Talk:Carmel (Israeli settlement)

Israel Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Project Israel To Do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles.
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page.
Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration.
Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005
Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel.
Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah
See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia.
Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data.
Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes.
Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention.
Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel.
NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries
Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel.
Stubs : See Israel stubs.
Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People
Other :
- Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Requested move 14 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: MOVED. Consensus met for "Carmel (Israeli settlement)". While place names typically use a comma rather than parenthetical for disambig, this is not an absolute rule. The proposed title is a reasonable NPOV solution. Hadal (talk) 15:23, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Carmel, Mount Hebron → Carmel (Israeli settlement) – Mount Hebron is not an administrative district, and there isnt a natural disambiguation for Carmel besides possibly West Bank, but that would gloss over the differences between Israeli settlements and Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank. So the most obvious disambigiation, and most common way of referring to Carmel, is Israeli settlement. Nableezy 18:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. Jerium (talk) 20:46, 21 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 01:10, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. "Mount Hebron" is ambiguous. Carmel (Israeli settlement) would do well to disambiguate it from Carmel (biblical settlement) and al-Karmil, both of which are also near Hebron 〜Festucalex • talk • contribs 02:23, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Festucalex. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Carmel, Har Hevron per the standard format of "Place name, Regional Council name" – see, for example, Elazar, Gush Etzion, Eli, Mateh Binyamin, Gilgal, Bik'at HaYarden, Gitit, Bik'at HaYarden, Hamra, Bik'at HaYarden, Kedar, Gush Etzion, Matityahu, Mateh Binyamin, Neria, Mateh Binyamin, Nili, Mateh Binyamin, Oz Zion, Mateh Binyamin, Rotem, Bik'at HaYarden, Susya, Har Hevron, Tekoa, Gush Etzion and Telem, Har Hevron. The bolded ones are in the same regional council area. Number 5 7 12:35, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those should be moved too, that really blurs the line between Israeli towns in Israel and Israeli settlements. Following this move request Ill work on a bulk change one. nableezy - 21:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't, because places in Israel do not use this naming convention. It's only used for settlements. Places in Israel use "Israel" rather than the Regional Council as the disambiguator (e.g. Avshalom, Israel, Kamon, Israel etc). All of the above places are settlements, not places in Israel. According to WP:PLACEDAB, for human settlements, a comma is the preferred form of disambiguation while brackets are used for geographic features. Number 5 7 11:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But it is using an Israeli Regional Council name for a place outside of Israel, if we wanted to use a a geographic disambiguator the one to use would be West Bank. nableezy - 16:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy with that as a solution. Number 5 7 21:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Im fine with it too, and I assume the other supports probably would be. Though I guess it be up to closer to determine, but Ill ping the prior participants here to ask if they would support Carmel, West Bank. @Festucalex, Necrothesp, Selfstudier, Nishidani, and NSH001:. Could we make it a unanimous agreement for Carmel, West Bank? nableezy - 07:14, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me.Selfstudier (talk) 07:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with Carmel, West Bank. As I pointed out before, Carmel (biblical settlement) and Al-Karmil are also both in the West Bank and close to the Carmel we're talking about, and thus the disambiguator would be useless. I'm sticking with supporting nableezy's original proposal for Carmel (Israeli settlement). 〜Festucalex • talk • contribs 08:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely and I concur. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is in fact an Israeli settlement in the West Bank and that Israel considers it as being administered by Har Hevron Regional Council is neither here nor there and is in fact a highly POV way of disambiguating Carmel and if there others similar in the above list given by Number57 then they should be changed as well.(Mount Hebron is a redirect to Hebron Hills which is an alternative disambiguation, since that is where this actually is (nor is it the POV Hebrew transliteration, Har Hevron).Selfstudier (talk) 13:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Nableezy and Selfstudier. And the others should also follow. Unanimously these are settlements.Nishidani (talk) 21:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Nableezy and others. --NSH001 (talk) 06:25, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support mv to Carmel (Israeli settlement), as primary choice. (That is far more informative than "Carmel, West Bank") Also, the other places mentioned by Number 57 should also be moved, Huldra (talk) 22:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. Those articles mentioned above by Number 57 should be moved as well, because they're a flagrant WP:NPOV violation. 〜 Festucalex • talk 16:03, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: I originally closed this RM in favor of the original proposal "Carmel (Israeli settlement)" but that was obviously a big mistake on my part. I've self-reverted and relisted the discussion, my apologies to everyone. Jerium (talk) 20:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: Revert close and relist, per offer below BilledMammal (talk) 01:10, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Why?

User:BilledMammal: Just a question: why did you move Carmel, Mount Hebron to Carmel, West Bank?

