Talk:List of towns and villages depopulated during the 1947–1949 Palestine war/Archive 1

Title
Al Nakba gets 2.3 million hits and has passed into the English language. It's also clearer in scope than the previous three titles of this list. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 22:52, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It may get many hits, but as you concede here, it is "a Palestinian term that several Israeli editors have opposed in the past". You acknowledge that you unilaterally moved the article to a name that makes use of partisan terminology, over the objections of other editors. Please don't do that again. Instead, please follow policy,which  instructs you to list moves that might be controversial at Requested moves. That is also preferable to [stealth canvassing of sympathetic editors] to come here and support you. LuvGoldStar (talk) 17:41, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Link to Dansk
The link to Dansk (language) doesn't work. 79.177.122.32 (talk) 14:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Fixed. — Malik Shabazz 18:38, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 1 - June 2009
oppose: Most people know that there was a mass refugee movement out of Palestine in 1948, but far fewer English-speakers outside the Muslim communities have much knowledge of Arabic words or know what a nakba is. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

List of towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestine War → List of towns and villages depopulated during Al-Nakba &mdash; (or the Nakba/Al Nakba, whichever is most appropriate). SlimVirgin talk| contribs 18:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The title of this list has changed several times in its lifetime. It was originally created to be a list of Palestinian villages depopulated in 1948 by the Israelis (by expulsion or creating an atmosphere of fear). It is an issue that is the subject of current scholarly research. Israeli editors then added the names of a few Jewish towns from which inhabitants fled. Then it was changed from during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War to 1948 Palestine War, and then changed to list of Arab towns, and then the 1967 war was added, and there have been other changes I don't recall. Now "Arab" has been removed again by. All the changes serve to obfuscate the basic issue.

I therefore propose that we call this "List of towns and villages depopulated during Al-Nakba". Al-Nakba is the name for the expulsions and flight, and the reasons behind them. It is what the Palestinian and other historians call it. It has passed into the English language. It gets over two million hits on Google. It means the list is clearly about the Palestinian towns and villages that were emptied, not Jewish towns. It is the former that is the subject of ongoing scholarly research, and it is what this list is about. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 18:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I support your rationale, but since al Naqba is a redirect to 1948 Palestinian exodus, maybe we should be name this article List of towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus for consistency. — Malik Shabazz 18:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, we could do that. Would it make sense to move 1948 Palestinian exodus to Al Nakba too? It seems that no articles about Al Nakba use that name on Wikikpedia, though people use it elsewhere, including historians. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 18:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I would think it preferable to add the Jewish towns/villages depopulated and leave it where it is (or possibly at "1948 Arab-Israeli War"), пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  19:03, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, having said that, I think merging back into the article from which it was forked is probably a better option. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  19:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Which article was that? — Malik Shabazz 19:16, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * List of villages depopulated during the Arab–Israeli conflict I believe. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  19:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This article was created to distinguish itself from that one, because that one started life as Palestinian villages destroyed during al-Nakba, and has morphed into Jewish villages and 1967, and you name it, with page moves and merges etc. As I said above, there has been a process of obfuscation around this issue. I'l; assume good faith and regard it as non-intentional. Regardless, it's time to sort it out. We need a list of villages destroyed during Al Nakba, and I propose it be called that to avoid any more confusion. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 20:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why a separate list is needed for the various villages abandoned over the years in the area, regardless of the ethnicity of the inhabitants. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  21:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It's the subject of scholarly debate so why would it not be needed? SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 21:39, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose and I'm leaning towards N57. First, a page about 'al nakba' should be opened to properly define the term. So nothing should point to it before that. The talk page on 1948 exodus also brings up that the term was used before 1948, so it would be another reason not to add confusion to this list. --Shuki (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The list is already confused now that it has been moved by an account with very few edits. The proposal is to stop the confusion. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 21:39, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, I think there is so much confusion generated by this issue in so many places that I decided to open a general RfC on it, in the hope of getting it resolved. See Requests for comment/Nakba. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 22:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the list it seems that it totally relies on two historians (Morris and Khalidi) --and mostly Morris-- to document them. Seems a bit weak on support. Does Israel acknowledge that it was responsible for the evacuation of each of these villages, or is there some dispute over this? Have the list and the accusations been checked for accuracy? Stellarkid (talk) 01:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There's no dispute about that. Disputes are about whether people fled from village A, or were expelled, and whether the land belonging to village A gave rise to Israeli town B. But that these villages were emptied is not in dispute. Morris and Khalidi are two of the historians who have done the most work, which is why they're referenced most. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 01:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

You say above: "We need a list of villages destroyed during Al Nakba..." Some of these villages, or maybe many of them, were abandoned. This does not necessarily speak to "destruction," even if the villages were later repopulated with Israelis (assuming they were so). For example the difference might be such as that in Gaza, when instead of simply repopulating the Gaza greenhouses and synagogues and homes, many were actually destroyed. One needs to be careful with how we express such things. "Abandonment" is one thing, "destruction" quite another. Stellarkid (talk) 03:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The lede has problems in my view. There is presented a list of "towns and villages that were depopulated or destroyed" but there is no differentiation between them. How many, or what percentage in this list were "entirely depopulated and destroyed"? How many "entirely... destroyed"? How many "were left with a few hundred residents" and then presumably repopulated with Jews and renamed? ie only partially "depopulated." How many left voluntarily to avoid hostilities generated by both sides? It is well known that some did leave voluntarily and so acknowledged by both Morris and Khalidi, if memory serves. Further, the majority of towns listed do not have any obvious support(sources) given by either Morris or Khalidi. Is this an attempt to imply more than what is actually known about these towns? I would think these are fair questions for such an important subject, and the use of "some" in the lede in this context is highly prejudicial. Stellarkid (talk) 04:15, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Some were depopulated entirely, some not. Some were repopulated, some not. What binds them is that they were Palestinian-Arab towns and villages that turned into something else, or became nothing at all. What wording would you prefer, Stellarkid? SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 01:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The lede
Sorry that went up to soon. But I think I understand what is troubling me about the lede, finally. I am posting it here as it stands.

"This is a list of Palestinian-Arab towns and villages that were depopulated or destroyed during the 1948 Palestine War, as a result of the flight of the Palestinian residents or their expulsion by the Israel Defense Forces. Some areas were entirely depopulated and destroyed; others were left with a few hundred residents and were repopulated by Jewish immigrants, then renamed. Towns and villages are arranged according to the subdistrict of the pre-1948 British Mandate of Palestine they were situated in."

Notice the passive voice. The Palestinian Arabs towns were acted upon. They were expelled, they were depopulated or were destroyed" Both terms are used in two of the three sentences of the lede.  (Some) villages "were left" (more passive voice) with a "few hundred residents" (what was the original population?).  The only bit that could be considered active voice is where it is said that the Palestinian residents "fled;" however, even this is presented as a reaction to something that was imposed upon them from outside, so basically still passive.

When referring to the Jews, however, the situation is reversed. It is all active voice. The Jews expelled, destroyed, repopulated. I believe quite a few of these Arab towns were left (some would argue "abandoned") prior to the establishment of Israel and the IDF, so I am not sure it is fair to refer to the Israel Defense Forces in this context. All in all, aside from the title there is nothing here that provides context. Are we to understand, or are we meant to understand, that no attacks against Jews were initiated from any of these villages? That there were no heavy weapons used on the Jewish Quarter in some of these towns? See Safed for example, a town that is on this list. Maybe it is true that each of these villages were indeed destroyed by the Jewish army of the time; but I think lumping of all these towns under such an umbrella requires (a lot) more evidence than is offered here. 95% of these villages don't offer so much as a footnote, so we must take it on faith. Stellarkid (talk) 02:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I now have a copy of the Morris 2004 book referenced here. The table of contents refers to Map 2 "Arab Settlements Abandoned in 1948-49."  If one wants to get into the causal events there is a key to the reasons for these villages being "abandoned."  Key to Map 2.  In the Key the following codes are used for decisive causes of abandonment.  A)Abandonment on Arab orders C)Influence by nearby towns' fall E)Expulsion by Jewish forces F)Fear (of being caught up in fighting) M)Military assault on settlements W)Whispering campaigns.  Clearly the lede, and even the title is POV. If you are going to use Morris almost completely as a reference, then his words should be used.  He uses abandoned not "depopulated."    Stellarkid (talk) 14:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

move to original stable version
I moved the article back to List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War because this term is more neutral and more encompassing.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 15:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * But it is not more encompassing, the 1948 Arab-Israeli War forms a part of the 1948 Palestine War so to say that it is more encompassing is bizarre. Can you explain the issue of neutrality? If we want this page to cover villages depopulated during both the 1947-48 Civil War and the 48 Arab-Israeli War then the title needs to encompass both of those, which 1948 Palestine War does. Please, please, please tell me you are not one of those editors who thinks the word Palestine makes a title non-neutral. Please.  nableezy  - 07:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Huh?!! Could you please explain what "the 1948 Arab-Israeli War forms a part of the 1948 Palestine War" is supposed to mean?  That statement implies that there were TWO wars, a larger one called "Palestine" and a smaller one, part of the larger war, which was "Arab-Israeli".  If so, who was fighting in the "Palestine" war besides the "Arabs and Israelis"?  The Turks?  Roman centurions?  The French Foreign Legion?  That's a "unique" interpretation of history if I ever heard one. -- Eliyahu S Talk 20:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Now that I've read further, I see what you're driving at, but the terms are new to me and I'm not new to the topic. And see my comments below.-- Eliyahu S Talk 20:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 2 - August 2009
Brewcrewer moved this in July without discussion from "List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestine War" to the current title. 

