Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by Israel


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. Suggestions that this page represents a certain POV go unsubstantiated, so it's hard to offer these votes much weight. Overall, though, while renaming is a valid issue that is worth discussing, the consensus here is to keep. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

List of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by Israel

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Virtually none of the content is sourced at all, let alone reliably, and there are no apparent plans to provide sourcing. A pagemove discussion has been opened, but the move - if accepted - will contribute nothing to solving the problem. All in all, this seems to be an unusually silly political propaganda article. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 00:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Original article has been tampered with: This is the real article: User Gilbrand removed templates, categorizes and replaced information from the original article. Its all sourced. And I was planning to expand it with more info, sources, and to create stubs. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I see no significant difference between the versions, and in both of them virtually all the content is unsourced. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 01:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The templates and categories were removed and info changed, show me one thing that isnt sourced. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 01:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Not a single item on the list is sourced. The only thing that is sourced are a couple of background statements. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 01:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Nothing of what you have said is true. You can not show me one single sentence. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 01:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Supreme Deliciousness has been blocked for 24 hrs for edit warring on List of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by Israel. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep but Rename. An article identifying former population centers appears notable and legitimate, but the title of the article appears to be pushing a particular political agenda.  I would support a renaming of the article as List of Syrian towns and villages depopulated by Israel List of pre-1967 Syrian towns on the Golan Heights to avoid potential POV in the title name and to conform to the names of similar articles ie: List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus and List of villages depopulated during the Arab-Israeli conflict. Cbl62 (talk) 00:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I have modified to support The Anome's renaming proposal. 05:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Its a list of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by Israel, just like there is a list for the depopulated Palestinian villages: Notability is there. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * oppose delete of this article be no more than attempt to deny arab culture and promote zionist propaganda that seek to discredit horrible genocide and other atrocity commit by israeli government. This important article about mass destroy & genocide of arab village and town in Golan Heights Ani medjool (talk) 00:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: Ani medjool appears to be a sock puppet of Supreme Deliciousness, who has been suspected of sockpuppetry in the past. I have opened a case at Sockpuppet investigations/Supreme Deliciousness. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 00:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC) - Please do not say "he appears to be" because this is not true. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep but Rename mostly per Cbl62. I prefer "List of Syrian towns and villages depopulated in the Arab-Israeli conflict". If all are known to have been depopulated by Israel which is likely the case (but must be proven) then we could also call it "List of Syrian towns and villages depopulated by Israel." --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The alt renaming proposal made by Al Ameer son appears to be fine. My concern is to try to avoid advancing either side's agenda and to attempt to describe the list in a neutral fashion. Cbl62 (talk) 01:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * My concern is to avoid putting unverified content on Wikipedia. Can you explain how the proposed move would address my concern, considering that the unsourced content would remain the same? Jalapenos do exist (talk) 01:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The sources provided in the article do appear to verify the depopulation of many former population centers in the Golan Heights -- albeit not every specific entry on the lengthy list of red-linked villages. I agree that verifiable sources should be included for each entry on the list, but that concern is not, IMO, a basis for deleting the entire article. My vote would be to rename the article in a neutral manner and then to follow appropriate protocol to demand sourcing for each entry.  To the extent such sourcing is not provided, then any specifid villages that remain unsourced can/should be removed. Cbl62 (talk) 01:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The sources are not reliable, and even if they were they would only support an article such as List of pre-1967 Syrian towns on the Golan Heights. Like any WP:MADEUP, it could become a good article if only the title and all the content were changed. