Jump to content

Talk:Nakba

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Core sources

[edit]

Works marked with an asterisk (*) are already cited in this Wikipedia article.

21st-century "classics"

[edit]

Highly-cited (100s of cites) 21st-century books by highly-cited authors (and more-recent works by those same authors):

General

[edit]

21st-century academically-reviewed books:

21st-century well-cited academic papers/chapters:

Nakba in culture

[edit]

21st-century academically-reviewed books:

21st-century well-cited academic papers/chapters:

Nakba and genocide studies

[edit]

21st-century academically-reviewed books:

21st-century well-cited academic papers/chapters:

Nakba denial / Nakba memory

[edit]

21st-century well-cited academic papers/chapters:

Discussion (core sources)

[edit]

Additions/subtractions? Levivich (talk) 03:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Levivich, happy to add here - could you explain the objective? There are many more relevant books in the article bibliography, and in google books. Not to mention the various sources in Arabic (e.g. Ma'na an-Nakba). Onceinawhile (talk) 17:01, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The objective is to identify the major books about Nakba -- the "best" sources. I had missed two books already in the article, which I just added to this list, but I think at this point all the books in the article are on this list. Did I miss any others? In addition to those, there are, listed above, books that should be cited in the article, but aren't. Are there any others? The article relies too much on not-the-best sources: newspaper articles, kind-of-obscure journal papers, etc., which can and ought to be replaced with better sources, like the major books by major scholars in the field. No doubt there are foreign-language books about Nakba as well, but I've only looked at English books. Levivich (talk) 18:14, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, your list - prioritizing Pappe and Morris - is incorrectly weighted. They are absolutely core to the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight, which is the story of what the Israelis did to the Palestinians. But the Nakba is a wider topic, about the overall Palestinian collective trauma.
I can bring more sources, but we should iron this difference out first.
Onceinawhile (talk) 20:27, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't really intend this list to be weighted, except that the "classics" have like 10x or 100x the citations of other books on the list, so I separated them, and then I looked for any more-recent books by the same authors about Palestine, so we can see what if anything they changed or added in their writing about Nakba since they wrote their "classics." The classics, like all classics, are widely-cited, but relatively old. That's why I think it's important to look at newer sources and not just the classics.
I don't necessarily think classics should be given more weight than newer sources. In instances where newer sources say something different than the classics, we need to pay attention to that. We need to determine if the mainstream scholarly views have changed, or if new significant minority views have emerged, or what. One example: did Nakba start and end in 1948, or did it begin before 48, and/or continue after 48? My sense that scholarship has moved on those questions since Pappe 2006 and Masalha 2012, and I'd be keen on looking at how more recent sources describe the timeline of Nakba (and also what Pappe and Masalha have said in more recent writings on the topic, including papers and not just books).
I'm not entirely sure how to handle Morris. My gut instinct is that Morris represents a significant minority view on Nakba (or maybe more specifically, the causes of the Nakba). I see that other scholars discuss Morris's views, particularly in relation to Pappe's, and both Morris and Pappe discuss each other's views, and the Wikipedia article mentions them already. I was going to see how the most recent scholarship handled Morris. It may be one of those cases where Morris is talked about in the article more than used as a source for the article (and maybe same with Pappe).
For now, though, I'm just looking to collect the most in-depth, widely-cited, reputable works about Nakba... i.e., books by scholars reviewed in some academic journal, the more citations the better. That could obviously be expanded to book chapters and journal articles, but I think books is a good place to start because they will have the most depth. Levivich (talk) 21:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You could retitle the "classics" as "highly cited" instead, if people object? It's not a huge issue, and I realise I'm about a year late, but wanted to offer a solution if needed. Lewisguile (talk) 18:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added some papers that had decent cite counts, reorganized the list by topic, and clarified inclusion criteria. Levivich (talk) 16:08, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Outline

[edit]
Outline

Full source citations at #Core sources

Discussion (outline)

[edit]

A work in progress, but thoughts? Levivich (talk) 22:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

👍 Like nableezy - 23:19, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The current structure is nothing to particularly write home about, so yeah, like. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hired. ) Selfstudier (talk) 12:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Levivich (talk) 01:14, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm adding to the outline links to other articles, and sub-topics (where I'm not aware of an article to link), that I think are WP:DUE per the sources listed in each outline section. Please speak up if you think anything should be added or removed. Also, as the outline will be changing, just note that folks' approval/disapproval at any given point in time may no longer apply to a later, changed version of the outline. Levivich (talk) 01:14, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this outline is missing coverage of notable opposing narratives, namely the Israeli national narrative which is currently covered in the section 'Opposition to the notion of Nakba'. Marokwitz (talk) 10:46, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I expect that'll be covered in historiography and memory section; I haven't gotten to expanding those parts of the outline yet (and probably won't for a while, still on the history section right now). Levivich (talk) 22:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added article links to the history section in the outline above. If anyone thinks there are other articles that should be linked in the history section of the Nakba article, or that we shouldn't be linking to something that is listed in the outline, please let me know. Levivich (talk) 20:53, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a very small bare-bones start to the History section of the article, and struck through the links on the outline that are now in the article. My plan is to expand the history section until all the links in the outline are in the article, then move on to the other sections. I may move some links to other parts of the outline and reorganize the outline a bit as I go. Levivich (talk) 05:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive quotations in citations