I would like to move it back, but can't without using the tools, so I'm opening it up here for discussion, then we can ask an uninvolved admin to move it if there's consensus.

There are three reasons to move it back to 1948 Palestine War, an umbrella term historians use for the 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and the 1948 Arab-Israeli War that followed the creation of Israel.

1. Brewcrewer moved it without discussion, even though it's clearly somewhat contentious.

2. The list includes areas depopulated before the Arab-Israeli War began on May 15, 1948: see, for example, Deir Yassin massacre, which occurred in April 1948.

3. The associated template uses 1948 Palestine War: Template:Palestinian Arab villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestine War. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 21:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the use by historians of the term 1948 Palestine War, this discussion may be helpful. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 22:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Agree:
 * 1)  SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 21:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) The scope of the list is wider than the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and the term used for the time period for what is covered here is 1948 Palestine War.  nableezy  - 21:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) The corresponding article on the conflict is 1948 Palestine war, so we should use that for consistency. There is no justification for using different names. The battle for which name to use consistently belongs over at  Talk:1948 Palestine war. Zerotalk 06:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFF and as you can see by the length and depth of that article, it is not taken too seriously. --Shuki (talk) 18:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That makes no sense, this isnt about other stuff. This list covers more than just the villages depopulated during the 48 Arab-Israeli War. It also covers the period of the civil war. Those two combine to form the 48 Palestine War.  nableezy  - 02:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Scholars refer to this period as the 1948 Palestine War. There were around 350,000 Palestinian Refugees before the 1948 Arab-Israel War. So, during 1948 Arab-Israeli War is not accurate. 81.244.176.116 (talk) 06:52, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Disagree:
 * 1) Before the '1948 Palestine war' can be used, I think that more proof shown on that page that it is in fact the most widely used term, and not just by a few historians. The events leading up to the Arab Israeli war are generally relevant to the war itself, similar to other war articles that do not start on the day of the first volley. My opinion is to usually take advantage of WP in order to categorize and until then, lumping them all in one list might be misleading so IMO so for more detailed categorizing, the list could be split up to before and after the May 14th date, but in effect the months leading up to the specific war are directly related. --Shuki (talk) 22:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I don't have a strong opinion on the issue, but the truth is that 1948 Arab-Israeli War is the most neutral term for what the Arabs call the Palestine War and what the Jews call the War of Independence. --GHcool (talk) 22:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If 1948 Palestine War was not neutral or accurate, Efraim Karsh, who is strongly pro-Israeli biased and Yoav Gelber, who is opposed to the New Historians would not use this. You have known this argument already. 81.244.176.116 (talk) 06:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Per Ghcool and Shuki. Its best that WP use the most neutral term.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 18:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Explain what is not NPOV about 1948 Palestine War, and please dont say it is non-neutral because it has the word "Palestine" in it. 1948 Palestine War is not the same as 48 Arab-Israeli War. If the argument is that this is a more neutral name it falls flat on its face. The question here is scope, if this page is to cover what it is covering it needs the scope reflected in the title of the article. The NPOV title of the period that this list covers is the 48 Palestine War.  nableezy  - 02:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) As above, as the 1948 Arab-Israeli war is both more common and more neutral than "1948 Palestine War". I find it odd that Israel's War of Independence redirects to the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, while the 1948 Palestine war has its own page, which would more rightly be termed a "stub."  That article should be merged into this one, as we are essentially talking about the same event.  Any differences can be added to the larger, more thorough article.  Stellarkid (talk) 02:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats because they arent the same thing.  nableezy  - 03:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The sources have been given that the common name among scholars is 1948 Palestine War for that period. Do you claim Efraim Karsh and Yoav Gelber and Palestinians ? 81.244.176.116 (talk) 06:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) I also agree that 1948 Arab-Israeli War appears to be the most widely used term and is the most neutral term for what the Israelis call the Israel's War of Independence and the Arabs apparently call the Palestine War, even though such terms may not be 100% interchangeable. Davshul (talk) 09:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What is funny is that it is easy to fish pov-pushers. There are just five here above. 81.242.79.254 (talk) 07:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Comments:
 * GHcool, your statement above is entirely accurate for one aspect, it is the most neutral term for what the Jews call the War of Independence (most of the Arabic I have seen, though that is admittedly mostly limited to Egyptian historians and commentators just call it the 1948 war). But 1948 Palestine War is not the equivalent name for 1948 Arab-Israeli War, it is a term that encompasses both the 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and it is the most commonly used name, by all sides so far as I can tell, for that entire period. This page currently covers events from both, so we need to use a more encompassing term.  nableezy  - 22:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The discussion pointed out by Slim Virgin above found here has a list of WP notables who refer to the 1948 Palestine War. I thought it would be reasonable to add a list of those who refer to it as the 1948 or First Arab-Israeli War. Some authors mentioned may not have a WP page, but all are notable academics.


 * William L Cleveland - A history of the modern Middle East pg 260 Section title:  "The first Arab-Israeli War"
 * Peter L. Hahn Caught int he Middle East: U. S. policy toward the Arab-Israeli conflict pag 44 "The May 1948 establishment of Israel and subsequent Arab-Israeli war..."
 * Dan Kurzman Genesis 1948: the first Arab-Israeli war pag ix : "This book teslls for the first time the full epic story of the initial Arab-Israeli war and the events leading up to it."
 * Chiam Herzog, Shlomo Gazit The Arab-Israeli wars: war and peace in the Middle East
 * Edgar O'Ballance The Arab-Isareli War, 1948
 * Martin Gilbert Israel "Jewish History Atlas" "The Arab Israeli War 1948-1949" pg 16
 * Dorothy Weitz Drummond Holy Land, whose land?:modern dilemma, ancient roots Section Title: Independence and the First Arab-Israeli War:  1948  pg 14.
 * Avi Shlaim ''The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World pg 35 "...the first Arab-Israeli war..."
 * 1985 Reader's digest almanac --  "Egypt took the major part in the Arab-Israeli war of 1948."
 * Norman Finkelstein Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History pg 52 "...depiction of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war..."
 * Richard Brandon Morris, Graham W. Irwin Harper encyclopedia of the modern world: a concise reference history pg 623 "During the Arab-Israeli War of 1948..."
 * Richard H. Pfaff Jerusalem; keystone of an Arab-Israeli settlement "The 1948-1949 Arab-Israeli war led to..."
 * Richard Ernest Dupuy, Trevor Nevitt Dupuy - ''The encyclopedia of military history: from 3500 B.C. to the present' - Pg 1221 Section Titled "The Arab-Israeli War" "...the First Arab- Israeli War, or Israeli War of Independence, 1948-1949..."

