Talk:State of Palestine

Correcting sentence in lead

In the lead, it says "It is officially recognized as a state by the United Nations and numerous countries." I understand this last bit is imprecise, as "numerous" may mean 20 or 30, while the real number is significant: 140 of 193 UN members, meaning 72.5%; for that, I would suggest correcting the bit "and numerous countries" to "and by the vast majority of the world's countries". 2A02:14F:177:44BB:A5D4:927E:38DF:5A18 (talk) 12:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Done. Selfstudier (talk) 12:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to follow on that. It's materially incorrect to talk about "recognition as a state by the UN", since the UN has no power to determine sovereignty. We've been having similar discussions with regard to certain partially recognised states aligned with Russia, and the editors' consensus there seemed to follow the academic consensus within the framework of the constitutive theory: Westphalian sovereignty is defined only through recognition by other states, as every state has a sovereign right to recognise and treat another polity as its equal.

For this reason, Wikipedia talks about "states with limited recognition", i.e., those whose sovereignty has not been recognised by a majority of other states.

However, the UN, being essentially an intergovernmental association, has no accepted powers to determine the Westphalian sovereignty of any polity. The most the UN can do is to allow or disallow its membership.

My recommendation is to rework the lead section so that UN membership is not presented as linked to sovereignty. — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

I am not personally bothered by the wording here, quite happy to let the legal eagles argue the toss about it. However it is worth mentioning that 2011 vote is actually considered a de facto (not de jure) recognition which has had an impact on the question of Palestinian statehood in international law, for example, the ICC took it into account in deciding that Palestine was as a "state party", allowed to bring a case there.

These days, the consensus is not so much either the constitutive or the declarative but some more practical realization of both. Certainly the US sees the Palestinian membership debate at the UN as being directly linked to statehood, although that is probably a political position rather than anything else.

Another go round shortly :) Selfstudier (talk) 13:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

2011 vote is actually considered a de facto (not de jure) recognition. This might have been the case for some Western European or American countries, I don't know. Much of the remaining world has been having diplomatic relations with Palestine for a decade or two, with Palestnian embassies operating in many of the world's capitals and Palestinian ambassadors being normal members of the diplomatic corps. — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

International recognition by UN members

Trinidad and Tobago recognized the State of Palestine on 2 May 2024.

The number of UN members that recognize the State of Palestine needs to be updated to 141. Surfacedextrous (talk) 06:16, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Some debate going on about what the exact number is right now, at Talk:Foreign_relations of the State of Palestine#140 and at Talk:International recognition of the State of Palestine, suggest the discussion take place only at the latter article until resolved. Selfstudier (talk) 09:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 May 2024

In the first one or two paragraphs there is a grammatical error, with the article saying “it have a combined area” instead of “it has”, the latter being correct. MrGamerMooseBTW (talk) 12:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Just for one of two grammar mistakes you can't change whole section Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Introdution fourth paragraph. Edits needed

"The Palestinian Authority governs parts of the West Bank while Hamas controls the Gaza Strip. Currently the country is challenging from expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, impact of occupation, settler violence, blockade by Israel, restrictions on movement and ongoing security concerns. Current effort is advancing the Palestinian cause and achieving a just and lasting resolution to the conflict."

The second sentence is not in proper engligh. The third sentence is both subjective and flat out wrong. Personally I would change it to 'unsuccessful efforts have been made to solve the conflict' then bang on a source. Firestar47 (talk) 08:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. — kashmīrī ^TALK 00:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Strange Sentence in History Section

Under the "History" section, there is a sentence which does not appear to make much sense. It reads:

"Abdul Hamid, the last Khalifa of the world, oppose Zionist movement, but failed." My problems with this sentence are twofold: Firstly, it is not grammatically correct, as it should read "Abdul Hamid, the last Khalifa of the world, opposed Zionist movement, but failed." Secondly, it does not convey much encyclopedic information. How did he "oppose Zionist movement"? This is not elaborated upon in the text to my knowledge. Why does the article refer to Abdul Hamid as "the last Khalifa of the world"? This title is not used in Hamid's main article, and it appears to be invented by whoever wrote it.

