![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on April 25, 2011, April 25, 2017, April 25, 2019, and April 25, 2020. |
![]() | 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 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.
|
Note Article 25: "In the territories Iying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, ", which clearly implies that the eastern boundaries were not determined by this conference. Also, note the Ma'an and Aqaba border issues between Transjordan and Hejaz, not resolved until 1925. - Mustafaa 11:22, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
You're right, but that's from the 1921-22 text of the Mandate, not the 1920 resolution, to which I gave a couple of links. In view of your comment, I probably should have said (at least) five years, not four, but I want to do a bit more checking. AFAIK the major issues were resolved by 4 years later, many of them much earlier.-- John Z 14:13, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This article makes the following statement - "The decisions of the conference mainly just confirmed (e.g. concerning Palestine) those of the First Conference of London (February 1920)". However the page on the "Conference of London" that this is linked to indicates that that conference took place after the Sanremo conference. MarkMcLT 20:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Balfour's intention was for ALL of Palestine to become the Jewish National Home, not just the western 22%. This was confirmed by Balfour's grandson at a conference at Balfour House at which I was present. In 1939 the British Parliament debated the meaning of 'in Palestine' and decided in its infamous antisemitic White Paper to interpret this as some small part of Palestine. The UN failed to uphold its charter article 80 which maintains the rights obtained at San Remo. John UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.28.5 ( talk) 18:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
The Conference was known then and since as the "San Remo Conference" and was never referred to as anything else. The fact that the town is actually called "Sanremo" in Italian is not really relevant. For the sake of accuracy I recommend that we change the name of this article back to what it was. -- Ian Pitchford 13:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah yes. I'd noticed the incorrect link a while ago and had forgotten about it. Thanks again. BTW I have checked contemporary news sources and all refer to the event as the "San Remo Conference". -- Ian Pitchford 11:28, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
This is indeed the conference held in a city.
In italian, the city is named "Sanremo" but in French it is "San Remo".
Alithien
22:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Not sure what the best name for the conference is: whatever good quality English language sources use. But this is a quote from santiebeati.it on ‘San Remo’, which seems to confirm that the saint did exist (a seventh-century bishop of Genoa), that he died in the the place now called Sanremo, and that the town can also be called ‘San Remo’ in Italian:
— Ian Spackman 14:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
There is an error in the last sentence in the article's lead section: "As Turkey rejected this treaty, the conference's decisions were only finally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922 subsequent to the acceptance of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne." Either (a) the 24 July 1922 date is wrong, or (b) the word subsequent is wrong. Unfortunately, I don't know the facts needed to resolve this. Thanks, -- Rich Janis ( talk) 05:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
The Ottoman empire accepted the treaty of Sevres in disposition of the Sanjak of Jerusalem and parts of the velayet of Beirut. Neither of these territories were ever claimed by the new state of Turkey. There are possibly valid political points for bending over so far backwards, but wikipedia doesn't need to get into that kind of thinking. 108.65.0.169 ( talk) 19:07, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
The book "Foundations of the International Legal Rights of the Jewish People and the State of Israel" is obviously a book written by an activist and not even close to being a reliable source. In case that isn't blindingly obvious, the book is self-published. The publisher is Creation House, which describes itself as a Christian self-publishing company, in other words a vanity press. Wallace also wrote another book, "Don't miss the Rapture" that also looks like a barrel of laughs. No thank you. Zero talk 09:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
I also tagged the section about the "celebrations" a few activists organised in San Remo on the 90th anniversary. The intro of the section says "the town of San Remo marked the 90th anniversary", which is not even supported by the source (it only says the mayor attended). The information is trivial and the pronouncements made are predictable and boring. Zero talk 09:55, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Geez, you make it sound like this person is a creationist or something. However her background: "Dr. Cynthia Day Wallace received her PhD in international law from Cambridge University. Dr. Wallace’s international law career spans some thirty years, and she has held academic and senior diplomatic-level posts, including Deputy Executive Director, Investment Negotiation Program, International Law Institute, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington DC; Senior Fellow and Project Director, International Business and Economics Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington DC (“think tank”); and Senior Advisor to the Executive Secretary, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Geneva. With more than thirty publications, including six books, she is the recipient of the Grotius International Law Award for a law journal article selected jointly by the UN Association and the T.M.C. Asser Institute of The Hague. She is a US citizen and resides in Geneva, Switzerland." We do not assume that every Christian or Jew with pro-Israel views is 'obviously' an activist. By this thinking you couldn't use any information gleaned from anyone who is published by the Institute for Palestine Studies, as it is obviously activist. Ridingdog ( talk) 14:49, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
{{{1}}}
|
SInce Maccabipage has been topic banned, its long nonsense posting and my reply are collapsed. Zero talk 02:46, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
There needs to be a map that shows the division of the land, specifically the region of west Palestine.-- Jane955 ( talk) 11:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/map-of-jewish-national-home-determined-by-san-remo-conference-1920 Batsquatch ( talk) 22:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
JVL is not "generally unreliable", that article was inaccurate. Jordan has an established border and so did the Syria mandate and Egypt, meaning everywhere Israel bordered was established. Batsquatch ( talk) 17:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Quite hypocritical of you to say that what I've just wrote is absolute nonsense, when you yourself have made that same mistake. It's explicitly in the Balfour declaration that they supported the creation of Israel in all of mandate Palestine, which Jordan was in. There are plenty of books written by actual historian's that you can read that back up what I've said. Batsquatch ( talk) 04:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Over time this article seems to have become very messy and disjointed so I am going to tidy it up a bit. Anyone wants to join in, feel free. Selfstudier ( talk) 12:57, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Jane955, Zero0000, and Selfstudier: I created the "File:Minutes_of_the_1920_Conference_of_San_Remo.pdf" which is better than the actual djvu one. As I am not allowed to edit this page, do it if you please. Valp ( talk) 21:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
This was recently added to the article , without any supporting sources: "Under Article 22 of the British government was charged with recognizing the Arabs of Palestine, like other "communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire" as having "reached a stage of development where their existence as [an] independent nation can be provisionally recognized", and with rendering to these Arabs "administrative advice and assistance until such time as they are able to stand alone" . The source at the end of these new additions does not mention Arabs, at all, but refers to Jews.
JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (
talk)
19:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The line saying the "Conference was attended by the 4 principal allied powers France, Britain, Italy and Japan" should be changed to "4 Allied Powers attended the conference France, Britain, Italy, and Japan" because Japan is not a principal allied power in WW1 and olnly played a minor role. Grahammydoodle ( talk) 23:42, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
TREATY OF PEACE BETWEEN THE ALLIED AND ASSOCIATED POWERS AND GERMANY …THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE BRITISH EMPIRE, FRANCE, ITALY AND JAPAN, these Powers being described in the present Treaty as the Principal Allied and Associated Powers, BELGIUM, BOLIVIA, BRAZIL, CHINA, CUBA, ECUADOR, GREECE, GUATEMALA, HAITI, THE HEDJAZ, HONDURAS, LIBERIA, NICARAGUA, PANAMA, PERU, POLAND, PORTUGAL, ROUMANIA, THE SERB-CROAT-SLOVENE STATE, SIAM, CZECHOSLOVAKIA AND URUGUAY, these Powers constituting with the Principal Powers mentioned above the Allied and Associated Powers.
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on April 25, 2011, April 25, 2017, April 25, 2019, and April 25, 2020. |
![]() | 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 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.
|
Note Article 25: "In the territories Iying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, ", which clearly implies that the eastern boundaries were not determined by this conference. Also, note the Ma'an and Aqaba border issues between Transjordan and Hejaz, not resolved until 1925. - Mustafaa 11:22, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
You're right, but that's from the 1921-22 text of the Mandate, not the 1920 resolution, to which I gave a couple of links. In view of your comment, I probably should have said (at least) five years, not four, but I want to do a bit more checking. AFAIK the major issues were resolved by 4 years later, many of them much earlier.-- John Z 14:13, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This article makes the following statement - "The decisions of the conference mainly just confirmed (e.g. concerning Palestine) those of the First Conference of London (February 1920)". However the page on the "Conference of London" that this is linked to indicates that that conference took place after the Sanremo conference. MarkMcLT 20:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Balfour's intention was for ALL of Palestine to become the Jewish National Home, not just the western 22%. This was confirmed by Balfour's grandson at a conference at Balfour House at which I was present. In 1939 the British Parliament debated the meaning of 'in Palestine' and decided in its infamous antisemitic White Paper to interpret this as some small part of Palestine. The UN failed to uphold its charter article 80 which maintains the rights obtained at San Remo. John UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.28.5 ( talk) 18:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
The Conference was known then and since as the "San Remo Conference" and was never referred to as anything else. The fact that the town is actually called "Sanremo" in Italian is not really relevant. For the sake of accuracy I recommend that we change the name of this article back to what it was. -- Ian Pitchford 13:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah yes. I'd noticed the incorrect link a while ago and had forgotten about it. Thanks again. BTW I have checked contemporary news sources and all refer to the event as the "San Remo Conference". -- Ian Pitchford 11:28, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
This is indeed the conference held in a city.
In italian, the city is named "Sanremo" but in French it is "San Remo".
