Talk:Embassy of the United States, Jerusalem

This Page Should Be Protected

This page should probably extended-confirmed protected under WP:ARBPIA due it's relation to the Palestine-Israel conflict. Thoughts?

Retroity (talk) 13:59, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes it should but that goes on WP:RPP not here - Galatz^Talk 14:02, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

I already requested it. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 14:03, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok, good to hear. Retroity (talk) 14:09, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Impact of Move

I think this section should be removed. The article is on the Embassy not on the impact and WP:NOTNEWS. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 14:00, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

• I have removed the most egregious WP:CRYSTALBALLERY from the section. Abductive (reasoning) 18:39, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

If not removed, It should be updated with the fact that Paraguay is moving back his embassy to Tel Aviv: Paraguay's new government has announced that it will move its embassy in Israel back to Tel Aviv - just three months after shifting it to Jerusalem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leyton99 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Location

The article should note both the location of the temporary embassy and the permanent embassy, if known. Note that the temporary embassy is in West Jerusalem. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 18:02, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

The temporary embassy is in disputed territory, partially in West Jerusalem and partially in no man's land, as per the NYTs. technically, West Jerusalem is also disputed territorty, of course. Nishidani (talk) 10:16, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

The location in the info box at the top of the page says Jerusalem, Israel. Israel should be removed from that line due to territory dispute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.128.237.4 (talk) 13:57, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@Nishidani: I just noticed that we added very similar information at around the same time... You got there first so your text should take precedence. I will try to fix it. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:35, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Fixed. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:43, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Well I put that in the lead. It could be put more succinctly, and then expanded (in the Armona suburb etc.) in the article's main text. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 10:56, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

This desperately needs fixing "It was relocated from its consultate in Tel Aviv by the Donald Trump Administration and is on the site of the previous US Consulate." Suggest: "The Embassy seat has been moved from Tel Aviv where most Embassy operations remain. Space has been created for the Ambassador and a small staff in the Consular Section Building of the US Consulate General in Jerusalem, an independent mission. The Ambassador will split his time between the Tel Aviv Branch and Jerusalem Office." WIKIpedia has failed miserably on this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomholladay (talk • contribs) 04:25, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Precise name, if any

Is the official name "Embassy of the United States, Jerusalem" or, as the bolding suggests, "Embassy of the United States of America in Jerusalem". One imagines that there is a State Dept protocol for naming embassies. Abductive (reasoning) 18:37, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Copy edit

Good day. I am visiting from WP:GOCE to see if we can get rid of the copy edit tag. I am aware that almost any edit may be contentious, so I tried to explain each copy edit in my edit summary. If you think that I have got it wrong, or I just haven't explained comprehensively feel free to ping me from here. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:19, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

UN Official "Statement"

The article refers to a UN official who "stated" that the embassy is partially on "occupied land". Given the article referenced mentions that the UN official in question was (a) anonymous, (b) making an unofficial statement, (c) specifically said he wasn't authorized to speak on the issue, a NPOV would refer to an "on the condition of anonymity, an unidentified UN official said" instead of the referring to an individual making a "statement" - a word with connotations of officiality that seriously misrepresents it as an authoritative/authorized remark rather than an anonymous and unauthorized interview with the press. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.11.168 (talk) 18:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Embassy's position does not affect terretorial claims

This sentence states a nonsense opinion in my view: "According to Eugene Kontorovich, the decision to shift the US embassy to this disputed area, is tantamount to recognition by the United States of Israeli sovereignty over land it captured in the Six Days War in 1967."

Embassies can always be in other countries:

• Embassies to the Holy See (Vatican City) usually are in Rome, Italy.

This includes the U.S. Embassy to the Holy See, about 4 km away https://va.usembassy.gov/embassy/ and at a different street address that the US embassy to Italy.

• Many embassies to Liechtenstein are in Berne, Switzerland, more than 100 km away.

Also the "US Embassy in Sitzerland and Liechtenstein" (!), as it is called on its website.https://ch.usembassy.gov/ .

• Embassies to the UN usually are in New York, USA.

