Talk:Neve Yaakov

message: Neve Ya'aqov is part of the East Jerusalem territory that Israel has effectively annexed following the Six-Day war. Since this annexation is not recognized internationally, the status of these parts is the same as the rest of the West Bank. Therefore, Neve Ya'aqov is considered by international bodies, as well as by some Israelis, as settlements. This subject is covered in the Israeli settlement article, if the relevant sentence in this article is disputed, I suggest discussing this first in that article's talk page.--Doron 08:10, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Legal status

message: The most common spelling is Neveh Yaakov, not Neve Ya'aqov. It is unnecessary and confusing for the reader to write the ' in Ya'akov, and the Q for the ק has almost universally been replaced with a K. Thus, I will change Ya'aqov to Yaakov. If anyone objects, please discuss here or contact me through my talk page. Note that Google gives 434 results for "Neve Ya'aqov" and 19,700 results for "Neveh Yaakov", which proves the commonality of the latter spelling. --Daniel575 23:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I live here in Neve Yaakov, and Google gives 67,100 hits for that spelling ("Neve Yaakov"). Yoninah 08:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So I guess that's also possible. Which do you prefer? Feel free to change it. But hopefully you agree that the Q in transliterations - as well as the C - is totally outdated. --Daniel575 12:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks—I'll change it to Neve Yaakov. I totally agree about the "q"; I think that was added by a Hebrew linguistics expert a while back. He may turn up again, but in the meantime even "Qiriat Belz" has been renamed Kiryat Belz! Yoninah 21:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neveh Yaakov

message: Funnily enough, the only two sources listed for this page call it a settlement. So why is it only a settlement according to 'some' sources. Granted, not all sources will call it a settlement, as this term is disputed by Israel. But the vast majority of sources refer to it as a settlement. Peace Now refers to it as both a neighborhood and a settlement. Its legal status as a neighborhood of Jerusalem is disputed in UN Resolution 476, so how can we lead with this term so unqualified? And why is a term that is disputed by the International Community used so blatantly and prefferably to a term that is disputed only by the Israeli Government (in terms of sovereign government recognitions)? This page really does not seem NPOV, but more like the Israeli Governments POV. Colourinthemeaning (talk) 03:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "described by some sources" 

message: As some have accused the term 'international community,' or 'majority of the international community' to be a weasel word, I would like to know on what basis this is exactly, and what alternatives you may consider appropriate? Would for instance 'The majority of nations in the world, and Non-Governmental Organizations' be acceptable?  Given they are synonymous as far as I can see, I don't quite understand what the issue with 'majority of the international community' could actually be? Colourinthemeaning (talk) 10:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find a source for majority of nations in the world, then sure. International community is a weasel because it implies that the entire world believes something, when in fact it isn't true... and there isn't a precise definition for what the term "international community" literally refers to. Breein1007 (talk) 18:44, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Then sure' like the other dozens of sources I have added and you have simply removed? Colourinthemeaning (talk) 04:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not misrepresent the truth. You haven't added any sources that indicate "a majority of countries'" position on the matter. Breein1007 (talk) 04:51, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I just do not want to waste my time if you plan to remove it without any explanation like you have to dozens of other sources I have added. Colourinthemeaning (talk) 05:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid that your unwillingness to waste time isn't worth anything here. If you don't care about improving the quality of the article, leave it alone and don't make edits that lower the quality and cause edit wars. I haven't removed any sourced content that was appropriate for the article, and everything I removed was done with an explanation. Breein1007 (talk) 05:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I am simply trying to reach an agreement with you in this talk page, as I am still unsure why you have removed so many sources. On just Neve Yaakov for instance, you said 'dont overload on sources,' but why is that? Each source stated a different part of the puzzle and was included for a different reason. Why do only you get to decide which sources will be included, and which ones will be censored? My edits have had no intention of causing a wiki war, and have only improved the quality of the articles. Of course, it must only be my edits that are causing a wikiwar and lowering the quality of the articles, your edits would have no place in that? Correct? Colourinthemeaning (talk) 05:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Community 

message: It is considered a part of the ring neighborhoods, according to whom?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colourinthemeaning (talk • contribs) 07:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ring Neighborhood 

message: Gilabrand, the source you have listed only states there is a fire station in Neve Yaakov. It does not mention by name, that it receives any other services from the city or what these services may be. Colourinthemeaning (talk) 07:31, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this source is even accurate. They moved the fire station from Neve Yaakov to Pisgat Ze'ev a while ago. There is a police station here and an army installation. Yoninah (talk) 09:39, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Municipal Services 