[edit]

WP:FOOTQUOTE notes the purpose of a reference quotation is to "[allow] readers to immediately identify the applicable portion of the reference"; it also highlights that "caution should be exercised, as always, to avoid copyright violations". I don't believe this guidelien has been sufficiently followed in this article. Take the following, which was the first sentence-reference correlation I looked at:

"Expulsions, massacres, and Israeli expansion continued in the autumn of 1948,[1]"

There is somewhere in the region of 700 words of quotations here. Reminder: citations are meant to verify the text, and quotations are meant to allow readers to immediately identify the applicable portion of the citation. Here, the quotations should allow immediate identification of the sources stating some part of: that expulsions continued in autumn 1948, that massacres continued in autumn 1948, and that Israeli expansion continued in autumn 1948.

I have read the provided quotation from Manna 2022 thrice, and have yet to find where it states that the massacres, pillagings, and rapes detailed occurred in any part of 1948 (and what is the relevance of the p. 60 quote at all?). The same can be said for Hasian Jr. 2020 and Slater 2020. Morris 2008's quotation does not even verify that Israeli expansion occurred in 1948—it only says "the IDF offensive". Cohen 2017 and Pappe 2006 are the only quoted sources whose copyrights have not been unnecessarily violated—and quoting the latter's final sentence is completely unnecessary.

I see that many citations contain upwards of 1200 words of quotations; I count at least two with more than 2000. (For reference, the current word count of the article itself is short of 5,000.) If one comparatively-short citation contains so much unnecessary plagiarism from copyrighted sources, I shudder to think of what the longer ones do. Please take better care when quoting the sources.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let's go through this source by source. All bolding is my emphasis.

I have read the provided quotation from Manna 2022 thrice, and have yet to find where it states that the massacres, pillagings, and rapes detailed occurred in any part of 1948

The citation is: Manna 2022, pp. 60-92... Manna 2022 is available for free, linked in the Bibliography of the article. That book is titled Nakba and Survival: The Story of Palestinians Who Remained in Haifa and the Galilee, 1948–1956, which is how we know it's about 1948. The citation is to pp. 60-92, which are 32 pages of the book. Those 32 pages are Chapter 2 of the book. The chapter title is: "Completing the Occupation of Gililee--Operation Hiram". Operation Hiram occurred 29-31 October 1948. The entire chapter, all 32 pages, are about events in the autumn of 1948.
And what are those events in the autumn of 1948? massacres, pillagings, and rapes. The quotes from Manna are:
  • From page 75: In the villages of upper Galilee closer to the Lebanese border, however, the war crimes and expulsions were more severe and cruel. The Israeli army carried out killings (including massacres), pillaged, and raped in a number of border villages, including Safsaf, Saliha, Jish, Hula, and Sa‘sa‘, on the day the villages were occupied or shortly thereafter. The killings and expulsions were carried out in villages that had put up no resistance to the occupiers. The inhabitants of some villages (Saliha, for example) even resisted the presence of the ARA in their village, but this did not save them when the soldiers of the Israeli army entered their village.
  • Page 301 n. 83 is a footnote from Chapter 2.
    • Footnote 83 is at the end of this sentence on Page 77: The fact that the army perpetrated fifteen massacres during a single week after occupying the Galilee speaks to the presence of a formal policy.83.
    • The footnote lists the 15 massacres that occurred in October 1948: The Israeli army carried out massacres in ‘Ilabun, against al-Mawasi Arabs, in Kufr ‘Inan, Farradiyya, Majd al-Krum, al-Bi‘na, Dayr al-Asad, Nahaf, Tarshiha, Safsaf, Jish, Sa‘sa‘, Hula, and Saliha. In the massacres of upper Galilee alone hundreds of defenseless civilians and prisoners were executed by the soldiers.
  • Page 308 n. 96 is a footnote from Chapter 3.
    • Footnote 96 is at the end of this sentence on page 121: Even after news of the massacres and the expulsion of the residents of villages in upper Galilee leaked out at the end of the year, the major figures in Maki did not express criticism of these actions.96
    • The footnote again lists the massacres: The murder and expulsion of defenseless civilians involved the residents of the villages of ‘Ilabun, al-Mawasi Arabs, Kufr ‘Inan, Majd al-Krum, al-Bi‘na, Dayr al-Asad, Nahf, Sha‘b, Mirun, Jish, al-Safsaf, Sa‘sa‘, Tarshiha, Salha, Hula, and others.

