Talk:Hasan Salama

Operation ATLAS
Interesting. Nothing about his involvement in Operation Atlas in which he and other Nazi operatives were parachuted on the night of November 2nd 1944 near Jericho with the intention of poisoning the drinking waters of Tel-Aviv. The British army caught his associates, but he managed to escape. Avihu 20:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Got any sources? If you do, it'd be appreciated if you add this piece of information. ← A NAS '''  Talk? 10:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The only source I know of is the book about his son Ali Hassan Salameh who was involved with the Munich Massacre. The book is "Massacre in Munich: The Manhunt for the Killers Behind the 1972 Olympics Massacre" by Michael Bar Bar-Zohar and Eitan Haber. The affair is described in detail in the Hebrew Wikipedia article he:מבצע אטלס which include dates and names of those invloved. Avihu 18:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Look at Operation ATLAS. Avihu (talk) 04:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Is this good? It's from the WP Operation ATLAS article: The document from the British MI5 archives which covers the details of "Operation Atlas" פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 09:35, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * mostly a bad Piece of jewish anti-german Bullshit, especially these hoax to Poison the Water Supply of TelAviv /jaffa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.237.50.132 (talk) 00:25, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

WP:RS
(I apologize because it is a basic comment:) The summary page of the National Archives are not wp:rs. We don't know who made this summary. Only the contents are wp:rs and anyway they are primary sources and must be handled with care.

So, I will remove this : "The mission was intended to supply local Palestinian Arab resistance groups with resources and arms, and to direct sabotage activity primarily at Jewish (rather than British) targets."

Given "Jewish (rather than British" is just an usual pov-pushing.

Pluto2012 (talk) 10:33, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Poison
Ykantor wrote in an edit summary: "While I don't believe the poison story, it should not be deleted until the MI5 "poison" file content is known". First, Ykantor needs to read WP:ONUS; actually we have to keep dubious things out until they are verifiable, not the other way around. Second, the British files on the mission are known. I would dearly like to read them all myself, but meanwhile Mallman's book "Nazi Palestine" cites them directly (giving the archival identifier) without mentioning poison, and Schwanitz also refers to them (though without an archive reference) and states that the poison story is not supported there. Zerotalk 08:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree. Pluto2012 (talk) 08:03, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm taking a min-break from my WIkibreak (due to software-development obligations) to order the KV 2/400-402 documents from the British National Archives. We'll have to find a way to share them. Does anyone know if we can legitimately submit the (legally purchased) official copy into Wikmedia (which would be the best way for all of us to view them). I've tried to get these docs from Stanford (including the Hoover Institution) and UCLA Library systems, and neither could find interlibrary loans or other methods for examining the source material. I've also had a hard time finding secondary sources that have deals with these archived materials. Does anyone have citation to peer-review articles? There are plenty of news reports from the time (see the Operation ATLAS article 'external links'), so there's probably subsequently been a peer-review journal article by academic historian. Any suggestions? Ronreisman (talk) 01:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I started to buy that file from the UK national archives a few years ago but changed my mind when they told me the price. I don't remember exactly but it was something in the order of $400.  I hope you can get a better price out of them.  I don't know if they charge big money for everyone who asks, or just for the first (after which they have the scan on computer and can just burn it on a CD). Zerotalk 02:18, 14 February 2014 (UTC)


 * @Ronreisman: great personal investment but we must all have in mind that 1st sources can only be used to "reject" some 2nd sources if it is very clear that he made a mistake. Eg if a scholar states a first publication would have been in May and that we find a 1st source reporting the publication sooner ; or in the current case if the report undoubtedly state there were gallons on poison on not just pills.
 * If there is room for interpretation, 2nd sources will always be mare reliable than us...
 * So the investment may be huge for nearly nothing but I support the proposal.
 * Pluto2012 (talk) 06:40, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

