Talk:Battle of Haifa (1948)

message: Jaques Bar who planned and led the capture of Haifa see http://www.jaques-bar.com has all the information which Benny Morris either lacks or was is a Labour spinner since nothing here is REAl... Yoram Bar.
Benny Morris (2004) p 191..."By late afternoon, Carmeli Brigade was reporting....Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 02:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have the Morris book in question. Do you mind scanning the relevant pages? I believe you of course, per WP:AGF, but would rather see it for myself (you'll notice for example, that I made a change 'according to Walid Khalidi...' after you provided an online source for another statement). -- Ynhockey (Talk) 08:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Thank you very much for the link. I will make major changes to the article based on that source, although they will be made slowly and discussed, of course. At the first stage, I believe that the article should be moved to Operation Bi'ur Hametz, because Misparayim, according to Morris, was the name for a Carmeli plan which was never carried out, and replaced by Bi'ur Hametz (they are not the same plan). -- Ynhockey (Talk) 13:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

text: On a side note, I realized that Carmeli was part of HISH, originally I thought that they were not. That clears things up. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 13:56, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Benny Morris source and discussion

message: I'm searching the Palestine Post archives (including the search query given) and can't for the life of me find that quote. Not only that, but also there seems to be no Palestine Post issue on April 30 (strange, because it was a Friday, not a Saturday). I'll try to search further but if nothing comes up, the quote needs to be changed. I have found another article on this battle in the Post. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 17:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: just found the quote. It is in the April 23 edition. I was right to suspect Khalidi. Here's the link. It has some other interesting info about the surrender terms, which should probably be in the aritcle. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 18:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

text: As I said, there was no Post editing on April 30 at all. Moreover, the quote is not from the April 29 editing (writted on April 21), but from the April 23 edition, written on the same day. Indeed, it could not have been written on April 21, because the events described took place on April 22. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 16:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Palestine Post quote 

message: it's not passover cleaning, it's passover removal of leavened bread. Amoruso (talk) 00:19, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: translation

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support 1948 Conquest of Haifa for the reasons explained above. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 20:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Any additional comments:
Funny the thing about Haifa Wehbe. She's become more important than a historical event that left thousands homeless. (Personal disclosure: Some of members of my extended family had to leave Haifa in 1948 because of the bombings there and lost two family members and their family home. After the British left, Arab civilians were left largely without defenses there.) Tiamuttalk 21:17, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Searching for Battle of Haifa minus street doesn't really accomplish anything because the term 'street' is very common and could appear on any page. A more accurate search shows 89 relevant hits. But that's not really important; it's not that Battle of Haifa is predominantly used in academia, it's that the other terms are used in specific contexts so "Battle of Haifa" (or a variation thereof) is the most common regular term. The sources I have mostly list it as the "Campaign for Haifa" (e.g. Gelber, Vilnay), and a couple list the "Liberation of Haifa", a POV term. I have seen no evidence that Morris uses "conquest of Haifa" to describe it on a regular basis, but have seen him use "fighting in Haifa" in some places, which is similar to Battle of Haifa (translated into an article title), and "Battle of Haifa" (Revisited, p. 9). I just don't think any of the other proposed titles have a case. —Ynhockey (Talk) 00:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