Then there are the many, many more who refer to the time as "Israel's War of Independence" such as John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt in "The Israel lobby and U.S. foreign policy" pg 82 Avi Shlaim, Netanel Lorch ,Mitchell Geoffrey Bard, Joseph Heckelman, Martin Gilbert, Arthur Goldschmidt, Reuven Gal, Donna Rosenthal ,Chiam Herzog, Tom Segev, Efraim Karsh, Jacob Abadi,Anthony Pagden,Birdsall S. Viault,Alan M. Dershowitz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stellarkid (talk • contribs) 01:50, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You apparently missed the point. This is about a wider time period than the 48 Arab-Israeli War. Nobody is saying that we should change the name of that article. This list covers a wider scope than that war though, it also covers villages destroyed during the earlier civil war.  nableezy  - 02:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, Nableezy, SK's not missing the point, but rather the discussion has swayed into the fact that the 1948 independance war started several months earlier than, and the legitimacy of this 'Palestine War' description is disputed. --Shuki (talk) 08:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That couldnt possibly be the point of those sources, all those sources are covering when the other Arab nations fought a war with Israel, not the civil war that preceded the end of the mandate.  nableezy  - 00:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Since the article, 1948 Palestine war attempts to cover both what the article says is "A Civil War (occasionally referred to as an "inter-communal" war) ....(until mid-May 1948)" - as well as the 1948 Arab–Israeli War after May 15, and since we already have an article called 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine which covers "to the termination of the British Mandate itself on 14 May 1948"  and an article title 1948 Arab-Israeli War, I would think the [stub] "1948 Palestine War" would better merge with the Civil War article and leave the 1948 Arab-Israeli War to itself.  The "1948 Palestine War" could redirect to 1948 Arab-Israeli War, as does "Israel's War of Independence" with references in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war article like:  "For information regarding the earlier civil war in Palestine see 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine." There could be a mention that some writers refer to both as "1948 Palestine War".  Both the Arab-Israeli War and the Civil War articles are plenty long enough.  An article that attempts to merge both of them would be both bulky and confusing.   Stellarkid (talk) 00:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The point of the 1948 Palestine War article is to provide an overall summary of both the civil war and arab-israeli war articles. 1948 Palestine War != 1948 Arab-Israeli War. There is no way that should be a redirect and the recent AfD attempt affirmed that.  nableezy  - 00:36, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The AfD showed considerable support for merging the material, which is exactly what should happen. The AfD was not my idea of an affirmation, simply a default position. Is there anything in that article that is not already included in one or the other of the two articles already written?   Stellarkid (talk) 03:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, no it did not. Most of the users, including almost every user not usually involved in the I/P area, felt the article should exist. And you are still missing the point. 1948 Palestine War is an umbrella term for the civil war and arab-israeli war. Not one or the other, but both.  nableezy  - 04:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Stellrakid, the oldest of these publications is more recent than the most recent of yours. More, all the sensibilities are covered : Did you read the book you provide ? They start to talk about event starting on 15 May. I hope, because Israel didn't exist before and the War started on November 30, 1947. 81.244.176.116 (talk) 07:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yoav Gelber, Palestine 1948, Sussex Academic Press, Brighton, 2006, ISBN 1845190750
 * Saleh Abdel Jawad, The Arab and Palestinian Narratives of the 1948 War, in Robert I. Rotberg, Israeli and Palestinian Narratives of Conflict, Indiana University Press, 2006, ISBN 978-0-253-21857-5.
 * Efraim Karsh, The Arab-Israeli Conflict: The Palestine War 1948, Osprey publishing, 2002.
 * Walid Khalidi (ed.), All that remains.ISBN 0 88728 224 5.
 * Walid Khalidi, Selected Documents on the 1948 Palestine War, Journal of Palestine Studies, 27(3), 79, 1998.
 * Benny Morris, 1948, Yale University Press, 2008, ISBN 9780300126969
 * Eugene Rogan & Avi Shlaim, The War for Palestine - Rewriting the history of 1948, Cambridge University Press, 2001.
 * David Tal, War in Palestine, 1948. Strategy and Diplomacy, Routledge, 2004.
 * Anon IP, I could ask the same question. The titles you are providing do not refer to the 1948 Palestine War.  Gelber's book is a time and place-- Palestine 1948-- Morris is just a time 1948' - Jawad's book refers to the 1948 War, Karsh comes close with The Palestine War 1948. Then there is the The War for Palestine and  War in Palestine -- Only Khalidi actually uses the term as you would have it.  The fact that your choices are more recent merely makes an argument against it on the grounds of WP:recentism.  Stellarkid (talk) 03:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to speak to your comment about May 15, we already have an article named 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine that covers that period.  The stub entitled 1948 Palestine War could/should easily merge any non-redundant material into that article or into the 1948 Arab-Israeli War as appropriate. Stellarkid (talk) 03:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, they are not the same thing. 1948 Palestine War covers both the civil war and the arab-israeli war.  nableezy  - 04:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Stellarkid. I am happy that you refer to the article about the '47-48 civil war. I wrote this in French and it was translated to wp:en. It covers the period from 30 Nov 47 to 15 May 48. The article about the 1948 Arab-Israeli War covers the period from 15 May to the different armistices. The full period is named by scholars 1948 Palestine War and Arab villages where depopulated during the period from 30 Nov to 1950. So, you have the choice between :
 * Arab villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestine War
 * Arab villages depopulated during the 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and during the 1948-1949 Arab-Israel War.
 * About the "war in...", "war for..." :-)
 * 81.244.41.148 (talk) 07:20, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice. You wrote the article by yourself or did you collaborate with others? At any rate, one does have (other) choices.  In fact, it could easily be determined (since virtually all of this list, masquerading as an article, is taken from the Khalidi book All that remains) which villages were abandoned in the Mandatory Period and which villages were "depopulated" during the war.  This would give a reader more information, instead of lumping it all into one period, giving the (mistaken) impression that every village was "depopulated" due to expulsion or as claimed in the ethnic cleansing article,  by virtue of ethnic cleansing by the Jews.  So with respect to the choices, I suggest two articles:
 * Arab villages depopulated during the British Mandate of Palestine and
 * Arab villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
 * Stellarkid (talk) 13:40, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't talk about this article but about : 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine
 * I reject your suggestion : we will moved back to former article. We should only discuss between people who really care to write articles and who are fed-up of frustrated Israeli pov-pushers. Cheers, 81.244.41.148 (talk) 13:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)And I reject your characterization of me. Sometimes we are unable to see in ourselves the faults we believe we clearly see in others.  Be that as it may, I have made a point of discussing all controversial edits on the talk page in a scholarly way, which is simply civil for Wikipedians to do.  Stellarkid (talk) 18:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I reject that as well, the two periods are treated together by historians. We do the same.  nableezy  - 18:07, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * So with the discovery of the civil war article, perhaps the '1948 Palestine war' page is now redundant. I don't see a point in having a redundant cover page that would be sufficiently covered in well written leads. --Shuki (talk) 17:51, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It is like nobody is paying attention. One more time. The 1948 Palestine War covers both the civil war and the 48 Arab-Israeli war. It should be an article covering both, per WP:SUMMARY. It is not one or the other, it is not just the 48 Arab-Israeli war and it is not just the earlier civil war. It covers both.  nableezy  - 18:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * My guess is that the article is doubly and triply redundant. In fact there are some fourteen or so paragraphs in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war article already  under background which is entitled 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine, and links to the main article, ie 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine.  Stellarkid (talk) 18:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * And?  nableezy  - 19:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The list of books and authors put up by 81.244.176.116 to evidence that these authors use the term "1948 Palestine war" as a blanket term to cover pre- & post-May 14 can be  referenced and searched at Google books which I did, with  interesting results.