message: Colourinthemeaning: If Neve Yaakov's 30,000 residents are "outside" Jerusalem in your point of view, then Pisgat Ze'ev's 50,000 residents are also "outside" Jerusalem, right? So why can't we be consistent in both articles? We could simply lift the first 4 sentences of the lead of Pisgat Ze'ev, which says it cleanly and clearly: Pisgat Ze'ev (, lit. Ze'ev's Peak)Neve Yaakov (, lit. Jacob's Oasis), is a residential neighborhood with a population of 50,00030,000 located in northeastern Jerusalem. It was established on land annexed by Israel after the Six Day War. The United Nations and European Union consider it an illegal Israeli settlement.Settlement Monitor 1995, pp. 122-134  Israel and the United States consider it a neighborhood in Jerusalem, and all services are provided by the Jerusalem Municipality.Municipal services in Jerusalem
I wish the Jerusalem Municipality would read your version and stop billing us for arnona (city property taxes). :) Yoninah (talk) 09:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Let's be consistent

message: Full citation: Hall, J. How "HaKfar HaIvri" Became "Rechov Kfar Ivri". Shiras Devorah: Neshei Neve Yaakov newsletter for English-speaking women, Vol. 1, No. 4, Kislev 5759 (December 1998), pp. 15-17.
This source is cited nine times in the article only one other source in the article is cited more than once. Would anyone be able to explain to me exactly what this source is (who it was written by ect) and why it is suitable as the basis for an encyclopaedia article on the topic? Dlv999 (talk) 08:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This article was based on research of Hebrew-language sources from Yad Ben-Zvi and also personal interviews with the children of Neve Yaakov founders. If you like, I could try to look up and quote the Hebrew sources directly. Yoninah (talk) 10:28, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not convinced that the article meets the requirements expected for sources of historical topics in Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (history)). Dlv999 (talk) 19:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shiras Devorah: Neshei Neve Yaakov newsletter for English-speaking women 

message: The current location seems to be some distance from the original location (about a kilometre).  It is not accurate to say that the new one is built on the site of the old one. Zerotalk 13:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  old and new locations 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Neve Yaakov. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727090750/http://www.mizrachi.org/elearning/View_history.asp?id=126 to http://www.mizrachi.org/elearning/View_history.asp?id=126
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:36, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Neve Yaakov in the north jerusalem not east (it north east but in jerusalem we call this area of this city "the north of the city" or "the far north of the city" 109.186.161.15 (talk) 21:59, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. "East Jerusalem" here means "the sector of Jerusalem that was occupied by Jordan in 1948" and there are five citations that say Neve Yakov is in that area.  You will need to provide citations to sources that contradict that statement in order for this to be changed. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 February 2018 

message: The settlement was established in 1970 as a private development. Regardless of the political history that happned on the same place. It's fair to mention what happened between 1914-1947 under history, but it is clear the district was established in 1970 Rabolisk (talk) 14:24, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Already done See the section "Re-establishment of Neve Yaakov" Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:47, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 November 2019 

message: Current text:
The international community considers Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem illegal under international law, but the Israeli government disputes this,[9] defining it as a neighborhood within the jurisdiction of the Jerusalem Municipality, which provides all services.[10]
Suggested text:
Much of the international community (with Israel and the United States notable as exceptions) considers Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem illegal under international law.  The Israeli government defines Neve Yaakov as a neighborhood within the jurisdiction of the Jerusalem Municipality, which provides all services. Israelgale (talk) 18:59, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Substituting not-cited text such as this suggestion for the currently text is generally discouraged.  In addition, you should probably read the policy on neutral point of view. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 December 2019 

message: Existing text:
"In 1972, a new Jewish neighborhood was constructed on the site of the original village".
Requested text:
"In 1972, a new Jewish neighborhood was constructed on the site of the original village, on land that had been purchased by Jews in 1924."
Justification:
The previous sentence emphasizes that the first neighborhood of the new settlement was built  on land that was owned by Arabs.  As currently written, the reader will need to remember information from the very beginning of the article in order to realize that this second neighborhood was built on land that had long been Jewish owned.  Let's make the article accurate, not ideological. Israelgale (talk) 19:22, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. As above. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 December 2019