Talk:Awarta

message: What a disgustingly biased page.  This talks about the Itamar killers as being "suspected" of being from Awarta, while making no mention of the fact that they confessed and were in fact from Awarta.  Instead, it shamelessly uses this brutal murder as a way to slander Israel.  When is Wikipedia going to do something about this?
:I've made this correction.  I've sourced the facts, and also noted that the killings were condemned by Mahmoud Abbas.  I've also left the allegations of rough handling by the IDF and settler violence in response completely untouched.  Please note. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 06:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, how about that.  My edits have been instantly cleaned up by another editor to assuage the damaging image of the event for the village of Awarta.  And in quite a professional way, I might ad.  So why wasn't it up there to begin with? Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 16:55, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

message: The article now has: "Awarta has been inhabited since Biblical times.." sourced to "Biblical Holy Places: An Illustrated Guide" by Rivka Gonen. She gives no sources (except the Bible....)
However, Finkelstein et. al, 1997, p. 706, writes:
The village was not surveyed by our team. It was visited by Kallai (1972:29), but no pottery was collected. For two Samaritan inscriptions which possibly originated from 'Awarta - one apparently dating to the 14th century and the other from recent centuries- see Baillet 1964. The village appears in the Talmud (Jer. Bikurim I 63d; B. Berakhoth 39a) and in the Samaritan sources (Conder 1876:196; Ben-Zvi 1970:59-62; Hüttenmeister and Reeg 1977:554-556). It was almost certainly inhabited in the Byzantine period. The ancient name was probably Gibea, or Gabaas (see Onomasticon 70:23; Wilkinson 1977:51).
It is mentioned by travellers of the Crusader period (Beyer 1940: 190). The village and its holy tombs are mentioned by 'Ali of Herat (12th century), Yaqut (III:745) and Mujir ed-Din (15th century). For some of these references see Le Strange 1890:404; Marmardji 1951:151. 'Awarta appears in the Early Ottoman deftar (Hütteroth and Abdulfattah 1977). The size of the site was determined according to this source (Cohen Finkelstein 1991).
So Finkelstein does not have any info pre-Byzantine period about Awarta. I suggest we remove the Rivka Gonen-reference, and stick to the Finkelstein-info. Comments? Huldra (talk) 20:39, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No issue with this—unless pre-Byzantine past could be demonstrated by RS. --Al Ameer (talk) 20:46, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I´ll wait a day to two, and see if anyone else has any objections. Huldra (talk) 22:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biblical? 

message: From the Preface of the SWP name list volume: "The letters p.n. (proper name) after a name, mean either that it is a common Arabic personal appellation, or that it is a word to which no meaning can be assigned ; the former will be at once recognized by the Arabic scholar, the latter will form interesting problems for future investigation."  It is a pity that the same designation is used for both cases, but in any case "proper noun which designates a place" isn't useful since all place names are proper nouns.  I'll try to find some words that match the source better. Zerotalk 02:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks. I know that in Jastrow and in other reference works the same initials are often used for "proper noun," especially in given place names. I was unaware of the Preface to SWP with its explanation of terms, but, obviously, you are right, that it can go both ways.Davidbena (talk) 03:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The meaning of "p.n." 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Awarta. 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/20071009174603/http://www.hwc-pal.org/awarta.htm to http://www.hwc-pal.org/awarta.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.palestineremembered.com/download/VillageStatistics/Table%20I/Nablus/Page-059.jpg
*Added  tag to http://www.palestineremembered.com/download/VillageStatistics/Table%20II/Nablus/Page-105.jpg
*Added  tag to http://www.palestineremembered.com/download/VillageStatistics/Table%20III/Nablus/Page-155.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516205016/http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/11/14/466123.aspx to http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/11/14/466123.aspx
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) 17:45, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Awarta. 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/20110518165019/http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=54853 to http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=54853
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) 16:56, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Does everything pertaining to the Itamar attack also belong in this article? I think no. 
Should I add to Duma, Nablus that Israeli settlers taunted the Palestinian relatives of the burned  toddler: "“Where is Ali? Ali’s dead,” “Ali’s on the grill” link link?
I would say no, that belongs to the Duma arson attack.
Likewise here; Huldra (talk) 21:40, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not everything belongs in this article, of course. But we certainly can't have the article give just one side of the story ("Some residents of Awarta condemned the murders, including the village council chief") but omit the fact that other Awarta residents wholeheartedly supported the murders. That would be evidence of POV-ediing, which would likely get you banned from the topic area. Here come the Suns (talk) 21:48, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think we can cut out the "some residents" part, but the opinion of the village council chief is definitely notable, IMO, Huldra (talk) 22:05, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  As is the opinion of the relatives of the murderers, IMO. Here come the Suns (talk) 22:07, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: If that is acceptable in this article, then so is the  taunting of the Palestinian relatives in the  Duma, Nablus article, Huldra (talk) 22:10, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't do this kind of article hostage taking on wikipedia. But if you'd like to be told that by some administrator, I suggest you take it to some notice board. Here come the Suns (talk) 22:14, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sigh, "what is good for the goose is good for the  gander".  Huldra (talk) 22:19, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What belongs in this article? 

message: In the same vein as the above discussion (can't have just the voices of those condemning the event, need to balance with those supporting it - either both are in or both are out) - we can't have just the reactions of suspected settlers who threw stones in the village, without mentioning the spray-painting of pro-murderers slogans on the nearby tombstones. Either both in, or both out. Here come the Suns (talk) 23:06, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reactions to Itamar attack