Talk:There was no such thing as Palestinians

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

More general idea[edit]

It would be good to have an article about denial of the existence of a Palestinian people in general. Synotia (moan) 09:36, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, where this stupid article could become two sentences which is as much as it deserves. Zerotalk 10:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It could rather be a section of a new article. Synotia (moan) 16:26, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Synotia, @Zero0000: Anyone who wants to culture such material can see here. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Zero There is no need for this sort of language.
You may not like it, but it's not for you alone to decide what "this stupid article" "deserves". You aren't engaging with other editors in good faith; you are merely throwing around insults. Your tone is so vague that I can't actually work out what you're objecting to. You should try to communicate with other editors in respectful language, and in enough detail as to allow them to make sense of your complaints.
Finally: a talk page is not a place for you to preach your political beliefs. It exists to facilitate the smooth management of an article. Show some respect for the community. Foxmilder (talk) 07:58, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Foxmilder: Whereas I commented on the quality of an article, as all editors are entitled to do, you commented on the motivation of a person, which is strictly forbidden by policy and likely to get you blocked if you continue. Zerotalk 10:35, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In retrospect, you are right with regard to my assumptions regarding your motivations. All of that was needlessly personal.
I was annoyed because I couldn’t make sense of what you were very strongly criticising, but that’s no excuse.
My apologies for not assuming good faith — and I appreciate this may sound somewhat ironic. Foxmilder (talk) 00:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
scolding anyone in that tone, especially a fellow adult, will not make you popular anywhere; no matter the underlying feelings. Synotia (moan) 19:24, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Later clarifications[edit]

This sentence at the end of the section

Meir's description of Mandatory Palestine and Palestinian citizenship extending to Transjordan was incorrect.

The sentence is speaking in Wikipedia’s voice that Meir’s description was “incorrect”, and that this is verifiable from the reference. But that is the strangest reference I’ve ever seen on any Wiki. This seems like original research. Regardless, something is wrong here. But I don’t have a clue as to where to start to fix it. Artificial Nagger (talk) 04:59, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This article is not sufficient enough to stand on its own merits. There is already an appropriate separate section in the Golda Meir main article: Golda Meir#"There was no such thing as Palestinians" and this article does not state much more.
Definitely also think there should be an article on general denialism on Palestinian identity. Just not sure if this meets muster to have an article all on its own. Mistamystery (talk) 16:00, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perspective[edit]

Would be interesting to put the very well knows quote of Zuheir_Mohsen, a Palestinian leader of the (PLO) between 1971 and 1979, who have said, in a Dutch Newspaper, nearly the same thing : https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Zuheir_Mohsen. Gallycyborg (talk) 10:26, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He did not say the same thing - he was talking about Pan-Arabism. More importantly, he was a not-particularly-senior member of the PLO. His quote is only well known because anti-Palestinian commentators have amplified it, despite it being an extreme fringe viewpoint.
What would be more relevant here is the parallel with the claims that there is "no such thing as a Jewish people" - i.e. the claim that Jews are a religious group not an ethnic group. See for example Racial conceptions of Jewish identity in Zionism.
Onceinawhile (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cattan quote[edit]

The quote from his book does demonstrate an extreme response, but I'm not sure of the value of including it here. It is part of a rant with clear POV, and reads into the quote elements that are not there (as he segues in the same sentence into a criticism of a book by another author). – SJ + 19:02, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Golda Meir?[edit]

While this is a quote that occasionally comes up in popular debates and gets interpreted as suits the argument (almost always as a straw man), this is not Wikiquote and it doesn't seem to have independent historical significance. It was a memorable point of controversy in Meir's political career, worth a mention in her bio; but this should probably merge into her article. – SJ + 19:02, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Significant post-dated critical commentary on a quote (widely cited out of context, mind you) does not warrant a page of this size.
There’s already a mention in her article and an expansion of that section should be sufficient.
Mistamystery (talk) 22:07, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree - the quote is highly significant in its own right. Notwithstanding the high quality of the sources used in the article, note that in the last two years this article has been read almost 150,000 times. That statistic alone confirms the clear notability of this topic. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accidental revert / Browser error[edit]

@IOHANNVSVERVS@Clammodest my apologies, there seems to have been a browser error on my end and I did not intend to make this revert on this page. Just clarifying as the justification was meant for another edit and not this one. IO thanks for handling. Mistamystery (talk) 01:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]