I think the authors given as support for the general usage of "1948 Palestine War" are not at all unanimous or unambiguous. Karsh & Khalidi yes. Gelber, maybe, Tal, Morris, Jawad, Shlaim, no. Stellarkid (talk) 03:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Efraim Karsh in his book does use the term exclusively to refer to the both the pre- and post- May 14, 1948. He does not use the term "Arab-Israeli war" at all except in a reference footnote.
 * David Tal book: : "What the rest of the world calls the first Arab-Israeli war, or the 1948 war, is, for the Jews, the War of Independence, and for the Palestinians, al Nakba (the Catastrophe).  The variety of names is an indication, of course, of the different points of view regarding the war ....could be better described as Israel's war against the Palestinians, the Egyptians, Jordanians, the Syrians, the Lebanese, the Iraquis and the ALA.  ....hence it would be much more accurate to speak of the 1948 Arab wars against Israel instead of the 1948-Arab-Israeli war."  pg 469 "War in Palestine, 1948."  pg 3, "Arab-Jewish 1948 war"  "1947-1949 Arab-Israeli War" page 75 &60, 171, 47, 56.  Tal also uses the term "Palestine War" 5 times, more often in his references in footnotes. There is no clear difference in his use of the two terms, or that he is using "Palestine war" as a "blanket term" to cover both periods. I would say no.
 * Gelber -- uses "1948 Palestine war" three times in footnotes referencing other writings. "Arab-Israeli war" one time, referring to the time after the "civil" war.
 * Avi Shlaim, uses it in footnotes to reference other books such as those of Khalidi but in his own writings refers to (first) "Arab-Israeli war" Arab-Israeli war some 10 times, another 12 referencing other writers.  eg pgs xvii, 80, 100,204,75
 * Morris 48: 8 results for "Palestine War" -- 5 are footnote references. pg 77:  "The 1948 War--called by the Arab world the First Palestine War...and by the Jews the War of Independence, the War of Liberation, or the War of Establishment. "  And on page 415 "And against the backdrop of the Palestine war..."  34 results for "First Arab-Israeli War"  96 for "Arab-Israeli War."
 * Jawad " uses it 3 times in footnotes, never in his own writing. Pg 72 writes "The 1948 Arab-Israeli war was one of the most important events in the contemporary Middle East."
 * This is not a pilpul and if it was, you should be wise enough to stop.
 * There CANNOT be an arab-ISRAELI war before 14 may 1948 because there were NO ISRAEL before and the war we are talking about started on 30 november 1947 (or 15 days later according to some Palestinian scholars).
 * In a book, main points can be found in the conclusions and in the title, not in the footnotes. If people use the words : "Palestine War" in the title, it means the topic of the book they wrote deals with that.
 * But you perfectly know that. 81.244.174.220 (talk) 18:58, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That may be your logic (WP:OR?) but it is not necessarily that of others. Perhaps you would like to take this to your/my talk page instead?  As an example, we have an article at WP on the State of Palestine even though there is no consensus a state exists and no declared borders. I'm sure we referred to "Palestinians" before ever there was a declaration of State.  I am fully aware that main points are not found in the footnotes, which was why I specifically differentiated footnotes from the body of the text, so that you could draw your own conclusions.  Please do not threaten me.  I quoted what the authors said. Titles are not sufficient.  A writer may call his book "War in Palestine" or "War for Palestine" and yet refer to the war itself as "the Arab-Israeli war."  Clearly English is not your first language.  I am simply demonstrating through academic works that 1948 War in Palestine is not the academic consensus, nor does it specifically act as a "blanket" name for the few months' prior to Israel's declaration of statehood.  I am demonstrating this through my own sources and through those that you have provided. What is ambiguous about David Tal's statement in War in Palestine: "What the rest of the world calls the first Arab-Israeli war, or the 1948 war...?"  I will stop here, something about beating a dead horse.    If you want to continue this you are more than welcome to discuss it civilly on my talk page.  Thanks  Stellarkid (talk) 01:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The 'in', 'for' is pilpul. Civility is deserved when contributors are of good faith. WP:AGF is not for pov-pushers.
 * There is no WP:0R. The conclusions of a book are certainly the most important point in a book.
 * If you think authors use strange words in their title to trouble the reader, and that the title is not properly chosen by them, civility will not help you. 81.242.79.254 (talk) 07:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Why don't you log in from your main account? LoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk) 14:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Why dont you?  nableezy  - 14:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Anon IP: The conclusions of a book are not (necessarily) presented in the titles. David Tal (an historian and expert) in his book "War in Palestine" has told us that "the rest of the world" refers to the first "Arab-Israeli war." The consensus among historians seems to be such, and it is not up to us to insert our own personal opinions. You need to address this with quotes from other historians that demonstrate that they support the position you assert (1948 Palestine war), rather than with accusations of bad faith or pov-pushing. Not clear what your point is in your referrals to pilpul -- as we are not parsing  sacred religious texts but rather the conclusions and naming practices of respected historians & academics, without regard to their religion. Please continue further discussion on my talk page, unless of course you have references, sources and quotes. We needn't cloud this page with peripheral concerns and/or personal attacks. Thanks! Stellarkid (talk) 14:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * An IP is less anon that a pseudo.
 * David Tal chose a name that nobody use as title ? And Efraim Karsh, Yoav Gelber, Mashala and all others did too ?
 * That is your thesis. There is no discussion possible with such a thesis.
 * 81.241.77.202 (talk) 13:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

lead sentence
Please work on the first sentence. It's now an awkward runon sentence. --Shuki (talk) 21:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

compromise suggestion
Why wouldn't it be appropriate to redirect move (?) this article to the 1948 Palestinian exodus instead of to the war articles? Stellarkid (talk) 18:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Please clarify your suggestion. Nobody has proposed redirecting this article. Zero talk

01:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Zero, I could easily be confused between move and redirect etc, but my understanding was that there was a question (above) of moving? this article to the "List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestine War" from ""List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War" or vice versa. I guess it is a move not a redirect?  Or is a re-name?  It is more than a little confusing.  I just thought it more appropriate to move? redirect? rename? (HELP!!) to: "List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus" since that is what that article actually discusses, and the list would clarify.  Hope this is clearer.  Stellarkid (talk) 03:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Think of it like a UNIX file name, to rename it you "move" it. A move here is moving the history and the content to a new name.  nableezy  - 04:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * -- usually leaving behind a redirect with the old name, so actually the difference is slight in our context. Zerotalk 04:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, a move (i.e. change of title) to "List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus" is a reasonable suggestion. What do others think about it? Zerotalk 04:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that is fine as well. We just need a title that covers the time period that the list does, this or 1948 Palestine War work. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 04:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I had not given second thought to that before, but 'exodus' sounds like a voluntary departure to a final destination. Is that word really used widely in reference to the nakba? --Shuki (talk) 07:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No it isn't and it is a bit too Urisish for my liking even though I put up with it. But I have another suggestion:  what about "List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during 1948-1949"?  I can't think of any change to the list, and it avoids all these problems.  Zerotalk 07:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This proposal was indeed already made some time ago during a former discussion to move the title. This is even more accurate that the one with '1948 Palestine War' given some villages were depopulated after the war. 81.241.77.202 (talk) 13:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

It is clear that the article currently entitled 1948 Palestinian exodus is what this list should appropriately point to. It is the parent article. Stellarkid (talk) 00:14, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Not meaning to be difficult, but at least one of these villages was depopulated in 1947 and several in 1949. Zerotalk 09:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You are correct of course, but the 1948 Palestinian exodus does cover that right up front - it is the first phase:
 * 1 History
 * 1.1 First Phase of the Exodus, December 1947 – March 1948
 * 1.2 Second Phase of the Exodus, April 1948 – June 1948
 * 1.3 Third Phase of the Exodus, July–October 1948
 * 1.4 Fourth Phase of the Exodus, October 1948 – March 1949


 * It is the same with the 1948-Arab Israeli war which covers the background half dozen months as well. Now if you wanted to split the Exodus article into two parts, pre- and post- Israel, that would make sense.  Then you could split this list as well into pre- and post- Israel and give the reader a lot more accurate information.  But that sounds like a lot of work!  Stellarkid (talk) 13:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I certainly wasn't proposing any splitting. Zerotalk 14:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

villages depopulated of Jews during the Holocaust
Chesdovi, could you please present a source here that relate the villages being depopulated in the Palestine War with those depopulated of Jews during the Holocaust? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 15:16, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Displaced Jews didn't just come from Arab lands, but from Europe too. Chesdovi (talk) 13:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not quite clear how that's an answer. Could you rephrase it? SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 14:27, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Jewish exodus from Arab lands is also in the See also section. Chesdovi (talk) 14:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And? Could you please provide a source linking the villages depopulated of Jews during the Holocaust with the Arab villages depopulated during the Palestine War? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 14:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Lohamei HaGeta'ot was one of many places that was re-populated with Holocaust survivors. They came from somewhere. Chesdovi (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the information. Could you please provide a source linking the villages depopulated of Jews during the Holocaust with the Arab villages depopulated during the Palestine War? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 14:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not required by WP:ALSO. It's commom sense. Chesdovi (talk) 14:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It is not "common sense" and it is needed. WP:ALSO says that A reasonable number of relevant links that would be in the body of a hypothetical perfect article are suitable to add to the "See also" appendix of a less developed one. For the link to be in the body of a supposedly "perfect" article it would need a source connecting the two. Could you please provide a source that makes this relation? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 15:07, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a list. Chesdovi (talk) 15:20, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And? As you have not provided any sources connecting the topic I will be removing it again. If you can provide such a source by all means re-add it. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 15:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

This is a list and not an article; therefore there is no need to harp on about the hypothetical case of it being a “perfect article”. WP:ALSO also says: ''“Whether a link belongs in the "See also" section is ultimately a matter of editorial judgment and common sense. Links included in the "See also" section may be useful for readers seeking to read as much about a topic as possible, including subjects only peripherally related to the one in question.”''

These topics are not "peripherally related". I view both subjects inextricably linked. I do not need to provide a source. If you are so intent on there being one, find it yourself! Chesdovi (talk) 17:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Could you explain exactly how you see them as inextricably linked, Chesdovi? SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 17:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ...It marked the beginning of the depopulation of over 400 Arab villages and cities and the expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinian inhabitants to make room for victims of the Holocaust. - Remembering Deir Yassin: The Future of Israel and Palestine, by Daniel McGowan and Marc H. Ellis., New York: Olive Branch Press, 1998. Chesdovi (talk) 17:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * All I wanted, thank you. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 17:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Move
There is an consensus for the move to the title given in the lead. Could someone take care of this ? I can't. Thanks. 81.244.165.107 (talk) 07:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Does anyone mind if I remove the "that were"? SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 07:48, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Brewcrewer reverted because of some imaginary "real consensus" for it being at 1948 Arab-Israeli War here. There is wide agreement to have the end of the title say "1948 Palestinian exodus". Brewcrewer, please explain yourself. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 06:25, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I've asked him on his talk page. Sorry, I did that before I saw this. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 08:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Posting in favour of List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus, I see Zero0000, Stellarkid, Nableezy, 81.241.77.202, and I'll add my name to that list here. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 08:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The page should not be moved from its original name until there's a consensus, something that was not clear prior to the previous move. We should get the opinion of those opposing the previous proposal before doing anything too exciting.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 05:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats nice, but why did you make a couple of garbage edits to make moving the page impossible without an admin? And would you care to explain any actual objections to the name that does have clear consensus above with not a single opposing editor in a month? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 06:33, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * wp:agf can go a long way, especially when dealing with an editor who has categorized hundreds of uncategorized pages. love, -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 06:53, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It can go a long way, but this just looks trying to to force the name to remain. And could you please explain any actual objections to the proposed name that was met with clear consensus above (here)? <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 07:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

