Revision as of 21:43, 21 May 2024 editPppery (talk | contribs)Interface administrators, Administrators101,027 edits →Edit request - Amarna reference: Done← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 06:27, 11 January 2025 edit undoIskandar323 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers47,573 edits →Edit request - first phrase: ReplyTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit Reply | ||
(42 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown) | |||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Edit request - first phrase == | |||
== Christian community == | |||
Hi, many people wonder if Bethlehem is in Israel or Palestine, that’s why I liked the previous opening sentence - “Bethlehem is a city in the ], in the ]…”, but I see that it has recently been changed to “…is a city in the Israeli-occupied West Bank”, which of course is factually correct, but in my opinion saying first thing that it is Israeli-occupied makes it seem like it is Israeli, more so than Palestinian. What about removing the “Israeli” from the first line, only to make it clear it is Palestinian, and leaving the part about Israeli occupation where it is already mentioned, further down? Thank you. ] (]) 18:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
Do we have any sources with surveys that report on explicit reasons of the community's dwindling numbers? ] (]) 15:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
: |
:I suggest we change the introduction to "Bethlehem is a Palestinian city in the Israeli-occupied West Bank". This adds clarity to the legal status of the city. ] (]) 21:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
:@] | |||
:Hello, I see that you reverted the first sentence to include "Israeli-occupied" before West Bank. | |||
:- | |||
:While this is an accurate description, some of us would prefer it be rephrased, so that the UN legal status of the city (Palestinian) is more obvious to readers who wish to skim the article. | |||
:- | |||
:I'd like your input on this discussion so we can make an informal consensus about the lead. ] (]) 23:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::I'm not sure. I think the present phrasing is pretty clear and doesn't really create the problem you describe. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 05:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Re: this article : | |||
:::This phrasing is surprising. Look at the lede for most any other page describing some city, say, ] or ]. I expect the first link naming the country/region/etc. a city is in to link to the page on that country/region/etc. Using a phrasing like "...is a city in ], in the ]" is obviously factually correct and links directly to the appropriate containing region with two useful levels of granularity. Note, for example, that the third paragraph on Donetsk also describes how that region is currently under military occupation in quite some detail: it is and has been relevant enough to deserve that kind of placement. Maybe the opening or the lede of this article deserves more detail about the impacts of this occupation, but that sounds more like an enhancement someone could make than a flaw in what stood. | |||
:::I think the version in my edit was better on those fronts, so I'm currently feeling like we should just let that version rock, and let anyone so interested improve it further. If you've got any objections, I'd like to see something more constructive than "I think it was pretty clear before" or "I don't feel like this an improvement." ''Why?'' ] (]) 19:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::Remsense hasn't responded, and it's been a week. I think it would be okay for you to be bold and restore your edit. ] (]) 05:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::::I mean, I still think the present phrasing is perfectly clear, but if others are convinced there's a problem I don't see the need to stonewall. I don't feel there's much to say about it—it's not a big change—I just don't see the problems described above when I read the present wording, sorry. Every article's different, and while the ] argument here isn't entirely hollow I don't think it's changing my mind. I did try. That is to say, the proposed change is fine; I meant what I said before in that I don't think it's an improvement, but go for it. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 05:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::::::A reference to the occupation in the first sentence is not needed for the reasons mentioned in . In addition, "Israeli-occupied West Bank" is a redundant and tautologous phrase, since all of the West Bank is occupied (that's its deal), and there is no "un-occupied West Bank" to contrast this with. It's like talking about the "wet ocean". ] (]) 06:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== Etymology == | |||
== Persecution of Christians by Muslims and Palestinian authority officals == | |||
'לחם' in any context does not mean food. | |||
Opening discussion regarding whether and where this should be included in lead. ] (]) 14:06, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
'בית לחם' can only mean 'house of bread'. | |||
