Talk:Mandatory Palestine

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

EDIT REQUEST: Insert the following map in the section #Land Ownership[edit]


I would like to request that in the #Land Ownership section, to replace this map (see thumbnail, top image next to Edit Request)

Palestine Index to Villages and Settlements, showing Land in Jewish Possession as at 31.12.44

with this new map (see thumbnail next to Edit Request, second image), created by User:Shahanshah26:

Mandatory Palestine Land Ownership in 1945

Why do I think this to be a relevant and beneficial change?

The photo created by the above user combines the data information present on multiple UN Maps (including the two already present currently in #Land Ownership). It combines this information in what I believe to be an neutral, well-sourced, intuitive, and comprehensible-for-the-layman format.

To quote the author's post linked on the file, the map sources from the following maps:

Jewish Owned Land in 1945 (map attached to the 1945–46 Survey of Palestine)

State Land in 1947 (map attached to the 1945–46 Survey of Palestine)

Detail of State Land in the West Bank (I used dark blue and orange, lands registered before 1967)

“Jordanian Land Policy in the West Bank” (shows continuity in state land under Jordan and the British Mandate)

“Under the Guise of Legality” (part two includes a description of land law in the British Mandate; Palestinian bias)

“Israel-Palestine land division” (the article includes a description of land law in the British Mandate; Israeli bias)

Structure of a Palestinian Village (according to the Ottoman Land Code of 1858, applied by the British)

Palestine Open Maps (used to determine village boundaries and cultivation status of land)

Map Used as a Template (I erased the municipality boundaries, fixed shape of Dead Sea to about what it looked like in 1945, and added Lake Hula)

Land Ownership by Sub-Districts (map attached to the 1945–46 Survey of Palestine)

Timeline of Jewish Settlements (includes maps)

Furthermore, when asking the author to submit his work to Wikimedia, he also referred me to the following resources which he made use of (album of six maps).

In short, I believe the map to be an invaluable resource, and clearer and more comprehensive to the maps currently present on the page. My edit request is to replace the second UN map in Land Ownership with this one, which provides the same info present currently, with the addition of Arab villages as well.

If whichever editor reading this believes that replacing the image to not be necessary, I request you to consider adding it in addition to, rather than instead of, the current image. I believe it to be a valuable resource for understanding the conflict and the 181 Partition Plan. --Xland44 (talk) 16:57, 25 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maps are tricky, even trickier when this is the subject matter. Some might also with some justification argue that this is original research. The target anyway ought to be United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, I would have thought. I think if there additional points to be made above and beyond the sourced maps (to further explain those maps, is that the idea?), then those points should come from reliable secondary sources. Sorry to be a wet blanket, looks like a nice piece of work but as time consuming to check as it was to create, probably. Selfstudier (talk) 19:47, 25 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's completely fair to say that maps are tricky on this subject matter, which is why I would have posted this as an edit request / discussion even were I auto-confirmed. This edit request is intended to also enable other parties (e.g, you) to look at the sources (that's why I've listed them) and judge whether it portrays the already-available information in an honest/unbiased & clear-cut manner. Indeed, it's intended to further explain these maps. I don't think it's explicitly original research, as it's simply unifying already accessible maps and information.

I'll also note there seems to be precedent and current usage of similar maps: See Demographics of Israel and Demographics of the State of Palestine, which both use the following map (see third thumbnail), and also commons:User:Bolter21

Demographic map of Palestine - Israel - with Legend

But yes, I'm suggesting to add this image because I believe it to be neutral and provides clarity; if you don't think that is the case, I'll respect your opinion. That being said, I would suggest perhaps an RfC for a topic that is indeed, as tricky as this.

Cheers, thank you for replying! Xland44 (talk) 05:47, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Romanization/transliteration errors[edit]

The transliterations given in the first paragraph, Pālēśtīnā and Ērētz Yīśrā'ēl, are erroneous. According to Wikipedia guidelines (, these should be Palestina and Eretz Yisra'el. Even if someone wanted to use the old-fashioned pseudo-scientific pseudo-Biblical transliterations that can indicate specific vowels, the ē in Pālēśtīnā and in Ērētz, and the ī in Yīśrā'ēl are incorrect. They would more correctly be Pāleśtīnā and Ereṣ Yiśrā'ēl, but, again, Wikipedia standards require Palestina and Eretz Yisra'el.--Linguistatlunch (talk) 17:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit request[edit]

This map is indicating the partition only AFTER Transjordan split from Mandatory Palestine.Modern day Jordan is the Majority of the land mass that once called itself The British Mandate of Palestine.

The British colony was much larger and should reflect this in your map.

Kindly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:46, 9 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done. Your information is not correct. "Mandatory Palestine", the topic of this article, was not the same as British Mandate for Palestine which was a legal document covering two territories. Zerotalk 05:45, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


@Pngeditor: The McMahon-Hussein article says that "conflicting interpretations of this description were to cause great controversy in subsequent years" not that McMahon and Hussein had different interpretations when they wrote each other. Hussein laid out the territories he wanted, MaMchon responded with some exclusions, and Hussein grudgingly accepted for the meantime. The current phrasing portrays it more as a matter of miscommunication rather than purposeful ambiguity and deceit on the side of the British; the latter POV supported by most scholarly works. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:29, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]