Talk:Israel National Trail

message: I think the topic is more readable now, (I hope I didn't change the meaning anywhere), but it needs much more attention--KevR 21:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

message: The Golan picture is not of northern Israel, and the Israel National Trail does not even enter any occupied lands, so there is no reason for it to be here. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 09:47, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Golan is not occupied. As much as you would like it to be. Leifern (talk) 16:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Issue solved. That content was indeed not appropriate in many ways. See my talk below. ClovisPJ (talk) 00:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: It is true that Israel occupied the Golan Heights and the Judea and Samaria area, but because it did it as an act of self defense, It can not be considered as occupied territories, while the army strike agreements were approved by the UN and between Jordan, Syria and Israel. 
Further more, The Judea and Samaria area was occupied from Jordan, witch named it "the West Bunk". It is not the historical name, and it is not the real name of the place.
In the peace agreement between Jordan and Israel, Jordan gave Israel full control on the area, and declared that Jordan would not ask for giving back those territories.
There for the Golan heights and The Judea and Sameria area should not be defined as Occupied territories and as West Bunk. To the most, and by legal lows, those territories can be referred as disputed territories.
thank you, Gershon.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerpuk77 (talk • contribs) 10:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting "Occupied Israeli territories" from the article and switching "West Bunk" to "Judea and Samaria"  

message: Both the map shown later on this page and Google Maps depict the Israel National Trail crossing the 1949 Armistice Line dividing Israel and the West Bank. However, the introduction to the article claims that, 'It does not enter the Golan Heights or the West Bank.' I have added a contradiction tag, as there is a reference provided, but I believe it to be unreliable considering the contradictory evidence. 162.157.65.13 (talk)   — Preceding undated comment added 05:31, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Google Maps it briefly crosses the green line near Latrun, area that Israel annexed. It's likely that officially INT goes around, but in reality people walking the trail (including the team who recorded it for Google street view) take a shortcut. “WarKosign” 09:50, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: the Israeli trail does not at any point cross the green line. people hiking the trail do not follow the trail on google maps, but navigate using official maps and the trail marks, hence they generally do not make shortcuts. google maps is wrong and should not be viewed as a more reliable source than official trail maps. even if it was likely that some hikers were taking shortcuts (which again, isn't likely), that would mean they are leaving the marked trail, not that the trail crossed the line. אודוני (talk) 19:28, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction re West Bank 

message: The section named "Sections" has multiple issues, as highlighted by the banner, as well as here on the talk page. I've discovered it has been copied from this source https://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/forums/middle-east/topics/israeli-national-trail. This is a series of forum messages, which are translations of (Hebrew) https://web.archive.org/web/20071017021304/http://www.shvil.org.il/shvil.html (wayback machine, since the page seems to have gone now). Although the text has changed quite a lot, through edits, it can be clearly seen (both in history, and even now by direct comparison) as copied text (and yet hasn't even attributed this source). If I understand copyright policy for Wikipedia correctly, this content therefore must be removed.
I will therefore delete this content. I am rewriting it in a improved manner, with referencing.
I will maintain any currently included features which I can verify, however, I've noticed it contains a lot of mistakes (I imagine due to changes in the route), so they will be removed.
I'll also change it's name to "Route" which is more appropriate.
And I'll remove the banner, since this therefore resolves the lack of any references.
This is quite a big change, which is why I document it here, anybody is welcome to discuss.ClovisPJ (talk) 23:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections of the route