2019 and the Poison Hoax is still in Wikipedia, Shalom to all u liars and helpers of liars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.237.50.132 (talk) 00:28, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

wordpress blog as a source
A blog cannot be considered as a reliable source. Even less when it is named Haskalah. Pluto2012 (talk) 04:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * So you object to an Arabic website because it has a name that resembles the Hebrew word for 'Enlightenment'? Do you think it may not be written by Palestinian Arab, and suspect that it may actually be the work of a Jew?  Perhaps part of the Jewish population of Gaza City?   How much is 'part of' zero, anyway?  Thankyou for the entertainment.  Nevertheless, you've left the article in a sloppy state, and though you many not have intentionally wanted to vandalize the article, it's in a bad state due to your last edits.  Pluto2012:  Please don't remove refs and then leave the orphaned text unsupported.  Please either find RS to support the text or remove the unsupported (citation-needed) passages.Ronreisman (talk) 05:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, would you mind explaining why you deleted the phrase 'and burning Yishuv orchards' and left the rest of the orphaned text essentially untouched. I'm really very interested in your reasoning process, so please explain fully. In particular, please feel free to dispel the impression that you have deleted this line about 'burning orchards' because that is a popular charge against Zionists, and perhaps a anti-Zionist propagandist may  be motivated to falsify the record of Palestinian Arabs who burned orchards that belonged to Palestinian Jews.  Please explain how that was not your motivation.Ronreisman (talk) 05:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Your source is a website (so not WP:RS) and it is a blog (even less WP:RS). Let's not talk about an Israli blog faking Arab origins.
 * It is unrelevant to "burn orchard" whereas at the same time attacking British. By the way, it would be a pro-Palestinian argument to remind this given burning an orchard is nothing in comparison with killing people. It would mean they didn't attack Yishuv.
 * Pluto2012 (talk) 07:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thankyou for the reply. Your answer is very revealing. I couldn't agree with you more that people's lives are incomparably more valuable than trees. This is a pro-Human argument, not limited to pro-Israeli/Palestinian concerns. I'm sure you're acquainted, however, with the repetitive usage of the 'olive tree' and 'orchard' imagery to de-legitimize Israeli action that (they argue) preserves the sanctity of human life. Not to mention the success of the Palestinian 'plant-an-olive-tree' campaign, etc.  The use of trees & orchards as semi-sacred land-claims is beyond our topic (or our time :-), though you must be familiar with these arguments.  In case you're not, a quick google search for "Palestinian plant an olive tree" turned up about 515,000 results, including:  http://endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=3744  and  https://org.salsalabs.com/o/641/images/Visualizing%20Palestine%20-%20Olive%20Tree%20Info%20Graphic.jpg .  In fact, I believe the example of ripped-up olive-trees figured in some conversations that have involved both of us, if you'll recall :-)  Ronreisman (talk) 00:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * On a more serious although it may be fun to speculate on the sub-text on talk pages, the business of these pages it to improve the content of the articles. At the moment we have unsubstantiated content in the text; not an acceptable state. What are we going to do about getting RS for the (currently unsupported) text in the article.  I'm tempted to write the blogger and ask for his secondary sources, though my less-than-rudimentary-Arabic may not be up to the job. Incidentally, the 'Haskalah' in the blogname is an abbreviation of his name, and I think he'd be offended to be accused of having a Hebrew moniker :-), so I think we leave that out of the correspondence :-) Ronreisman (talk) 00:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

More complete view of his life in lead
The old version of the lead only mentioned his role in the 1947-1948 Palestine Civil War. However, most of the text in the article is about other periods of his life, with his role in the 1947-1948 being only 1 out of 4 sections. I've added a brief summary in the lead to correct this. OtterAM (talk) 23:44, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * He was first and foremost a Palestinian nationalist, you make it sound as if he was formats a Nazi. AND you have broken the 1RR rule by inserting it for a second time, after you were reverted. Please self servers, or you will probably be reported, Huldra (talk) 23:54, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I only did 1 revert. OtterAM (talk)
 * You added the same material TWICE, in one day, that is a violation, at least since December 2016, Huldra (talk) 23:58, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Changing this. OtterAM (talk) 00:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