The way I see it, the overwhelming support was to move this to Carmel (Israeli settlement), Huldra (talk) 22:23, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While it had more support, I considered the policy based arguments for Carmel, West Bank to be stronger. However, I am willing to revert the close and relist if editors think that will be more appropriate. BilledMammal (talk) 22:27, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see that on User_talk:Jerium#RM_closure_review it is stated that "says human settlements should be disambiguated via a comma." However, WP:PLACEDAB also states that parenthesis can also be used, as in Wolin (town). Do we need a RfC for *all* the places mentioned above ( Elazar, Gush Etzion, Eli, Mateh Binyamin, Gilgal, Bik'at HaYarden, etc)? Huldra (talk) 22:37, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That line of place dab is referring to circumstances where no regional tag would be sufficient to distinguish the location; I saw the comment about Carmel (biblical settlement), but found it unconvincing due to the abandoned nature of the settlement. Regarding your question, for some of those no disambiguation is required, and for the others it seems likely, though I haven't checked, that no argument can be made that the exception applies.

If you believe that it would be better to disambiguate the ones for which it is required with (Israeli settlement), then a multi-move request might succeed; it would have the benefit off adding a hypothetical consistency argument, and since WP:PLACEDAB is only a naming convention exceptions can be made if a strong policy-based argument is made - your comment about recognizability would help towards that, though it lacked support in this discussion.

For those that don't require disambiguation, however, I don't think RM's will be sufficient; guidelines and convention against unnecessary disambiguation, particularly parenthetical disambiguation, is too strong. For those, I believe you would need to update naming convention through an RfC; the naming convention relevant to this topic area is WP:NCWB.

If you have further comments or questions, please ping me; I do not have this page on my watchlist. BilledMammal (talk) 23:17, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BilledMammal, the population (or lackthereof) of Carmel (biblical settlement) is, as far as I can see, irrelevant to this move request, especially given the fact that ancient land claims are often discussed in relation to the conflict. 〜 Festucalex • talk 07:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, revert it, note not relist it, and also given your involvement in the topic area I very strongly suggest you not be the person to be closing RMs and RFCs in the ARBPIA topic area. That naming convention is about WB vs J/S and has nothing to do with the disambiguation to be used here. If you favored one name over the other you should have voted for it, and with past participation in the topic area such as here and here it boggles the mind that you would consider yourself an uninvolved editor in the Arab-Israeli conflict topic area. nableezy - 00:54, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And pinging BilledMammal for your attention to the above comment. nableezy - 01:06, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That naming convention has nothing to do with this discussion; I linked it because if Huldra wishes to open an RfC on setting a naming convention for this area that is where I believe it should go.

I have relisted per my offer to Huldra; there are some move requests in this broad topic area that I wouldn't close due to considering myself involved, but this isn't one of them. I will add that I have no personal preference on either of the two names. BilledMammal (talk) 01:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in the topic area, and you should not be closing discussions in it. The ARBPIA topic area is not that broad, and if you want to close discussions there are countless articles on Wikipedia outside of it. nableezy - 01:13, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You also need to move it back in the meantime. nableezy - 01:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I forgot that bit. Doing so. In the past day I have closed or relisted around 30 move requests; I saw and see this one as no different than the others I have closed, including within what could be seen as ARBPIA such as Talk:1990 Temple Mount killings#Requested move 9 February 2023, Talk:Zikhron Ya'akov#Requested move 17 February 2023, and Talk:Atlit#Requested move 22 February 2023. BilledMammal (talk) 01:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldnt close those either. You had a choice, be an editor in the topic area or perform administrative tasks in it. You chose editor. nableezy - 01:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:BilledMammal: Thank you for undoing your move. And in addition to the examples mentioned by Nableezy, you voted here: Talk:2023_Jenin_incursion#Requested_move_1_February_2023, and here: Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2023_February#2023_February (about 1948 Palestinian exodus), that was just a couple found from *this* year. You really need to stay far away from any closing of a RfC in the IP area, thanks, Huldra (talk) 21:36, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Editing in a topic area doesn't make an editor involved for the entire topic area. For example, I am considerably more engaged with New Zealand topics than I am with IP topics, but even there there are many move requests that I can close without involved issues. I also note that my comment in that move review was solely related to my belief that Spectre was not involved, and did not consider the broader question. BilledMammal (talk) 18:14, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well you can hold that position if you like, but if you continue to close discussions in the topic area Ill ask that you formally be restricted from doing so. You have not only "edited in a topic area", you have been involved in numerous disputes in the topic area, all of which have shown a consistent ideological position that would disqualify you from portraying yourself as a neutral disinterested observer. There are countless other topics you can close discussions in, kindly stop in this one. nableezy - 18:17, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]