Talk:Lapid (community settlement)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Lapid. 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/20090914032238/http://www.lapid.muni.il/ to http://www.lapid.muni.il/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:09, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Places established inside the green line

I think we need to have a RfC about wether or not we should have the standard text for Israeli settlements on places establish inside the green line. What does other people think? (As for it being no man land between 1948 to 1967: the land still belonged to someone..even if they were not allowed to access it. According to ARIJ, Israel actively confiscated the land from Saffa after 1967....that means it wasn't just "ownerless") Huldra (talk) 22:17, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I suspect the land being confiscated from Saffa was in the Palestinian territories, not land that the village might have previously owned in no-man's land prior to 1948. Not really clear what you mean by "inside the green line". As for whether the text is needed, the question that needs to be answered is whether villages built on land that was not claimed by another state/actor counts as an Israeli settlement (the text at that article makes no mention of no-man's land). Number 57 22:23, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

According to this report from Btselem, the Latrun no-man's land is not considered to be occupied territory under international law. Number 57 22:30, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

That is interesting. I would like to hear what User:Pluto2012 has to say about that, as he has worked a lot on the Latrun issue, Huldra (talk) 22:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I can see only around 30 Latrun-related edits in his entire editing history... Number 57 22:43, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Look at Battles of Latrun (1948) (He was Ceedjee~enwiki earlier), Huldra (talk) 23:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

As for what I mean with "inside the green line": take a look at the google map, say here for Lapid. Google map clearly marks two lines as "1949 Armistice Agreement line"...the places between those tho lines are what I call "inside the green line". (The Green Line (Israel) really could be clearer), Huldra (talk) 22:32, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello,

I am more competent for the period 1920-1949 but I have some know-how of the remaining.

Latrun was clearly not in Israel in 1949 and was conquered in June 1967. In that sense it is part of the Palestinian occupied territories.

But Israel gives a huge importance to this small aera for security considerations (the highway to Jerusalem crosses it) and I wonder it was not annexed too when Jerusalem was annexed (but no media mentioned this at the time) and I wonder also if this was validated during Oslo agreement... But I can't confirm this. That's just a vague idea of something I may have read somewhere and it may well have been a website rather than an academic work...

That's an interesting question anyway. I will have a look at this !

Pluto2012 (talk) 05:43, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

This reports Taba negociations:

The Palestinians also rejected Israel's demand that the "no man's land" around Latrun not be considered part of the West Bank.

It does not close the debate but if Palestinians disagree "a demand" at Taba it means it was still an open question.

We need to go deeper and find the complete Taba agreement conclusions. Pluto2012 (talk) 05:57, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

It can't be part of the occupied Palestinian territories if it was never part of the Palestinian territories in the first place. The Btselem report is quite clear that this is not occupied territory. Number 57 10:11, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

It's interesting that the Btselem report says that the salient was annexed, because I'm 99% sure that never happened. If there was an act of annexation it should be easy to find a direct reference to it; I invite everyone to try. There was a case where an Israeli got a speeding ticket there and challenged it in court on the grounds that he was not in Israel at the time. It went to quite a high court, if I remember correctly. Sorry but I can't find that reference at the moment, which is annoying since I read it just a few days ago. What nobody challenges is that both the Israeli and Palestinian sides have claimed it as rightfully theirs in every negotiation so far. Zero^talk 11:12, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

(Replacing the struck-out sentences.) In 2005 an Israeli was charged with illegally carrying a Palestinian into Israel but the magistrate found him not guilty on the grounds that he only entered the Latrun salient which was not in Israel. In 2009 a different magistrate ruled that Israeli law applied in the salient even though it had not formally been annexed. [1]. Zero^talk 11:26, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

This source refers to Annapolis negociations in 2007 and the status of the no man's land around Latrun was still disputed.

And referring eg to this map for UNO website I think we can conclude it is considered to be still a no man's land, nor Israel or the Palestinian occupied territories.