(and what is the relevance of the p. 60 quote at all?)

The quote from page 60 is about the population of the Galilee, which is the population that was ethnically cleansed in autumn 1948 during operations like Operation Hiram.

The same can be said for Hasian Jr. 2020

Hasian Jr. 2020, p. 93: In that 1988 Tikkun essay Benny Morris once argued that “Jewish atrocities” were “far more widespread than the old historians” had indicated, and he went on to mention the massacres of Arabs at places like Al-Dawayima, Eilaboun, Jish, Safsaf, Hule, Saliha, Sasa, and Lydda. Eilaboun, Jish, Safsaf, Hule, and Saliha, are massacres that happened in October 1948.

and Slater 2020.

Slater 2020, p. 90: On October 15, Rabin continued, after Egypt fired a few shots at the convoy, “we had our pretext” and Israel implemented its plan, succeeding not only in expelling the Egyptian forces from the Negev but also seizing a large section of the western Negev region that had previously been allocated to the Arab state. I don't understand how you can possibly not understand that this is talking about Israeli expansion in October 1948.

Morris 2008's quotation does not even verify that Israeli expansion occurred in 1948—it only says "the IDF offensive".

Morris 2008, p. 313: ... the IDF offensive against the Egyptian expeditionary force that began on 15 October and the offensive against the ALA in the Galilee two weeks later. The IDF offensive that began on 15 October was Operation Yoav. The one that began two weeks later was Operation Hiram.

If one comparatively-short citation contains so much unnecessary plagiarism from copyrighted sources, I shudder to think of what the longer ones do. Please take better care when quoting the sources.

Please take better care not to needlessly throw around words like "plagiarism" and "copyrighted." Quotations from sources are neither plagiarism nor copyvio.

Reminder: citations are meant to verify the text, and quotations are meant to allow readers to immediately identify the applicable portion of the citation.

It'd be nice to have shorter quotes, yet your post makes me think the thing to do is to expand the quotations rather than shorten them, since the quotations were apparently not clear enough to convey that they were about events in October 1948. Levivich (talk) 01:11, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be an improvement if I added wikilinks to the quotes, so readers could know what the various words were referring to? Levivich (talk) 01:15, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that seems unhelpful. Let's address what seems to be the biggest problem first. You argue that "quotations from sources are neither plagiarism nor copyvio". With that in mind, can you please explain the meaning of "However, caution should be exercised, as always, to avoid copyright violations." at WP:FOOTQUOTE? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:26, 2 September 2024 (UTC) EDIT: could you also ping me when you reply? I don't have this page on my watchlist.[reply]

References

  1. ^ Manna 2022, pp. 60-92 ("[p. 60] The dominant understanding that the population of the Galilee escaped the Nakba is not accurate, since of the 220 cities and villages in the Galilee populated by Arabs, only 70 remained after the Nakba. Over two-thirds of the Palestinian towns and villages had been destroyed and their populations expelled; 100,000 Arabs or fewer escaped this fate, representing about half of those who were living in the Galilee until the end of 1947. It is true that more Palestinian residents remained in the Galilee than in any other area occupied by Israel in 1948; nevertheless, ethnic cleansing in some parts of the Galilee was almost total ... [p. 75] In the villages of upper Galilee closer to the Lebanese border, however, the war crimes and expulsions were more severe and cruel. The Israeli army carried out killings (including massacres), pillaged, and raped in a number of border villages, including Safsaf, Saliha, Jish, Hula, and Sa‘sa‘, on the day the villages were occupied or shortly thereafter. The killings and expulsions were carried out in villages that had put up no resistance to the occupiers. The inhabitants of some villages (Saliha, for example) even resisted the presence of the ARA in their village, but this did not save them when the soldiers of the Israeli army entered their village."), 301 n. 83 ("The Israeli army carried out massacres in ‘Ilabun, against al-Mawasi Arabs, in Kufr ‘Inan, Farradiyya, Majd al-Krum, al-Bi‘na, Dayr al-Asad, Nahaf, Tarshiha, Safsaf, Jish, Sa‘sa‘, Hula, and Saliha. In the massacres of upper Galilee alone hundreds of defenseless civilians and prisoners were executed by the soldiers."), and 308 n. 96 ("The murder and expulsion of defenseless civilians involved the residents of the villages of ‘Ilabun, al-Mawasi Arabs, Kufr ‘Inan, Majd al-Krum, al-Bi‘na, Dayr al-Asad, Nahf, Sha‘b, Mirun, Jish, al-Safsaf, Sa‘sa‘, Tarshiha, Salha, Hula, and others."); Hasian Jr. 2020, p. 93, "In that 1988 Tikkun essay Benny Morris once argued that “Jewish atrocities” were “far more widespread than the old historians” had indicated, and he went on to mention the massacres of Arabs at places like Al-Dawayima, Eilaboun, Jish, Safsaf, Hule, Saliha, Sasa, and Lydda."; Slater 2020, p. 90, "On October 15, Rabin continued, after Egypt fired a few shots at the convoy, “we had our pretext” and Israel implemented its plan, succeeding not only in expelling the Egyptian forces from the Negev but also seizing a large section of the western Negev region that had previously been allocated to the Arab state."; Cohen 2017, p. 87, "Even before the government was discussing the census and the elections, it had decided on resuming the fighting. In late October of 1948, the IDF launched offensives in the south and north of the country and completed its conquest of the Galilee, the Negev, and the southern coastal line to Gaza. During these conquests, dozens of thousands of Palestinians were once again uprooted from their homes. Some were expelled by Jewish forces; others fled, fearing revenge. Some left with the retreating Egyptian army (in the south) and al-Qawuqji's Arab Liberation Army (in the north). In the south, none of the Arab settlements remained standing, but some of the Bedouin communities did. In the Galilee, many managed to remain steadfastly in their villages despite efforts to expel them."; Masalha 2012, pp. 73–74; Morris 2008, pp. 313 ("...the IDF offensive against the Egyptian expeditionary force that began on 15 October and the offensive against the ALA in the Galilee two weeks later.") and 344-348; Pappe 2006, p. 190, "Under the watchful eyes of UN observers who were patrolling the skies of the Galilee, the final stage of the ethnic cleansing operation, begun in October 1948, continued until the summer of 1949. Whether from the sky or on the ground, no one could fail to spot the hordes of men, women and children streaming north every day. Ragged women and children were conspicuously dominant in these human convoys: the young men were gone-executed, arrested or missing. By this time UN observers from above and Jewish eyewitnesses on the ground must have become desensitised towards the plight of the people passing by in front of them: how else to explain the silent acquiescence in the face of the massive deportation unfolding before their eyes?"

