Talk:Ro'i

Name in Hebrew
I think it is actually helpful and nicer to know the multiple meaning of the name in Hebrew.213.8.204.59 (talk) 11:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source to show that there is any relation between the definition and why they chose that for the name of the town? Without it, its irrelevant. -  Galatz Talk  16:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

The sentence simply mentions there's a multiple meaning in the name(something any Hebrew speaker notices), it comes after the formal etymology, and doesn't claim to be a reason for which the town's called Roi. maybe we can add something like " not to be mistaken with" or " the source of the name Ro'i may be misinterpreted as... it's actually the aka..."213.8.204.59 (talk)
 * Unless you have an RS showing it is at all relevant to the name of the town, what you are talking about is WP:OR -  Galatz Talk  22:00, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

You ask me to "prove" or to confirm that Ro'i in Hebrew is a given name of God as a shepherd, or you ask how come multiple meaning is relevant? I don't claim that's the reason in which the town is called Ro'i, I bring to the readers attention a fact any local or Hebrew speaker "naturally" knows. By the way, if you keep on arguing I'll simply use some of the sources from he.wiki, it brings a much more complex history of the naming of the place.213.8.204.59 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:22, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not asking you to prove the definition. I am stating that Wikipedia policy is that everything needs a WP:RS otherwise it is WP:OR. If there are sources, then yes, use them and show how its relevant. -  Galatz Talk  04:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

How come it's relevant to anyone that the town is called as it is because some committee has said so? The person visiting or living there call the place "spaghetti" not because of the formal decision but because that's the name everyone else uses. Now many might confuse, mistake or simply notice the double meaning of the name, that's the relevance argument, there's no source mentioning the double meaning because that's part of the chaotic-social-linguistic human reality and not like you army people think of human reality as a mere bureaucratic-computerized programmed-stagnant thing. The name of a place is used by people not by impeccable angels, it accumulates cultural charge over time and use. 213.8.204.59 (talk) 10:58, 23 May 2016 (UTC).


 * You are wrong about how Wikipedia works, though perhaps not so wrong about the name. Galatz is correct that you can't just add stuff on the basis of what "everyone" knows.  However, this official source (p1827) gives the intention of the name as its meaning in Isaiah, without mention of the paratrooper, and spells it without the acronym marker.  Official government maps also omit the acronym marker . This leads me to suspect that the Biblical meaning is the official one and that the paratrooper version is not the one accepted by the naming committee. Zerotalk 12:01, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I completely agree it is better to have a source, but it is not about the official naming it is about something Hebrew speakers notice as they speak, something I find relevant, the part of "the official name is due to.." and an anecdote regarding the name( I find Wikipedia no archetypical Encyclopaedia but something more inclusive, as long as it is not wrong or misleading and enough people find it as such it is better to have it). m not sure, taken by your feet but sure am fan of your words(well as long as it support my opinion) ;-) 213.8.204.59 (talk) 15:56, 23 May 2016 (UTC)