Jump to content

Talk:Arab citizens of Israel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
  • Expand : Muslims, Christians sub-sections: Please add a little about institutions, history, and towns
  • Verify : Please add reliable sources for all of the information (do not delete info please, look for verification)

Requested move 21 March 2024

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: No consensus (non-admin closure) microbiologyMarcus [petri dish·growths] 20:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arab citizens of Israel → Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel – Following the even votes at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palestinian citizens of Israel, the discussion was closed as merge. That article had been created as an outcome of another even vote at Talk:Arab citizens of Israel/Archive 8#Requested move 27 October 2021, which talked about a refactoring of the content if the name was changed. Implementing this merge will result in such a refactoring. Onceinawhile (talk) 16:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Bensci54 (talk) 16:53, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Doesn’t that deny a significant amount of arguments from the original thread, being that there is strong but not complete overlap? As the current title is broader and encompasses all, it’s preferable. FortunateSons (talk) 11:26, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Current title is broader and better. Palestinian Arabs are Arabs, ergo are included under the current implied scope. Why exclude the fraction of Israeli Arabs that are not or do not identify as Palestinian? Why should the page be rescoped? Srnec (talk) 03:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It seems the only way to fix up somewhat contradictory closes is for each subgroup of "Arab citizens of Israel" (which in truth is nothing more than an Israeli invention) to have its own article (some already do), so this one should have all the material that has nothing to do with Palestinian citizens of Israel removed from it and be renamed.Selfstudier (talk) 11:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Not all Israeli Arabs self-identify as Palestinian, yet all identify as Arab. Marokwitz (talk) 11:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Clearly an NPOV violation as not all Arabs identify as Palestinian. As I've suggested before, if people want an article on Arabs with Israeli citizenship who identify as Palestinian, that could be legitimately forked to Palestinian identity in Israel. Number 57 13:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The real problem here is that the current title is Israeli POV and thus violates WP:POVNAME. This can be credibly sourced without difficulty, viz:

...what label should be attached to them? Much more than merely semantics is at stake. how one chooses to identify the Arab minority in israel is often indicative of one’s politics. Supporters of israel generally refer to the Arab community in Israel as "Israeli Arabs" or "Arab Israelis" – using the terms commonly used by Israeli governments, the Hebrew-language media in Israel, and most Israeli Jews. Critics of israel, by contrast, tend to describe Israel’s Arab citizens simply as Palestinians or Palestinian Arabs. in doing so, they emphasize the Palestinian national identity of the Arab population in Israel and clearly reject the Israeli state’s longstanding avoidance of that label.Which, if any, of these names is correct? Are Arabs in Israel "Israeli Arabs" or "Palestinian Arabs"? Are they Israelis or Palestinians? Ilan Peleg; Dov Waxman (2011). Israel's Palestinians: The Conflict Within (illustrated ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 26. ISBN 978-0-521-15702-5.

