Talk:Zekharia

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

Merge[edit]

While this article is still under "merge"-vote: please don´t informally "merge" it by coping lots of stuff directly from other articles: very messy. Lets wait. Huldra (talk) 22:37, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena: It is really quite serious to accuse other people of vandalism, like you did here. I expect an apology. You yourself said, before you deleted it that "this would be superfluous". We don´t copy whole articles into one another. If you want the pre-1948 history clearer, then look at Jerusalem; you could make a paragraph here named, say, "Pre-1948 history". Then a {{main|Az-Zakariyya‎}}. And then a short text, saying something like: "Before 1948, a Palestinian Arab village was situated here".
In any case: it is really bad form to make such huge changes in any article where there is a "merge" vote going on. Huldra (talk) 20:27, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Huldra, as I have stated, many of these additions were made before you (or others) requested a merge, and besides, the substance of the sections - if you look closely - is slightly different in some cases from the substance of your article, Az-Zakariyya. In the very beginning, while working solely on your article and when you were insisting that I not add Israeli data to your article, I used the argument that having two articles on the same town with the exact same data would be superfluous. But after I saw that you were insistent in not having any mention of Israeli data in your own article, but only what pertains to the town's pre-1948 history, I realized then that it would NOT be superfluous to have in the other article (i.e. Zekharia) a more complete picture, with both its modern and ancient history. So, you can say that I changed my mind after seeing the full-picture. Therefore, I began working on, both, the modern and old history of the village (now a Moshav) in this current article, Zekharia, which additions in some cases slightly differ from your own. I do think that it is tantamount to vandalism if anyone deletes entirely pertinent and valid sections from articles on WP, with little or no feelings for the author who worked hard to bring down this data. Jews, by the way, are interested in seeing a town's early and modern history, which in your article Az-Zakariyya lacks the same town's modern history, and does not show current photographs of the town. Be well. Davidbena (talk) 19:03, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidbena: Not correct, on 2 points. Firstly, it was user Andrevan who requested a merge, he did that on 01:34, 16 June 2015. Your first addition of history was just after that, at 1:47, 16 June 2015. I am still waiting for that apology, and I expect you to undo your adding to the pre-1948 history, while the "merge"-vote is under way. And please read WP:VANDALISM to be sure of what you are accusing people of. Huldra (talk) 21:21, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Huldra, if what you say is correct, that it was Andrevan who first requested a merge, you can see that another editor, named Brewcrewer, made corrections in your article Az-Zakariyya, after he had placed the merge request, at 22:08, 16 June 2015. There is, therefore, nothing wrong nor amiss about adding or subtracting pertinent or irrelevant information to or from a WP article after a merger application is submitted. Moreover, User:Andrevan, himself, had suggested earlier that you agree to using the town's Hebrew spelling as well, as you can see in [1], which edit of his you later came along and deleted. As I said, if you wish to discuss only the pre-1948 history of your article Az-Zakariyya, this does not obligate us to do the same on the other article, namely this article, and to only make use of the town's modern-Israeli history. This current page, Zakharia, was written by User:Number 57. We are taught here to make edits and to maintain Good Faith, and that is exactly what we have done. Can we get an opinion from User:NeilN? I'm for keeping both articles, Az-Zakariyya and Zekharia, just as they stand now.Davidbena (talk) 09:38, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot possibly compare the very minor edit by Brewcrewer with your full-scale copying of one article -text into another. Again: Please self-revert, and wait the outcome of merge-discussion, Huldra (talk) 23:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The editing was ongoing, before and after the merge request, and the information in this article is very pertinent, while in some cases different from your own. There is no reason to delete the content. When a decision has been made one way or the other, it will be decided what shall stand and what shall go. Otherwise, I am against merging the two articles. After all, you have made it clear that you are insistent on keeping only the pre-1948 history in Az-Zakariyya. However, in this article, Zekharia, we would like to see its past and present history.Davidbena (talk) 01:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, editor User:DGG has voiced his opinion that normal practice is that there will be two articles, since there is no institutional continuity (just as there is a separate article for New Amsterdam, although the city is now called New York). See his comments at the end of the section, here. I know that there are many articles on WP covering the same city, although called by different names, just as there is here with respect to Az-Zakariyya (the Arab rendition) for the name of the Moshav Zekharia. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 13:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