RfC on what aspects of Hasan Salama's life should be mentioned in the lead
Should the lead only mention Hasan Salama's role in the Holy War Army or should it also mention his service with Nazi Germany and his death at the hands of the IDF? Here are two competing versions and. OtterAM (talk) 00:11, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Alternative 1 For a start, Alternative 2 is not sourced in the given reference, Mitchell, p. 136. And version 2 makes it sound as if Salama was a first and foremost a Nazi who happened to support the Palestinians, which is simply not correct. Huldra (talk) 20:25, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Just to point out, the first sentence in version 2 includes "Arab military and political leader" which is already more breadth than is included in version 1, which only mentions one of his military roles. After this sentence in version 2, the various significant aspects of his life are mentioned in chronological order, which is why his activities in WWII come before the 1947-1948 war. OtterAM (talk) 21:47, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, stop beating around the bush, what is the chance of you trying to having "the various significant aspects of his life" included in the lead, if one of those  "significant aspects" hadn't  been "giving his allegiance to Nazi Germany"?  I would say zero. Again, version 2 makes it sound as if Salama was a first and foremost a Nazi who happened to support the Palestinians, which is  simply not correct. Huldra (talk) 22:05, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * And compare the lead, with the infoboxes, in this article, with the article of Subhas Chandra Bose, who was a hundred times more important to the Nazis than Salama: still, no Nazi flag in the Bose article. Of course, there are not lots of people still denying the Indian people their independence...Huldra (talk) 22:21, 19 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Alternative 2 Summoned by bot. Perfectly relevant and encyclopedic, providing that it is adequately sourced. I was summoned by bot to an RfC on his son's article and the sourcing indicated there was insufficient to support the wording. However, if the sourcing is adequate it certainly should be used. Coretheapple (talk) 13:19, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Alternative 2 Summoned by bot. I don't have any concern with this alternative; it seems perfectly well-sourced by the article's body. It is mentioned without emphasis and it is in proportion to the body of the article. The body of the article itself gives little context to his involvement, citing only the facts of his involvement, so I cannot see how mirroring that language in the lede would give a "first and foremost" impression as feared. Heterodidact (talk) 21:39, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Alternative 2 Also summoned by a bot. I think #1 is too short and the alternative provides enough relevant detail to the subject without being too long. Comatmebro  (talk) 05:15, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Alternative 2 (I wasn't summoned, I saw this while checking edits made by an editor active here on another page). Sourcing is solid. Improves lede by adding notable aspect of subjects career.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:47, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Neither (on my watchlist for ages) The fact that he received commando training from Germany took part in a commando raid in cooperation with the Germans is notable enough for the lead, but the wording "gave his allegiance to Germany" is not supported by good sources. He accepted military training and assistance from Germany in pursuit of his Palestinian endeavors, which is not the same thing at all. Zerotalk 13:05, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Adding. Having spent a couple of hours scouring the sources, I take back the statement that he received commando training in Germany.  He already had military experience from Palestine and he received small-arms training in Iraq, but none of the detailed sources say that he had more training in Germany.  The statements that he was in the Waffen SS, and that the parachute mission was a Waffen SS operation are both unsourced. Actually, as cited by Mallman and Cüppers, Nazi Palestine, p200, to German documents, it was an operation of Amt VI. So this RfC is actually over whether to add falsehoods to the lead of this article. The rule that unsourced material can be removed will remain in force no matter the outcome. Zerotalk 12:20, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * And more. According to the secret British report on the parachute mission (file KV 2/401), the two Arabs Latif and Salama refused to wear German uniforms until the last stage of their flight to Palestine. At that point they were convinced that wearing uniforms would protect them from being treated as spies. This story is impossible if they were actually members of the German military. Latif was arrested with a German uniform under his civilian clothes and this indeed stopped him from being put on trial. The report also says that the weapons were explained to the two Arabs and they had a chance to fire them, but the weapons training that the Mufti wanted them to get from the Germans didn't happen. Zerotalk 13:35, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * And more. The same secret report has the following.  The mission was proposed by the Mufti.  One of the things that he demanded, and received in writing, was that after the party landed the three Germans would not interfere in the work of the two Arabs. The ranking German (Wielandt) was in command until the landing and after that he was only in command of the other two Germans. I'm not aware of any evidence at all that Salama and Latif were either members of the German military or acting under German command after they arrived in Palestine. We would expect hostile authors like Mallman and Cüppers to present such evidence if it existed, but they didn't despite citing many German documents. Zerotalk 05:27, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Alternative 2 Is adequately sourced and there is no reason to exclude any information. Shrike (talk) 13:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually there is no source at all given for "gave his allegiance to Germany". There is also no source for "member of a special commando unit of the Waffen SS". So what exactly is adequately sourced, in your opinion? Zerotalk 12:20, 15 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Alternative 1 - Sources aren't strong enough to include such a thing. Especially with the issues Zero brought up. Even if sourced, "gave his allegiance to Nazi Germany" has to be rephrased to something not so spicy. Cjhard (talk) 13:00, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * None. Hassan Salama didn't give allegiance to Nazi Germany. It can't be sourced given it is false: as part in the struggle for Arab Palestine independence, he participated to a commando organised from Germany. I add that he was not commander of the Holy War army but a commander of this army (having in charge the Lydda and al-Ramla front). (edit) I am not 100% sure but I think he had to report to Abd al-Qader al-Husseiny so he should not be placed at the same level. Pluto2012 (talk) 08:51, 18 June 2017 (UTC)a