I wanted to edit it, but since it is closed I can not, so here I am. ] (]) 16:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Edit request - failed source verification == | |||
:Current paragraph: | |||
:While it was historically a city of ], Bethlehem now has a majority of ]; it is still home to a significant community of ], however it has dwindled significantly, mostly due to difficulties resulting from living under the Israeli occupation. Presently, Bethlehem has become encircled by dozens of ], which significantly hinder the ability of ] in the city to openly access their land and livelihoods, which has contributed to the exodus of Palestinians | |||
:Is rather heavily NPOV, doesn't reflect persecution and discrimination against Christians by the Palestinian Authority and Muslims. ] (]) 14:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
::Also doesn't reflect following explaining Muslim majority, which happened also due to when the Palestinian Authority taking control in 1995, it reportedly expanded the boundaries of Bethlehem, allegedly to ensure a Muslim majority. This enlargement resulted in the inclusion of more than 30,000 Muslims from nearby refugee camps into the city. Yasser Arafat, at that time the head of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) also unilaterally replaced the predominantly Christian city council with a leadership that was predominantly Muslim. ] (]) 14:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::Expanding the boundaries of a city is not persecution. ''']''' <sub>]</sub> 01:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
::Also doesn't reflect hardships faced by Christians from PA officals in the judicary system, negative behaviour, attacks on churches and christians etc... ] (]) 14:19, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::The sources show that the Christians of Bethlehem blame the Israeli occupation for their wanting to leave the city, you put in a highly distorted view of the causes of their emigration. See for example: {{cite book | last=Allen | first=John L. |authorlink=John L. Allen Jr. | title=The Global War on Christians: Dispatches from the Front Lines of Anti-Christian Persecution | publisher=Crown Publishing Group | year=2016 | isbn=978-0-7704-3737-4 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UbjZCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA125 |pages=125-126 | access-date=2023-12-19| quote=Yet most Arab Christians living in Israel do not describe their situation in glowing terms. Samer Makhlouf, a Catholic and executive director of One Voice, a grassroots movement in Palestine that brings together young Palestinians and Israelis to promote peace, says that of the four problems facing Christians in the Holy Land, the first three are “occupation, occupation, occupation.” Makhlouf described Israeli military and security policy as “the father of all the problems in the region.” That perception seems widespread. A 2006 poll by Zogby International found that in the city of Bethlehem, 78 percent of Christians said that Christians were leaving the city because of Israeli occupation, while only 3.2 percent attributed the Christian exodus to the rise of Islamic movements.}} what you put in the article was, again, a highly distorted portrayal of why the Christians of Bethlehem are leaving. When the overwhelming majority is leaving because of the Israeli occupation and you claim it is because of Muslim oppression you are distorting the record. ''']''' - 14:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
::::Please see following sources: <ref>{{Cite web |last=Kamin |first=Debra |title=Are Bethlehem's Christians losing grip on their city? |url=http://www.timesofisrael.com/are-bethlehems-christians-losing-grip-on-their-city/ |access-date=2022-06-10 |website=www.timesofisrael.com |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last1=Klein |first1=Aaron |last2=Daily |first2=World Net |date=2005-12-27 |title='Muslims persecuting Bethlehem's Christians' |language=en |work=Ynetnews |url=https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3190798,00.html |access-date=2022-06-10}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=admin |date=2008-09-15 |title=Muslims Continue Pushing Christians Out of Bethlehem |url=https://www.persecution.org/2008/09/15/muslims-continue-pushing-christians-out-of-bethlehem/ |access-date=2023-12-07 |website=International Christian Concern |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name=":4">{{Cite web |title=Palestinian Crimes against Christian Arabs and Their Manipulation against Israel |url=https://jcpa.org/article/palestinian-crimes-against-christian-arabs-and-their-manipulation-against-israel/ |access-date=2023-12-07 |website=Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs |language=en-US}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite news |last1=Klein |first1=Aaron |last2=Daily |first2=World Net |date=2005-12-27 |title='Muslims persecuting Bethlehem's Christians' |language=en |work=Ynetnews |url=https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3190798,00.html |access-date=2023-12-07}}</ref><ref name=":5">{{Cite web |last=CNEWA |date=2002-01-23 |title=Christian Emigration Report: Palestine |url=https://cnewa.org/christian-emigration-report-palestine/ |access-date=2023-12-07 |website=CNEWA |language=en-US |quote=Selected accounts of Christians expressing feelings of intimidation/persecution due to rise in Muslim extremism: Muslims refusing to hire Christian workers or to sell property to Christians Christian women describe increasing harassment from Muslim men.}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite news |last=Meotti |first=Giulio |date=2012-04-28 |title=Bethlehem's last Christians? |language=en |work=Ynetnews |url=https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4221651,00.html |access-date=2023-12-07}}</ref> | |||
