Talk:Ortal, Golan Heights

Terms
Settlement was before kibbutz on June 15. Thats what it is called by the entire world. Get consensus if you want to change the position. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok dude. Thank you for letting me use your argument when I apply it the other way around. Cheers. --Shuki (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * So I went back in the history and found that the term kibbutz existed before you inserted the settlement label on 3 August 2009. so in other words,

''Settlement was before kibbutz on 3 August 2009. Get consensus if you want to change the position. Cheers. --Shuki (talk) 10:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No because "settlement" wasn't even in the article before august 3. So how could "kibbutz" have been "before" it? I don't see any consensus here for you rearranging and putting the term used by the entire world after "kibbutz". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 10:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I know you are aware that an RfC is going on now, and that the status quo should be kept until consensus is reached. We should refrain from edit warring on this, there are over 200 other geography articles like this one. At this time, I am not going to the other articles to rv back to before your POV edits last year, I suggest you also take a step back. --Shuki (talk) 12:33, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The "status quo" at this article was "settlement" before "kibbutz", at no previous time was the "kibbutz" before "settlement", you have no consensus for your pov rearranging. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Shuki, SD is right. Settlement has been before kibbutz before another user changed that. Accordingly, I will be placing settlement first here. I agree that while the RFC is being held we should maintain the status quo, but here the original order was settlement then kibbutz.  nableezy  - 15:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose you reread my comment and saw for yourself that until 3 August 2009, there was no settlement before kibbutz. --Shuki (talk) 19:17, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, but if we are operating under that standard perhaps we should go through each of the articles that originally only had settlement until you added town first and reverse the order. Just kidding of course, I am willing to see where the RFC leads us and do nothing in the meantime.  nableezy  - 22:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That would be fun but interesting at the same time. We start with almost all the Golan articles? On the other hand, two people on the RfC have voted opposite to how they started some/many articles. --Shuki (talk) 20:56, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Shuki, you said "Settlement was before kibbutz on 3 August 2009", still you haven't provided the diff to show me at what time exactly the "kibbutz" was before "settlement", if you cant show this, I guess it has be be reverted back to the status quo. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I need to do your work? Go check the first version of the article. There is no mention of settlement. It was only later put in by you over a year later. --Shuki (talk) 21:29, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I am looking at the first version of the article:, and I don't see that the kibbutz was before settlement, because "settlement" wasn't in the article, so it couldn't have been before "kibbutz". At no previous time was the "kibbutz" before "settlement". So your claims for the rearrangement is inaccurate, I am therefor changing back to the original status quo. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a weenie argument. What does that mean 'original status quo'? Pre RfC or post RfC? Pre-Nableezy or post-Nableezy? --Shuki (talk) 18:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Original status quo is how the position of these two terms was from the beginning. The argument is that at no previous time was the "kibutz" before "settlement". The earliest time these two terms appeared together here, "settlement" was before "kibbutz". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:42, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Out of curiosity Shuki, are you saying that if the original version of the article had only contained settlement and somebody had added "village" ahead of settlement we should go change it so that "settlement" is before "village"?  nableezy  - 21:38, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Status sentence
There has been long discussion at WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/Current Article Issues about adding the illegality issue in all settlement article: There is now consensus to have the sentence: "The international community considers Israeli settlements in (the Golan Heights/the West Bank/East Jerusalem) illegal under international law, but the Israeli government disputes this." in all relevant articles, but its not clear yet exactly where in the article, so therefor I'm suggesting that the agreed upon sentence be placed as the third sentence in this article. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:46, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I suggest you keep it to the centralized discussion instead of copy-pasting over a potential 200+ talk pages. --Shuki (talk) 23:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 20:07, 8 February 2014 (UTC)