 * Alternative 2 I was cautious about casting vote, however after careful review of sources, I believe that omitting Salama's Nazi history in the lead would be un-encyclopedic. Infinity Knight (talk) 08:06, 21 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I.F. Stone's 1948 book "This is Israel" is what you quoting via a recent reprinting. It is highly unreliable and is like a hagiography for Israel.  There is a dedication where it says "I salute ... all who died for Israel."  What sort of neutrality or reliability can we expect from such a book?  (Answer: none)  The Davar source is entirely bizarre.  Now he was not just a member of the German military but a battalion commander??  It is 101% impossible.  How could an Arab rise to such heights in such a short time?  Either it is propaganda of the sort that was common during the 1948 war, or it was a case of mistaken identity.  Actually he was a member of the Mufti's entourage, not a professional soldier. Find a modern academic source that makes these ridiculous claims. Zerotalk 03:52, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Also "German Army's 9th battalion" does not uniquely identify a unit of the German army. There were lots of 9th battalions so the claim is meaningless.  After identifying which battalion it is, it is possible to check the claim since the order of command of all of the Wehrmacht is available. Zerotalk 04:00, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * And how could a battalion commander be only a major? Your "sources" don't even agree with each other. Zerotalk 04:08, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Davar is indeed not a reliable source for such as statement, even less that it was an official newspaper during a war period (1948 war). More at the time media were controlled by the government in Israel. As Zero pointed, talking about a "9th battalion" is meaningless ? 9th battalion of which brigade of which division ? I have checked fast on the internet to find if there was a 9th army or 9th division involved in the Afrika Korps and it seems not . Pluto2012 (talk) 04:36, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * (edit) In their (un)famous Nazi Palestine: The Plans for the Extermination of the Jews of Palestine, Mallmann and Cüppers talk about Salama and about Rommel and about all the potential collusions between Nazis and Arabs for the extent of the genocide to the Middle East. They don't refer in no way to the presence of Hasan Salame in Rommel army and even less in the staff of his HQ. They would of course never have missed it. We can at this stage conclude it is 'hoax'. Pluto2012 (talk) 17:10, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Not sure what are you guys arguing about. Right now we have two references from circa 1948-1949. I personally value contemporary historical references when available. Davar news piece also provides a primary source, i.e. Le Monde. I'd suggest using full attribution though to preserve Wikipedia content neutrality. If you'd like something more modern Kai Bird 2014 book describes how HS became "a virtual covert operative of the Germans"  Infinity Knight (talk) 07:05, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * We are not arguing at all. We are editing according to Wikipedia's rules on reliable sources.  Besides that, there is no reason to believe Le Monde was a primary source; all we know is that Davar cited it. There's no reason to believe Le Monde in 1948 knew something amazing which later historians have all overlooked, even though it would be immediately obvious to anyone looking at the German records. It is 100 times more likely that Le Monde was wrong. Also, we don't quote impossible claims even with attribution unless there is an extremely good reason for it. Bird's statement adds nothing to what is in the article already and even supports what we are saying ("virtual operative" not "actual operative"), so I don't see how it would improve the article. Anyway, Bird's lack of familiarity with the primary sources is proved by his repetition of the debunked poison story; i.e., he just copied the story from some other secondary source without naming it. Zerotalk 07:37, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You had better stop adding stuff without consensus while there is a discussion about it going on. That is a good way to get blocked. Zerotalk 07:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Added source number #4 (Barry Rubin, Wolfgang G. Schwanitz published by Yale University Press in 2014) say on page 242: " One such story is that of the soldier in the German and al-Husaini armies, Hasan Salama" So I guess now we have 4 references. Thoughts? Infinity Knight (talk) 21:15, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * My thoughts are that you need to read WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT, since you relisted two items that are demolished already. The only interesting thing you found was that Rubin&Schwanitz cite a German document for Salameh attending a sabotage school. It is the first usable item you have found despite all your effort. Zerotalk 01:25, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * That's great, your input has been valuable. Appreciate your review. Infinity Knight (talk) 10:44, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Source #5 published in 1947 by Fitzhugh Turner for New York Herald Tribune reports German Army rank of major. Apparently it is well documented that HS's brother in arms Fawzi al-Qawuqji was awarded rank of colonel, Still impossible? Infinity Knight (talk) 15:33, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * There is also modern scholar reference #6 by Matthias Küntzel for the German army rank. If there are no more further objections I am going to add the rank to the body based on references number #5 & #6 above in the following week. Infinity Knight (talk) 09:17, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Source 5 is a primary sources and it is not wp:rs.
 * What exactly states source 6 ? I can't see any reference to Salama there but I may have missed it ? And note that Matthias Küntzel is not wp:rs either but we may try to find from where he got his information.
 * Pluto2012 (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Thomas G. Mitchell
Whatever else can be said about "independent scholar" Thomas G. Mitchell's book cited here, it isn't reliable for this. Everything in there comes openly from the book of Bar-Zohar and Haber, which is responsible for the bullshit story about poisoning the Tel-Aviv water supply. The debunking of that story can be found at Operation Atlas (Mandatory Palestine). Meanwhile, stuff cited to Mitchell is out until it is better cited. Zerotalk 12:43, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If indeed Mitchell's source is Bar-Zohar, this material is not reliable. Agreed. Pluto2012 (talk) 09:18, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Mitchell gives Bar-Zohar as his only source. Zerotalk 12:37, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Davar and the bullshit story about Salameh and Rommel
This is a continuation of the discussion above, and it can stand as a salutary lesson on treatment of dubious sources. The general rule of operating is: If there is a smell of rat, probably there is a rat around.