::::Clearly, Christians in Bethlehem suffer from both factors. It would be NPOV not to mention it. If the writing is problematic we can have the following: "''Christians in Bethlehem suffer from persecution from Muslims and PA officials. Their share of the city has fallen since the Palestinian Authority enlarged the city to encompass surrounding Muslim villages. They have emigrated, citing mainly the Israeli occupation''." ] (]) 10:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::::Any further responses? ] (]) 08:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
::::::NPOV not to include it in the ]? ] (]) 16:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
::You haven't said what is NPOV about that paragraph. ] (]) 16:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
The article includes the line, "Christian families that have lived in Bethlehem for hundreds of years are being forced to leave as land in Bethlehem is seized, and homes bulldozed, for construction of thousands of new Israeli homes." The citation, source , does not corroborate this. The closest the article (which is not directly hyperlinked for some reason?) comes is in the paragraph: "Down in Beit Sahour, which is mostly Christian, residents of one housing development have been living under the threat of demolition for more than a decade since an Israeli court ruled its building illegal. The order was frozen but never lifted, leaving families in limbo, wondering if or when the bulldozers will arrive and where they will go if they do. “This is the only place left for us,” says William Sahouri, whose family has lived in the area for more than 300 years. “There are no lands to expand.”" | |||
{{reflist-talk}} | |||
As you can see, this article does not allege that even a single Christian family was actually forced anywhere. The "lived in Bethlehem for hundreds of years" is in reference to a single family, that had lived "in the area", whose presence as far as the article is concerned is still in Bethlehem, and they are not even explicitly identified as Christian. The claim that Christian families are being forced out is not substantiated by the article, for reasons of constructing new Israeli homes or for any other reason. | |||
== Hamas rally image in Body == | |||
I request that the article be edited to reflect what the source actually says. | |||
Opening discussion regarding whether and where this should be included in body. ] (]) 14:12, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
Here is the article: https://www.thetimes.com/article/settlements-choke-peace-in-the-little-town-of-bethlehem-mkczz7vgvvz ] (]) 05:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
This image: :] rally in Bethlehem]] ] (]) 14:14, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
:I think that is it almost universally agreed upon that Palestinian Christians have had their homes seized and bulldozed in order for Israel to create and expand settlements. Regardless of somebody's political opinion in this area, removing information about the pressure placed on Palestinian Christians by the Israeli occupation would result in a presentation of the conflict that is not based in reality. If your issue is the source provided, there are several sources you can find that describe the theft of Palestinian Christian land and places of living in order to create or expand Israeli settlements. ] (]) 05:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:The image reflects political activity in the city of Bethlehem and therefore I do not see why it is not due to be included. If NPOV is an issue one can add an image of Fatah rally no? ] (]) 14:28, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
::Add those sources you found, then. Assuming OP here is correct (I haven't read deeply) , see ]. ] (]) 19:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
::No it doesn’t not reflect political activity in Bethlehem, Hamas is not the local government in Bethlehem and it is unrepresentative to feature that image. ''']''' - 14:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::Why don't we have both a picture of fatah and Hamas? ] (]) 10:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
::::Do we have Likud rally pictures on the Tel Aviv or Jerusalem articles? ] (]) 09:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::::I don't know, you can check. We're talking about Bethlehem here though. ] (]) 12:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | : |
||