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 02:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I have posted three more sources for the villages, and will expand the article and list tomorrow: --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 01:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * These are not from reliable sources, nor do they support the content of the list. The one that I checked lists towns on the Golan Heights abandoned during the Six-Day War, which is different from the article both according to the current title and the proposed title. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 01:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Irish center for Human Rights, National university of Ireland and Arab Center for Human Rights "Thus, it is evident that the vast majority of Syrians and their families, who were expelled in 1967" "1.2.1 Forcible transfer of civilians from the Occupied Syrian Golan The depopulation of the Syrian Golan of its native inhabitants was the firstmajorabuse conducted in the Golan during and following the end of the 1967 war between Israel and its Arab neighbours. Prior to the occupation, the Syrian Golan contained approximately 153,000 inhabitants; following the capture of 70% of the Golan territory by Israel, approximately 130,000 were forcibly transferred or displaced to Syria proper43and forbidden from returning." "1.2.2 The Destruction of villages and farms With thousands of people forced to leave the Occupied Golan and unable to return, (an estimated 130,000 people), the Israeli military were, for the most part, unopposed in their administration of the newly occupied territory and began a widespread campaign that destroyed numerous villages and farms. The only villages to escape the campaign of destruction were Majdal Shams, Masa’da, Bqa’atha, ‘Ein Qinyeh, and Al-Ghajar, fivesmallvillagesinthevalleyofMountHermon. Israeli settlements were then built in a number of places over destroyed Arab villages and farms, in so doing, control was taken of the land and resources." --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 01:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The source is the Arab Centre for Human Rights, which is not a reliable source, and your quotes don't support the article's content. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 01:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep But Rename per Al Ameer son : "List of Syrian towns and villages depopulated in the Arab-Israeli conflict" Unomi (talk) 01:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * "Depopulate" is a transitive verb that implies active agency; in other words, depopulating is something that one group does to another group. This source, for example, speaks of flight during the Six-Day War but says nothing of forcible transfer or anything like that. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 02:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete There are no reliable sources, and Supreme Deliciousness/Ani Medjool, whether that is one person or not, keeps adding more unreliable and biased sources to attempt to qualify the article. The fact that there AREN'T any reliable sources to be found, and he is forced to present these sad excuses of sources, only further attests to the ridiculousness of this article. Furthermore, the support to keep this article, as you can see above, is based on his belief that people need to be informed on the "mass destroy and genocide of arab" by the Israeli government. This is a complete joke. It is not objective, it is not neutral as per NPOV, and renaming the article will not change this fact. This needs to be deleted swiftly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.230.182 (talk) 02:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * If better sources can be found, I suggest that we Keep but rename to List of pre-1967 Syrian towns on the Golan Heights or similar less-politically-charged name. Otherwise, I suggest deletion, but without prejudice as to re-creation of the article at a later date. -- The Anome (talk) 02:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep But Rename - IF reliable 3rd party sources can be provided. As the editor who initiated the rename discussion on the article's talk page, I would also be supportive the alternate title suggested by Al Ameer son or The Anome's suggestion of List of pre-1967 Syrian towns on the Golan Heights (I personally lean more towards the 2nd) .  I don't think anyone disagrees that there were Syrian villages prior to the Israeli occupation that are no longer in existence; however we must strive to find a terminology that is less politically charged that also satisfies WP:NPOV and WP:RS. No solution will be perfect, but we can at least try to find a resolution that everyone can live with -- at least for the here and now.  -- nsaum75  ¡שיחת! 02:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)    Stellarkid (talk) 03:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep but Rename per nsaum with his/her caveats. I could live with  List of pre-1967 Syrian towns on the Golan Heights if we can find RS's and  use terminology that doesn't characterize events   in the usual anti-Israeli way. Stellarkid (talk) 03:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions.  — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Expand I would like to see an article of "List of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by the Jews and their henchmen". Just kidding. I agree with Stellarkid on this subject-- the talk page discussion will be beneficial to this subject. Shii (tock) 06:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, nationalist POV-pushing, not needed here. Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC).