Having said that, it is not clear that the current proposal is neutral either therefore I think we need to find a consensus via an RFC and not by an RM where editors are simply going to !vote their POV as is occurring here already.Selfstudier (talk) 11:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fair enough point – what would be a neutral term in your opinion? GnocchiFan (talk) 10:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Atm, I am simply considering an RFC with question "Is the current title NPOV? If not, what would be an appropriate title?" Selfstudier (talk) 15:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: There seems to be consensus that the current title may be NPOV but that the proposed title isn't better. Relisting to see if any NPOV titles are proposed. Bensci54 (talk) 16:53, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support renaming to "Palestinian and Arab citizens of Israel" as a middle ground, which builds on the consensus of the AfD to merge the two articles. Also important to note that a quick google search reveals that "Palestinian citizens of Israel" shows 191k results, while "Arab citizens of Israel" shows 142k results. Aside from these search results, majority of "Arab Israelis" are Palestinians, so we are giving undue weight here to the minority of "Arab Israelis" who do not identify as Palestinian for whatever reason. Makeandtoss (talk) 20:11, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are some Palestinian citizens of Israel not Arabs? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I can think of; but allegedly, some Arab citizens of Israel are not Palestinian, or at least they do not identify as such. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:21, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It really depends how you define Arab. For example there are Palestinian Christians who came from Greece in the early 20th century, but now speak Arabic. Are they Arab Christians? Or Arabic-speaking Greek Christians? The more you discuss ethnicity and identity, the more you unravel what a load of meaningless drivel it all is – except that is, of course, for use in racist rhetoric. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not really the issue, the Israeli POV simply classifies the population that is not Jewish as Arab, a practice that goes back to the Balfour Declaration ("existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine") and which then forms the basis for discrimination against that population. Selfstudier (talk) 10:22, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's an important question here. We shouldn't use an article title saying "A and B" if A is a subset of B. That would be redundant and confusing to readers since it would imply a non-subset relationship. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The more important thing is that "Arab citizens of Israel" is an Israeli invention and terminology, regardless of what subsets it contains. Selfstudier (talk) 17:12, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The real problem is the merger, the arguments for which were born out of deep miscomprehension. As noted, "Israeli Arabs" is an Israeli administrative categorization; "Palestinian citizens of Israel" was a topic/page about identity. The merger will erase the page about identity in favour of maintaining only a page about the administrative term – a somewhat onerous erasure. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:40, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support renaming to "Palestinian and Arab citizens of Israel" as a middle ground. It does not make sense to have two articles about what is (with <1% exceptions) the same group of people. (The exceptions are Golan Heights Arabs and a few thousand Lebanese). The Israeli authorities call them "Arab citizens of Israel" (ACI) and in the last decade or so, the majority of ACIs have started to prefer the term "Palestinian citizens of Israel (PCI)" or at least six variations using "Palestinian". I have over eight reliable sources which specifically say these terms are used for the same group, and 4 additional RS that use them interchangeably. Compare that to the argument that PCIs are "people who prefer the term Palestinian" - and there is *no* reliable source about the topic ever brought forward in these extensive discussions. I still don't understand how so many RS are simply ignored and some editors simply without RS that the term PCIs describes people who "prefer" that term, as if that were self-evident. That would be like having four separate articles for Black Americans, African Americans, Colored Americans and Negro Americans for example (pardon my use of the 2 terms now considered offensive, it's only to make a point). In any case, the result of that discussion was to delete the PCI article and merge any remainder into this one (which I had largely done anyway). I think compromising on the name is wise, because respecting the wishes of the majority of the PCI people themselves, would lead us to name the article "Palestinian citizens of Israel". As an analogy, the article Black Americans was moved to African Americans in 2009, presumably out of respect for the majority of African Americans' preference, rather than WP:COMMON. But I think the pushback from editors favoring the terminology of the Israeli authorities would be so great, that it would be intractable. Therefore Palestinian and Arab citizens of Israel. But, to keep the article as ACI, is considered by some a term that the Israeli ruling establishment use in order to dissociate PCIs from other descendants of the people of Mandatory Palestine, who live in the West Bank including East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, and outside of historic Palestine — although some PCIs would not agree.Keizers (talk) 22:28, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Druze Israelis are officially part of the Arab Citizens of Israel, but AFAIK few if any within Israel identify as Palestinian, but instead lean en masse into the Israeli side of they identity. They are 7.5% of the Arab population, 1.6% of all. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think this is a "middle ground" and is arguably quite confusing as it could be read as Palestinians not being Arabs. The idea that "Arab citizens of Israel" is non-neutral and an "Israeli invention" is nonsense in my view. It is a simple descriptive term, and in my view is the middle ground between describing people as "Arab-Israelis" and "Palestinians". And re the complaint re lack of article on Palestinian identity, I don't think anyone would have complained had there been an article on Palestinian identity in Israel. Number 57 11:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the best thing to do here is move directly to RFC on the neutrality issue. The irritating thing here is that there are sources aplenty on PCI and yet no article, one has to ask why is that? Selfstudier (talk) 11:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it's been explained why, including at both an RM and the AfD. But again – I don't think anyone would have a problem with an article on Palestinian identity in Israel. I really don't understand the resistance to simply putting the information there... Number 57 12:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This article is not NPOV imo and if it is true that the majority are PCI, then why not just call it that? I think we know the answer. Selfstudier (talk) 12:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Palestinian citizens of Israel or Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel or Palestinian Arabs in Israel or Palestinians in Israel, any of these would be better. Selfstudier (talk) 12:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As for --> Palestinian identity in Israel proposed by yourself in 2021, the close states "there is a clear absence consensus for a move at this time" so no need to keep banging that drum. Selfstudier (talk) 12:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above, plus the article is by definition about Arab Citizens of Israel. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:34, 3 April 2024 (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.

Identity

Number 57 commented above that "I don't think anyone would have a problem with an article on Palestinian identity in Israel". They must have forgotten the opposition to this exact proposal that they made 2.5 years ago (Talk:Palestinian citizens of Israel#Requested move 26 November 2021). Onceinawhile (talk) 14:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 April 2024

Arab citizens of Israel → Palestinian and Arab citizens of Israel – Per the smart suggestion from Keizers in the discussion above, this middle ground should address the concerns of both sides.