== Edit request - |
== Edit request - "effected" == | ||
Please can someone ''effect'' this change in the lead: | |||
I would like to ask for the '''help of an authorized editor''' to change the references to the Amarna correspondence as they are demonstrably based on wishful thinking. This is not crack-pottery or original research, but properly sourced below and also evident to anybody who can read some cuneiform. | |||
Aspects of life in and around Bethlehem are '''effected''' by the Israeli occupation of the West Bank. → Aspects of life in and around Bethlehem are '''affected''' by the Israeli occupation of the West Bank | |||
Here's how the Britannica puts it: '''"An ancient settlement, it is possibly mentioned in the Amarna Letters (14th-century-bce diplomatic documents found at Tell el-Amarna, Egypt), but the reading there is uncertain."''' - we could also just copy this statement. | |||
Per widely accepted usage, see ] and ]. ] (]) 02:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
The basis of the often repeated statement that Bethlehem is mentioned in the Amarna correspondence goes back to W. F. Albright. The original tablet, EA 290 (Amarna letter 290), does, however, not say bit-Lahmi, but bit-nin-urta (or nin-ib, in an alternative reading). Albright went through some hair-raising acrobatics to apply a different reading to get the desired result. | |||
:{{fixed}} by undoing the recent edit that happened to introduce the error, and I found not to be an improvement regardless. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 02:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Here is how Nicolas Blincoe (Bethlehem, biography of a town) describes the genesis of this interpretation (end of chapter 1, I do not see page numbers): | |||
== section 'Economy' : dead calm since 7 October 2023 == | |||
''"Albright was quick to pick up on Schroeder's claim to have found the first mention of Bethlehem. But he offered a different and far simpler translation. He argued that the cuneiform symbol Beit-Ninurta could be read Beit-Lahmu because "Lahmu" was an alternative for Ninurta among the Sumerians. No one has ever suggested this, and as Lahmu is only ever mentioned in conjunction with his twin sister, Lahamu, the connection is highly dubious. In truth, Albright seems to have misunderstood Schroeder's reading, which had only been published in German. Albright recanted in 1968, when he identified Beit-Ninurta with Beit Horon, yet his fanciful interpretation of the Abdi-Heba letter is still cited in guidebooks and archaeological studies to date Bethlehem."'' | |||
on 7 October 2023, Hamas and other terror groups launched the ]. Since then, there is almost no tourism in Israel. Bethlehem haslost two peak seasons: Christmas 2023 and 2024. poverty and unemployment have risen. | |||
BTB, Misplaced Pages's own article on the letter has bit-Ninurta, as it should: https://en.wikipedia.org/Amarna_letter_EA_290, line 15 | |||
https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/asien/weihnachten-bethlehem-krieg-nahost-102.html (2023) | |||
How about this as a compromise then: ''"Bethlehem has been suggested as a reading for the place-name bīt-ninurta in one of the Amarna letters (EA 290), but this reading is very uncertain and has been rejected by other scholars."'' | |||
https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/korrespondenten/bethlehem-im-westjordanland-weihnachten-im-krieg-100.html (2024) ] (]) 09:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Likewise in the section under Canaanite, the name Bit-Lachmi should be replaced by the original Bit-ninurta with a reference that this name has been interpreted by at least two scholars as Bethlehem, but that said reading is uncertain and has met with significant objections. | |||
:An English-language source: . ] 15:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Hope an editor sees this, makes it through my wall of text and is willing to work on it. Please contact me on my contact page if I can help. Thanks! ] (]) 23:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
== section 'Modern era': Biased sources and inaccurate information == | |||
{{EPER|answered=yes}} | |||
:please change "The earliest-known mention of Bethlehem is in the Amarna correspondence of ancient Egypt, dated to 1350–1330 BCE, when the town was inhabited by the Canaanites." to "A possible first mention of Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna correspondence of ancient Egypt, dated to 1350–1330 BCE, although that reading is uncertain". and "The earliest mention of Bethlehem as a place appears in the Amarna correspondence (c. 1400 BCE), in which it is referred to as Bit-Laḫmi, a name for which the origins remain unknown." (under Etymology) to "Amarna letter EA290 (wiki-link to https://en.wikipedia.org/Amarna_letter_EA_290) makes reference to a town bīt-ninurta which has been read as Bit-Lachmi by scholar W. F. Albright following a proposal by Otto Schroeder in 1815 and making it a potential first historical reference to Bethlehem. This reading is, however, uncertain and has met with objections " | |||