As brewcrewer has yet to explain any actual objection to the name, and has made reverting his move impossible by making garbage edits to the new name, and the name has consensus above could an admin please move this page to List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus?
 * Brewcrewer forgets to remind that he himself moved from "Palestine War" to "1948 Arab-Israeli War" without any consensus. He just just a bad faith pov pusher. Block him and proceed to the move. 87.65.220.88 (talk) 13:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The move is done, let's move on. Zerotalk 14:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I haven't been following this discussion but are you really sure you want to use the word 'exodus' when referring to Arabic people movement in 1948? The word is synonymous for a people leaving exile or imprisonment and becoming free and/or going home. It's like saying that this event of Palestinian exodus was correcting a wrong. That the Palestinians were returning to their homelands in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt. Very weird and revisionist. --Shuki (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * That's the word that has stuck across multiple articles. "Flight" would be wrong because some were expelled. "Expulsion" would be wrong because some fled. "Exodus" was chosen as a compromise. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs

Rename
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was consensus against move as inaccurate.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus → List of Arab towns and villages destroyed by Israel during the 1948 Palestinian exodus — This need to be rename to List of Arab towns and villages destroyed by Israel during the 1948 Palestinian exodus because it more factual. Depopulate be Pro-Israel POV in attempt to de emphasize the destruction. Other discussion on important article rename be here too Ani medjool (talk) 23:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I support name change to nakba. Ani medjool (talk) 00:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Some of these towns and villages were not destroyed but instead resettled by Israelis after the Palestinians left, including Beersheba, Tiberias, Sa'sa'/Sasa, etc. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 00:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Agree with MS. Even though most of these places were destroyed, some were not and it is better to leave the details to the articles on each locality. Zerotalk 00:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose While it is true that many of villages depopulated were also destroyed, this is not true in every case. To vet the list to discinlude those not destroyed would result in a smaller, less complete list. The main feature they all share is that they were depopulated of their Palestinian Arab inhabitants.  T i a m u t talk 18:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose. How many people except Muslims know what a nakba is? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment In that case, I support name change to independence. Get over yourself; this is wikipedia, not a soapbox.99.236.137.50 (talk) 01:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not all were depopulated by Israel. Chesdovi (talk) 00:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Arab Christians
It would be a good idea if Wikipedia could verify to what extent Arab Christians were affected by the 1948 depopulation movement. Before 1948, Palestine was often described by Orientalists as having at least 20-25 % of Christians at the beginning of the 20th century, but it was only after the Israeli victory (or "Nakba") that the Palestinian people acquired a predominantly Muslim status. It is therefore possible that the expropriation and emigration movements that took place between 1948 and 1967 had a more immediate effect on the local Christian commmunity, which had a long-established presence in key regions such as Galilee and East Jerusalem. ADM (talk) 19:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * On the contrary, Christians only formed a small minority of Arabs (10-15%) for many centuries up to the start of 1948. And I think (but don't have figures at hand) Christians were expelled on average less than Muslims were.  Zerotalk 00:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Your information is mistaken. The proportion of Christians in 1900 was approximately 10%.  I looked it up.  Zerotalk 23:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

It might be useful to add that Arab Christians - who might have been more like 20-25% in the early 20th century - began leaving in the Ottoman period because of more persecution by authorities. Also, there are references by Walid Khalidi and others that state that religion was very vague to many Palestinian villagers in the early 20th century and before. Many times they celebrated both Christian holidays and Muslim ones unaware if they were Muslim or Christian (so the numbers might be a bit hard to determine).Achamy (talk) 20:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Mixed towns and villages
There are a number of places depopulated by Arabs that were relatively diverse mixed towns... Such as Romema. How do we reconcile this. Should we change the title to perhaps "Areas depopulated? Achamy (talk) 21:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Adding "massacare so and so" (Deir yassin)
When you add a comment like "massacre April 9th 1948" it introduce an controversial information without proper context.

I believe that this is a violation of WP:NPOV and should be removed. I agree that it justified to have a link to an article about the issue where the sucject is fully explained. Bbeehvh (talk) 13:46, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It isnt "controversial" information. We include the cause of depopulation for the villages in the list. In Deir Yassin the cause was was the massacre by Jewish paramilitary forces. This is well sourced information. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 13:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * First - the claim that the cause of depopulation was the massacre needs support. Even if actually 107 people were massacred it is still not necessarily the cause of depopulation. In many places in the world much more than 107 were massacred, and they are still happily populated to this very day.
 * Second - the claim of a massacre is well sourced, but so is the claim that there wasn't any. This is why the story is "controversial".
 * Bbeehvh (talk) 14:24, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No, the "claim" that there was no massacre is not well sourced. There is no dispute among quality sources that a massacre was perpetrated by Jewish forces at Deir Yassin and that this, along with the expulsion of the remaining inhabitants, was the cause of the depopulation. There are a large number of quality sources that say this. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 14:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Can you please define "quality source", and name some that say what you have said?
 * Can you change your automatic signature ? How do you do that ?
 * Bbeehvh (talk) 16:54, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * For your last question feel free to ask on my talk page, this page should only be used for discussing the article. For the other questions, sure. A "quality source" is an academic source published by a quality academic press. Either a peer reviewed journal or a book published by a quality academic press. For example, Morris The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisted published by Cambridge University Press and authored by Benny Morris is a "quality source". Or another example, All That Remains: The Palestinian Villages Occupied and Depopulated by Israel in 1948 by Walid Khalidi and published by the Institute of Palestine Studies is a "quality source". Morris lists the cause of the depopulation of Deir Yassin as "Military assault on village" and "expulsion by Jewish forces". You can see many more sources discussing this issue at Deir Yassin massacre. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 18:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * We do not need another list for List of Arab towns and villages massacred during the 1948 Palestinian exodus. Massacres should be listed here. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:14, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * OK - I will leave the subject after these comments: (a) if Benny Morris is not controversial, I wonder who is, and (b) if Palestinians find some consolation in this sentence - let it be. The Palestinian subject is so full of myths - it can have this one, too.
 * Bbeehvh (talk) 20:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed, Bbeehvh. I've actually made edits with using far more renowned sources that simply don't agree with what would seem to be the only "reliable" historian allowed here: "Benny Morris". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.65.173 (talk) 06:43, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Hamlets instead of villages
I looked at almost all the names in this article and although i didn't count, i got the perception that there were more hamlets than villages. Should the title be changed to reflect this? 89.242.82.200 (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The great majority were villages. Also "hamlet" in English usually just means a small village so such a change would be confusing. Zerotalk 01:52, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Many were smaller khirbas, and not villages. We should make this distinction. --Almasworld (talk) 04:35, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Haifa, depopulated?... really?!?
This is a list of depopulated villages. There is no scientific definition of depopulated, but the lead says "Some areas were entirely depopulated and destroyed; others were left with a few hundred residents and were repopulated by Jewish immigrants, then renamed."

Haifa lost much of its population. But according to reliable sources, "five or six thousand remained." The town was not renamed and it isn't taken over by Jews.

This is a list of towns that are mostly or completely gone. Haifa is not part of the Nakba. Haifa shouldn't be on this list. Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 04:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * The great majority of Haifa's pre-1948 Arab population were not there post-1948, so it belongs here. It is a special case being a city much larger than the other localities on this page, so it can't be expected to satisfy a general definition.  Zerotalk 11:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Haifa is a sticky subject. RS put Haifa as a predominantly Arab city in the early part of the 20th Century. In the next few decades, immigrants poured in. The demographics shifted radically, riots and skirmishes broke out, and the city underwent industrialization. The Arab character of the city in 1947-48 is drawn into question. By this point, the population is about equal, verifiably speaking.


 * So was Haifa an Arab city depopulated in the Palestinian Exodus of 1948? According to the definition the list uses that I quote above, no. I think we can't say for sure that it was either Arab or depopulated.


