend on the outcome of the RFC. The RFC does NOT support it staying.Selfstudier (talk) 14:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Again I don't understand why did you removed this?What easter eggs are you talking about --Shrike (talk) 19:08, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

User:Shrike: It seems you're just reverting changes that you dislike in different ways. First, you say my edit is a violation of WP:POV without any explanation. Now, you use the fact that I am using a new account to revert the changes. Again, you did the same with a photograph I added to the article of [Yaba]. It is understandable to revert changes that are unsourced or unreliable, or if an edit vandalises an articles. However, my edits are nowhere near that and simply contribute to WikiPedia. Rabobux (talk) 21:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

User:Rabobux: you should not edit this article before you reach 30/500 edits: if you have well-sourced info which you want to add: then suggest that on the talk-page. (Editing the article itself will only get you blocked).

Besides that; Shrike; I cannot see that you have any valid argument here, (beyond WP:IDONTLIKEIT): I have returned the info.

BUT: I am open for discussion if this should be in the lead: perhaps in the post-1967 paragraph, instead? Huldra (talk) 21:50, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

ARIJ in the lead

Its only source that report this.It shouldn't be in the lead and I am pretty certain it should in the article at all. --Shrike (talk) 11:15, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Maybe you ought to look harder, if it's too difficult, I'll do it for you. Selfstudier (talk) 12:16, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

I added another source. Do you need any more? Selfstudier (talk) 14:53, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Various fringe sources not really a source.What make Kerem Navot a WP:RS and WP:DUE? Shrike (talk) 15:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Moving the goal posts? Your complaint was that there was only one source, now there are two. (and as I pointed out in the edit summary, ARIJ is used in all the West Bank village articles, its just that you don't like that).Selfstudier (talk) 16:39, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Here is the exact same report being cited in a scholarly rsSelfstudier (talk) 16:46, 3 July 2020 (UTC)