Alithien
22:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Not sure what the best name for the conference is: whatever good quality English language sources use. But this is a quote from santiebeati.it on ‘San Remo’, which seems to confirm that the saint did exist (a seventh-century bishop of Genoa), that he died in the the place now called Sanremo, and that the town can also be called ‘San Remo’ in Italian:
— Ian Spackman 14:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
There is an error in the last sentence in the article's lead section: "As Turkey rejected this treaty, the conference's decisions were only finally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922 subsequent to the acceptance of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne." Either (a) the 24 July 1922 date is wrong, or (b) the word subsequent is wrong. Unfortunately, I don't know the facts needed to resolve this. Thanks, -- Rich Janis ( talk) 05:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
The Ottoman empire accepted the treaty of Sevres in disposition of the Sanjak of Jerusalem and parts of the velayet of Beirut. Neither of these territories were ever claimed by the new state of Turkey. There are possibly valid political points for bending over so far backwards, but wikipedia doesn't need to get into that kind of thinking. 108.65.0.169 ( talk) 19:07, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
The book "Foundations of the International Legal Rights of the Jewish People and the State of Israel" is obviously a book written by an activist and not even close to being a reliable source. In case that isn't blindingly obvious, the book is self-published. The publisher is Creation House, which describes itself as a Christian self-publishing company, in other words a vanity press. Wallace also wrote another book, "Don't miss the Rapture" that also looks like a barrel of laughs. No thank you. Zero talk 09:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
I also tagged the section about the "celebrations" a few activists organised in San Remo on the 90th anniversary. The intro of the section says "the town of San Remo marked the 90th anniversary", which is not even supported by the source (it only says the mayor attended). The information is trivial and the pronouncements made are predictable and boring. Zero talk 09:55, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Geez, you make it sound like this person is a creationist or something. However her background: "Dr. Cynthia Day Wallace received her PhD in international law from Cambridge University. Dr. Wallace’s international law career spans some thirty years, and she has held academic and senior diplomatic-level posts, including Deputy Executive Director, Investment Negotiation Program, International Law Institute, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington DC; Senior Fellow and Project Director, International Business and Economics Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington DC (“think tank”); and Senior Advisor to the Executive Secretary, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Geneva. With more than thirty publications, including six books, she is the recipient of the Grotius International Law Award for a law journal article selected jointly by the UN Association and the T.M.C. Asser Institute of The Hague. She is a US citizen and resides in Geneva, Switzerland." We do not assume that every Christian or Jew with pro-Israel views is 'obviously' an activist. By this thinking you couldn't use any information gleaned from anyone who is published by the Institute for Palestine Studies, as it is obviously activist. Ridingdog ( talk) 14:49, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
{{{1}}}
|
SInce Maccabipage has been topic banned, its long nonsense posting and my reply are collapsed. Zero talk 02:46, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
There needs to be a map that shows the division of the land, specifically the region of west Palestine.-- Jane955 ( talk) 11:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/map-of-jewish-national-home-determined-by-san-remo-conference-1920 Batsquatch ( talk) 22:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
JVL is not "generally unreliable", that article was inaccurate. Jordan has an established border and so did the Syria mandate and Egypt, meaning everywhere Israel bordered was established. Batsquatch ( talk) 17:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Quite hypocritical of you to say that what I've just wrote is absolute nonsense, when you yourself have made that same mistake. It's explicitly in the Balfour declaration that they supported the creation of Israel in all of mandate Palestine, which Jordan was in. There are plenty of books written by actual historian's that you can read that back up what I've said. Batsquatch ( talk) 04:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Over time this article seems to have become very messy and disjointed so I am going to tidy it up a bit. Anyone wants to join in, feel free. Selfstudier ( talk) 12:57, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Jane955, Zero0000, and Selfstudier: I created the "File:Minutes_of_the_1920_Conference_of_San_Remo.pdf" which is better than the actual djvu one. As I am not allowed to edit this page, do it if you please. Valp ( talk) 21:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
This was recently added to the article , without any supporting sources: "Under Article 22 of the British government was charged with recognizing the Arabs of Palestine, like other "communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire" as having "reached a stage of development where their existence as [an] independent nation can be provisionally recognized", and with rendering to these Arabs "administrative advice and assistance until such time as they are able to stand alone" . The source at the end of these new additions does not mention Arabs, at all, but refers to Jews.
JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (
talk)
19:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The line saying the "Conference was attended by the 4 principal allied powers France, Britain, Italy and Japan" should be changed to "4 Allied Powers attended the conference France, Britain, Italy, and Japan" because Japan is not a principal allied power in WW1 and olnly played a minor role. Grahammydoodle ( talk) 23:42, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
TREATY OF PEACE BETWEEN THE ALLIED AND ASSOCIATED POWERS AND GERMANY …THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE BRITISH EMPIRE, FRANCE, ITALY AND JAPAN, these Powers being described in the present Treaty as the Principal Allied and Associated Powers, BELGIUM, BOLIVIA, BRAZIL, CHINA, CUBA, ECUADOR, GREECE, GUATEMALA, HAITI, THE HEDJAZ, HONDURAS, LIBERIA, NICARAGUA, PANAMA, PERU, POLAND, PORTUGAL, ROUMANIA, THE SERB-CROAT-SLOVENE STATE, SIAM, CZECHOSLOVAKIA AND URUGUAY, these Powers constituting with the Principal Powers mentioned above the Allied and Associated Powers.