Many editors have put a lot of time into this debate over many years, so we would ask you not to vote until you have reviewed the following discussions:

Onceinawhile (talk) 14:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, TBH this proposed change seems totally unnecessary. Umm, just this recent survey from November 2023 shows that only 8 percent of Israeli Arabs prioritize their "Palestinian identity" as the most important component of their personal identity. In contrast, 33 percent identify primarily with their "Israeli citizenship," 32 percent with their "Arab identity," and 23 percent with their "religious affiliation." Bottom line, I really fail to see the justification for the proposed renaming.[1][2] ElLuzDelSur (talk) 19:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC) ElLuzDelSur (talk) 19:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note for closer, this account is a blocked sock. Selfstudier (talk) 14:20, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As an additional note, they were not blocked at the time of the !vote - socks can only be struck and discounted if they made a duplicate !vote, or if their master was blocked at the time of the !vote. BilledMammal (talk) 14:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nevertheless, this vote should be fully discounted, struck or not. Selfstudier (talk) 14:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On what policy basis? WP:SOCKSTRIKE does not apply here. BilledMammal (talk) 14:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to leave it to the closer. No idea why anyone would wish to defend such accounts. Selfstudier (talk) 14:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because we have policy that we follow; if you want to change that I would likely support it, but at the moment as written it doesn’t support your claims. BilledMammal (talk) 14:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:IAR, you are defending the edits of blocked socks, end of. Selfstudier (talk) 14:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Policy tells us when we can strike blocked socks; we don’t need IAR because we have clear policy, and if you want to expand that I encourage you to open a discussion proposing doing so. BilledMammal (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Struck or not, I am making it clear what I think of such edits. Selfstudier (talk) 14:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused - they are a blocked sock, no? Socks that were already blocked wouldn't be able to post. We typically go back and remove or strike content where it's by a sock. I'm not aware of a rule that a sock master has to first be blocked once and then we only delete or strike subsequently blocked puppets. From the get-go, this was a socking user. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They were socking from the start, so they were socking at the time of this – and we don't reward socking. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BilledMammal: Where are these precepts written down? Iskandar323 (talk) 15:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We’re not rewarding it - as far as I can, this is their only vote in this discussion?
And the policy telling us when we can revert and strike is WP:BRV. BilledMammal (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But it seems that WP:SOCKSTRIKE goes further than that. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SOCKSTRIKE is an essay (I linked the wrong thing above), but even it doesn’t appear to discuss contributions that are not block violations and are not double !voting (It is done to alleviate the disruption/deception caused by abusing multiple accounts.) BilledMammal (talk) 15:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is nevertheless an essay on the conduct policy, and it states: In discussions such as WP:AFD, RFCs or other !voting discussion, you should strike their [(socks)] contributions using one of several available methods. [...] The goal is to make it obvious they are a sock so when the discussion is closed, their input will not be considered. This should be done for all blocked sockpuppets and sockmasters in a discussion. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, I agree with the comment above me. The population this article is about are known best as the Arab citizens of Israel. Some of them see themselves as Palestinian, but not most. The article should talk about all the different parts of their identity, but the title shouldn't favor one (and in this case, not the most common) over the others. Galamore (talk) 06:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The proposed title is unnecessarily duplicative as Palestinians are Arabs. And the claim that this is a middle ground is not true – the two "extremes" of how to describe this group are "Israeli Arabs" on one side or "Palestinians" on the other. The current title is the neutral middle ground that avoids either adjective. Number 57 08:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As I said in the last one, it is pointless to argue with a pro Israeli POV blockade and we should proceed directly to RFC on the title neutrality, which is the actual problem here. Selfstudier (talk) 13:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support as per the evidence showing that Palestinian citizens of Israel is an extremely common name in RS; the fact that there are Arab citizens of Israel who are not or do not identify as Palestinian interlaps; and so the two should be merged. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as better than the current title, if the scope of the article is going to cover both Palestinian and non-Palestinian Arabs in Israel. We can have an article about Palestinians in Israel; we can have two articles, one about Palestinians in Israel and one about non-Palestinian Arabs in Israel; we can have an article that covers both Palestinian and non-Palestinian Arabs in Israel; what we cannot have is an article about Palestinians in Israel that doesn't call them "Palestinians," as that would be denying Palestinian identity, and I think, based on the sources in the RFC below, not following NPOV. I'm not sure that one article about Palestinian and Arab citizens of Israel is the best arrangement, but the proposed title is better for than the current title if we're going to have one article for both groups. Levivich (talk) 02:58, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Levivich and others in this and post discussions. It's inappropriate to pigeonhole identity, and here specifically to pigeonhole it into the POV terminology of the Israeli state while denying other aspects of the identity of the group in question: here most notably their Palestinian-ness. It was fine before the merge discussion, but given its passage, the state of affairs that is now confronted is the imposition of a fairly egregious POV framing on a diverse set of identities of a range of ethnic groups. As it stands, the title imply that the subject is solely about the internal Israeli demographic categorisation of its "Arab" citizens regardless of whether they identify as Arab or not. That might be ok if the article was solely about Israeli POV categorisation of non-Jewish demographics in Israel, but it is not, because A) there is a broader topic of identity at work, and B) because we don't aim for POV topic framings. The broad subject here is a very loose demographic grouping of ethnicities, from Druze through to mixed city Arabs/Palestinians through to Bedouins – a topic that includes both other, alternative categorisations of the group, as well as their self-identification. Iskandar323 (talk) 03:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as per ElLuzDelSur, Galamore, Noah and Sir Joseph. GidiD (talk) 07:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, why is not the more natural and standard Arabs in Israel considered? This is the standard for all ethnic groups in Wikipedia, except for Jews, but including Arabs (Arabs in Turkey, Arabs in France, etc.). I looked into the talk page's archives and I don't see this having been discussed, at least in a formal RM, in a long time, though maybe I missed it. Super Ψ Dro 12:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea if that also allows Palestinians in Israel (interesting disambig). Selfstudier (talk) 12:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Depends on your definition. Some Palestinian Christians for example are recently departed Greek Orthodox groups from Turkey. Are they 'Arabs' purely by virtue of now speaking Arabic? The definitions of 'Arab' vary wildly from purely linguistic conceptions through to flawed race science-y stuff imagining all 'Arabs' as somehow genetically connected to the Arab conquests. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are likely a very small fraction of the population. They are not mentioned nor given attention by media outlets. This article's lead itself only mentions Arabic-speaking Arabs following Christianity, Islam or Druzism. And those groups likely do not suffer the same social situation as Arabs do in Israel. In fact I would imagine, though I don't know much about the matter, that Christian and specially Druze Arabs are not treated very differently from Jewish citizens. Saying this because much of the discussiong regarding the article, its title and content seems to be related to the social situation among the groups inside Israel. So why should we weight these Greeks or other groups in the area like Armenians or Assyrians for determining this article's title? Super Ψ Dro 17:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The majority weight is Palestinian (or Muslim if you prefer), the "Arab" emphasis is Israeli POV in this case, see below RFC. Selfstudier (talk) 17:06, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The proposed renaming does not align with WP:TITLE which emphasizes concise titles. All Palestinians are Arabs ("are culturally and linguistically Arab" as defined in Palestinians), and the suggested title change does not reflect a concise or clearer alternative. Marokwitz (talk) 20:38, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Some of these Israeli citizens are clearly not Arab, regardless of how one defines that term, and, even if they are a small number, it is crude in the extreme to label them all 'Arabs' regardless of ethnicity. Also a growing number of those who are broadly Arab, choose to identify specifically as Palestinian - regardless of how the Israeli state, the dominant ethnic group, or Israeli institutions feel about it. Again it is a crude political bludgeon, to deny that specific identity and impose one that suits the mythology of the dominant ethnic group. This is a good compromise of competing arguments in previous discussions.Pincrete (talk) 05:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Rudnitzky, Arik (December 3, 2023). "In-depth Survey of Arab Society's Views on the War between Israel and Hamas". Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies. (Full report).
  2. ^ Philologos (pen name) (23 June 2021). ""Israeli Arabs," "Palestinian Citizens of Israel," or "Israeli Palestinians"?". Mosaic. Retrieved 6 March 2024.