Davar of Feb 11, 1948 published a short report of which the following is a loose translation of the main part. Since I am a complete novice at Hebrew, even with Google's help, there can be mistakes. Please report them and they can be corrected.
 * Hassan Salameh, commander of the Jaffa area, was a member of the German army against Britain in the ranks of Rommel's desert army — as reported in the newspaper Le Monde. According to the newspaper, Hassan Salameh, commander of the German 9th Brigade and a long time officer, was also a lieutenant in Rommel's headquarters.  He was appointed to this position at the personal request of the chairman of the Arab Higher Committee, who was a German spy and was concerned that Salameh had been confined to a German soup kitchen.

Now I managed to obtain the source story in Le Monde of Jan 22 or 23, 1948. The start of it can be seen here, but I paid 2 euros for the full text. The relevant paragraph, which is the only place where "Salameh" or "Rommel" are mentioned, is this:
 * Ceux qu'il m'a été donné de voir étaient des hommes bien équipés et approvisionnés, armés de mausers et de " tomy-guns ". Leur armement de campagne comprend en outre des mitrailleuses et des mortiers légers. Leur concentration s'effectue entre Safad et Naplouse, dans les discrètes montagnes de Samarie et dans les montagnes de Judée entre Hébron et Belthléem. La Haganah prétend avoir la preuve que parmi les cadres de cette armée figurent d'anciens officiers supérieurs de l'Afrikakorp. On cite notamment le colonel Korf, qui servirait d'aide de camp à Kawkji, et le major Kortel, ancien chef du S. R. de Rommel, qui opérerait à Jérusalem, sous le nom de Hadj Salameh.

I'm not great at French either, so the following translation can also be corrected:
 * Those [Arab fighters] I was allowed to see were well-equipped and supplied men armed with mausers and tommy guns. Their field armament also includes machine guns and light mortars. They are concentrated between Safad and Nablus, in the desolate? mountains of Samaria and in the Judean mountains between Hebron and Bethlehem. The Haganah claims to have evidence that senior officers of the army include former senior officers of Afrikakorp. Colonel Korf, who would serve as aide-de-camp to Kawkji, and Major Kortel, a former chief of the S. R. of Rommel, who operated in Jerusalem under the name of Hadj Salameh, were mentioned. (Q: What is "S. R. de Rommel"?)
 * Great job Zero0000. Your translation is very good. "montagnes discrètes" means "hills where it is easy to go unnoticed" ; "S.R" stands for "Service de Renseignements" / "intelligence services". Pluto2012 (talk) 04:32, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

From this we can see: (1) The primary source is not Le Monde but the Hagana, but Davar hid this key fact from its readers. (2) The personal name "Hasan" does not appear in Le Monde; it is Davar who decided that "Hadj Salameh" is the same person as Hasan Salameh. (3) Le Monde describes him as a German named Kortel who was operating near Jerusalem under the name of Salameh, but nobody has ever seriously alleged that Salameh was not an Arab. Hasan Salameh was well known in Palestine since the 1930s, so it is entirely impossible that Davar didn't know he was an Arab. (4) Davar bolstered the false identification by placing Salameh at Jaffa, despite Le Monde placing him at Jerusalem. (5) The last part of Davar's story (if I translated it properly) didn't appear in Le Monde at all.