Pluto2012 (talk) 19:14, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I had hoped that someone could update Green Line (Israel) -article? That article seem quite lacking in info, at the moment, Huldra (talk) 20:15, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 30 May 2021

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 (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 19:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

---

• Lapid → Lapid, Israel
• Lapid (disambiguation) → Lapid

– Even in Israel, the word "Lapid" would be more likely to refer to one of the people with this last name - currently Yair Lapid, 15-20 years ago his father Tomi Lapid. And I very much doubt that people in any other part of the world would be likely to know of this small town, while several of the people are likely to be known. Animal lover 666 (talk) 16:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose There is only one topic called Lapid – the village. There is a hatnote pointing to a DAB page for people with the surname Lapid, and that should be sufficient. Number 57 19:19, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
  • A current headline in the on-line Jerusalem Post: "Bennett announces plan to form gov't with Lapid that will oust Netanyahu". The word Lapid in this sentence, clearly refers to Yair Lapid and not the villagem Animal lover 666 (talk) 22:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
    • I don't see how this has any relevance as I don't think anyone would be reasonably expecting to find Yair Lapid at the title Lapid. Using this logic we should Liverpool into a DAB page because people might be looking for Liverpool F.C. (who are almost always referred to as simply "Liverpool"). Number 57 11:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
      • At least two RMs come to mind — Talk:Trump (card games)#Requested move 9 November 2016 and Talk:Macron (diacritic)#Requested move 7 May 2017 — with consensus that parenthetical qualifiers should be appended to previously primary topics when holders of those surnames achieved high prominence. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 03:28, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nomination. The community settlement, population 2394, is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 00:50, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
• Support. I checked the links in. Other than those from templates (including at least {{Hevel Modi'in Regional Council}}), there were three. One was the DAB page, and one related to the settlement. The third was intended for the Lapid Movement for Learning the Lessons of the Holocaust, an organisation which apparently has nothing to do the the settlement (the Hebrew word לפיד (lapid) means "torch"). Narky Blert (talk) 11:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I googled for "lapid nrews story", and quickly found Israel politics: Lapid nears coalition after Netanyahu fell short (BBC, 30 May 2021), Netanyahu makes last-ditch effort as Lapid rallies opposition to unseat Israel's longest-serving leader (India Today, 30 May 2021) and Report: Lapid, Bennett may ink preliminary coalition agreements within a day (Times of Israel, 10 May 2021). No WP:PTOPIC. Narky Blert (talk) 11:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Narky Blert: The links in give a misleading picture as many were recently changed to point at Lapid, Israel.[2][3][4][5][6][7] Number 57 11:54, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Just to clarify: I moved the article and created the disambiguation page. Number 57 subsequently moved my disambiguation page and reverted my move. In between, quite likely other users fixed the link which, at the time, pointed to the disambiguation page. Animal lover 666 (talk) 12:53, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

• Support per above. I am surprised that the dab page was created just a few days ago. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 02:40, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

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.

Where is Lapid?

The Latrun region in Israel and Palestine

As can be seen from the map (see Latrun salient), the majority of it is in the West bank (but behind the WB barrier) and a small part is in the no man's land. Modi'in Illit is classed as an Israeli settlement in the West Bank and I can see no reason why Lapid should not be so classified, Kfar HaOranim is similar and that is so classified. Selfstudier (talk) 11:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Now I recall that there is something I didn't sort out. Two hi-res maps of Lapid and Kfar Haoranim are here (A) and here (B). I believe both maps are products of the Survey of Israel. Map A shows Kfar Haoranim on the south side of Lapid, while map B shows Kfar Haoranim on the west side of Lapid. In other words they are completely in contradiction. Now look at map B and see that there is a gap between the two areas crossed by only one road — the armistice line runs along that gap (1956 map at 1:20K checked). If you open the pull-down menu שכבות and select גושים you can see the armistice line as the dominant line separating the two neighborhoods.

I happen to think that map B is correct, which means that the map I drew is incorrect since I followed map A. Another government map agreeing with map B is map (C). Zero^talk 13:45, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Google Maps has Lapid fully in the no man's land (and matches Map B). Neighbouring (and contiguous) Kfar HaOranim is mostly in the West Bank but with a small portion in no man's land. Number 57 13:49, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

The position of the armistice line on Google Maps is about 100m east of the position on Israeli maps pre-1967. Those Israeli maps agree with the boundary of land-ownership type in map B and according to that all of Kfar Haoranim is in WB. Of course the position of the line was never defined to high precision in the armistice agreements. Was it demarcated in any way, such as with a fence or markers? Zero^talk 14:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

We seem to have established that Shalit, Lapid, Kfar Ruth, Maccabim and Neve Shalom are all in or mostly in the nlm. What I am after is a standard form of words that can be used for all these Israeli settlements. I will start a separate discussion about that at Latrun Salient article. Selfstudier (talk) 14:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)