Can this sentence be excised or altered to be more encyclopedic? Thanks. JohnR1Roberts (talk) 14:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done. @JohnR1Roberts, is it more acceptable now? — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I like the new wording. JohnR1Roberts (talk) 16:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Picture in the "Art, Music, and Clothing" Section

Under the 'Art, music, and clothing' Section there is a picture of 'Palestinian children in their traditional dress'. The picture itself was taken in London (on Oct. 9th 2023), and it is not clear this has anything to do with 'traditional Palestinian clothing'. The picture does contain a political message which is irrelevant to the information discussed in the section, and in addition contains a short manifesto in text when opened "There are more than two million people living there, and this brutal form of collective punishment is clearly a war crime which threatens the lives of all of them...". I suggest deleting this picture or finding a more suitable image which is relevant to the information discussed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2024

Please change the first sentence from: "Palestine (Arabic: فلسطين, romanized: Filasṭīn), officially the State of Palestine (دولة فلسطين, Dawlat Filasṭīn), is a country in the southern Levant region of West Asia."

"To:

"Palestine (Arabic: فلسطين, romanized: Filasṭīn), officially the State of Palestine (دولة فلسطين, Dawlat Filasṭīn), is a territory in the southern Levant region of West Asia."

This change aims to reflect a more neutral stance by describing Palestine as a territory, acknowledging the disputed nature of its status.

Sources:

United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/67/19U.S.

Department of State - Country Profiles

European Union - External Action Service, "EU Relations with Palestine" ヘンドリックス (talk) 20:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Not done. Has been discussed more than once. The clue is in the name "State of...Selfstudier (talk) 21:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect Historical Representation of Palestine

Mistake: “The region of Palestine has played an important part in world history… Judaism traces its origins back to historic Palestine during biblical times.”

Correction: “The region historically known today as Palestine has played an important part in world history. In ancient times, this area was known by various names depending on the ruling empire, including Canaan, Israel, Judah, and later Judea. The term ‘Palestine’ itself was more broadly applied by the Greeks and Romans.” 2603:9008:1607:E4FD:6848:D6C:3FC0:6598 (talk) 13:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

We do to need to list every name in this sentence. I also note you left out Philistine and Pelesheth. Slatersteven (talk) 13:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Misleading sentence with inappropriate, non-sequitur citation

In Early History, the sentence “The Israelites, Abraham's descendants, settled in Canaan, which later became known as Palestine.” is misleading because there are thousands of years between Canaan and the use of the term “Palestine”.

A more correct option for a rewrite would be The Israelites, Abraham's descendants, settled in Canaan, which eventually became known as Palestine and Israel.

The citation has nothing to do with any of this and must be removed. Citation 28 links to an illustrated children’s version of the Mormon re-telling of the Hebrew Bible. This is an inappropriate link because the Mormon religion is never mentioned in the article, and because the term “Palestine” never appears in the linked page. Instead, the linked source claims that the land of Canaan came to be known as the land of Israel or the land of Judah. 2601:80:8600:EFA0:897D:F00F:62A0:7682 (talk) 17:32, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Removed unreliable source and replaced with cn tag. Selfstudier (talk) 17:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect use of inline citation throughout

Many paragraphs in this article share the same error, I can go through paragraph by paragraph and reference by reference if needed, but in general: if a paragraph is 5 sentences long and only cites one source, there is no reason to have 5 identical inline citations in that paragraph. Just one at the end of the paragraph is sufficient and is the way to adhere to Wikipedia’s guidelines on clutter. 174.247.80.205 (talk) 20:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Specifics, please. Selfstudier (talk) 21:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Early History, 3rd paragraph is 7 sentences long, and has 7 consecutive links to citation 39. Also, 39 appears to be a dead link.

I suggest removing all instances of [39] and adding one instance of citation needed to the end of the paragraph 2601:80:8600:EFA0:C5B7:ECFB:7F54:4012 (talk) 18:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

It's currently 38 and the link is archived here. Selfstudier (talk) 08:48, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Early History 4th paragraph has 8 consecutive references to citation 40. There should only be one citation at the end of the paragraph in this case.