No one would claim that the areas of the respective embassies form part of the national borders of the Vatican, of Liechtenstein or even of the UN, only because an embassy responsible for these states resides there (or in a storey of an office buidung in many cases of embassies to the UN. The sentence should therefore be deleted due to irrelevance of the statement. By the way, it is not a stement of the NY Times author, but already there a citation. Mr. Kontorovich is the director of international law at the conservative Jerusalem-based Kohelet Policy Forum . certainly not an independand observer that should be referred to without comment. Meerwind7 (talk) 12:53, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Nonsense opinions are a staple of I/P reportage, and are all over our articles. Secondly, we go by what RS state, and this view is attributed to a knowledgeable scholar. Your objection is WP:OR because the reason why, historically, embassies were in Tel Aviv and not in Jerusalem was because placing them in Jerusalem would indicate taking sides in an as yet unresolved geopolitical crux, which is not the case with the Vatican, Liechtenstein etc.Nishidani (talk) 13:12, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

To be restored-Failure of erasing editor to confirm that the reports were factual

Yaniv here excises what was widely reported, because he thinks a scholarly book summary is an opinion piece, when the material cited was easily verifiable from any number of news sources. It was a fact, not an opinion.

To be restored:

The opening and closing prayers were conducted by Evangelicals, the former led by Reverend Robert Jeffress,noted for his view that 'you can’t be saved by being a Jew,' and the latter spoken by the Reverend John C. Hagee, noted for his view that the Holocaust was God’s way of getting Jews 'to come back to the land of Israel'. Nishidani (talk) 16:33, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

• (2) After I restored this sock-deleted material, Icewhiz then 'duplications, trim' eviscerated the edit with a false edit summary, effectively endorsing what one of the most notorious socks did. Her also removed a source. These remarks were widely reported and there are no adequate grounds for repressing them. So this has to be restored, with a ce.

Two prayers were conducted by Evangelicals: the Reverend Robert Jeffress -noted for his view that 'you can’t be saved by being a Jew' - led the opening prayer, and the Reverend John C. Hagee - noted for his view that the Holocaust was God’s way of getting Jews 'to come back to the land of Israel'- spoke the closing prayer. Nishidani (talk) 16:33, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nishidani (talk • contribs)

I did not remove a source. I did remove "The opening and closing prayers were conducted by Evangelicals" which appeared twice for some odd reason and very selective cherry-picked quotes (which were made years prior to the embassy opening and in a different context) of Jeffress and Hagee - which each have their own articles we linked to, and seeing this is an article about an embassy - and not about the ministers who offered a brief prayer at the opening (or Ivanaka's outfit for that matter) - too much detail to these ministers would be UNDUE.Icewhiz (talk) 14:25, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Paraguay needs update in Impact of move section

Paraguay reversed its decision to move its embassy and returned to Tel Aviv. Israel responded by shuttering its Asunción embassy, and recalling their ambassador. See Israel–Paraguay relations and https://www.reuters.com/article/us-paraguay-israel-netanyahu/israel-closing-embassy-in-paraguay-in-response-to-return-of-mission-to-tel-aviv-idUSKCN1LL2KG 71.241.252.192 (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Sentence -Ashrawi's visa request to the United States was subsequently denied

I have tagged this as SYNTH. It is being presented as if the remarks sourced in the immediately prior sentence are the cause of the visa denial when no reason was given for denial. Nor does denial of the visa appear to have any direct relation with the subject matter of the article.Selfstudier (talk) 12:19, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

'current'

The article currently has the sentence, "The United States Embassy is currently located in the Arnona consular section of the current U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem." The Consulate General of the United States, Jerusalem has been merged with the embassy since March, so I think that 'current' might not be the appropriate wording here, but I'm not sure. Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:39, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 February 2021

Bold text

Change
"and is situated in the Arnona section of the US Consulate"
to
"and is situated in what was previously the Arnona section of the former US Consulate"

and change
"The United States Embassy is currently located in the Arnona consular section of the current U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem."
to
"The United States Embassy is currently located in what was previously the Arnona section of the former U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem."

and change
"Most consular Functions of the still existing Consulate have been subsumed under Embassy authority."
to
"Most consular Functions of the former Consulate were subsumed under Embassy authority."

2019UKUser (talk) 22:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Reactivate your request by setting the answered parameter in the {{edit extended-protected}} template back to no once you've provided reliable sources to support this change here. Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 09:05, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Pinging User:2019UKUser. Please can you get back to me on this? Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 14:21, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Here is a reliable source confirming the closure of the U.S. Consulate-General in Jerusalem and its merger with the embassy: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-47442145
2019UKUser (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for coming back and providing a reference 2019UKUser βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 15:54, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Introduction

The short introduction focuses more on Pompeo's October 18, 2018 statement regarding merging the embassy and the consulate general but doesn't mention Trump's December 6, 2017 order to move the embassy or the opening of the embassy on May 14, 2018. I believe that this is misplaced focus.