 * Keep From memory, Syrian and Israeli government figures agree that about 100,000 fled from the Golan in 1967. The topic is therefore notable, and should be sourceable with some work.  Another name might be preferable, but that is not a reason for deletion.John Z (talk) 09:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, but perhaps rename 'List of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by Israeli forces', 'List of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by Israeli forces during the 1967 war' or something similar. Just saying 'depopulated' is a bit weird terminology, it doesn't really paint an actual picture of events. --Soman (talk) 09:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of them were not destroyed during the war but over the next few years, using civilian contractors. Zerotalk 01:22, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

*FYI, the above msg.-- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! 16:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep but Rename to something more like.. "List of Syrian towns and villages (depopulated or occupied) in the Arab-Israeli conflict". Off2riorob (talk) 12:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep but Rename and tag for RS needed - rename into something like List of pre-1967 Syrian towns on the Golan Height, and a tag for RS until this has been worked out on the talk page between the involved editors. Pantherskin (talk) 16:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete-The article just seems to be Anti-Israel propaganda. All the sources are unrealible. Delete it.--Ace Oliveira (talk) 17:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - but rename to something more encyclopedic and improve the sourcing. Since this was a significant event in the 20th century in terms of generating displaced persons, having a list of the population centres that were destroyed during and after the war is appropriate content in my view. Sourcing details can be addressed.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 17:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep though there are a number of problems: the list of villages needs sources for each name, preferably more than one, and redlinks may be premature. If there are records of some of these villages being of some significant size, and not just arbitrary names for a loosely populated region, they need to be listed, i believe, per our policies on settlments. there are a lot of totally unrelated links that give this an OR or POV taint, which need to be stripped, (all the links to things like ghost towns and villages lost to desert, etc). the nuclear facility should not appear here, as that makes the article about israeli aggression against syria, a broader topic than the title warrants. I support a renaming such as "Depopulated Syrian settlements from the 6 day war" or "Syrian settlements destroyed in the 6 day war". i know that name doesnt directly address the aggression directed at syria by israel, but that fact can be addressed in the body of the article, and of course in links to the war itself. naming the article as it is creates a huge POV problem. the name implies that israel was solely to blame for this, and denies that "blame" must go both ways, regardless of how much more horrific one sides actions MAY appear compared to another. i dont see other articles like: "list of german villages destroyed by the allies" and i could find only one article with a title using this kind of wording: Khachkar destruction in Nakhchivan. its a subtle point, but article titles seem to be extremely neutral in overall tone, esp. when discussing controversial subjects. and please, lets assume good faith. IF people commenting here have an overt zionist or antizionist (or other) agenda in other areas of their life (which is utterly ok by me, i have my agendas in my life, wouldnt deny them to others), set that aside while here, and set aside bad faith comments about others, or bad faith comments about what a deletion or retention may say about our process and culture at WP. this article could easily be deleted for poor sourcing (which as i said i bet could be found for at least SOME of the content), which is no reflection on whether anyone here is agenda pushing, or even if WP has an agenda. we dont WANT to have an agenda, so were all trying to NOT bring an agenda and trying to help each other avoid that. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There is another page I know of which has the word "destruction" in it: Destruction of sites associated with early Islam. Chesdovi (talk) 21:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep Notable subject for which there are enough sources to make a good article. As for the name, it is fine given that all of the 130 Syrian villages depopulated were destroyed ("completely levelled", accordingly to Baruch Kimmerling, as I noted on the talk page in the section on renaming). There is nothing wrong with stating verifiably facts. We don't water down the truth just so as not to offend people.  T i a m u t talk 18:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment-Tiamut, it's obvious your opinion is biased about the subject. Not only that, but all the sources cited were not reliable. As for the article, It's badly written. I really see no reason to keep this article around. Except if we find good sources since this could be a really good article if rewritten.--Ace Oliveira (talk) 18:31, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ace Olivera, please comment on content, not contributors. And for your information, I just voted "oppose" to renaming List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus to "List of Arab villages destroyed during the 1948 Palestinian exodus", because in that case, not every village was destroyed. In this case, reliable sources like Baruch Kimmerling, an Israeli historian, say following Israel's conquest of the area, almost 130 villages were completely levelled.
 * Comment - I checked the book, and the self-description alone on the back cover makes it clear that this is not exactly the realiable source we are looking for here. A partisan and opinionated voice yes, but nothing more. Pantherskin (talk) 19:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but your opinion regarding Kimmerling's partisanship is frankly irrelevant. His book is published by an academic press and he is an expert in this field. He is WP:RS and the information is WP:V, whether you like it or not.  T i a m u t talk 20:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is published by Verso, the self-proclaimed "largest radical publisher in the English-language world". Doesn't exactly sound like a non-partisan academic press. Pantherskin (talk) 20:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Further, another source supports Kimmerling's assessment. Virginia Tilley writes of the Golan Heights: "It is a visually compelling region, with 33 Jewish settlements sparsely scattered through a craggy moor landscape marked by 131 destroyed Arab villages, which were bombed and/or bulldozed by Israel after the flight in 1967 of some 100,000 Arab residents."  T i a m u t talk 20:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment-Oh dear. I guess I will stay out of this then. I can't find any good or bad sources on Google. I don't like your sources Tiamut. But I can't find any either. I think this article has potential, but it's very far from good right now. I still say we should delete it.