 * You want to give it an exemption because it doesn't satisfy a "general definition"? Then what definition do you use, your heart?Luke 19 Verse 27 (talk) 00:31, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Like most things here on Wikipedia, it depends on the sources. Do any reliable sources describe Haifa as "depopulated" or not? I would err on removing it anyway because Haifa was not a town or a village. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 02:11, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - if Haifa is listed as an Arab depopulated village, i assume we may add most Arab League capital cities to "list of Jewish towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict". Baghdad was about 30% Jewish for example, now it is 0%.Greyshark09 (talk) 20:16, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You are right about Baghdad apart from being off by several years. But everyone has always understood this article to be about localities in Israel+Palestine.  The name could be changed to reflect that, but it is already too long. Feel free to make a list of former Jewish communities around the Middle East.  If done well it could be quite interesting. Zerotalk 00:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If it is only a quesiton of name, we can say : List of Arab population centers
 * Regarding source, "(Arab) Haïfa" is listed at number 172 in Map 2 of Morris book The Birth ... Revisited. He talks about Arab settlement, so another option is to talk about List of Arab settlements depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus.
 * Pluto2012 (talk) 22:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Listed or not, I think it is relevant to mention what happened to the urban centers as they were not untouched from what happened to the villages but a part of the 1948 Palestinian exodus. In fact, these cities had a population (and with that influence) that were enormous in comparision to many of the villages. So I think it is correct to mention them and have now added a part about that. --IRISZOOM (talk) 08:54, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Terminology
What happened with contemporary term for forcible removal of population: ethnic cleansing ?!

I mean, "exodus", "depopulated", "left", are terms circulated around these articles on Palestinians and Palestine, with intent to whitewash narrative about these tragic events. Palestinians are ethnically cleansed from their homes, they didn't "left", and that has nothing to do with "depopulation" - their homes are seized by perpetrators, not "resettled" by third parties !?--Santasa99 (talk) 21:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Santasa99: The Israeli side always call these villages for "abandoned", (even places like Deir Yassin (!)), while the Palestinian side calls it  ethnic cleansing.  "Depopulated" is a compromise, which neither side is very happy with, but both sides have learned to live with. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 21:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, that's hardly "compromise", more likely blackmail. However, even if "compromise" is acceptable over cold, hard facts, particular term, as it is too often the case in these situations, is still outside of neutral zone of the "compromise" - depopulated is still term which gives "Israeli side" upper hand in its desirable whitewashing approach to narrative. That ("compromise") is the reason Wikipedia was never accepted as serious encyclopedia, serious anything.--Santasa99 (talk) 22:18, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

What would be useful
I use this page/list regularly and find it very helpful. Is there anyway of highlighting the villages that were cleared before 14th May? Break the lists in two? underline? I'm willing to do the work but not sure what would be sensible. Padres Hana (talk) 17:43, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That's indeed informative.
 * That could be done in sharing each section in 2; first the villages depopulated before 14 May and then those depopulated after.
 * Until 14 May 1948:
 * list
 * After 15 May 1948:
 * list
 * Pluto2012 (talk) 06:30, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Zionist terrorism category
Does the overall English-language (and Arabic and Hebrew) historiography terms the sum of these events a product of Zionist terrorism, specifically? (Does it apply to all or most of the events mentioned?) This is the central question to which sources must be accompanied. I have no strong opinion of yet, but I believe that if the category is to be added, these sourcing conditions must be met, so I tentatively removed it until these can be provided. (One can only shutter to think what this will do to my "reputation!") El_C 04:05, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As a rule, all categories and statements claiming terrorism need impeccable sources. I see no sources that the depopulation of villages was an act of terrorism. In this case, that would be state terrorism, and the changes of finding reliable, neutral, sources for such a statement are minimal IMHO. Debresser (talk) 10:11, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There was Zionist terrorism, but it is only distantly connected to the subject of this article. A terrorist ideology may have driven the IZL and Lehi in the small minority of their acts, and especially their public statements during the Civil War period, but this is not directly connected to the overall topic of the Palestinian exodus.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 11:16, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Israeli "Offensives".
Many Jewish towns were depopulated by Arabs during this very same war, yet receive no mention. This "list" is absolutely and totally biased as it gives the reader the impression that the Arabs were 100% innocent victims of Jewish agression, when in fact the entire war was the result of the Arab assault on those lands granted to Jews in the UN Partition Plan which the Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected.

Yet each Israeli operation mentioned is referred to as an "offensive". These "offensives" were no more "offensives" than the Allied "offensive" in Normandy.

Bottom line: The war was started by the Arabs. The Arabs were the aggressors and the Jews were merely responding to that aggression.

"The best defense is a good offense" says it all. Your attackers hit you, you hit them back in DEFENSE.

None of these so-called "offensives" were carried out for the purpose of "depopulation".

"WE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.

WE EXTEND our hand to all neighbouring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighbourliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The State of Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East." - Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel, May 14th, 1948.

This entire "List of Arab towns Depopulated" nonsense is but a mere effort to revise history in order to falsely portray Jews as brutal monsters attempting to ethnically cleanse a land of its native inhabitants, and as such it is repugnant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.23.10 (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The Zionists began their ethnic cleansing campaign and civil war with the Palestinians before the Arab armies declared war in defense of their Palestinian brethren. The Zionist authority was the aggressor. The Arabs declared war, but they were only acknowledging the aggression committed by the Zionists in attempting to conquer and ethnically cleanse "its" portion of palestine. Also FYI UNGA resolutions are legally non-binding. It is hilarious that the Zionist authority uses this one as the legal justification for its long planned and sought after genocide of the Palestinian population yet ignores every other one in the book that doesn't suit it. Lofty statements in the Zionist Authorities declaration are irrelevant, they are propaganda and not borne out at all by the actual actions of the Zionist Authority. The entire Zionist project specifically called for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, this was long known and planned for. It's hilarious that once the Zionist Authority carries out its long standing goal suddenly it becomes anathema to mention this fact.2601:140:8980:106F:1427:D747:B3C5:C86F (talk) 02:08, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus. 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://archive.is/20150925094605/http://inakba.org/ to http://inakba.org/

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) 10:09, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

name
I suggest we rename this article to "List of Palestinian Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus." Huldra (talk) 20:48, 3 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree and I disagree with the current title move which (not voluntary) "denies" the depopulation of the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, Kfar Eztion, Hartuv, and a some other Jewish villages. 2A02:2788:925:F87E:44D9:D78A:20C7:5D3 (talk) 08:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

New table for comment - DRAFT
I have made this table from the data in Abu Sitta. I have it in spreadsheet form so can easily make changes at this point. Will be more difficult once it is in the article. Comments would be appreciated. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I have added coordinates and current locations, and added it to the article. I have also added a map. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Arab Ghawarina / Jidru
I was wondering if Arab Ghawarina is/was the same as Jisr az-Zarqa?? See village #145, on User:Huldra/Morris-list, (And the political/military leadership of the Yishuv had decided to empty it, it survived thanks to local Jewish pressure (they needed their work-force). (Story is told in Morris, 1994, " 1948 and after"), Huldra (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, you are correct. I just checked - see Part 1 page 32 table 2.10 (taken from Village Statistics). Onceinawhile (talk) 21:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * See excerpt from Village Statistics, 1945 to the right – see separate cells for Arab Ghawarina / Jidru. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Plethora of reference errors
Onceinawhile: Your edit of 01:18, 5 July 2020‎ resulted in a plethora of reference errors. Please fix them right away; otherwise I may be tempted to revert to the version just before that. —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

p.s. This edit also plunged the article into category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. Fixing the reference errors should also fix this. —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:57, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Most ref errors fixed, a few remaining. Zerotalk 10:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you both. I have fixed the rest. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Zero, Onceinawhile, thank you for fixing the reference errors. As it happens, the article remains in category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. This needs to be fixed somehow.
 * I have just removed 440 nested coord templates within the map in this edit - do you think that has fixed it? Onceinawhile (talk) 07:57, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Onceinawhile: Yes, you fixed it, thanks! category:Pages where template include size is exceeded is a hidden category. To see hidden categories, go to Preferences, choose the Appearances tab, check the box by Show hidden categories, and click save. Like normal non-hidden categories, if you turn on display of hidden categories, they are displayed in old versions of pages. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:20, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Depopulated number of villages
What is the best approximation for the number of depopulated villages? This page says "around 400" other pages says "400 to 600" and Al-Jazeera's interactive map says 530. ImTheIP (talk) 11:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)


 * There is no objective answer to this question because there is no objective definition of "village" and no objective definition of "depopulated". The book "All that Remains" by Walid Khalidi contains a discussion of this question in the introduction and a village-by-village comparison of six different lists in Appendix IV. Zerotalk 04:56, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I put 'at least' in front of 400 in the lede sentence. TheEpicGhosty (talk) 19:33, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 November 2020
Please fix the following citation in the article's lead:



It should be:



The web page cited is published by the broadcasting company Al Jazeera. It is not written by a guy named Mr. Jazeera with the first name Al. Thanks, 61.239.39.90 (talk) 06:18, 27 November 2020 (UTC)


 * You are correct but I removed the sentence instead of fixing it. Zerotalk 07:32, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Jewish towns depopulated during the war
is there a separate article for the jewish towns depopulated during the war or is the information just missing? RimonLV (talk) 08:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes it is at List of villages depopulated during the Arab–Israeli conflict. It was basically the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, plus Gush Etzion. Naharayim was also evacuated, although that town was not in Palestine.
 * The title of this article used to include the word Nakba, so that it was clear it related to the Palestinians. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:10, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Abu Sitta 2006, pp. 108–115
The table cites "Abu Sitta 2006, pp. 108–115" as the source, linking to Abu Sitta's two page essay "Map and Grab" in issue XXXV(2) of Journal of Palestine Studies. His two page essay doesn't contain the eight pages being cited (108–115); moreover, it doesn't contain any data that the table attributes to it. The two page essay is a review of a 2005 book named "A Survey of Palestine under the British Mandate, 1920–1948", which doesn't contain any data from the table either. Finally, pp. 108–115 in issue XXXV(2) of Journal of Palestine Studies are taken by the essays "Words and Stones: The Politics of Language and Identity in Israel and A War of Words" by William O. Beeman, "Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism and Dying to Kill" by Lori Allen, "Palestinian Identity in Jordan and Israel: The Necessary “Other” in the Making of a Nation" by Betty Anderson, and "Palestinians Born in Exile: Diaspora and the Search for a Homeland" by Randa Farah. None of these four essays contains any data from the table.

