Talk:1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article is rated B-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.
|
This article has previously been nominated to be moved.
Discussions:
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Nakbah[edit]
Warum nicht "Nakbah"? Isn't that the most commonly known many for it? Or is this a different event to the Nakbah ? Or is this like the Taiwan pages… Irtapil (talk) 14:59, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- If this a stage of the other? Irtapil (talk) 15:01, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
- exactly like the Taiwan pages. The English article on the Ben Gurion Canal Project was deleted, despite other languages being unaffected 2601:283:C100:2CF0:C064:A62F:8CB4:EB67 (talk) 20:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Self reference in Israeli Resettlement[edit]
The section about the Israeli Resettlement contains the phrase "inalienable right of return", in which "right of return" is wiki-linked to this article. Self reference, circular reference, or something else? I don't know if that is wrong, just that it's out of my depth. So I can only inform others here. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 04:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see anything wrong here. —Alalch E. 09:39, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 February 2024[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In reference to Israelis poisoning wells in the War of 1948, "this was based on false media reports saying Israeli rabbis were inciting the poisoning of water of Palestinians, led by a rabbi Shlomo Mlma or Mlmad from the Council of Rabbis in the West Bank settlements. A rabbi by that name could not be located, nor is such an organization listed."
https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Well_poisoning Pianomanross (talk) 16:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a source and anyway that sentence refers to the current West Bank not the 48 war. Selfstudier (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Noting that I just added a line about this to both articles. Levivich (talk) 18:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Typhus or typhoid?[edit]
Currently the article states that water was poisoned with both typhus and typhoid, both pretty clearly referring to the same incidents. These aren't the same disease and only one of them, typhoid, is waterborne. Unfortunately there are sources attesting to both with no recognition of the discrepancy, so I'm not sure how to go about correcting it. The reference here [1] is almost certainly incorrect, doesn't align with the other sources in the article and isn't the only source attesting to biological warfare, so I feel it should just be removed. XeCyranium (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- I see there's been a discussion of this already, my bad for overlooking. It seems the idea was to just adjust the mention of typhus to typhoid, so I'll do that for the article mention. XeCyranium (talk) 23:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for fixing this.
- Also, from the source you linked:
- "The unsigned report, ‘Ittihad Hospital, Acre, 18 July 1948' [...] spoke of ‘a terrible typhoid epidemic’, spread chiefly through the water supply and affecting ‘mainly children and infants’. In fact, typhoid and typhus are different diseases, but the Jews/Israelis, Acre townspeople, and, often, foreigners (British and Red Cross personnel) referred to the Acre outbreak as ‘typhus’. The ‘water-borne’ epidemic generated by the Haganah was, of course, typhoid, but it is possible that the town suffered simultaneously also from cases of typhus, commonly transmitted by lice and fleas."
- - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oh shoot I just reverted myself because I thought I had misread the previous discussion and that it supported the wording of "typhus". I don't have access to the source so that passage helps greatly. I'll revert my revert. XeCyranium (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
23 March 2024[edit]
Alaexis, beyond no consensus
, what is your problem with the changes that you reverted? إيان (talk) 23:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- The new text reads
were forcibly expelled from their homes or made to flee, at first by Zionist paramilitaries and after the establishment of the State of Israel, by the Israeli army
. It doesn't make sense since "expelling" and "making to flee" is pretty much the same thing, so it's a duplication. The old version ("expelled or fled") is a better summary of the causes of the exodus, see Causes_of_the_1948_Palestinian_expulsion_and_flight#Causes_of_the_first_wave,_December_1947_–_March_1948. Alaexis¿question? 14:35, 24 March 2024 (UTC)- 1. Wikipedia is not a source.
- 2. Surely if people were fleeing imminent violence then they were "made to flee", no?
- Some sources to support this:
- "The military commander interpreted Plan Dalet as calling for the expulsion of only the Muslims. To make sure this was done swiftly, he executed several Muslims on the village’s piazza in front of all the villagers, which effectively ‘persuaded’ the rest to flee." -The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
- "Ben-Gurion was unimpressed. His thoughts were already somewhere else. He was unhappy with the limited scope of the operations: ‘A small reaction [to Arab hostility] does not impress anyone. A destroyed house – nothing. Destroy a neighborhood, and you begin to make an impression!’ He liked the Sa‘sa operation for the way it had ‘caused the Arabs to flee’." -idem
- "They were forcibly removed by the occupying army or were made to flee to neighboring villages or areas for refuge as a result of military operations" [2]
- Even Benny Morris says here [3] that "The majority fled or were made to flee."