Keep and rename if necessary if reliable sources are found for each village and farm. The red links should be removed as I doubt any of these villages are notable enough for their own pages. The template should also be deleted. Chesdovi (talk) 21:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment A search for "Golan" or "Syria" from http://www.internal-displacement.org/, which appears to be produced by the Norwegian Refugee Council, an apparently independent and respectable source, might be a good place to start. This CIA map of the extent of the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights might also be useful. -- The Anome (talk) 23:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Redlink farm. Who has decided what constitutes and how large a village is? Did each locality included numerous homes and hundreds of people? I suggest that first some articles be developed so their legitimacy/notability be judged. MY OR: I've seen many single buildings around the Golan, and a few of what might be considered a small village, but over 131? This might be POV. --Shuki (talk) 23:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Shuki has a point. I mean how valid is it to included in the list "108 farms". How notable is a farm? Maybe 10 people live on it?! Unless we are to measure notability by the number of livestock it rears! Chesdovi (talk) 10:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep To this point, the pro-side has been able to provide at least two WP:RS indicating that the verb "destroyed" is an accurate description of list. However, per Chesdovi it is a redlink farm of ex-"villages" unlikely to be notable in their own right and I have nominated Supreme Deliciousness's template for deletion on that basis here. If the delete/rename side can provide WP:RS that these sources are incorrect, I'll happily reconsider. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Yes, I don't think the word 'destroyed' is particularly controversial or non-neutral. It simply describes what happened. It's words like 'depopulated' that are controversial and disputed because they touch upon the forcibly expelled vs fled narrative wars.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 02:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Redlink farm. Article is not reliably sourced. I concur with Shuki. I also find the article name highly POV. Delete it. Shlomke (talk) 14:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

*Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. —Shlomke (talk) 14:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC) (removed by User:Malik Shabazz)
 * This above notice no longer exit on judaism page. i not delete it from judaism page, User Shlomke delete it. So since it no longer list, it should no longer be here on this page.  Maybe it belong striked out but i do not know how to do that. Ani medjool (talk)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  —Shlomke (talk) 23:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Question: does anyone have access to a pre-1967 atlas published by a mainstream publisher containing a detailed map of, or gazetteer for, Syria that might be usable as an independent, verifiable, reliable source for the names of the populated places given here? Or, alternatively something like this map, cited as "Portion of Dimashq (Damascus), Syria; Lebanon, Joint Operations Graphic (AIR), Series 1501 AIR, Sheet NI 37-9, Edition 4. Original scale 1:250,000. U.S. National Imagery and Mapping Agency, compiled November 1972, revised July 1998, air information current through 5 April 1999. Not for navigational use", which seems to show older settlements? -- The Anome (talk) 23:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes it is certainly possible (with some work). As a start, I will upload a very detailed 1943 map that shows all the villages at that time. Zerotalk 01:22, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, obviously. There is an issue about the best name, and there will always be a question about the inclusion of some of the localities.  But it is a fact that in the 1967-9 time frame a large number of villages on the Golan Heights were demolished by Israel.  There is no question about that whatever (see for example "The Fate of Abandoned Arab Villages, 1965-1969" by Aron Shai  which quotes Israeli internal documents from the demolition project).  Since this happened, I can't see any reason why an attempt to list the villages is a bad idea.  Looking above, the only substantive reason for deletion is the difficulty of sourcing.  We have well-developed methods for dealing with that problem; it is not a reason for deletion.  If necessary, data can be moved to the talk page and reinstated as sources for each village are identified.  Zerotalk 10:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The abstract of the article you cite does not support the contention that even one of the towns on the list was destroyed by Israel. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 22:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Why should that be in the abstract? Anyway, the paper discusses the general situation, not individual villages. Examples: "As the pace of the surveys increased in the West Bank, widespread operations also began on the Golan Heights, which had been captured from Syria during the war (figure 7). Dan Urman, whose official title was Head of Surveying and Demolition Supervision for the Golan Heights, was in charge of this task. Urman submitted a list of 127 villages for demolition to his bosses." ... "The demolitions were executed by contractors hired for the job. Financial arrangements and coordination with the ILA and the army were recorded in detail. Davidson commissioned surveys and demolition supervision from the IASS. Thus, for example, in a letter dated 15 May 1968, he wrote to Ze'ev Yavin: 'Further to our meeting, this is to inform you that within a few days we will start demolishing about 90 abandoned villages on the Golan Heights (see attached list).'" And so forth, all carefully cited to the Israeli archives. Zerotalk 01:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This excerpt, if accurate, would also not support the contention that even one of the towns on the list was destroyed by Israel. