Talk:Nafez Assaily

message: I added the Arabic text to the article, therefore there is no need for this template anymore.  I added this text here so that it doesn't show that I "blanked out" the talk page, in case the revert was automatic.... --Fjmustak (talk) 09:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks from the heart, John. I'll try to do some further legwork. At least this is editing, a huge relief from these endless, vapid tiffs in a tin teapot one gets sucked into.Nishidani (talk) 21:39, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

message: I won't object to the elision. But Jordan's armistice agreement with Israel ceded land to Israel in exchange for land to Jordan. The former was recognized internationally as belonging thereafter to Israel. Technical obstacles can be raised to deny that Israel's yielding of land conquered near Hebron to Jordan, and Jordan's annexation and concession of Jordanian citizenship to all West Bankers (as distinct from all Western bankers, who should however end up in like conditions), allows one to say that at the time it was 'Jordanian'. It was so, in international law only to Jordan and Great Britain. But technically, at the same time, Nafez Assaily was born on the West Bank with Jordanian citizenship. His birth registration would have indicated that, as his subsequent papers down to the Israeli occupation. It is a matter of some curiosity to me that of all land exchanged in the 1949 armistice agreements between the various parties, that which came under Israeli control was ipso facto, thereafter, Israeli. That which fell to Egyptian or Jordanian or Syrian control was 'occupied'. Go figure.Nishidani (talk) 17:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonsense. THe armistice agreement was explict in stating that it does not involve any "ceding" of land nor determining final borders. Jordan's illegal and non-recognized annexation of the West Bank did not make this occupied territory a part of Jordan any more than Israel's similar actions with regards to East Jerusalem or the Golan Hieghts made those Israeli territory. Canadian Monkey (talk) 23:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Another teapot in search of a tempest, une autre théière à la recherche d'une tempête voulue? Well, if what I said was nonsense, (based on Benny Morris: 'The Israeli-Jordanian armistice agreement of 3 April 1949 provided for minor frontier changes, with a few small areas (in the Beisan Valley and southwest of the Hebron Hills) being transferred from Israel to Jordan, and two larger strips, along Wadi 'Ara and between Baqa al Gharbiya and Kafr Qasim, being ceded to Israel. BM,2004:530), take Benny Morris to task, and now that I've checked what Wikipedia has on this, please go and bring your huge erudition to bear on the wiki articles West Bank and Occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem by Jordan. I nowhere spoke of determining final borders (I think on this that the riposte is called a 'strawman gambit'). ps. 'Hieghts' = 'Heights': the old primary school rule, 'i' before 'e' except after 'c' does have its states of exception.Nishidani (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Thanks Niel!Nishidani (talk) 14:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jordanian West Bank 

message: It's obvious what is going on here. This page was ignored. I had a long discussion over Eleland, and all of a sudden several people on the other side of that discussion have discovered the page and call for its elimination on technical grounds. No stalking involved, of course. Eliminate it, and you take one Palestinian page off wiki, on a technicality, while ignoring many contiguous pages (thematically) whichimpress Israeli settler traces all around the same area where Nafez Assaily lives and works. This is not editorial scruple according to Wiki principles, but politics.
I will begin to place here links to wiki articles on groups, settlements, people, incidents in the Hebron area which should be examined together with this page in order to determine whether this page alone should suffer deletion, despite, for the moment, sharing the defects of the others. Examine the criteria of notability and sourcing for all. Contributions and suggestions are welcome.
(1) Murder of Shalhevet Pass</br>
(2) David Wilder (Israeli settler)</br>
(3) Tel Rumeida</br>
(4) Avraham Shmulevich</br>
Nishidani (talk) 13:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nishidani, if you want to make your point, it's best to leave the settlements off this list, as geographical locations are, by convention, assumed to have intrinsic notability on Wikipedia. --NSH001 (talk) 14:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'll be the last one to question your judgement, Neil. Some of those places (I could add Migron, Mateh Binyamin.a camper/shed sites named to figure as geographical recreations of Biblical areas. They spring up, are slated for removal by Supreme Court or local yeshiva council decisions, and probably won't stay around. A 'geographical location' improvised by a sudden seizure of a piece of territory and the establishment of a 'provisory settlement', is that 'intrinsically notable', rather than being the old strategy of erasing the history of a land in order to deny its actual historical designations in Arab tradition? All I note is the frequency of these pages, designating areas that had Arab names with Hebrew biblical names or names recalling terror victims. I never delete, never question this. But objectively, I do not think it does a credit to the encyclopedia's aims. Still, you're quite welcome to remove them, even though their status as 'geographical locations' is perhaps stretching it. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 14:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah I won't remove them, I'll leave you to make your case in your own inimitable way. --NSH001 (talk) 19:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The recent courtesies of several my way have got me bowing my head in virtual directions, as though I had Tourette's syndrome with a Qibla tic. Since you're too sweet n'discreet to do what you think wiki rules require, I find myself morally obliged to execute the suggestion. I've taken all the towns out, save Tel Rumeida. That's too rum (if you know the bizarre stories about it) to knock off out of sheer scruple for technical fidelity, and in all applications of the law, latitude for an exception saves us from the implicit dangers of rigourism. Cheers, mate Nishidani (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: On the Catholic Caritas site there are photoes both of him, and a panorama of the land he has had expropriated from him by the Harsina settlers. I'll try and see if these are copyrighted.Nishidani (talk) 18:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: does not seem to be the case, will remove it now. if somebody feels that tag is appropriate they should explain why here. nableezy - 18:13, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  primary sources tag