![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli 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.
|
See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (West Bank). Sean.hoyland - talk 13:44, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
The Template:Israel-geo-stub was removed in this edit, the reason being, "Geographically Revava is not in Israel, but in the West Bank." Without getting into whether or not that statement's true, it isn't a valid reason for the template's removal. To wit, the template doesn't assert what the edit summary is arguing against, i.e. it doesn't assert that Revava is in Israel. What it does is it relates the article Revava to the article Geography of Israel, which covers (with the consensus of multiple editors) Israel's settlements in the West Bank.— Biosketch ( talk) 16:23, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
The paragraph commencing Doubts to the real ownership of the land of the village implies that everyone now agrees with the decision of the Israeli Court as to ownership of the land of the village.
I suspect not everyone accepts the jurisdiction of the Israeli Court in the matter, certainly anyone who challenges the legality of the occupation of the West Bank. Further we don't know whether any individual Palestinians were given the opportunity to present a claim at the hearing.
Apart for the reason given by Nableezy, I agree tha the whole paragraph shopuld be deleted as unhelpful. Trahelliven ( talk) 9:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Can somebody provide an actually reliable source about Peace Now? I am not opposed to including such material, but I would like to see it without the typical settler spin that Arutz7 adds to seemingly every "news" story they publish. nableezy - 21:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Like I wrote above, I am not opposed to including the material, I would just like to see reliable sources for the claim. Shuki, can you please provide quotes of the relevant portions from the articles you cited and translations of those quotes? nableezy - 21:54, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
I have added an additional source for the Peace Now issue. -- User:ShmuelGoldstein —Preceding undated comment added 10:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC).
I dont know Hebrew, so I cant search for Hebrew sources that associate the name of the settlement with the Bible verse. In my brief search in English I could not find anything. This needs to be sourced. I added a couple of other tags to unreferenced paragraphs. nableezy - 21:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
This article is an apology to this settlement. Sources used to write this are not RS. 81.247.222.10 ( talk) 22:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Revava. 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.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli 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.
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (West Bank). Sean.hoyland - talk 13:44, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
The Template:Israel-geo-stub was removed in this edit, the reason being, "Geographically Revava is not in Israel, but in the West Bank." Without getting into whether or not that statement's true, it isn't a valid reason for the template's removal. To wit, the template doesn't assert what the edit summary is arguing against, i.e. it doesn't assert that Revava is in Israel. What it does is it relates the article Revava to the article Geography of Israel, which covers (with the consensus of multiple editors) Israel's settlements in the West Bank.— Biosketch ( talk) 16:23, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
The paragraph commencing Doubts to the real ownership of the land of the village implies that everyone now agrees with the decision of the Israeli Court as to ownership of the land of the village.
I suspect not everyone accepts the jurisdiction of the Israeli Court in the matter, certainly anyone who challenges the legality of the occupation of the West Bank. Further we don't know whether any individual Palestinians were given the opportunity to present a claim at the hearing.
Apart for the reason given by Nableezy, I agree tha the whole paragraph shopuld be deleted as unhelpful. Trahelliven ( talk) 9:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Can somebody provide an actually reliable source about Peace Now? I am not opposed to including such material, but I would like to see it without the typical settler spin that Arutz7 adds to seemingly every "news" story they publish. nableezy - 21:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Like I wrote above, I am not opposed to including the material, I would just like to see reliable sources for the claim. Shuki, can you please provide quotes of the relevant portions from the articles you cited and translations of those quotes? nableezy - 21:54, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
I have added an additional source for the Peace Now issue. -- User:ShmuelGoldstein —Preceding undated comment added 10:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC).
I dont know Hebrew, so I cant search for Hebrew sources that associate the name of the settlement with the Bible verse. In my brief search in English I could not find anything. This needs to be sourced. I added a couple of other tags to unreferenced paragraphs. nableezy - 21:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
This article is an apology to this settlement. Sources used to write this are not RS. 81.247.222.10 ( talk) 22:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Revava. 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.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)