History of Arab Village[edit]

User:Huldra, I noticed where you removed a large chunk of the "old history" of the former Arab village (see: edit), which is fine with me, but then either you or someone else turned around and added more information related strictly to the "old history" of the Arab village, which you allowed to stay, such as this:

In the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, Az-Zakariyya was the longest lasting Arab community in the southern Jerusalem Corridor.[1] The village was defended by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, the Arab Liberation Army and local militiamen, who were defeated by the Israel Defense Forces on 23 October 1948. In the course of Operation Yoav, the 54th Battalion of the Givati Brigade, found the village "almost empty", as most of the residents had fled to the nearby hills. Two residents were executed by Israeli soldiers.[1] In December 1948 the army evicted about 40 "old men and women" to the West Bank.[2] In March 1949 the Interior Ministry requested the eviction of "145 or so" remaining villagers: the official in charge of the Jerusalem District said there were many good houses in the village which could be used to accommodate several hundred new immigrants.[3] In January 1950 David Ben-Gurion, Moshe Sharett and Yosef Weitz decided to evict the villagers, "but without coercion."[4] On March 19, 1950 the transfer of the Arabs of Zakariya was approved and the order was carried out on June 9, 1950.[5]
The manner of expulsion of the villagers is not mentioned.[6] Some of the villagers moved to Ramla and Lod, while others ("perhaps the majority") settled in the Dheisheh Refugee Camp in the West Bank.[5]

I strongly object to adding this in the Israeli moshav, Zekharia, and suggest that you put the information in the former Arab village, Az-Zakariyya, where it rightfully belongs. If, both, old and new history belongs in these articles, then we should be at liberty to add the new history in the article Az-Zakariyya. I think that you will agree here that it's better to keep these histories separate, except only when briefly mentioning them. Davidbena (talk) 19:44, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I (mostly) agree; this (mostly) belongs in the Az-Zakariyya article. I think it could be cut down to something about the Az-Zakariyya villagers being expelled in three different times, without putting all the details into it. (But something should be mentioned: it is not as if the people of Zekharia magically found the area empty....) Huldra (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why not merge it all here? This site has a continuous history under slightly different names and it's not really helpful to readers to have two separate articles (as we don't for Isdud/Ashdod). This is something that could be done for a lot of other village articles where the modern Israeli village was built directly on top of the previous Arab one. Number 57 20:38, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for a start: AFAIK, Zekharia does not include all of the land which Az-Zakariyya had, Huldra (talk) 21:20, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Land doesn't really matter – municipal boundaries change all the time. If the core village is the same place, then I don't see the point in having two separate articles. Number 57 22:06, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See historical consensus at talk:Az-Zakariyya#Merge. Personally I am often supportive of combining Palestinian-village/Israeli town articles when the core locations are the same and there is some element of continuity. I don’t know enough about this situation to take a clear view yet. But if we did merge there would need to be a clear explanation in the lede that the entire population was expelled in 1950 and replaced with newcomers. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC) [reply]

References

  1. ^ a b Morris, 2004, p. 521
  2. ^ Fourth Brigade \Intelligence, "Daily Summary 18.12.48, 19. Dec. 1948, IDFA 6647\49\\48. Quoted in Morris, 2004, p. 521
  3. ^ A. Bergman, cited in Morris, 2004, p. 521
  4. ^ Entry for 14 Jan. 1950, Weitz, Diary, IV, p. 69. Cited in Morris, 2004, p. 521
  5. ^ a b Mordechai Bar-On, officer in charge of the eviction. Quoted in Morris, 2004, p. 521
  6. ^ Cite error: The named reference Khalidi, 1992, p. 226 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

POV Tag[edit]

