Talk:Horvat 'Eqed

Location
The article says it is in "central Israel located midway between Jerusalem and Jaffa". But it is located east of the Green Line, so it is presumably in the disputed West Bank, even though it is west of the West Bank Wall and occupied by the Israeli military. --Macrakis (talk) 17:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Where do sources say it is west of the West Bank Wall and east of the Green Line? This would seem an important bit to put in the article. --GRuban (talk) 18:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Horvat 'Eqed / Khirbet el-'Aqd is in the Latrun salient, about 1.6 km from the former village of Imwas (calculated from the coordinates in the articles), which was razed and ethnically cleansed by Israeli forces in 1967. There is more detail in the Canada Park article. The Latrun salient article has a map showing the position of Green Line and the West Wall Bank; there's also File:West Bank Access Restrictions June 2020.pdf. --Macrakis (talk) 19:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It is also listed in Israeli Archaeological Activity in the West Bank 1967-2007 by Raphael Greenberg and Adi Keinan, p. 73-74; they call the West Bank "an area of vital historical importance that is internationally defined as occupied Palestinian territory." (p. 1) --Macrakis (talk) 19:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Owenglyndur replaced "in the Israeli-occupied West Bank" with "in the Latrun salient", with the following footnote:
 * Between 1948-1967, the Latrun Salient was a no-man's land between Israel and the Jordanian-occupied West Bank. Israel considers the area part of its territory, while Palestinians regard it as part of the West Bank. The area is nowadays controlled by Israel.
 * This is not true. The Latrun salient was surrounded by a no-man's land between Israeli and Jordanian territory. The Salient itself was not no-man's land; it was occupied by three Palestinian villages until they were razed and their residents expelled in 1967.
 * It is true that it is now "controlled by" Israel, but it remains occupied territory under international law, which is what the previous wording says.
 * For the general reader, the "Latrun salient" means nothing, while the "West Bank" is understandable. It is not just Palestinians who consider it part of the West Bank. The Greenberg and Keinan book covers it as part of the West Bank (see above). --Macrakis (talk) 16:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Why "West Bank" is the right description of the area where Horvat 'Eqed / Khirbet el-'Aqd is found:
 * Wikipedia naming convention: WP:WESTBANK, guideline 4.
 * A reliable Israeli archaeology source:
 * It is administered as part of the Israeli Judea and Samaria Area, the Israeli name for the occupied West Bank.
 * Our article Latrun salient calls it "an area of the West Bank".
 * Our article West Bank includes it.
 * It is east of the Green Line (Israel) on the UN Armistice Map of 1955.
 * Our map Location of the West Bank within the claimed territory of the State of Palestine shows it as part of the West Bank.
 * The UN Map "West Bank Access Restrictions -- June 2020" shows it as part of the West Bank.
 * --Macrakis (talk) 14:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Name
Why are we using the Hebrew name of this site rather than the Arabic name? The Arabic name seems more common on Google Scholar, especially in the past 10 years. --Macrakis (talk) 23:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC) Indeed, the main source for this article (Hizmi et al., which is also the source mentioned in the DYK nomination) uses the Arabic name, and the article doesn't even mention the Hebrew name. Most of the other sources (all published in Israel, some by official government organizations) also use the Arabic name. So I propose to move the article to the Arabic name. --Macrakis (talk) 15:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No objection. I just moved the page to avoid a MOS:STRAIGHT violation, which is something I've been systematically doing for months. But a WP:RM is probably better than an informal discussion for this. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:21, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * What is the rule for the use of (ayin) in article titles? It is clear that in article text we should use  (MOS:APOSTROPHE) and MOS:STRAIGHT only talks about apostrophes and quotation marks, not the letters  (ayin) and  (hamza). --Macrakis (talk) 15:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The character I removed from the title is ’ (right single quotation mark). MOS:ARABIC. There seems to be no specific rule for ayin other than the vague MOS:ARABIC. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointer. It looks like ayin should be written as straight single-quote (') in titles. --Macrakis (talk) 16:28, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * By the way, right single quotation mark <’> isn't correct anyway, for either Hebrew or Arabic. It's the letter ayin -- ע (Hebrew) or ع (Arabic) -- which is transliterated as modifier letter left half ring ⟨ʿ⟩ in scholarly contexts or less formally as Left single quotation mark <‘> or more sloppily as grave <`>. --Macrakis (talk) 20:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)