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 23:47, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Why is Al-Marsad aka "Arab centre for human rights" any less RS than other NGO's? See the following description of them in this UN document here. I have done no research other than finding this reference, but certainly no need for a speedy delete here. This article should stay and writer allowed to develop this page and one for Al-Marsad (if he chooses) to support the supposition that this is a RS NGO. Jgui (talk) 16:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Many NGOs are not obscure, demonstrate some commitment to rigor and accuracy, and are not obviously partisan and radical. But creating an article based solely (or mainly) on any NGO would be a bad idea. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 22:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: At the time of this writing, the vast majority of the list remains unsourced, and there is still not a single item on the list that is sourced to anything other than the Arab Centre for Human Rights, which is not a reliable source. Retaining an article sourced solely to an obscure and radically partisan organization would be a very problematic precedent. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 22:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply: Im working on the list: Source is reliable: Arab Center for Human Rights in the Golan Heights which is an independent non-profit legal human rights organization, UN document co-authored by Declan Gannon, legal researcher Al- Marsad, and Dr. Ray Murphy, senior lecture Irish Center for Human Rights at National University of Ireland, Galway. There is also a lot of interviews from refugees in the source.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Althougth certainly not a neutral source in itself, it is definately not a run of the mill reliable source. This is because of, amoung other things, the dedication to the destroyed village in the preface. Chesdovi (talk) 22:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The publisher of the paper has an impressive website; unfortunately the organisation is bereft of staff and board members. Chesdovi (talk) 22:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Board members and staff are listed here: Zerotalk 03:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You've already mentioned that they have a university lecturer on board. That doesn't make them a reliable source; see WP:RS. In the future, I don't suppose it would be too much to ask that you create encyclopedia articles after you've found reliable sources for their content. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 22:58, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The source has been called reliable by several editors: --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:06, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * And it has been called unreliable by many more. Thankfully, that's not how this game works.Breein1007 (talk) 02:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make it reliable either. See WP:RS. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 23:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, obviously,...firstly: it is indisputable that Syrian towns and villages *were* depopulated/destroyed by Israel...secondly; it is actually rather funny to see people argue that the sources for this do no meet WP:RS....while at the very same time Arutz Sheva apparently is reliable. Wonderful. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 03:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * DELETE Anti-Israel propaganda. --Firefly322 (talk) 04:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that Israel did not destroy lots of Golan villages? On what basis?  Or are you just expressing your political viewpoint? Zerotalk 05:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed. It's hard to see what the problem is. As far as I know no reliable (or otherwise) source from any POV has ever disputed that many villages were destroyed and depopulated. There just aren't two sides here for a neutrality question to appear. Of course if we are going to list obscure villages, we are going to need to do some work and use some obscure (but reasonably reliable) sources.  But I thought that that was a major aim of wikipedia. John Z (talk) 07:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Please. An article entitled "destroyed by Israel"?  Its very title is in-your-face evil.  --Firefly322 (talk) 07:21, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The article title is a problem that can be discussed on the article talk page. This page is for discussing a deletion proposal. Zerotalk 09:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * All the pages that record depopulated/destroyed villages during the Arab/Israeli conflict, whether in BM Palestine, Syrian, Lebabon or Israel etc. should be all lumped together on one single page called List of town and villages depopulated or destroyed during the Arab-Israel Conflict. Chesdovi (talk) 10:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Eeeeh, why???  