I have added a POV tag following an editor's removal of text from the lede explaining that this moshav was built on the ruins of a depopulated Palestinian village. The exclusion of this information makes the page non-neutral. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely pathetic, but sadly unexpected. Why does that one aspect of the history merit mention in the lead. Number 57 23:04, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please retract your insulting language. It is not conducive to a calm and constructive editing environment.
The reason is that the topic of this article begins with the history of its foundation. Everything prior to 1948-50 is covered in more detail in the article about the predecessor town of Az-Zakariyya.
Approximately three-quarters of the main body’s content is about this predecessor town.
Without context the lede does not summarize the article and is materially less informative than it should be.
Onceinawhile (talk) 23:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I now realize that this same information has now been removed five times from the lede by the same editor: [2],[3],[4],[5],[6]. The revert tool was not used on any one of the five occasions, such that no notifications were given. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:48, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And you have attempted to add it three times
As per the comments in the section above, I agree the two articles can be merged, which would enable a longer lead to be written covering more aspects of the history. Only including one aspect of the history is undue weight and obvious point-scoring. Number 57 18:04, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Merge[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To merge given the same or similar location at different historic periods with overlapping content. Klbrain (talk) 15:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on the proposed merger of Az-Zakariyya into this article. The following excellent research paper provides useful context: Tsahor, Dan (2019). "Postwar Nakba: A Microhistory of the Depopulation of Zakariyya, 1950". Journal of Palestine Studies. 49 (1 (193)). Taylor & Francis, Ltd.: 47–63. ISSN 0377-919X. JSTOR 26873258. But unlike other, similar settlements that were built over the ruins of erased Palestinian localities, Moshav Zekharia seems to have maintained the original layout of the former Palestinian village. While most post-1948 Jewish settlements were constructed on land leveled by bulldozers, the residential buildings of Moshav Zekharia stand on uneven terrain. The settlement's roads follow paths that had earlier served the residents of Zakariyya, and some of the old limestone houses, and even the village mosque, remain standing in the center of the moshav, surrounded by hazard signs that warn passersby of a possible collapse... On 17 May 1950, the military transferred fifteen families, comprising 65 people, to the town of Ramla, while the rest of the community, some 130 people, were taken to a location near the Jordanian border. On the day of the eviction, soldiers went to every house in the village calling all residents to gather in the center of Zakariyya... To hasten the process, soldiers shot in the air several times... The "evacuation" of Zakariyya was a historic turning point, not only for the evacuees but also in terms of the material landscape they left behind. Two weeks after the village was emptied, the Jewish Agency brought in families of Jewish-Kurdish veterans from the Iraqi army. The new residents first settled in a tent encampment near the village school before moving into eighty new stone-built houses inside the boundaries of the former Palestinian village and among its remaining old buildings.

Note there was historical consensus against a merge at talk:Az-Zakariyya#Merge. I support a merge, as there is historical continuity in location and layout, despite the wholesale replacement of the population. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:32, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena, Huldra, Number 57, Gilabrand, Andrevan, IZAK, and Ar2332: Pinging previously involved editors. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:37, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in two minds about this, but I haven't read the Tsahor article. User:Onceinawhile; do you have it? Huldra (talk) 23:31, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per my comments above. Number 57 01:08, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I supported the merge, but, I apparently did that in 2015 and there wasn't a consensus for it then, and I can't remember why. However, it does seem to have been essentially the same location, a village with different phases of development not unlike Byzantium and Constantinople (which are separate articles, but, much longer ones). It's true that sometimes there are 2 different locations with the same or cognate/similar names, but I didn't see that this was the case here. It seems to be a WP:POVFORK (I don't think I could/would have quoted that policy shortcut in 2015, but I think it applies here). I mean, conventionally, in Israel/Palestine, I understand that Arab villages and Jewish ones are often very separate and different, for obvious reasons. So, I guess that was the reason why this still hasn't been merged since 2015, and maybe it shouldn't if that is our convention. Andre🚐 03:20, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I assume that a bunch of communities in Israel (and maybe some other countries?) have a similar history. Isn't there a norm in cases like this? Ar2332 (talk) 20:02, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of modern Israeli towns were built near but not on top of the depopulated Palestinian historical sites – well known examples include Beit Guvrin, Israel and Tzippori. For those that were built right on top of the ancient site, note what the quote at the top of this thread says: ”But unlike other, similar settlements that were built over the ruins of erased Palestinian localities…” An example of these completely leveled / bulldozed villages is Al-Mansura, Acre. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:35, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Same settlement and location, population just displaced and replaced. The article is already mainly the shared history any, so there's not even any obvious distinction between the two articles except for the different titles/slants. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  checkY Merger complete.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Zekharia&oldid=1200104043"