Talk:Ein Hod
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think it is very disappointing that an editor spend his/her time removing links which are clearly within WP:RS, especially when the article is in great need for constructive work (now; it is e.g. partially contradictary; it says both that the original Inhabitants moved to a nearby wady, *and* that they ended up on the West Bank!). If people want to do something constructive on Wikipedia, the get hold of the Benvenisti book (or any other RS that writes about Ein Hods history), start *reading* and *add* that information. Instead of censoring out information. Thank you. Regards, Huldra 14:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC) PS. This is the first and only time I have heard that a website published by the Khalil Sakakini Cultural Centre is not an RS!
- Huldra, i've treated this article with a great deal of respect in regards to the problematic external links such as "palestineremembered.com" and despite the more than obvious POV ("Ethnically cleansed 21,440 days ago") I kept that external link for encyclopedic value on such instances as "One mosque now restaurant or bar" and "Operation Shoter (Police)".
- your insistance on reintroducing over and overalnakba.org,[2],same link again,and again more POV external linkage and removal of the Palestinian exodus link (i'm wondering what would be your reasonng for that move) don't give out a good impression for the way you edit this article.
- If you have new and interesting information relating to a book, you can cite them and the ref page for the information. you can also write down more interesting information in the article such as the f.a.s.t. competition. However, that has nothing to do with branching out and linking more non WP:RS POV websites (http://www.alnakba.org/ - fairly POV presentation on the 1948 Arab-Israeli War).
- Now, as i've allready mentioned in the reverts, one non WP:RS is enough for the added encyclopedic value and you should choose the one that is more informative/preffered/WP:RS in your eyes. as for the multiple stubs "fad" of yours, i belive the bottom of the article has a "This geography of Israel article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.", now you can add a palestinian stub to that Israeli stub, however, adding these "left-out" stubs with dates makes the article unreadable and shows lack of seriousness on your part. If you want to add info, you can do it, these stubs are interffering more than they will help an future editor add to the article and they compromise the current state of the article.
- Last note is on the issue of the F.A.S.T. contest. you should add some text about it rather than just externally link to it, the point behind Wikipedia is encyclopedic information not politically motivated linkage.
- Last last note, you should consider making changes to your last revert per this talk (i'm not saying we resolved everything) to avoid POV edit warring escalation. Jaakobou 16:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)