:Direct link to Blincoe: https://books.google.com/books?id=wJOYDgAAQBAJ&pg=PT51&lpg=PT51&dq=Albright+was+quick+to+pick+up+on+Schroeder%27s+claim+to+have+found+the+first+mention+of+Bethlehem.+But+he+offered+a+different+and+far+simpler+translation.+He+argued+that+the+cuneiform&source=bl&ots=oQbBCZTWGN&sig=ACfU3U3UIje8VOqbXc1m5qLyjTvsbhVLlg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwioo_fE7YKFAxXZg4kEHc8yDt4Q6AF6BAgrEAM#v=onepage&q=Albright%20was%20quick%20to%20pick%20up%20on%20Schroeder's%20claim%20to%20have%20found%20the%20first%20mention%20of%20Bethlehem.%20But%20he%20offered%20a%20different%20and%20far%20simpler%20translation.%20He%20argued%20that%20the%20cuneiform&f=false | |||
:I have no interest in denigrating the history of any particular religion or ethnicity - simply came to this from the cuneiform side when a student mentioned the Amarna reference to me and I looked at the tablet in question to quickly realize that this is a common story which is uncritically repeated a hundred years after even though the evidence really does not bear it out, in my view - I am horrified that this is not at least qualified somewhat in the Misplaced Pages article the way e.g. the Britannica does it. Having raised this issue twice in the comments now (see Archive 2), I thought I'd try an EPER. Hope somebody can take a look and happy to collaborate if I can. ] (]) 12:43, 20 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
:: {{done}} ] ] 21:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
Hello, best wishes to you all. Under the 'Modern era' section of the article, there are several pieces of information included that are not factually based or are only supported by extremely biased sources. First, it is claimed that "When the Palestinian Authority assumed control in 1995, it publicly extended the boundaries of Bethlehem, allegedly to secure a Muslim majority". However, the source provided for this claim is a pro-Israel website that argues against the positions of Jerusalem's Latin Patriarch, the Archbishop of Westminster, and other supporters of Palestinian Christians. Often times, the source quotes its own author as sources for its claims, and it does not provide any legitimate evidence for its claim. The author clearly has a pro-Israel viewpoint, and is writing in order to support this viewpoint. | |||
== A história está sendo reescrita por muçulmanos, progressistas e pró-palestinos == | |||
Second, it is claimed that "According to International Christian Concern, there are reports of Christians suffering sexual harassments, kidnappings, forced marriages, extortion and murder of converts by Muslims and PA officials". However, both sources provided for this claim are blatantly biased and do not present the facts in a balanced manner. For instance, the first source from International Christian Concern portrays the secular Palestinian Authority as "The Muslim Fatah-controlled authority in Judea and Samaria". The usage of the term "Judea and Samaria" in order to describe the internationally-recognized West Bank represents a clear pro-Israel bias in the supposed source. Furthermore, describing the Palestinian Authority as "Muslim Fatah-controlled" clearly ignores the fact that Fatah is a secular Palestinian political party that includes many Christians, including Anton Salman, the former Mayor of Bethlehem. As a result, the claim being made is biased and does not portray the conflict in a fair, neutral manner. | |||
Milhares de termos relacionados a Israel e ao povo judeu são reescritos para se adequarem a narrativas falsas. Isso prejudica a credibilidade do site. ] (]) 15:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
Therefore, I am requesting for both of these claims to be removed from the page. I appreciate your help with this matter, as well as your interest in keeping the page neutral. ] (]) 05:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Made-up "sources" == | |||
⚫ | : The claim about extending the boundaries was sourced to WorldNetDaily, which has been deprecated since 2018. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 05:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
1st sentence had as "sources" two totally unrelated texts, dealing with preps for Millennium Year (pre-2000 real building work & "Potemkin villages") and use of Hebrew and Arabic in "Small Triangle" vs. West Bank. Not | |||
*B. in Arabic, Hebrew | |||
*distance from Jerusalem (how to be measured? Not an empty question, the two touch each other.) | |||
*current population | |||
*admin. status of B. city. | |||
Who's kidding whom? | |||
Here they are if you doubt it. | |||
Amara, 1999, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210529123058/https://books.google.com/books?id=LG5seycNTAcC&pg=PA18 |date=May 29, 2021 }}. | |||
Brynen, 2000, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210529123059/https://books.google.com/books?id=AQhxlSjmDcQC&pg=PA202 |date=May 29, 2021 }} ] (]) 21:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 06:27, 11 January 2025
Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bethlehem article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
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 Misplaced Pages, 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.
