{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" 
 |rowspan="2" valign="middle" |  
 |rowspan="2" | 
 |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | The Original Barnstar 
 |- 
 |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | For grace, diplomacy, intelligence, and magnanimity!    
 |} 
 
 Thanks Tiamut for your support of the compromise at Palestinian people.  I can only imagine how maddening this discussion must have been for you, and for the record I have real misgivings about having even responded to posts on my talk page about you as an editor.  As you know, I agree with you that there's no reliably sourced opposition to the fact of Palestinian nationhood, so the NPOV argument against including it in the lede was very weak.  What swayed me to accepting "a people" was  PētersV's (and to some extent IronDuke's) arguments that however crisply the term "nation" may be defined and used by scholars and historians, its colloquial use as a synonym for state create a potential cloud around its use in the lede.  I think the section lower down on Palestinian nationhood could be bolstered with work by Khalidi, Rosemary Sayigh and others.  Hopefully you and I can work on that together; the historical process of Palestinian nation-formation is (or should be) one of the most interesting dimensions of this article.