At the moment I can't find another mention of Major Kortel or Haj Salameh in the 1948 context; please let us know if you can. In summary, this was a dubious story in Le Monde reported in highly distorted form by Davar. Personally I believe the evidence is for deliberate deception on Davar's part. But we didn't need this investigation to know that the Davar story was unreliable for Wikipedia usage. It was, in fact, bloody obvious from the beginning. Zerotalk 09:20, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed. We don't need to deploy such efforts to demonstrate Davar is not reliable. In French we talk about "enfoncer des portes ouvertes", which google suggests me to translate by "to push at open doors". Pluto2012 (talk) 04:32, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Wp:rs
I don't know if this is true or not but that's not wp:rs
 * When he was in Damascus, Syria in 1939, according to British records,  Salama "approached indirectly"  the British whom he had been fighting and offered his services  to round up his past comprades, but the British declined his offer. "

Pluto2012 (talk) 22:15, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

This is a long standing content, Please obtain consensus for removal. Infinity Knight (talk) 21:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The source is Sheikh Hassan Salameh British Police file, hosted by Israel State Archives. See here. If you scroll to page 13, section 8: "While in Damascus Sheikh Hassan Salameh indirectly approached the British Consul there with a view to obtaining employment with the Palestine Government for the purpose of rounding up his past comrades.   His services were declined."
 * Although you are not the first editor to think that long-standing text has higher status, there is no such rule. The onus is on those wishing articles to contain given text, regardless of how long it has been there. Anyway, the police report is unreliable as are all police reports; using it would definitely violate WP:PRIMARY. The archive's summary of the police report is also unreliable for two reasons: (1) they did no further investigating but just summarised, (2) they are a mouthpiece of the Israeli government and so not a third-party source. Zerotalk 21:51, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't fully follow what's going on here, but I want to comment on Reliable Sources and WP:Primary. Government records are Reliable Sources for almost all purposes, and they are probably always Reliable Sources when used in the form of "According to...". A source is always reliable for supporting a statement that the source-itself said something. We also routinely use police reports. If you search Wikipedia for "according to police", "police report", and "police reports", you will find many hundreds of examples. WP:Primary explicitly says primary sources may be used. It says primary sources don't establish Notability, that articles should not be mostly based on primary sources, and extra care needs to be used not to add creative interpretation beyond what the source says. Alsee (talk) 09:44, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hasan Salama. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131413425100/http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/personalities/alpha_s.htm to http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/personalities/alpha_s.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:59, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 March 2020
I'm sorting Middle Eastern collaborators with Nazi Germany by their ethnicity, that's more accurate, so I want to replace this: Arab collaborators with Nazi Germany RedEye98 (talk) 16:25, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  NonsensicalSystem (err0r?)(.log) 10:44, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Heinkel plane?!
There seems to be an error in the article.

The article reads: “parachuted from a German Heinkel HeS 3 into mandatory Palestine”... However, the Heinkel HeS3 was a JET ENGINE, not an AIRPLANE.

I was of the assumptions that jet engines are usually attached to wings and form part of a plane. Not that they can fly independently, however I’m not an expert on the topic.192.38.137.248 (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Photo
I've uploaded this photo of the 1945 Mandate of Palestine reward poster (pfft, barely offered any reward) which seems relevant - would appreciate if someone can add it to the article which is still seemingly edit-protected (time to remove?) Mostcommonphraseongoogle (talk) 21:47, 11 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks. It is added. Zerotalk 02:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Edit request: Fix typo "comprades"
"comprades" does not seem to be an English word. Maybe either "comrades" or "compadres" are meant? As the article is edit-protected, I would appreciate this simple fix. Terber (talk) 09:26, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thanks, User:Terber; yeah, it was a spelling mistake, Huldra (talk) 20:42, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually, I wonder if we shouldn't remove that whole sentence? It relies on primary sources, + a blog from the Israel State Archives (ISA), by a certain "Shlomo". That isn't really brilliant, Huldra (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)