Talk:Nuaman

Palestine High‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

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:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

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.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

کیف حالکم اخی العزیز اَلسَلامُ عَلَيْكُم وَرَحْمَةُ اَللهِ وَبَرَكاتُهُ‎ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.138.51.162 (talk) 21:07, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ref #3

Nishidani, great work, as usual. Just a quick note to say there seems to be a mistake in ref 3 - McCarthy 2010, p. 6. Oncenawhile (talk) 19:51, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for the fixes. Rushed work, and I'm bound to slip up. Thank you guys for checking.Nishidani (talk) 20:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's the least I can do! Just to ensure my brief comment wasn't misunderstood, what I mean is that there isn't a McCarthy in 2010 and the 2009 article doesn't have a page 6. Oncenawhile (talk) 20:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your edit, and like those of NS, I don't check them usually. I thought you'd fixed it. Sorry. I've done so now.Nishidani (talk) 20:45, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm here, any chance you could cast your experienced eye over the RFC at WP:IPCOLL? Oncenawhile (talk) 20:41, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checked, but, being stupid, (it's a book fixation neurosis. If I see print anywhere, I read it. When I see columns of stuff and links, and technical wiki discussions, I ignore it. If you tell me what the RfC's about, I'll have a look tomorrow, but tonight's strictly for Aeneid Bk 7.Nishidani (talk) 20:48, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a very civilized evening.

Sorry I misunderstood you. I think you're alluding to an important point - I am not getting enough people commenting on the RFC because it looks too technical. In a nutshell, it's that we have three main articles on the conflict, which is fine, but in my view we should also have a single article bringing the whole summarized narrative in one place.

Oncenawhile (talk) 20:58, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Location

See these maps. In the WaPo article it says "At the time the war broke out, the village was located in Jordan... According to aerial photographs taken in August 1967 by Israel's mapping agency, 13 houses ran along the ridge. While showing that the houses existed, the photos have not resolved the question of who lived in them at the time. The soldiers registered the people they found there as residents of Um A-Talla, a West Bank village where the head of their clan lived. Israel then renamed the village Mazmuriya for a Roman archaeological site nearby, erasing Nuaman from the map."

"Ni'man", Mazmuriya and Umm Al Asafir (clearly visible immediately south of Har Homa on the UN map I just added to the article) are all visible on the 1940 map.

I can't see any sign of Um A-Talla. The full map is at File:17-12-Talpiyot-1943.jpg so perhaps there is something there I missed.

Onceinawhile (talk) 18:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kh. Umm at Tala' is on that map at 175/122, about 5km east of Beit Sahur. Zero^talk 21:50, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zero0000, brilliant. I don't know how you do it. So it seems it has become part of Ash-Shawawra, which is just visible on the bottom right of the map in the infobox. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Onceinawhile I do it by looking up the Gazetteer. It has everything that appears on the 1:100K maps. Zero^talk 06:14, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you. Even an idjet can walk down a road, but it always a comfort to them to know there are folks on the way who know the landscape intimately, and have the courtesy to point one the right path beyond the Frostian uncertainties.Nishidani (talk) 12:05, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Levy

Is widely cited, and the material used here is benign. Ive restored the source. Deprecated does not mean blacklisted, and WP:DEPS does not allow for the indiscriminate removal of deprecated sources. nableezy - 14:41, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, this is ridiculous (also for info http://web.archive.org/web/20060326061650/http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=661298).Selfstudier (talk) 14:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]