Additionally, reference 40 is an opinion piece. There are no sources in it besides Quranic quotes and at the end the publisher notes “Author is an engineering student. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author’s and do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of Kashmir Life.”

This passage is a direct quote from the cited editorial: “So many chapters and verses have been revealed in the Quran to enlighten the people about the inhumanity of Israel and its people. The Jews, the people of Israel are cursed for killing their Prophets and disobeying Allah’s commands.

I think we can find a source with better credibility than this and I suggest deleting all instances of [40] and adding cn tag to the end of the paragraph. 2601:80:8600:EFA0:C5B7:ECFB:7F54:4012 (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Currently 39, I removed all but one and tagged it for better source. Selfstudier (talk) 09:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Roman Empire paragraphs 2 and 3 exclusively cite reference [44], 6 times in a row. I suggest de-cluttering these redundant citations.

Additionally, the second paragraph misquotes its source by stating, “After the Jewish revolts, the Romans abolished the client kingdom and transformed Judea into a Roman province called Judea.” This is clearly false on its face. Obviously the Romans did not “transform Judea into Judea”.

Source 44 actually states, “The Emperor Hadrian was so enraged by Jewish resistance that he re-named the province Syria Palaestina (after the two traditional enemies of the Jews, the Syrians and the Philistines) and banished all Jews from the region, building his city Aelia Capitolina on the ruins of Jerusalem.”

I suggest re-writing paragraph 2 to more accurately reflect the content of the source. Edits in brackets:

After the Jewish revolts, the Romans abolished the client kingdom and [changed the name of the province from Judea to Syria Palaestina.] The Roman administration imposed direct rule, leading to the [banishment] of [all] Jewish communities [in the region.] The destruction of the Second Temple… 2601:80:8600:EFA0:C5B7:ECFB:7F54:4012 (talk) 19:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Middle Age paragraph 3, 6 consecutive links to reference 50. 1 link at the end of the paragraph will suffice.

Middle Age paragraph 4, 8 consecutive links to reference 51. 2601:80:8600:EFA0:C5B7:ECFB:7F54:4012 (talk) 19:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Ottoman Palestine paragraph 2, 4 consecutive links to [52].

Additionally, [50] and [52] are identical urls. All instances of 52 should be deleted and replaced with 50 2601:80:8600:EFA0:C5B7:ECFB:7F54:4012 (talk) 19:33, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Multiple citation numbers for the same source

References 45 and 46 are identical 2601:80:8600:EFA0:C5B7:ECFB:7F54:4012 (talk) 19:39, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

58 and 59 are identical 2601:80:8600:EFA0:C5B7:ECFB:7F54:4012 (talk) 19:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

They seem different? Selfstudier (talk) 08:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit request

This page has fringe text. In particular the early history section appears to draw pn myth uncritically.

Text to change: The Exodus from Egypt, led by Moses, is a pivotal event in Jewish history, symbolizing deliverance from slavery and the return to their ancestral homeland.

New text: (empty)

The exodus didn't happen, and thus shouldn't be presented as history.

12.75.41.36 (talk) 03:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Maybe, but they claim it did, thus is a pivotal moment in their history. Slatersteven (talk) 08:58, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Either way, I guess it is a misalignment issue because the primary article, The Exodus, calls it a founding myth, and this article calls it history, both using wiki-voice. This is probably not ideal. Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

So we re-word it, such as "The Exodus from Egypt, led by Moses, is a pivotal event in Jewish mythology, symbolizing deliverance from slavery and the return to their ancestral homeland.". Slatersteven (talk) 09:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Doug Weller's solution works for me. Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Seconded. Thanks Doug for the Gordian (k)not.Nishidani (talk) 09:35, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks folks. That editor has real CIR issues.[1]. No clue about reliable sources. Doug Weller talk 10:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

+1 – the pre-modern content was never relevant in the first place. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Though the lead needs fixing/aligning too now. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)