|
Bethlehem has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 21, 2016, December 21, 2019, and December 21, 2020. |
This level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Edit request - first phrase
Hi, many people wonder if Bethlehem is in Israel or Palestine, that’s why I liked the previous opening sentence - “Bethlehem is a city in the West Bank, in the State of Palestine…”, but I see that it has recently been changed to “…is a city in the Israeli-occupied West Bank”, which of course is factually correct, but in my opinion saying first thing that it is Israeli-occupied makes it seem like it is Israeli, more so than Palestinian. What about removing the “Israeli” from the first line, only to make it clear it is Palestinian, and leaving the part about Israeli occupation where it is already mentioned, further down? Thank you. 2A00:A041:3B9A:AC00:11E2:7CD6:40A5:1A3C (talk) 18:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- I suggest we change the introduction to "Bethlehem is a Palestinian city in the Israeli-occupied West Bank". This adds clarity to the legal status of the city. Zoozoor (talk) 21:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Remsense
- Hello, I see that you reverted the first sentence to include "Israeli-occupied" before West Bank.
- -
- While this is an accurate description, some of us would prefer it be rephrased, so that the UN legal status of the city (Palestinian) is more obvious to readers who wish to skim the article.
- -
- I'd like your input on this discussion so we can make an informal consensus about the lead. Zoozoor (talk) 23:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. I think the present phrasing is pretty clear and doesn't really create the problem you describe. Remsense ‥ 论 05:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Re: this article post-revert:
- This phrasing is surprising. Look at the lede for most any other page describing some city, say, Barcelona or Donetsk Oblast. I expect the first link naming the country/region/etc. a city is in to link to the page on that country/region/etc. Using a phrasing like "...is a city in Palestine, in the West Bank" is obviously factually correct and links directly to the appropriate containing region with two useful levels of granularity. Note, for example, that the third paragraph on Donetsk also describes how that region is currently under military occupation in quite some detail: it is and has been relevant enough to deserve that kind of placement. Maybe the opening or the lede of this article deserves more detail about the impacts of this occupation, but that sounds more like an enhancement someone could make than a flaw in what stood.
