Talk:Sur Baher

message: This edit was done by a banned sock, for me reverting POV-edits from  banned socks *is* copy-editing. Huldra (talk) 22:44, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  socks 

message: The article has a road sign giving  its English name as Tsur Baher. I understand that this may be more consistent with the Hebrew pronunciation than the Arabic, but if its official local spelling is Tsur, perhaps the article should be renamed.
Joe in Australia (talk) 04:34, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "Sur Baher" is much more common in English. Zerotalk 05:02, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed with "Sur" as most common, but it is a good idea to add the official spelling as well. Debresser (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why do you think Tsur is the official spelling? Why do you think there is an official English spelling at all? Road signs in Israel use spellings all over the place, the English transliterations they give aren't even consistent let alone official.  On government websites I also see "Zur Baher" and "Tzur Baher" as well as "Sur Baher", plus all of those with "Bahar" instead of "Baher".  At best, "Tsur" is a transliteration of the Hebrew name. Zerotalk 12:55, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Incidentally the English name given on the signs for the main road through Sur Baher is "Sur Baher St". Zerotalk 13:29, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

text:  First of all, it is on the roadboard, but even without that, it is in common use. Debresser (talk) 14:22, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I can't see that it hurts to give the most common transliterations as alternatives, particularly one that appears on the photo used to illustrate the article. I'm not suggesting that we need to go overboard, of course, but someone looking up the village should be able to find it by referring to any commonly-used name, certainly ones that appear on local signage. Joe in Australia (talk) 04:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm happy with how it is just now.  Mostly I objected to the word "official". Zerotalk 08:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just wanted to record my agreement with Zero0000. Debresser (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of the area 

message: I object to  Hebrew being  ok on an article about a place under Israeli occupation. It makes it sound like it is Israeli, while no-one in the world (except Israel) sees it like that. Comments? 
And don´t fool yourself:  there was never any “consensus” for calling it “Israeli control”… I just got tired of Debressers intransigence, and started working elsewhere, Huldra (talk) 21:11, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It is standard practise that *all* places in Israel should have the name in both the official languages of Israel, that is Hebrew and Arabic; I would argue the same should be for Israeli persons, at least persons in public office. This is something completely different from using Hebrew in a place which is occupied by Israel. Yes: occupied. To me, this is a way of underhand trying to let it appear as if this place is Israeli, too. Which is not the view of the international community. I therefor suggest we remove it, Huldra (talk) 20:46, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

text: I would hope we could discuss it here, and not spread this "edit-war" over at other articles, Huldra (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  The place is under Israel control; Hebrew is on the road board at the entrances to these places. Ergo, it is relevant. Nothing to discuss here. Debresser (talk) 23:21, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

text:  For crying out loud, it is a neighborhood of Jerusalem. How can Hebrew not be relevant? I mean, politics aside here, please, and be realistic. Debresser (talk) 23:52, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hebrew 

message: I had actually never noticed that this place had "Infobox Israel municipality", that is not correct, IMO. It simply has to go. The alternative  "Infobox Palestinian Authority municipality"  is not ideal, either, any suggestion? Huldra (talk) 20:52, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Huldra, see section above. Debresser (talk) 00:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Sight, Yeah, I saw that. But that section discussed many, many things; I thought it would be clearer if we had a sub-section for  each specific issue we disagree about. I suggest using "Infobox Palestinian Authority muni" here (it is also used, at say ash-Sheikh Sa'd.) Comments? Huldra (talk) 23:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Huldra, that discussion is really in the section above. As you can see, of all the subjects I posted about, this is the subject the discussion is concentration on. Debresser (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, well. it was precisely due to "all the subjects" you posted there, that I had hoped we could  have one specifically for the infobox, Huldra (talk) 22:35, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  ..and it went as I suspected, the discussion got "lost" among so many other issues. And a biased info-box remains.  Huldra (talk) 20:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox