Talk:Ma'ale Shomron

message: I moved the page to Ma'ale Shomron, because of the naming conventions and the precedent set forth by Ma'ale Adummim. However, the official website spells it Maale Shomron (without the h, but also without the apostrophe), so that may need to be used. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 14:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW, I think it is wrong. This is English WP. A non-Israeli pronouncing 'Ma'ale' will say ma ale ('ale' as in ginger ale). Simply wrong and misleading. --Shuki 17:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yitzhak (proper English pronunciation: Yi-JAK) is also quite a bit different from Hebrew יצחק (its-HUCK). The idea behind the Hebrew naming conventions are twofold: to give a reader mildly familiar with Hebrew pronunciation (or foreign pronunciation in general) an idea of how to say the word, and to introduce a standard which is both clear to English-speakers and does not deviate far from the direct transliteration (or academic if you will). Maaleh for מעלה violates both things - an English speaker with no idea about the word will say something like MAW-l'h, while in Hebrew it would be more like מאלח. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 17:44, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't say anything about yitzhack. Anyway, the thing is that you aren't a native English speaker, so it's very challenging to know what how a native English speaker sees words. One principal rule is that when a word ends with a vower (a e i o u, and sometimes y) then the other vowels inside the word are long: whole, scale, revere, etc... 'Ma'ale' = ma ale ('ale' as in ginger ale). If you really want to be a tzaddik, then go all the way: Maallay --Shuki 20:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: This is nonsense, this argument has been had on many pages and we continue to have to prove the same thing over and over. The most common description of this place, and every other Israeli settlement (meaning Israeli locality built on occupied land outside of Israel, a bit redundant but some still dont seem to understand) is "Israeli settlement". This instance: This BBC map labels it an "Israeli settlement". Christian Science Monitor only labels it an "Israeli settlement" or a "Jewish settlement", never any other label. The world uses certain descriptions of these places before any other description and this continued insistence to downplay that is bogus. This argument should not be needed on every single settlement page and those remaining from the J+S gang appear to have found a new method of imposing language not recognized by anybody other than the occupying power as the primary language of an encyclopedia. nableezy - 02:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the npov tag as two editors are intent on maintaining the use of language by an extreme minority (Samaria before West Bank and communal village before Israeli settlement). Other comments are welcome. nableezy - 03:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Calling other editors gangs is not most conducive for colloberation. There doesn't seem to be any configuration that will satisfy you unless the opening words of the article are "Israeli Settlement."--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: crowd: an informal body of friends; "he still hangs out with the same crowd (2nd definition). And why should the first description not be the most common one? nableezy - 05:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

text: And brewcrewer, why did you remove the wikilink to West Bank? Why did you place "Samarian hills" before West Bank? That is in addition to using the language of an extreme minority before the common "Israeli settlement" which you completely removed from the first sentence on the laughable pretense that would "satisfy" everybody. nableezy - 06:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  first description