I suggest deleting the reference to "Abu Sitta 2006, pp. 108–115" as misattributed. --Crash48 (talk) 11:22, 25 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The wrong work of Abu Sitta is being cited. The page numbers match a table of locations in Atlas of Palestine. I'll change the citation. Zerotalk 03:12, 26 May 2021 (UTC)


 * thanks! Luckily this source is available online at -- note in particular Arab Population (1948): 0 stated for Birket Ramadan, as well as Exodus Causes and Destruction Ref being blank (p. 111) -- all consistent with an uninhabited plot of agricultural land. --Crash48 (talk) 06:03, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2021
Delete Birket Ramadan from the table: it was not a town or a village but a swamp, as evident even from its name (birka means "pond" or "pool"). It could not have been depopulated because it wasn't a settlement. --Crash48 (talk) 11:22, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ (Diff)  TG HL ↗  🍁 15:30, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The fact that the name means "pond" and there was a swamp there means nothing. Lots of places are named after swamps, mountains, wadis, etc. Note that the source refers to Arab settlers. In addition, this place is listed as a depopulated village in Morris, Revisited and shown as a village (without population shown) in the 1938 village statistics. Probably it was a site of bedouin encampments. Zerotalk 02:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, Roza I.M. El-Eini, Mandated Landscape includes it in a large table of drained swamps. It says number of affected people approximately 9,000 within 5km. But 5km is a fairly large area so this is of limited usefulness. Zerotalk 03:06, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The affected people, and the Arab settlers, would include those who worked the fields and/or hunted wildfowl in the swamps. Does any source state that anybody actually lived in Birket Ramadan?
 * As you recently noted yourself at Talk:Hadera, the census of 1931 included even Hadera East railway station (without population shown) among the villages, so inclusion in a British census, without population shown, doesn't by itself imply the place was populated. --Crash48 (talk) 05:48, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There are two different things here. In the 1931 census, small populated places were lumped together with large populated places. The railway station probably did have a resident station master and family, but that is not shown separately. On the other hand, the non-settled population (i.e. bedouin without permanent buildings) was not listed as a village but instead listed under the name of the tribe. If there were a significant number of people who were customarily camped there, they would not be counted as a village population. Your source's "Arab settlers" literally means people living there. Also, a lot of the area was owned by the Supreme Muslim Council. More information is needed to form a complete picture. Zerotalk 11:36, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * "Arab settlers" literally means people living somewhere who wanted the swamp to be drained for their use. It is undisputed that the land of Birket Ramadan was owned by the Supreme Muslim Council, who leased it out to Arab farmers. Apparently it was also at some point considered by the British as a location for the settlement of landless Arabs, but they chose Wadi al-Hawarith instead. Why would we need to infer anything from indirect evidence such as this, given that the source of the table has the direct statement that the population of Birket Ramadan was zero? --Crash48 (talk) 13:48, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Wilhelma and Sarona
Those were German Templer villages whose inhabitants were deported by the British in 1941 to Tatura, Australia. What do they have to do with the 1947–1949 Palestine war? --Crash48 (talk) 17:38, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * They didn't come to an end in 1941, but I agree that "depopulated during the 1947–1949 Palestine war" is not correct. The local council of Sarona was disestablished by the High Commissioner in March 1948. I'll remove them. Zerotalk 11:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * see a good summary below:
 * Onceinawhile (talk) 12:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I have tidied up the information on this topic by creating the article German Templer Colonies in Palestine. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:05, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * do either of you object to keeping Beit Lahm of Galilee and Waldheim in here? Per German Templer colonies in Palestine they both had a Muslim population, presumably the inhabitants of the prior Palestinian villages in those two locations. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * If they had an Arab population that was removed in 1948, it is appropriate for them to be here. I haven't looked at the evidence. Zerotalk 03:51, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * [[File:Location of Beit Lahm and Waldheim (both established later) German Templar Colonies in the PEF Survey of Palestine in the context of Haifa (see green circles).png|thumb|Location of Beit Lahm and Waldheim (both established later) German Templar Colonies in the PEF Survey of Palestine in the context of Haifa (see green circles)]]
 * [[File:1945 Palestine Mandate Village Statistics population page for Sub-District of Haifa.jpg|thumb|1945 Palestine Mandate Village Statistics population page for Sub-District of Haifa]]
 * Hi, the trouble is the only evidence I have at the moment is primary – the map and statistics above. I can’t find anything which explains what happened to the native population of these two places when the colonies were established in 1906-07. Onceinawhile (talk) 05:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * my understanding is that Waldheim was the part of Umm al-'Amad which the Templers purchased and inhabited, so, lacking evidence that the Templers and the Arab Muslims ever mixed together, I presume that Waldheim and Umm al-'Amad existed as two co-located but distinct villages. This would explain both names appearing in the 1945 census. Umm al-'Amad remains in the list. --Crash48 (talk) 09:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * my understanding is that Waldheim was the part of Umm al-'Amad which the Templers purchased and inhabited, so, lacking evidence that the Templers and the Arab Muslims ever mixed together, I presume that Waldheim and Umm al-'Amad existed as two co-located but distinct villages. This would explain both names appearing in the 1945 census. Umm al-'Amad remains in the list. --Crash48 (talk) 09:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Name
your new title is ambiguous:
 * This article only refers to the Arab Palestinian locations (there is another article at List of villages depopulated during the Arab–Israeli conflict)
 * Not all the depopulation took place during the 1947-49 war. Notably Az-Zakariyya and the Bedouin removals.

The current title is entirely unambiguous, and much more concise.

Onceinawhile (talk) 20:56, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I disagree and don't think it's NPOV. The article had a stable title for well over a decade until around a year ago; since then it's been moved to three different titles by yourself, plus another title by someone else. I'd be happy with a move back to the original stable title (List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus), but the recent move was controvesrial and needs an RM. Number   5  7  21:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)


 * please self revert your crossing of 1RR.
 * Re your edit comment ("literally only been there a month"), I would also note that the title you are proposing was also there for a similar time period, and had no explicit discussion on talk. So you are swapping one title with silent consensus for another, or one title with no consensus for another, whichever way you wish to look at it.
 * Also please explain and source your suggestion of POV.
 * Onceinawhile (talk) 21:23, 12 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Ditto re 1RR vio. Need to fix that.Selfstudier (talk) 21:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I have not broken 1RR. I have made one edit to the article. A move is not a revert.
 * By all means let's go back to the stable title and you can do an RM from there. Number   5  7  21:27, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * See my comment at . Onceinawhile (talk) 21:29, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "On Wikipedia, reverting means undoing or otherwise negating the effects of one or more edits, which results in the page (or a part of it) being restored to a previous version." Selfstudier (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for confirming my point – a page move is not an edit. Cheers Number   5  7  21:37, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * AE beckons.Selfstudier (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

While the AE goes on, shall we try to have a constructive discussion here? can you explain what exactly you disagree with in my comments above (you wrote "I disagree" but did not explain – presumably this relates to my statement that your title is ambiguous and doesn't match the content of the article?), and can you explain what you base your suggestion of non-NPOV on?