- Some sources to support this:
- - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 15:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Also, regarding your statement that 'expelling' and 'making to flee' are "pretty much the same thing" - I agree, and it's reasonable to speak simply of the Palestinian expulsion, without having to always add "and flight". IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 15:35, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- IOHANNVSVERVS is correct. إيان (talk) 17:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a source, but the section I've linked contains a number of references to RS. Morris writes as follows about the first wave (December 1947 – March 1948), p. 139
“ | Only an extremely small, almost insignificant number of the refugees during this early period left because of Haganah or IZL or LHI expulsion orders or forceful ‘advice’ to that effect. Many more – especially women, children and old people – left as a result of orders or advice from Arab military commanders and officials | ” |
- Alaexis¿question? 15:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- That's the early period, before Plan Dalet in April. Less than 10% of the 750,000 Palestinians who were expelled/fled, were expelled/fled during this period (70,000 is the common figure up to March 1948). Those were mostly rich Palestinians who could afford to leave the country in order to avoid the war (thinking that they'd be able to return after the fighting stopped).
- While I'm here: "expulsion" and "made to flee" are not the same thing. According to the sources (like Morris's book 1948, or Ilan Pappe's ethnic cleansing book), the expulsions and flight included the following types of things:
- Literal, physical expulsion, as in Israelis put Palestinians onto trucks/buses, drove them somewhere else (e.g., in the middle of the desert), kicked them out of the vehicles, and drove off
- Expulsion under direct threat of violence, as in Israelis pointed guns at Palestinians and said "start walking or we shoot," so the Palestinians started walking
- Expulsion under indirect threat of violence, as in Israelis drove around in loudspeaker vans and announced, "if you don't leave by dawn, we will kill you all," and then the Palestinians left
- Violence to induce flight, as in the Israelis massacred Palestinians in one village, and then the Palestinians in neighboring villages ran away so they wouldn't be next; one thing that pretty much everyone I've read seems to agree on, including Morris, is that the purpose of the massacres was to induce flight
- A tiny portion of "expelled or fled" involves voluntary flight (as mentioned, less than 10%, prior to Plan Dalet in April 1948), and every part of it involves violence. None of it was a voluntary emigration. These expulsions and flights started in December 1947 and continued well after the end of the war in 1949 (even until today). For sources and quotes, see Nakba#The 1948 Nakba (and subsequent sections for the "well after the end of the war" part). Levivich (talk) 16:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- No one is saying that Palestinians just decided to emigrate, so it's a straw man argument. The point is that fleeing and being expelled are substantially different things, even if both were caused by the same conflict. To take a recent example, Karabakh Armenians fled their country fearing the occupation by Azerbaijan. We should try to be precise, and if both expulsions and flight took place, that's what we should write. Alaexis¿question? 12:32, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- You, above on March 24:
It doesn't make sense since "expelling" and "making to flee" is pretty much the same thing, so it's a duplication.
- You just now:
The point is that fleeing and being expelled are substantially different things, even if both were caused by the same conflict.
- You seem to have been arguing that the flight was voluntary, sorry if I misunderstood you. The edit in the OP changed "forcibly expelled" to "expelled," and "made to flee" to "fled."
- The point is that they did not flee voluntarily, they were made to flee by psychological warfare operations (in addition to the forced expulsions, eg at the point of a gun). Levivich (talk) 12:57, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- You, above on March 24:
- No one is saying that Palestinians just decided to emigrate, so it's a straw man argument. The point is that fleeing and being expelled are substantially different things, even if both were caused by the same conflict. To take a recent example, Karabakh Armenians fled their country fearing the occupation by Azerbaijan. We should try to be precise, and if both expulsions and flight took place, that's what we should write. Alaexis¿question? 12:32, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- Alaexis¿question? 15:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
"Violently" and other recent edit issues.[edit]
...is clear NPOV. No citation provided, and for this to stand, and all expulsions would have had to be violent for this to be described as such. If there were a qualifier ("often violently" or "occasionally violently" backed by a citation, sure), but "violently expelled" is polemical and not remotely neutral or accurate.
