Talk:Palestinian Bedouin/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Palestinian Bedouin. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
POV Fork
This article appears to be a POV fork of Negev Bedouin, to push the POV that these Bedouins are an organic part of the Palestinian people. Virtually all the contents there appears in the original article, with less POV terminology. Inf-in MD (talk) 00:25, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
as no one seems to object, I'll redo the redirect. Inf-in MD (talk) 16:19, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
I dont think thats accurate, this covers more than just the Negev. nableezy - 20:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
I don't think so. There may be single mention of non-Negev Bedouins ("predominantly concentrated in the South (al-Naqab/Negev and Gaza), the North (al-Jalil/Galilee) and in the Jerusalem area"), but the rest is essentially a content fork. Inf-in MD (talk) 21:52, 18 November 2021 (UTC)- This page is somewhat lacking, but definitely does not only cover Negev Bedouin. There are bedouin in the West Bank (see here for example). That would very much not be covered by Negev Bedouin, but would here. nableezy - 23:27, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
This page does not discuss those West Bank Bedouins (other that in that single mention I called out above). It is simply a POV fork of Negev Bedouins if one looks at the content. If you want to create a new page about West Bank Bedouins, be my guest, but there's no reason to have another article that is 99% the same as Negev Bedouins, which is what this is. Inf-in MD (talk) 23:43, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- This page is somewhat lacking, but definitely does not only cover Negev Bedouin. There are bedouin in the West Bank (see here for example). That would very much not be covered by Negev Bedouin, but would here. nableezy - 23:27, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
nableezy do you think the West Bank Bedouin are similar enough to the Negev Bedouin to be covered in the same article? FYI, I'm the one who created the Negev Bedouin page.VR talk 04:16, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Also if this article is to remain, it might need a disambiguator. "Palestinian Bedouin" typically refers to the Bedouin of the Negev desert (inside the Green line)[1].VR talk 04:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- Not really honestly, the Bedouin in Israel proper face their own challenges with the unrecognized villages and being denied equal rights as Israeli citizens. nableezy - 16:39, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- No, a merge would be premature in the present state of articles. The Palestinian Bedouin article is undeveloped, a stub, but explores a distinct modern historical reality which the Negev Bedouin article openly admits in the final section. The Negev Bedouin article in turn looks like an official government whitewash of the history of the Bedouin in that region. Everytime I look at it I shake my head and the amount of material about their modern history not included in the article, which is massive. Nishidani (talk) 17:42, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
"a merge would be premature in the present state of articles"
- this has it exactly backwards. Right now the article (which is not a stub) has more than 95% overlap with Negev Bedouin. In fact, save for the single sentence I quoted above, it doesn't even mention the West Bank Bedouins. As such, we should either delete it as a POV fork, or redirect it to Negev Bedouin, as a plausible search term. And if the Negev Bedouin article needs improvement - stop cringing and shaking your head and go fix it. If someday a meaningful article is written about the West Bank Bedouin, we can then remove the redirect, but we should not keep this POV fork in its current state in the hope that maybe, someday, someone will create that different article.Inf-in MD (talk) 00:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)- The following is a bit tongue in cheek with overtones of seriousness so in that spirit. If "Arab citizens of Israel" is a catch all title, then we could have " X citizens of Israel" as components, where X = Palestinian, Druze, Bedouin. Do some Druze, Bedouin CoI identify as Palestinian, sure, does it matter, nope. There is some crossover but it doesn't mean the article(s) should not exist. Probably we should have an article for the Jewish citizens of Israel as well, oh wait, we do, Israeli Jews (so should be Israeli Bedouin? Shome mishtake, shorely). I realize that some would just like to have an article Non Jewish citizens of Israel, oh well. So yes, I would merge the two articles under the name Bedouin (citizens) of Israel and then identify in that article, sub categories of that. Palestinian, Negev, tribe, whatever. Then what to do with residents who are not citizens and those in East Jerusalem and the Golan, tsk. Or perhaps wait till we sort out the biggest slice first Palestinian citizens of Israel or maybe Israeli Palestinians and then sort out the rest.Selfstudier (talk) 12:34, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
The above has little to do with the merge discussion. We have an article for that sub-component- it is called Negev Bedouin, and we shouldn't have POV fork of it called Palestinian Bedouin. If you want to have the Negev Bedouin article renamed to Bedouin (citizens) of Israel - make a move request. Inf-in MD (talk) 12:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)- It could equally go the other way around, couldn't it? There are plenty of sources for "Palestinian Bedouin". And anyway, I disagree in general, this is clearly linked with the other matters I raised, there needs to be consistency across articles.Selfstudier (talk) 12:41, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
It might, but again, that's a rename discussion, not a merge discussion. This article's content is entirely covered by Negev Bedouin one except for one sentence, with the latter one older, more developed and less POV, so it is the more natural one to be merged into. If you want to suggest a rename, post merger, you could do that Inf-in MD (talk) 12:45, 23 November 2021 (UTC)- Redirect is usually result of an AfD, so what? You asked for a discussion and I have given my opinion. Atm , you don't have enough support for what you want to do unofficially, so maybe you better try something formal, don't you think? Selfstudier (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
It can be, but there's no reason it must go to AfD if editors agree to redirect. There's a formal discussion taking place here - where there are currently 3 support for the redirect.Inf-in MD (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)strike sock- And now 4 against.Selfstudier (talk) 13:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect is usually result of an AfD, so what? You asked for a discussion and I have given my opinion. Atm , you don't have enough support for what you want to do unofficially, so maybe you better try something formal, don't you think? Selfstudier (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- It could equally go the other way around, couldn't it? There are plenty of sources for "Palestinian Bedouin". And anyway, I disagree in general, this is clearly linked with the other matters I raised, there needs to be consistency across articles.Selfstudier (talk) 12:41, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- The following is a bit tongue in cheek with overtones of seriousness so in that spirit. If "Arab citizens of Israel" is a catch all title, then we could have " X citizens of Israel" as components, where X = Palestinian, Druze, Bedouin. Do some Druze, Bedouin CoI identify as Palestinian, sure, does it matter, nope. There is some crossover but it doesn't mean the article(s) should not exist. Probably we should have an article for the Jewish citizens of Israel as well, oh wait, we do, Israeli Jews (so should be Israeli Bedouin? Shome mishtake, shorely). I realize that some would just like to have an article Non Jewish citizens of Israel, oh well. So yes, I would merge the two articles under the name Bedouin (citizens) of Israel and then identify in that article, sub categories of that. Palestinian, Negev, tribe, whatever. Then what to do with residents who are not citizens and those in East Jerusalem and the Golan, tsk. Or perhaps wait till we sort out the biggest slice first Palestinian citizens of Israel or maybe Israeli Palestinians and then sort out the rest.Selfstudier (talk) 12:34, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- No, a merge would be premature in the present state of articles. The Palestinian Bedouin article is undeveloped, a stub, but explores a distinct modern historical reality which the Negev Bedouin article openly admits in the final section. The Negev Bedouin article in turn looks like an official government whitewash of the history of the Bedouin in that region. Everytime I look at it I shake my head and the amount of material about their modern history not included in the article, which is massive. Nishidani (talk) 17:42, 22 November 2021 (UTC)