We have been working hard to try to find a good and stable article title for this page for some time. It was great to have achieved that stability with a name that fitted all five WP:CRITERIA (which no prior title did), until now. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Reverse move to stable title. Disruptive this was moved to begin with. The "Depopulated Palestinian locations in Israel" title hijacking is not neutral, and is also non-specific and includes numerous locations that have nothing to do with this article. Locations depopulated after 1950 could be included in the "in Israel" title. So could hundreds, even thousands, of Khirbets that were abandoned decades before 1948.--Hippeus (talk) 13:40, 13 August 2021 (UTC) sock


 * Nope Given the disagreement, RM is the way to go now (before as well, probably).Selfstudier (talk) 13:44, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Duplicate
Isn't this page a duplicate of List of villages depopulated during the Arab–Israeli conflict? Shouldn't both page be merged? Patrick.N.L (talk) 09:24, 27 August 2021 (UTC)


 * It could be merged, but it isn't a duplicate. The 1948 war is just one of the times that villages were depopulated. I believe the articles were separated because the combined list was too long and now there is quite little overlap. Zerotalk 09:52, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Move request
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: (non-admin closure) NOT MOVED User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 18:05, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

While there isn't consensus that the current title is good, there is consensus that it is an acceptable neutral status quo ante title, and there is consensus against each of the proposed moves. No prejudice against any immediate good-faith, follow-up, standard-format RM proposal. User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 18:05, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

List of towns and villages depopulated during the 1947–1949 Palestine war → ? – Procedural request given that everyone keeps saying "let's start an RM" but no one will actually do so. Please keep the opinions above in mind (which is why this is a subsection). Potential options, based on previous moves: Primefac (talk) 13:56, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) List of towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus
 * 2) List of towns and villages depopulated during the Nakba
 * 3) Depopulated Palestinian locations in Israel
 * 4) Other not listed


 * Comment per WP:CRITERIA we really should not have an article title which is 12 words long. Nor should we have one which is not precise to the topic of this article (the article is based on the sources in the bibliography, which relate to (a) depopulations roughly between 1947 and 1950, many of which happened outside of the war or the exodus; and (b) Palestinian locations only – the handful of depopulated [and since repopulated] Jewish villages are not covered). Some editors have got heated about POV here but that seems nonsensical to me – this is a simple question of finding an elegant title and I can’t see the excitement in any of the options. I have a preference but I will wait to see what arguments others bring first. Onceinawhile (talk) 17:49, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note there is a second relevant article with a poor title: List of villages depopulated during the Arab–Israeli conflict: (1) that article does not just describe villages – there are many towns and other types of settlement, and (2) in Wikipedia we state the Arab–Israeli conflict as having started in 1948, yet the article lists depopulations from the 1880s. Onceinawhile (talk) 17:55, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't really like "mixed" articles, a lot of them have been split now, less problems that way.Selfstudier (talk) 18:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Option 4 K, I'll go first, heh. Twas me moved it from "1" to the current title back in April because it isn't just 48 and "exodus" gives the impression it is only about refugees when it is also about properties.


 * The logic I think has slightly altered, the current subject does not specify Palestinian (the old "Arab" seems inaccurate/generic, see eg 1948 Palestinian exodus from Lydda and Ramle and 1949–1956 Palestinian exodus, 1967 Palestinian exodus). If the when is not only 47-49 then how to conveniently describe it? 47-56? I might go with List of towns and villages depopulated during the Nakba as was tried in 2009 except that Nakba could be construed as including the 67 exodus and subsequent displacements. Option 3 has the merit of specifying the location while leaving the dates implicit and is short and sweet. Still, I prefer to stick with my original thought, even if it is a bit long, while picking up the root cause (the 47-9 war), amended somewhat. List of Palestinian towns and villages depopulated due to the 1947–1949 Palestine war — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selfstudier (talk • contribs) 18:05, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That doesn't seem accurate since the lead says they were repopulated by Israelis since, and that proposed title makes it seem like the land they were on remains depopulated. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 01:09, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Personally I would prefer to refer to displacement rather than depopulation but the latter has been used for long. "Palestinian displacement.." also doesn't sit well with "List of..." (the property vs refugee thing I mentioned before) you would have to have something like "(List of) localities (per Zero) with Palestinians displaced due to....", idk.Selfstudier (talk) 06:21, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose I think the current title is probably the clearest and least problematic title possible (and I think the list should also cover the small number of non-Arab villages that were depopulated). If there are any issues with the length of it, we could replace "towns and villages" with "settlements". Number   5  7  21:22, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , which source follows this scope? I don't believe there are any, and therefore I believe what you are proposing is synth. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:07, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Separately, the term "settlement" has a very specific connotation in this topic area (see e.g. "Settler", which is the form of the word as it is used for Israeli settlements), so sources obviously avoid using the term settlement to refer to historical Palestinian locations given the potential for misunderstanding. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:16, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't see what external sources have to do with what we decide to include in a Wikipedia list; we define it as editors.
 * In response to the (now changed) claim that source never use the phrase "settlement" to refer to Arab villages, this clearly isn't the case. Number   5  7  23:32, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , the answer is at WP:Notability: if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article.
 * There is already a wider list article which includes the small number of depopulated Jewish locations, and all the pre-and-post-Nakba depopulated Palestinian locations. The reason this article was created in 2009 was because the depopulation of Palestinian towns during the Nakba is an area of a significant number of academic publications. See the discussion at Talk:List of villages depopulated during the Arab–Israeli conflict. Onceinawhile (talk) 00:23, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * please could you provide your view on this? Onceinawhile (talk) 14:49, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * My view remains that it would be preferable (and beneficial to readers) for all the places (both Arab and Jewish) depopulated in the 1947-49 conflict to be covered in a single list. Number   5  7  15:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That flies in the face of a consensus which has held ever since this article was created, twelve years ago. You should have opened an RfC to assess consensus regarding a change in scope before edit warring in a title which did not have consensus. Now we have a title that is inconsistent with the scope of the article. What a mess. Will you be working to resolve this, or do you propose to leave us to tidy it up? Onceinawhile (talk) 19:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You asked me for my view, not what consensus is. I am also not the person who originally moved it to that title; I was simply following standard RM practice by moving a controversial move back to the previous title; by all means ask the original editor why they moved it to the current title. As I've said more than once above, I would have been fine with it being moved back to the long-term stable title, but rather than take up that offer and start an RM from there, you decided to go to AE, so the article being stuck at this title for the foreseeable is your mess to tidy up. And as for why I think it's controversial – I think the combination of 'Israel' and 'Palestinian' is problematic; I would have been fine with "Depopulated Arab locations in Israel", which avoids any potential assumptions/confusion about the identity/nationality of those who left or territorial changes/claims. Now, please stop pinging me. Thanks, Number   5  7  18:09, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no consensus for that. Even if "Palestinian" is not part of the title, it is clear by inspection that is the scope (although it currently says "Arab"). "Mixed" articles are also problematic to categorize, particularly when one element is in a small minority compared to another.Selfstudier (talk) 09:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * NPOV requires that Jewish location attacked, early in the war, and depopulated (whether resettled or not late be included. Singling out only Arab locations is POV. Free1Soul (talk) 17:29, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment two points:
 * I would prefer a name with "List of" in the name; as this article is a list.
 * I thought of List of depopulated Palestinian locations in Israel; alas that is a problem: lots of Arab/Palestinian localities were depopulated long before 1948; how can we have a name which should not include Afula, Petah Tikva, Kiryat Ata, and lots of other places? Huldra (talk) 22:15, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I prefer "localities" to either "locations" or "towns and villages". In the first case, it is better English. In the second case, it helps to keep the title short and it avoids the issue of what a village is, which is particularly important in the case of bedouin. Zerotalk 05:21, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose, the current title is neutral and has a well defined scope. Free1Soul (talk) 14:46, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose, I don't see any good reason to move the title doesn't break any policy and follows WP:NDESC --Shrike (talk) 14:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Corrections and lack of source
Marus was depopulated through operation Hiram not Yiftach. The source does not even have the term Yiftach. Patrick.N.L (talk) 04:26, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, have fixed. Onceinawhile (talk) 06:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

The problem still needs fixing
the problem created by your move war two months ago remains. We have a title which in inconsistent with the content, and there is no consensus to change either the title or the content. What do you propose? Onceinawhile (talk) 21:41, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I propose adding in the other villages that were depopulated. I can't see any meaningful discussion about that suggestion for several years, and it would only mean adding around 10 extra places to the list so I don't see why it's such a big deal.
 * And for the record, it was not 'my move war' – you were the one that violated the WP:RM protocol by attempting to reinstate an undiscussed and reverted move – this title was not my creation. I also suggested returning to the stable title, which was ignored. Number   5  7  22:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * please could you take responsibility for finding consensus around a solution here? We are still stuck with your title, which remains inconsistent with the content, and there is as yet no consensus to change either the title or the content. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:19, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Again: The current title was not one I came up with; I simply reverted a bad move by yourself, restoring the previous title. I also suggested restoring an early long-standing title, but you ignored that too. Please stop pinging me with these false claims. Number   5  7  10:31, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn’t ignore anything. You and I can’t do anything alone now – there was a moment in time when we could have resolved it together through discussion, but your actions complicated the situation, and now nothing but wide consensus will fix the mess. It has now been a year in this incorrect / misleading arrangement – are you really comfortable leaving it like this? Onceinawhile (talk) 12:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Procedural Comment I don't know what the title of the article should be, but I do know that anyone who moves the article without using the Requested Move process will be immediately reported to either ANI or Arbitration Enforcement, by me. User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 22:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

How many?
How many locations are in the list? Synotia (moan) 08:26, 27 March 2023 (UTC)