Talk:Neve Daniel
 | 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.
|
2009-16 edit
This is also an Israeli settlement? Even though there are irrefutable records showing it was purchased from el-Khadr and was fully paid for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.68.82.54 (talk) 17:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Why cite a legal opinion from a body that has existed for decades, but omit written citations from accepted legal authorities just because those citations are found in holy books that have been accepted by members of various religious bodies indigenous to the area for millennia? The use of the term "international community" violates the a neutral POV because the term is being used as a stand-in for the UN etc. without regard for the international community composed of adherents of faiths that accept the written documents in their respective holy books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichelleInSanMarcos (talk • contribs) 18:36, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
image edit
the image is irrelevant to the section it is in. In that section it is purely decorative and in fact does not meet MOS:PERTINENCE. nableezy - 20:25, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support - The image has been in the article for about two years. Not only is the image relevant, per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE, the image is the topic in visual form. A comparison would be adding a wide-angle photo of an elephant to the article elephants. The image is not of a random plant growing in Neve Daniel, or of friends having cocktails on a Neve Daniel patio. Instead, the image shows a wide-angle view of Neve Daniel (which is the topic of this article). How could this image possibly not be relevant? Magnolia677 (talk) 22:59, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- Explain how a picture of snow is relevant to either the section it was in or the section you placed it in. nableezy - 23:32, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- As your issue is clearly about the image caption and the section the image was placed in, those can be easily remedied without deletion. As such, I have moved the image to another section (the placement of wide image is sometimes a challenge). Feel free to change the image caption to something you feel more appropriate. Please wait for the input of other editors before deleting. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- Can you answer my question? How is a picture of snow related to the topic of the demographics of Neve Daniel? How is this picture not simply decorative? nableezy - 19:06, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
- Still waiting on an answer to that. nableezy - 22:32, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- The image is significant and relevant to the topic. It shows this settlement in panorama, unlike the other images, and is of a very high graphic quality. The article layout and its size don't leave a lot of other places to add this image, but if you feel it would be best in another section, or with another caption, please do so. That there is snow in the image, well, it snowed the day the photo was taken. I fail to see the issue? You may wish to seek a third opinion about your concern with the image. This isn't just an issue you may have with panoramics, is it? Many editors do you know. Look how my photo at Hoohoo contributes to the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:23, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
- As your issue is clearly about the image caption and the section the image was placed in, those can be easily remedied without deletion. As such, I have moved the image to another section (the placement of wide image is sometimes a challenge). Feel free to change the image caption to something you feel more appropriate. Please wait for the input of other editors before deleting. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- Explain how a picture of snow is relevant to either the section it was in or the section you placed it in. nableezy - 23:32, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018) edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Neve Daniel. 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/20100706021237/http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf to http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf
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) 17:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)