Cheers, Huldra (talk) 10:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Or perhaps a single page that lists all depopulated/destroyed Syrian villages together with all Israeli settlements in the Golan Heights.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 14:37, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with Chesdovi. That would be a much more NPOV title and more general list that encompasses more articles. This would mean that rather than having a list of 50 redlinks with 2 actual articles (which aren't even notable to begin with), we could have a proper list with some useful articles. In terms of grouping previously-Syrian villages with current Israeli villages, I disagree. That doesn't make much sense... and what would you make the title then?!?Breein1007 (talk) 18:45, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * They are all population centres which have or had people living in them in the same region on the planet over a certain period of time during which certain events happened and continue to happen. Obviously using that as a title isn't ideal. It kind of makes sense to me once I take down the Syrian and Israeli flags fluttering in my brain.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 18:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I very strongly disagree, we shouldn't mix todays israeli settlements with destroyed Syrian villages, Chesdovi has tried this before mixing in stuff with the article that has nothing to do with it to undermine the topic:  and there is an article for palestinian villages: --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The fact that Chesdovi has "tried this before" is irrelevant and certainly does not make his suggestion any less valuable, Supreme Deliciousness (sign your posts). Combining these topics would make a more general article with more notable information rather than a list of redlinks that nobody cares about. You have not made any comments about the merit of the suggestion, you are only trying to personally attack the person making the suggestion, something unacceptable on Wikipedia. If you have any comments regarding the actual idea then go ahead and explain why you think it is such a bad one.Breein1007 (talk) 17:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I have already answered, there is a list for Palestinian villages, so there is no reason for there to not be a list for Syrian villages, and just because you do not care about these villages doesn't mean other people don't. In this vote the majority of people have voted to keep the article, so the majority of people see it as notable. And what redlinks are you referring to?--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 15:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I suggest merging the following 3 pages:
 * List of villages depopulated during the Arab–Israeli conflict
 * List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus
 * List of Syrian towns and villages destroyed by Israel. Chesdovi (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, sourcing is in progress (though more reliable sources probably are preferable), the subject seems notable enough (though the individual villages may be another matter), the title may be changed if necessary. Huon (talk) 15:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment What makes these villages more notable than, let's say the 240 villages evacuated by Saudi Arabia? Chesdovi (talk) 01:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * If you create a good quality article on those 240 villages I will help you defend it against the pro-Saudi wikipedians who want it deleted. Zerotalk 01:24, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The UN have investigated the destruction of at least one of these towns and villages and condemned it as a breach of the Geneva Convention. The Saudis, on the other hand, seem to be evacuationg their own citizens to prevent civilian casualties while they're fighting the Yemeni rebels. The Golan issue has received vastly more coverage. That makes these villages more notable. Huon (talk) 01:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * UN condemnations do not bestow notability, neither does the plight of a large section of people only gain notability when measures against them are taken by a foreign government. The fact that the Mid-East conflict gets more coverage indicates systemic bias, nothing else. I agree with Zero0000. The villages have just as much notability as the Syrian ones. The difficulty is getting the infomation. Chesdovi (talk) 21:27, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. If these villages and towns were indeed destroyed by Israel, there is no reason not to have a list article about them. --NSH001 (talk) 17:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Same reason as NSH001. Frederico1234 (talk) 19:11, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * As noted above, I concur that the content is valid but the current name of the article reflects a partisan POV. Of course, the naming could be worse, e.g., List of peaceful Syrian villages pillaged and annihilated by the iron hand of the Zionist infidels, but we really should strive to have a neutrally-worded title. Cbl62 (talk) 20:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I think "annihilated by the brutal Zionist cowards" sounds better. Chesdovi (talk) 20:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * But seriously, a title like the one suggested above, List of pre-1967 Syrian towns on the Golan Heights, is accurate and neutral. Discussion as to what resulted in these population centers, and the differing points of view, can appropriately be dealt with the in the text of the article, but the title should be neutrally worded. Cbl62 (talk) 20:59, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.