- I think the version in my edit was better on those fronts, so I'm currently feeling like we should just let that version rock, and let anyone so interested improve it further. If you've got any objections, I'd like to see something more constructive than "I think it was pretty clear before" or "I don't feel like this an improvement." Why? nfd9001 (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Remsense hasn't responded, and it's been a week. I think it would be okay for you to be bold and restore your edit. Zoozoor (talk) 05:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I mean, I still think the present phrasing is perfectly clear, but if others are convinced there's a problem I don't see the need to stonewall. I don't feel there's much to say about it—it's not a big change—I just don't see the problems described above when I read the present wording, sorry. Every article's different, and while the WP:OTHERCONTENT argument here isn't entirely hollow I don't think it's changing my mind. I did try. That is to say, the proposed change is fine; I meant what I said before in that I don't think it's an improvement, but go for it. Remsense ‥ 论 05:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- A reference to the occupation in the first sentence is not needed for the reasons mentioned in this edit summary. In addition, "Israeli-occupied West Bank" is a redundant and tautologous phrase, since all of the West Bank is occupied (that's its deal), and there is no "un-occupied West Bank" to contrast this with. It's like talking about the "wet ocean". Iskandar323 (talk) 06:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I mean, I still think the present phrasing is perfectly clear, but if others are convinced there's a problem I don't see the need to stonewall. I don't feel there's much to say about it—it's not a big change—I just don't see the problems described above when I read the present wording, sorry. Every article's different, and while the WP:OTHERCONTENT argument here isn't entirely hollow I don't think it's changing my mind. I did try. That is to say, the proposed change is fine; I meant what I said before in that I don't think it's an improvement, but go for it. Remsense ‥ 论 05:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- Remsense hasn't responded, and it's been a week. I think it would be okay for you to be bold and restore your edit. Zoozoor (talk) 05:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. I think the present phrasing is pretty clear and doesn't really create the problem you describe. Remsense ‥ 论 05:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Etymology
'לחם' in any context does not mean food.
'בית לחם' can only mean 'house of bread'.
I wanted to edit it, but since it is closed I can not, so here I am. Hwndqkjep (talk) 16:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Edit request - failed source verification
The article includes the line, "Christian families that have lived in Bethlehem for hundreds of years are being forced to leave as land in Bethlehem is seized, and homes bulldozed, for construction of thousands of new Israeli homes." The citation, source , does not corroborate this. The closest the article (which is not directly hyperlinked for some reason?) comes is in the paragraph: "Down in Beit Sahour, which is mostly Christian, residents of one housing development have been living under the threat of demolition for more than a decade since an Israeli court ruled its building illegal. The order was frozen but never lifted, leaving families in limbo, wondering if or when the bulldozers will arrive and where they will go if they do. “This is the only place left for us,” says William Sahouri, whose family has lived in the area for more than 300 years. “There are no lands to expand.”"
As you can see, this article does not allege that even a single Christian family was actually forced anywhere. The "lived in Bethlehem for hundreds of years" is in reference to a single family, that had lived "in the area", whose presence as far as the article is concerned is still in Bethlehem, and they are not even explicitly identified as Christian. The claim that Christian families are being forced out is not substantiated by the article, for reasons of constructing new Israeli homes or for any other reason.
I request that the article be edited to reflect what the source actually says.
Here is the article: https://www.thetimes.com/article/settlements-choke-peace-in-the-little-town-of-bethlehem-mkczz7vgvvz 2600:1700:67A8:230:43:4E0C:6A70:7096 (talk) 05:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think that is it almost universally agreed upon that Palestinian Christians have had their homes seized and bulldozed in order for Israel to create and expand settlements. Regardless of somebody's political opinion in this area, removing information about the pressure placed on Palestinian Christians by the Israeli occupation would result in a presentation of the conflict that is not based in reality. If your issue is the source provided, there are several sources you can find that describe the theft of Palestinian Christian land and places of living in order to create or expand Israeli settlements. SirCapybara (talk) 05:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- Add those sources you found, then. Assuming OP here is correct (I haven't read deeply) , see WP:BURDEN. nfd9001 (talk) 19:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Edit request - "effected"
Please can someone effect this change in the lead:
Aspects of life in and around Bethlehem are effected by the Israeli occupation of the West Bank. → Aspects of life in and around Bethlehem are affected by the Israeli occupation of the West Bank
Per widely accepted usage, see affect and effect. Mediocre.marsupial (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed by undoing the recent edit that happened to introduce the error, and I found not to be an improvement regardless. Remsense ‥ 论 02:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
section 'Economy' : dead calm since 7 October 2023
on 7 October 2023, Hamas and other terror groups launched the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel. Since then, there is almost no tourism in Israel. Bethlehem haslost two peak seasons: Christmas 2023 and 2024. poverty and unemployment have risen.