As for the causes belli - the recent edit is tendentious and OR and will be reported if preserved without appropriate citation. The rephrasing is not the issue...it is leading and OR and is neither cited nor discussed later in the article. Mistamystery (talk) 05:27, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- 1. "Not remotely neutral or accurate?" Really?
- 2. It's not OR just because there is no inline citation... And in what way is it "leading"? I don't know what you mean by that. If it's not discussed later in the article then that is something to be addressed.
- - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 05:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Here's a citation for #2 (which I found in a few minutes...) from Benny Morris, 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War, p. 180:
"As the months passed and the Palestinian Arabs, beefed up by contingents of foreign volunteers, proved incapable of defeating the Yishuv, the Arab leaders began more seriously to contemplate sending in their armies. The events of April 1948—Deir Yassin, Tiberias, Haifa, Jaffa—rattled and focused their minds, and the arrival of tens of thousands of refugees drove home the urgency of direct intervention. By the end of April, they decided to invade."
- IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 05:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- 1. Really? Yes. Insisting that the entirety of the expulsions were violent when A) they weren't and B) there is no citation provided is NPOV and agenda pushing. Be specific with citation or keep it general.
- 2. The citation you provided does not make your point, nor support the sentence you are trying to keep. The quote insists that the Arab league invaded because they Palestinians were failing to defeat the Jewish forces, as well as other factors (including refugees). It also points out that they (Arab countries) were already supporting the Palestinian military cause with soldiers and were failing to have an impact. Mistamystery (talk) 05:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding 2: You might want to familiarize yourself with what the reliable sources say about the history you're disputing here. Or you could check the primary source that is the cablegram sent to the UN Secretary General by the Arab League on May 15, which laid out their reasons for intervening in Palestine.
- Additionally, it would be more appropriate to add a citation needed tag to content which you are unsure about; the removal of significant content without bringing it up on the talk page should only be done if you're very confident the information is wrong.
- The fact that "about 250000–300000 Palestinians fled or were expelled during the 1947–1948 civil war [...] was named as a casus belli for the entry of the Arab League into the country", is a rather basic fact of this history, and I'll remind you that WP:Competence is required. I don't mean to be rude but I do think that removing basic facts first and asking for sources second, rather than the other way around, is disruptive editing.
- - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 08:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- It's your responsibility to provide a source if something is challenged. Also, even if something is indeed supported by a source it doesn't mean that it has to be in the lead. Alaexis¿question? 22:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- I see you've added a citation needed tag to the sentence here disputed. Not everything requires an inline citation so am I correct in assuming that you've added this tag because you dispute or doubt the accuracy of the information? As I said above, it's a rather basic fact of this history so I don't understand the challenge and demand for sources here. Have you read "the primary source that is the cablegram sent to the UN Secretary General by the Arab League on May 15, which laid out their reasons for intervening in Palestine", which I cited above?
- - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- The cablegram is a primary source and generally we prefer secondary ones, especially to determine whether certain information should be included in the lede. Alaexis¿question? 07:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- It's sufficient to address the citation needed tag and I'll be removing it. As I said before as well, there are many references cited here which undoubtedly support this basic fact already.
- If you think some or all of this disputed sentence doesn't belong in the lead then you'll have to say so directly and explain why. Hard to believe it could be undue for the lead however given the subject of the article.
- - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 07:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Actually I won't remove the cn tag unilaterally; I'll ask if you consider the sourcing concern resolved.
- Note that I can easily provide secondary sources for this but that it would be a waste of time for me to do so. Have you made any effort to find secondary sources for this yourself? I'm not sure which RS you're going by which would lead you to doubt this information in the first place.
- - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 08:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understood your point. There are three issues here
- The source for this specific claim. Please feel free to add the cablegram and remove the tag.
- Should this claim be in the lede? Secondary sources should be provided that establish its importance for the topic.
- The information should be added to the article itself, as the lede generally should summarise the information that is already in the article per WP:MOSLEDE.
