Talk:Tayibe

message: What sort of impartiality is this? "Until the 1950's and 60's, the majority of the inhabitants of the city were Christian Arabs, however many of the original Christian inhabitants immigrated to America and Canada to seek a better economic life rather then remain under illegal Israeli occupation and brutal apartheid control."  The phrase "illegal Israeli occupation" implies that the State of Israel is illegitimate and illegal. Tayibe is not in any sort of disputed territory, nor occupied.
"Brutal apartheid control"  is just stupid.  I live alongside Israeli Arabs who earn more and live better than the Jews who are their neighbors.  They own farms and factories, and work in the trades, as professionals and business owners.  It is not in any way comparable to apartheid South Africa.
:Please sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes. Furthermore, personal observations of users cannot be used in articles, unless they appear in reliable published sources.
:This being said, you're obviously correct that calling Israeli lands within the Green Line "illegal Israeli occupation" is a highly partisan position which is disputed by (virtually all) reliable published sources, and talk of "brutal apartheid control", while being somewhat more plausible, is also a partisan position not shared by many (most?) sources.
:If these allegations exist, and appear in reliable published sources, they should be reported as allegations. Eleland 15:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, come to think of it, they may not have intended to make those accusations. Editor could easily have been confusing Tayibe and Taybeh. Eleland 15:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Even if they meant Taybeh and not Tayibe it still is NOP to say that the Israeli occupation is illegal and apartheid.   They can reference creditable sources that may draw those conclusion but wikipedia articles are supposed to be impartial and there are obviously two sides in articles that talk about issues related to Palestinian Israeli conflict.  It just makes Wikipedia look bad if an article "takes a side" as it were.  --Hadees 22:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impartial? 

message: I have generally found Petersen, Andrew (2001), A Gazetteer of Buildings in Muslim Palestine: Volume I (British Academy Monographs in Archaeology) to be very reliable. But on this town there are some mistakes, as references which are for Taybeh, West Bank, are given here. I will list the refs given, and try to find out if it checks out or not. See also Talk:Tira, Israel Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:16, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  From a snippet, I see it is the one on p144 of the 1894 edition.  It is somewhere to the south or south east of Hebron, neither this one nor Taybeh.  Note that the 1894 edition has 6 different "Tayyibeh"s in the index and it isn't clear that any of them is this one. Zerotalk 23:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  A Tayyibe appears on each of those pages, but this one is on p141 (but pls see the question on my talk page so we can be sure). Zerotalk 23:26, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Petersen, 2001, mix-up 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Tayibe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080706183957/http://www.fotw.net/flags/il-tayib.html to http://www.fotw.net/flags/il-tayib.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified