Talk:Acre Sanjak

Comment
I know this page has been here for months, and I've always been a little perplexed by it - certainly I don't know as much about the crusades as I would like, but is "district of Acre" a crusader term, or something later? I'm not aware of the crusaders dividing things into "districts" like this. Adam Bishop 16:32, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Ahem?
"removed irrelevant, incorrect or POV info. i.e. info about the mandate in general, info that there were 27 palestinian villages in the district (there were more), and reference to depopulated villages)"

Irrelevant, how?

Incorrect how?

POV how?

The article simply follows the District of Acre as it changed hands through history. Make a better article instead of deleting the information. The District of Acre lasted beyond the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the article should reflect that.

--Rain 17:55, 8 December 2005 (UTC)


 * If you'd like to write a better section with NPOV in mind, then no one will delete it. -- Ynhockey 15:56, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I asked you to point out the POV, please do so. If you wish to restate the information so it is not POV, do so. But do not delete the information. --Rain 22:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I didn't delete your 'information' the first time so obviously someone else at least agrees with me. But for instance, In 1948, as a result of both the rejection of the 1947_UN_Partition_Plan by the Jewish settlers in Palestine is POV and factually incorrect, since the Arabs rejected the plan, not the Jews. Check your facts and stop POV-pushing please. I'll bring this article to the attention of other editors as well. -- Ynhockey 08:35, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * As you can also tell, I left the 'British' section, since it follows NPOV. -- Ynhockey 08:36, 10 December 2005 (UTC)


 * 1. You did delete the information the first time, look at the history again.
 * 2. If you look at 1947_UN_Partition_Plan you will see that both Jews and Arabs opposed the plan, though not all of them. I edited the article for those readers who are not smart enough to make the connection.
 * 3. I really could careless if you bring the article to so-called "editors", thanks for the empty threat.
 * 4. The page you linked to in the "See also" section mentions 27 villages in the District of Acre, perhaps you should count them again before saying there are more
 * --Rain 01:57, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Moving to left

I don't think you understood at all. If you think the above is incorrect, please prove it. Also keep in mind Civility
 * There were not 27 villages in the District of Acre before 1947, but 27 (actually 26, according to a very biased source, but let's say it's correct) were depopulated. Dozens of others were not.
 * The city of Acre was never destroyed or re-built.
 * The District of Acre wasn't destroyed, it was officially removed. If the US decided to merge North and South Carolina, would you say that they were destroyed?
 * The reason the British withdrew wasn't 'Zionist violence'. If Zionists could drive out the British with a show of force in 1947, we'd be the most powerful nation in the world right now by far.

-- Ynhockey 10:50, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You talk about civility??
 * You deleted information from the article without any useful comments on the discussion page, without correcting the information, without anything. You repetedly deleted information without specifying why. Keep it civil buddy... Oh, and I hardly consider someone from Israel an NPOV source...good luck with that...