text: P.S. Just looked at the Fall of Haifa sources on Google Books, it appears that about half of the ones relevant to 1948 are just citations of Khalidi, and the actual authors of these books don't describe this event as the "fall of Haifa". As a term, it is also problematic because it has no Hebrew translation and could therefore be seen as biased against one side even if you ignore the fact that it's inherently the name given by the defeated party. By comparison, the Battle of Tzemah in the Battles of the Kinarot Valley is called Fall of Tzemah by most Israeli sources, but I did not use that term because of that. —Ynhockey (Talk) 01:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Would Fall of Haifa be okay with you, Ynhockey? Because Battle doesn't do it for me or Slim Virgin and other editors against "Conquest" seem to be okay with "Fall". Tiamuttalk 06:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I accepted this term in the past in order not to drag out a dispute with SlimVirgin (thinking that no one else cared about the name), but this is definitely not the term I support. The post you replied to partly lists why (see P.S. paragraph). —Ynhockey (Talk) 10:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you still willing to accept it as a compromise? Because I cannot really accept "Battle" myself given the near total lack of Arab forces in Haifa. Even the article itself notes this: "The Arab garrison for the Palestinian Arab areas of the city was commanded by Captain Amin Izz al-Din who had been appointed by the Arab Liberation Army's (ALA) military committee on the 27 March in Damascus. Through the next month his original force of 450 was depleted by desertion until it was no longer a fighting force." Tiamuttalk 10:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Fall of Haifa" isn't really a compromise between "Fall of Haifa" and "Battle of Haifa", which are two mainly-used terms. Besides, as far as I know, over a dozen Haganah persons died in the battles, so it's a deception to say that the Arabs didn't have a fighting force. Almost every battle has a tactical winner and a tactical loser; this doesn't mean that the either of their POVs gets to be represented in the title. —Ynhockey (Talk) 11:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So you're not willing to accept Fall of Haifa as a compromise? Tiamuttalk 11:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think "fall" need necessarily imply the other side didn't have an army - the Fall of Constantinople involved a long siege, for example. However we do use Battle of France, not Fall of France, which lends some support to the anti-move side. YeshuaDavid • Talk • 22:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I'm aware that it does not necessarily imply a lack of army, which is why I'm (re)proposing it (its already been proposed and was the name of this page before and out-of-process move) as a satisfactory compromise for both sides - those uncomfortable with "battle" and those uncomfortable with "conquest". Given that its used as much, if not more, than both, it also fits with WP:COMMONNAME. An all-round win win situation, no? Tiamuttalk 23:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: The 2000 to 3,500 estimate for the number of militiamen looks a bit strange. Jon Kimche (" I was in Haifa during these days and watched the fighting.") states "The actual number of armed and trained Arab combatants was not much larger than that of the Jews - 560, to be exact." (Kimche, Jon and David (1960) A Clash of Destinies. The Arab-Jewish War and the Founding of the State of Israel. Frederick A. Praeger. Library of Congress number 60-6996. Page 120.) This figure is so different from the number in the info box I don't know how to incorporate. Padres Hana (talk) 21:02, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Kimche is a primary source so we should avoid relying on him. Having said that, the figure seems at least notable. The correct way to add it to the infobox would be to write: 560[1]–3,500[2] —Ynhockey (Talk) 14:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  strength 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Battle of Haifa (1948). 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/20110526061809/http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK1.pdf to http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110526061611/http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK2.pdf to http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK2.pdf
*Added  tag to http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/2f86ce183126001f85256cef0073ccce/8f8675274b4c7e4a85256a5700687322!OpenDocument
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110526063953/http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21AP35.pdf to http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21AP35.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110526063321/http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK116.pdf to http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK116.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110526063558/http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK112.pdf to http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK112.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070701120321/http://schumacher.haifa.ac.il/templers.htm to http://schumacher.haifa.ac.il/templers.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110526062759/http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK123.pdf to http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK123.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080910181356/http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK120.pdf to http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK120.pdf
*Added  tag to http://jic.tau.ac.il/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=PalestineP&BaseHref=Palestine/1948/04/23&PageLabel=&EntityId=Ar00100&ViewMode=HTML&GZ=T
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110526062258/http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK126.pdf to http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC21UK126.pdf
*Added  tag to http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/dc2eddeb3864796785256a570064fe71!OpenDocument
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:53, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Battle of Haifa (1948). 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/20090319003435/http://ipsnewsite.mysite4now.com/enakba/exodus/Erskine%20Childers,%20Walid%20Khalidi,%20Jon%20Kimche,%20et%20al.pdf to http://ipsnewsite.mysite4now.com/enakba/exodus/Erskine%20Childers,%20Walid%20Khalidi,%20Jon%20Kimche,%20et%20al.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The mention of the Partition Plan of Palestine should not say that Haifa was "allotted to a Jewish state". The Partition Plan didn't allot anything to anyone. It should read that it PROPOSED or RECOMMENDED the incorporation of Haifa into a Jewish state. Jacob D (talk) 08:20, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) 17:16, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 June 2017 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Haifa (1948). 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/20080519065846/http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/46815f76b9d9270085256ce600522c9e%21OpenDocument to http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/46815f76b9d9270085256ce600522c9e%21OpenDocument
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://ipsnewsite.mysite4now.com/enakba/exodus/Erskine%20Childers%2C%20Walid%20Khalidi%2C%20Jon%20Kimche%2C%20et%20al.pdf
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) 02:21, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Please replace the comma with a period after the following sentence in the Background section:
"Haifa was the country's largest deep water port,"
Thank you! 208.114.192.129 (talk) 19:45, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Diff of change. I also took the liberty of fixing additional punctuation issues I came across in that paragraph, although I'm sure I missed more. OhKayeSierra (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request 

message: Change "atrocity propaganda" to "the recent events in Deir Yassin" . Don't change the hyperlink. Busdurrr (talk) 23:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: De-piped. Thanks. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 October 2023 

message: I removed the following paragraph from the "Battle" section of the article:
The banner headlines of the Palestine Post on 23April 1948 announced "Haifa Pivotal Points fall to Haganah forces in 30-hour battle...". The report continued that "Haganah crushed all resistance, occupied many major buildings forcing thousands of Arabs to flee by the only open route-the sea". The report was written up on 21April but not printed until 30April, presumedly for security reasons.Palestine Post archives Tel Aviv University search date April 1948Spectator Correspondence   Erskine Childers, Walidi Khlid, Jon Kimche, Hedley V Cooke, Edward Atiyah, David Cairns,
Seems irrelevant in my opinion. Maybe would belong in a "Reactions" section. I leave it here for discussion. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Palestine Post paragraph 

message: I've made significant changes regarding controversial content here .
I think the article still needs a lot of work and I plan to make further changes along these lines.
I'm just putting this here for visibility/review and to invite discussion/comments. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significant changes