- Alaexis¿question? 08:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- 1. And you'll not do that yourself why? You're the one who is insisting on an inline citation for this.
- 2. Is there any doubt that the Palestinian expulsions — the subject of this article — being a casus belli of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war is due for the lead? WP:SKYISBLUE, no? Again, I'm not sure which reliable sources you're going by — you've not cited any here so far — which would make you doubt this.
- 3. Absolutely
and adding this information to the body would be an extremely productive contribution you could make here.[Striking this per WP:TONE, although I'm feeling rather frustrated here.] 08:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC) - - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 08:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material is a very basic tenet of WP:V. Alaexis¿question? 21:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Which is why I've provided two sources to support the content.
- Any response to my questions 1 or 2 above?
- - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Re your first question, if you want to retain it, the burden is on you to demonstrate verifiability.
- Re the second one, I think it definitely played a part, but there were other reasons as well (as far as I remember Abdullah of Jordan wanted to annex the Arab part of Palestine to his dominion). But again, if it's so obvious you should have no problems finding reliable secondary sources explicitly confirming it. Alaexis¿question? 12:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
- The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material is a very basic tenet of WP:V. Alaexis¿question? 21:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understood your point. There are three issues here
- The cablegram is a primary source and generally we prefer secondary ones, especially to determine whether certain information should be included in the lede. Alaexis¿question? 07:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- It's your responsibility to provide a source if something is challenged. Also, even if something is indeed supported by a source it doesn't mean that it has to be in the lead. Alaexis¿question? 22:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Mistamystery, please tell us about these supposed nonviolent expulsions with RS, and how they are statistically significant out of the 700,000+ Palestinians to merit the due weight you suggest. إيان (talk) 14:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- +1 – expulsion is implicitly violent, so indeed, it needs demonstrating if any instances are otherwise. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, but I'm a bit confused, is it an argument for or against retaining this characterisation? Alaexis¿question? 21:53, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- The thread appears to be about removing or mollifying the word, among other complaints. Iskandar323 (talk) 23:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, but I'm a bit confused, is it an argument for or against retaining this characterisation? Alaexis¿question? 21:53, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- +1 – expulsion is implicitly violent, so indeed, it needs demonstrating if any instances are otherwise. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
What do you think @Mistamystery? Do you still think the content should be removed or do we have consensus that it should stay? Do you have any concerns about it being undue for the lead? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 12:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Items are included in articles because of clear citative basis and nothing more.
- 1. Violence and expulsion are separate matters. If incidences of violence or conduct in an explicitly violent manner happened, the use of the term "violent" need be in regard to citation that expounds of nature and extent of violence during expulsion. If those sources cannot be provided, the inclusion of the word is editorializing and leading.
- 2. And in regards to the causus belli - there are many factors that are cited by numerous sources well beyond this supposed single minded aim of responding to the refugee crisis. For instance, the abundance of Arab Leaders who stated their aim as plain elimination or expulsion of the Jewish population. And this is well before the refugee crisis began.
- As it stands that sentence was there without any citation or further mention in the article to start with - which is plain editorializing and POV pushing. It should be withheld from the edit on those grounds alone.
- Likewise, the Morris quote does not support the assertion. Mistamystery (talk) 14:45, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- "The abundance of Arab Leaders who stated their aim as plain elimination or expulsion of the Jewish population. And this is well before the refugee crisis began." RS for this? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- Unless we're considering adding this information to this article, this question is irrelevant to the discussion. We simply need reliable secondary sources which support the added content. Alaexis¿question? 21:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- "The abundance of Arab Leaders who stated their aim as plain elimination or expulsion of the Jewish population. And this is well before the refugee crisis began." RS for this? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
- B-Class Palestine-related articles
- Top-importance Palestine-related articles
- WikiProject Palestine articles
- B-Class Israel-related articles
- High-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- B-Class Human rights articles
- Low-importance Human rights articles
- WikiProject Human rights articles
- B-Class International relations articles
- Low-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles
- B-Class Discrimination articles
- Low-importance Discrimination articles
- WikiProject Discrimination articles
- B-Class law articles
- Low-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- B-Class history articles
- Low-importance history articles
- WikiProject History articles