Talk:1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight RfC

[edit]

There's a discussion at Talk:1948_Palestinian_expulsion_and_flight#RfC_–_In_the_article_section_about_"Haifa",_should_the_following_paragraph_be_added? about whether specific prose attributed to Benny Morris should be added to 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight. Editors are invited to participate. TarnishedPathtalk 07:15, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photo source

[edit]

Does anyone have a proper source for this photo? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Man_see_school_nakba.jpg IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UNRWA Film and Photo Archive A newly displaced Palestine refugee man overlooks Jaramana camp, Syria... claims "© 1970 UNRWA Photo by Jack Madvo" fiveby(zero) 20:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant, thank you. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:12, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Possible first publication and source is the UNRWA photo catalogue 1983 or 1984. fiveby(zero) 20:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The 1948 Nakba

[edit]

I think the first sentence stating that “The central facts of the Nakba during the 1948 Palestine war are not disputed” should be removed. This is not because I disagree with it(I don’t) but because it doesn’t need to be stated especially given that the facts are laid out. It also kind of reads in a weird way starting a section with a sentence saying that the following content is not in dispute, given that if it were in dispute it wouldn’t be included or would be made note off. Originalcola (talk) 12:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User:إيان I accidentally deleted part of the following paragraph when trying to remove it that I did not intend to delete, I only object to the first sentence. Originalcola (talk) 12:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This edit was most unhelpful to your case. I would not expect that sort of thing to be repeated. Selfstudier (talk) 12:17, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's the most important sentence in the entire article (disclosure: I added it to the article), for two reasons: First, many sources state this explicitly; 7 are cited in the article; more could be cited. For this reason, I think it's WP:DUE for inclusion in the body (and maybe even in the lead).
Second, not really a WP-policy-based reason, but I think there's a widespread misconception in the world that the basic facts of the Nakba are disputed (search twitter or reddit for "wikipedia nakba" and you can see examples of this), and so it's important that Wikipedia inform readers that the RSes say that these basic facts are not disputed.
Originally, the first sentence was part of the same paragraph as the next paragraph. That next paragraph lists the "central facts" that "are not disputed" (sourced to the same sources as the first sentence, plus many additional sources). So the intent was that the first sentence state that the central facts are not disputed, and the rest of the paragraph lists out what those central facts are (and thus also simultaneously summarizes the rest of "The 1948 Nakba" section). Personally, I think that's a better arrangement--to have just one paragraph--but that's just a matter of personal stylistic preference. I don't feel strongly that it needs to be one paragraph, but I strongly support keeping that content, including the first sentence. Levivich (talk) 15:55, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t know much about how prevalent denialism is so I can’t really comment on your second argument, but it seems reasonable to move it to the lead instead. Originalcola (talk) 20:09, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nakba&oldid=1262321242"