User talk:Fatima30

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!  Nacimota  [ T 11:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Names in Bibliographies
Salam Fatima30, Welcome on wikipedia and thank you for your contributions ! For information : this is not at all mandatory but in bibliography or reference sections, the name of the author is often written with first the surname and then the given name. In the article title, it is the contrary. For that reason, it is usally done that way : Cheers, Ceedjee (talk) 12:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Mashala, Nur that gives Mashala, Nur.

Thank you for your work on Nur-eldeen Masalha....Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 23:01, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Question re A land without a people for a people without a land
Hi Fatima, I've got a question about this edit you made to A_land_without_a_people_for_a_people_without_a_land

In the following quotation there are a couple of editorial interpretations in square brackets.

"In its initial stage, Zionism was conceived by its pioneers as a movement wholly depending on mechanical factors: there is a country which happens to be called Palestine, a country without a people, and, on the other hand, there exists the Jewish people, and it has no country. What else is necessary, then, than to fit the gem into the ring, to unite this people with this country? The owners of the country [the Ottoman Turks?] must, therefore, be persuaded and convinced that this marriage is advantageous, not only for the [Jewish] people and for the country, but also for themselves."

Are they interpretations by you or by Litvinoff the editor of the book from which you made the quotation? If they are by Litvinoff, I think one of us needs to make this clear. If they are by you, then you may be unaware that Wikipedia has an editorial WP:No original research (often abbreviated to NOR or WP:NOR) which restricts heavilly what can be said. While the explanatory insertion of "[Jewish]" isn't a problem, the insertion of "[the Ottoman Turks?]" since the owners could equally be the Turkish or Arab (Syrian or Palestinian) landlords who would be selling the land, or the then inhabitants of the land. You (or someone else who knows the relevant literature) would need to reference in the article a scholar who suggest the Ottomans as the correct interpretation and, if scholars are in disagreement WP:Undue would require that the range of interpretations were appropriately represented.

I doubt that you will be greatly surprised if I say that the whole Arab-Israeli dispute is an area of continuing dispute on Wikipedia. This means that you have to be especially well-prepared if you are to successfully defend your edits from people whose politics are different from yours

You might also like to look at some Wikipedia projects. WikiProject Palestine consists of people interested in improving the coverage of articles on Palestinian projects. Politically most members would be pro-Palestinian with a few people with opposing opinions wanting to monitor what is said. WP: Israel is in some ways a mirror-image. WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration has members with a range of standpoints and is intended to encourage a focus on improving articles whilst keeping aggressive and unconstructive behaviours to a minimum.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

A land without a people for a people without a land

 * I appreciate your adding material from Ghada Karmi and Eugene Cotrans book on the Palestinian exodus, but you need to learn to put them in the right section of the article. By putting them right at the top of article you give Jayjg an excuse to automatically revert them. You also need to use less POV Words. I've moved the sources you've added to the "wish that arabs would go away section" and couched them in Karmi and Cotrans arguments, sense that's where they originally came from.


 * Believe me, I'm sympathetic to your aims, but there are other editors with rigid ideological outlooks who will cease on any infraction to revert your edits. You have to be careful how you add them. annoynmous 13:25, 31 March 2009 (UTC)