| Revision as of 04:49, 30 April 2009 editTiamut (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,614 edits →redundancy in the lead: r← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:51, 30 April 2009 edit undoTiamut (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,614 edits →Centralized discussion as applied to specific articles: rNext edit → | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| A perusal of ] indicates that there was no consensus to call these neighborhoods as settlements. As the discussion manifests, the problem with calling these neighborhoods as settlements is that no reliable sources use that term settlements in reference to these neighborhoods. There are some partisan sources that use term settlement, but this term as applied to these neighborhoods has never picked up by mainstream and neutral reliable sources. --'']] ]'' 04:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | A perusal of ] indicates that there was no consensus to call these neighborhoods as settlements. As the discussion manifests, the problem with calling these neighborhoods as settlements is that no reliable sources use that term settlements in reference to these neighborhoods. There are some partisan sources that use term settlement, but this term as applied to these neighborhoods has never picked up by mainstream and neutral reliable sources. --'']] ]'' 04:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :I don't see the consensus to which you point. In this article, the illegal status of Ramot and its designation as a settlement are attested to in the sources cited to the ] (FMEP). In the FMEP2 citation, they cite an EU report which states this very clearly. Are you saying that the FMEP is not a ] or that EU is not an RS on this issue? ]<sup>]</sup> 04:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:51, 30 April 2009
 | Palestine Start‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | The factual accuracy of part of this article is disputed. The dispute is about whether to (predominantly) term the entry as a Settelment, versus Neighborhood. See centralized discussion''. Please help to ensure that disputed statements are reliably sourced. See the relevant discussion on the ]. (March 2008) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Reason why there's no Ramot 05
Is the reason given in this article really true? (It was submitted by an anonymous user.) I was under the impression that land was allocated for all six Ramots, but they skipped 05 in favor of building 06. Yoninah 22:09, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
- Doesn't sound right--there's a Katamon Heh. I believe they do skip 7, Zayin, though--there's a Katamon Vav and a Katamon Tet, but no Zayin. Alexisr 04:51, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Query
Any special reason that the 'settlement' issue should be once in the first paragraph and another two times in the second paragraph? Jaakobou 16:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
redundancy in the lead
the lead dedicates an entire para to the designation as a settlement. there's no need to push that pov into the first sentence as well. NoCal100 (talk) 04:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- The lead currently reads as follows:
Ramot (Template:Lang-he-n, lit. Heights), also known as Ramot Alon (Template:Lang-he, lit. Alon Heights) is one of the largest Israeli settlements and neighborhoods in Jerusalem, with about 40,000 residents. It is situated in the northwestern part of the city and divided into six sections, from Ramot 1, the oldest section, to Ramot 6, the newest section. Ramot 5 is the commercial center.
Because of its location east of the Green Line it is considered to be an illegal settlement by the International Community, though Israel disputes this and the United States also traditionally refrains from characterizing Israeli localities in East Jerusalem as settlements.
- So the second paragraph discusses the view of the international community that it is an illegal settlement and the view of Israel and the US that it is not "illegal" or not a "settlement". The first sentence uses the terms "Israeli settlement" and "neighbourhood" side by side so as to respect WP:NPOV by presenting all significant viewpoints, even though the Israeli and US viewpoint is in the minority. That seems pretty darn fair to me. What's the issue again? Tiamut 04:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Centralized discussion as applied to specific articles
A perusal of Misplaced Pages:Centralized discussion/Jewish Neighborhoods versus Settlements of Jerusalem indicates that there was no consensus to call these neighborhoods as settlements. As the discussion manifests, the problem with calling these neighborhoods as settlements is that no reliable sources use that term settlements in reference to these neighborhoods. There are some partisan sources that use term settlement, but this term as applied to these neighborhoods has never picked up by mainstream and neutral reliable sources. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see the consensus to which you point. In this article, the illegal status of Ramot and its designation as a settlement are attested to in the sources cited to the Foundation for Middle East Peace (FMEP). In the FMEP2 citation, they cite an EU report which states this very clearly. Are you saying that the FMEP is not a WP:RS or that EU is not an RS on this issue? Tiamut 04:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- "Settlement Time Line: Settlement Report". Foundation for Middle East Peace (FMEP). September–October 2008. Retrieved 2009-04-29.
{{cite web}}: Unknown parameter|colume=ignored (help)CS1 maint: date format (link) - "Leor Tubul, 17 years old, and Ronan Karamani, 18, vanished at a busy intersection outside the Ramot neighborhood, a Jewish suburb built in an area that had been the West Bank before Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1967." Slaying of 2 Jews Stirs Violence in Jerusalem New York Times August 7, 1990.
- "They began planting neighborhoods such as Ramot Allon on annexed West Bank land..." Clashing values alter a city’s face by Richard Boudreaux, Los Angeles Times June 05, 2007
- "EU Report: Israel "Actively Pursuing the Illegal Annexation" of East Jerusalem". FMEP. March–April 2009. Retrieved 2009-04-29.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: date format (link) - Jerusalem Post, Jan 8, 2008