![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the ArabâIsraeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
Greyshark09, you made this revert with the sounding comment "unsourced biased political anti-Hamas manifest". You created this article on 12 October 2014â without further adding one iota. Please can you explaine your hollow cry that does not make any sense? I merely stated obvious facts, which are unchallenged and supported by links.
You make an absolute fool of yourself by calling the presentation of Hamas' position an "anti-Hamas manifest", so make a useful contribution or back off. -- Qualitatis ( talk) 12:08, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
This phrase is used in the article but I question it's appropriateness. Does most of the world actually oppose the unification of Fatah-Hamas or is it just the usual anti-Palestine players who oppose a unified Palestinian government? Sepsis II ( talk) 03:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on FatahâHamas reconciliation process. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.â InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Could an authorised editor (perhaps Qualitatis, Sepsis II or Bolter21) please add, or consider adding, the following edit under a new sub-section?
2017 talks
In 2017 reconciliation talks led to an agreement whereby Hamas will cede control of Gazaâs civilian ministries and add 3,000 Palestinian Authority police officers in the enclave. [1] The deal was organised under pressure from Qatar, the UAE and, especially, Egypt; however, according to The Economist, it âis likely to fail for the same sorts of reasonsâ as agreements of the past. [1]
References
Can an authorized user please add info about the 2022 Palestinian reconciliation agreement? Quantum XYZ ( talk) 12:34, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
It is not written by subject matter experts (as far as I can tell), and the source is not to be used in this area, where it is particularly unreliable. FortunateSons ( talk) 17:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
the source is not to be used in this area, where it is particularly unreliable ? Says who? What area? Selfstudier ( talk) 18:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Fatah clings to adherence to the Quartet conditions, including recognition of Israel and focus on negotiations with Israel, while Hamas wants a majority in a new government and refuses to recognize Israel.Are you suggesting that they are not accurately representing what happened? Or is it that you think that any usage in anything related to Palestine is unreliable? Beyond that, it is a Wikipedia:Convenience link for the IPS article. Anyway, you dont get to decide that a source may not be used in a topic area, that isnt how any of this works. nableezy - 18:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the ArabâIsraeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
Greyshark09, you made this revert with the sounding comment "unsourced biased political anti-Hamas manifest". You created this article on 12 October 2014â without further adding one iota. Please can you explaine your hollow cry that does not make any sense? I merely stated obvious facts, which are unchallenged and supported by links.
You make an absolute fool of yourself by calling the presentation of Hamas' position an "anti-Hamas manifest", so make a useful contribution or back off. -- Qualitatis ( talk) 12:08, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
This phrase is used in the article but I question it's appropriateness. Does most of the world actually oppose the unification of Fatah-Hamas or is it just the usual anti-Palestine players who oppose a unified Palestinian government? Sepsis II ( talk) 03:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on FatahâHamas reconciliation process. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.â InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Could an authorised editor (perhaps Qualitatis, Sepsis II or Bolter21) please add, or consider adding, the following edit under a new sub-section?
2017 talks
In 2017 reconciliation talks led to an agreement whereby Hamas will cede control of Gazaâs civilian ministries and add 3,000 Palestinian Authority police officers in the enclave. [1] The deal was organised under pressure from Qatar, the UAE and, especially, Egypt; however, according to The Economist, it âis likely to fail for the same sorts of reasonsâ as agreements of the past. [1]
References
Can an authorized user please add info about the 2022 Palestinian reconciliation agreement? Quantum XYZ ( talk) 12:34, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
It is not written by subject matter experts (as far as I can tell), and the source is not to be used in this area, where it is particularly unreliable. FortunateSons ( talk) 17:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
the source is not to be used in this area, where it is particularly unreliable ? Says who? What area? Selfstudier ( talk) 18:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Fatah clings to adherence to the Quartet conditions, including recognition of Israel and focus on negotiations with Israel, while Hamas wants a majority in a new government and refuses to recognize Israel.Are you suggesting that they are not accurately representing what happened? Or is it that you think that any usage in anything related to Palestine is unreliable? Beyond that, it is a Wikipedia:Convenience link for the IPS article. Anyway, you dont get to decide that a source may not be used in a topic area, that isnt how any of this works. nableezy - 18:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)