https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/asien/weihnachten-bethlehem-krieg-nahost-102.html (2023)
https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/korrespondenten/bethlehem-im-westjordanland-weihnachten-im-krieg-100.html (2024) 178.203.109.225 (talk) 09:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- An English-language source: Associated Press. Donald Albury 15:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
section 'Modern era': Biased sources and inaccurate information
Hello, best wishes to you all. Under the 'Modern era' section of the article, there are several pieces of information included that are not factually based or are only supported by extremely biased sources. First, it is claimed that "When the Palestinian Authority assumed control in 1995, it publicly extended the boundaries of Bethlehem, allegedly to secure a Muslim majority". However, the source provided for this claim is a pro-Israel website that argues against the positions of Jerusalem's Latin Patriarch, the Archbishop of Westminster, and other supporters of Palestinian Christians. Often times, the source quotes its own author as sources for its claims, and it does not provide any legitimate evidence for its claim. The author clearly has a pro-Israel viewpoint, and is writing in order to support this viewpoint.
Second, it is claimed that "According to International Christian Concern, there are reports of Christians suffering sexual harassments, kidnappings, forced marriages, extortion and murder of converts by Muslims and PA officials". However, both sources provided for this claim are blatantly biased and do not present the facts in a balanced manner. For instance, the first source from International Christian Concern portrays the secular Palestinian Authority as "The Muslim Fatah-controlled authority in Judea and Samaria". The usage of the term "Judea and Samaria" in order to describe the internationally-recognized West Bank represents a clear pro-Israel bias in the supposed source. Furthermore, describing the Palestinian Authority as "Muslim Fatah-controlled" clearly ignores the fact that Fatah is a secular Palestinian political party that includes many Christians, including Anton Salman, the former Mayor of Bethlehem. As a result, the claim being made is biased and does not portray the conflict in a fair, neutral manner.
Therefore, I am requesting for both of these claims to be removed from the page. I appreciate your help with this matter, as well as your interest in keeping the page neutral. SirCapybara (talk) 05:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- The claim about extending the boundaries was sourced to WorldNetDaily, which has been deprecated since 2018. Zero 05:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages good articles
- Geography and places good articles
- GA-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in Geography
- GA-Class vital articles in Geography
- GA-Class Arab world articles
- Mid-importance Arab world articles
- WikiProject Arab world articles
- GA-Class Holidays articles
- Mid-importance Holidays articles
- GA-Class Christmas articles
- High-importance Christmas articles
- Christmas task force articles
- WikiProject Holidays articles
- GA-Class Christianity articles
- Mid-importance Christianity articles
- GA-Class Christian History articles
- Unknown-importance Christian History articles
- Christian History articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- GA-Class WikiProject Cities articles
- All WikiProject Cities pages
- GA-Class Judaism articles
- Mid-importance Judaism articles
- GA-Class Jewish history-related articles
- Mid-importance Jewish history-related articles
- WikiProject Jewish history articles
- GA-Class Palestine-related articles
- Top-importance Palestine-related articles
- WikiProject Palestine articles
- GA-Class Israel-related articles
- Mid-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- GA-Class Greek articles
- High-importance Greek articles
- Byzantine world task force articles
- WikiProject Greece history articles
- All WikiProject Greece pages
- GA-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles
- High-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles
- All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages
- GA-Class military history articles
- GA-Class fortifications articles
- Fortifications task force articles
- GA-Class Middle Eastern military history articles
- Middle Eastern military history task force articles
- GA-Class Ottoman military history articles
- Ottoman military history task force articles
- GA-Class Roman and Byzantine military history articles
- Roman and Byzantine military history task force articles
- GA-Class Classical warfare articles
- Classical warfare task force articles
- GA-Class Medieval warfare articles
- Medieval warfare task force articles
- GA-Class early Muslim military history articles
- Early Muslim military history task force articles
- GA-Class Crusades articles
- Crusades task force articles
- GA-Class Early Modern warfare articles
- Early Modern warfare task force articles