Misplaced Pages

:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues/Archive. Legality of Israeli settlements: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration | Current Article Issues Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 07:47, 17 July 2019 view sourceOnceinawhile (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers49,730 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 12:01, 17 July 2019 view source Shrike (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers14,544 edits The convention is not in forceTag: 2017 wikitext editorNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{pp-move|small=yes}}{{pp-semi-indef}} {{pp-move|small=yes}}{{pp-semi-indef}}

{{shortcut|WP:Legality of Israeli settlements}}
⚫ This convention has been superseded by discussion , clarification .

{{cot|Previous consensus}}


== Settlement illegality text == == Settlement illegality text ==
Through a long process ], the following text has established consensus: Through a long process ], the following text has established consensus:
*'''The international community considers Israeli settlements in (the Golan Heights/the West Bank/East Jerusalem) illegal under international law, but the Israeli government disputes this.''' *The international community considers Israeli settlements in (the Golan Heights/the West Bank/East Jerusalem) illegal under international law, but the Israeli government disputes this.

==Guidance and further discussion==
* Guidance on use from the original discussion at ]:
⚫ **From LHvU: "there is agreement of the use of the wording in articles both of multi section length, and single section/stub standard"
⚫ **According to LHvU's clarification: "I found that there was consensus for the wording per proposal 2, and for it to be included in the opening paragraph(s) of multi section articles, where it may be expanded per WP:LEDE in the article body, and to be used without further expansion in stub or very short articles."
⚫ **According to LHvU at Arbitration enforcement: "Only in some articles, those which had a brief introduction and then a body of one or two sections, was there disagreement on ''how'' it was to be incorporated - but not ''if''.
⚫ **From T. Canens at Arbitration Enforcement: "As the objection has been made clear, I expect Nableezy <ref>added by Carwil, who drafted these notes</ref> to either conform their future edits to the consensus wording as determined by LHvU, or obtain consensus for their new version."


===Guidance===
⚫ * In 2012 further discussion took place , with clarification .
We also have the following guidance on its use.
⚫ *From LHvU: "there is agreement of the use of the wording in articles both of multi section length, and single section/stub standard"
⚫ *According to LHvU's clarification: "I found that there was consensus for the wording per proposal 2, and for it to be included in the opening paragraph(s) of multi section articles, where it may be expanded per WP:LEDE in the article body, and to be used without further expansion in stub or very short articles."
⚫ *According to LHvU at Arbitration enforcement: "Only in some articles, those which had a brief introduction and then a body of one or two sections, was there disagreement on ''how'' it was to be incorporated - but not ''if''.
⚫ *From T. Canens at Arbitration Enforcement: "As the objection has been made clear, I expect Nableezy <ref>added by Carwil, who drafted these notes</ref> to either conform their future edits to the consensus wording as determined by LHvU, or obtain consensus for their new version."


==Notes== ==Notes==
{{reflist}} {{reflist}}
{{cob}}

Revision as of 12:01, 17 July 2019

This convention has been superseded by discussion here, clarification here.

Previous consensus

Settlement illegality text

Through a long process on the talk page, the following text has established consensus:

  • The international community considers Israeli settlements in (the Golan Heights/the West Bank/East Jerusalem) illegal under international law, but the Israeli government disputes this.

Guidance

We also have the following guidance on its use.

  • From LHvU: "there is agreement of the use of the wording in articles both of multi section length, and single section/stub standard"
  • According to LHvU's clarification: "I found that there was consensus for the wording per proposal 2, and for it to be included in the opening paragraph(s) of multi section articles, where it may be expanded per WP:LEDE in the article body, and to be used without further expansion in stub or very short articles."
  • According to LHvU at Arbitration enforcement: "Only in some articles, those which had a brief introduction and then a body of one or two sections, was there disagreement on how it was to be incorporated - but not if.
  • From T. Canens at Arbitration Enforcement: "As the objection has been made clear, I expect Nableezy to either conform their future edits to the consensus wording as determined by LHvU, or obtain consensus for their new version."

Notes

  1. added by Carwil, who drafted these notes
Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues/Archive. Legality of Israeli settlements: Difference between revisions Add topic