RFC

Is the current title NPOV? (Edit, change to POV from NPOV since all the answers are the other way about) If not, what would be an appropriate title? Selfstudier (talk) 17:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFC before: RM of 27 October 2021 proposing the move Arab citizens of Israel → Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Subsequently, the article Palestinian citizens of Israel was spun out. Then the recently concluded Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palestinian citizens of Israel found a consensus to merge it back to this article.

The subsequent RM proposing a change to Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel was closed as no consensus.

#Requested move 16 April 2024 proposing Arab citizens of Israel → Palestinian and Arab citizens of Israel appears likely to conclude as not moved. Selfstudier (talk) 17:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

  • Yes The current title is Israeli POV and thus violates WP:POVNAME. Sourcing for this is straightforwardly located, see discussion below. Any title should reflect the fact that the vast majority of this population either are originally or identify as Palestinian. Selfstudier (talk) 17:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No The current title comes from a neutral point of view. "Arab-Israelis" and "Arab citizens of Israel" is the terminology overwhelmingly used in reliable sources. In addition, the views of Arab-Israelis on whether they are "Palestinian" or not is diverse and varies significantly between Druze, Christians, and Muslims. Noah 💬 21:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No – "Arab citizens" is a neutral description, and there are obviously Arab-Israelis who do not identify with Palestine. Preferences on terminology and national identity are suitably covered in the article. 5225C (talk • contributions) 01:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, "Arab citizens of Israel" is not an WP:NPOV description, or an accurate description, because this is not what WP:RS call them anymore. Variations of "Arab Israelis"/"Israeli Arabs" is obsolete. The group at issue isn't any Arabs who live in or are citizens of Israel; the group at issue is specifically Palestinians who live in or are citizens of Israel, particularly those who were there before 1948 who ended up within the 1948 borders of Israel.

    I looked for scholarly books (not papers, but books) from the last five years and could not find a single one that used "Arab Israelis" or "Israeli Arabs" in its own voice though several noted that this was what they used to be called in the past. Here's what I did find:

    Based on this, I think the article should be moved to "Israeli Palestinians." Levivich (talk) 02:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC) ETA: I searched the above for eight variations used in the author's own voice ("Israeli Palestinians", "Palestinian Israelis", "Palestinians in Israel", "Palestinian citizens", "Israeli Arabs", "Arab Israelis", "Arabs in Israel", and "Arab citizens"), updated the list with quotes (and pages where available), and slightly re-arranged the list (moving two sources into a "various" section). Levivich (talk) 02:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • An interesting choice of sources. I wouldn't consider them as providing entirely comprehensive coverage of the topic, since many of the authors are known for their distinct viewpoints, and it's crucial for Wikipedia to incorporate a diverse range of sources. Anywway, the "Arab Israelis"/"Israeli Arabs" is far from obsolete, this is pretty much wrong... Galamore (talk) 10:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      The onus is on you to demonstrate that, not merely assert it. Selfstudier (talk) 10:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A quick search on JSTOR finds many books that use "Arab Israeli" or similar. For example:
    (As a side note, I also see a number of sources using "Arab-Palestinian citizens" or "Palestinian-Arab citizens" - that may be an alternative worth considering? BilledMammal (talk) 11:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That was tried per the RFCbefore. Selfstudier (talk) 12:17, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for bringing sources to this discussion BM, I'll take a look at them. Off the bat, though, it's (so far) 12-5 in terms of academic books in the last five years. Are there more that still use "Arab"? Because if it's "Palestinian" over "Arab" by more than 2:1, that would demonstrate "Israeli Palestinian" is the mainstream term and "Arab Israeli" is a significant minority viewpoint (in the parlance of WP:NPOV). Levivich (talk) 14:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ...and also Manna 2022 appears on both our lists. I'll take a closer look at that and will prob post some page numbers and quotes so we can clarify what exactly these sources are saying or what terms they're using. Levivich (talk) 14:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There were many more; I just stopped going through them after five:
    Manna 2022 says, on page 95, These victories were the crowning achievement of resistance by the communists and of support by the Arab citizens of Israel for the party. They also say, on page 228, Ben-Gurion’s reply to the proposals of the leaders of Maki in general, and Tubi in particular, was that their position did not represent the opinion of Israeli Arabs. I'm only looking at individual chapters, so perhaps in a different chapter it uses different terminology? BilledMammal (talk) 15:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    More sources like the first two I gave in the discussion that specifically address the terminology question, perhaps in a foreword or explanatory note, would be useful, if you come across any of those. Selfstudier (talk) 15:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll try to find some. BilledMammal (talk) 15:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Me too. I'm sure some but not all of the sources I posted have explicit discussions about the naming issue, I'll go through them again and pull quotes in the next day or two. Levivich (talk) 15:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC) ETA: now done. Levivich (talk) 02:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Israel as an Ethnic Democracy: Palestinian Citizens and the Fight for Equal Rights Here is one: "A note on terminology is appropriate. Because some citizens of Israel identify themselves as Palestinians, or as Arabs, or as Israeli Arabs, or as Palestinian Arabs, or as Palestinian Arabs in Israel, I am using the terms Israeli Arabs and Israeli Palestinians interchangeably". Selfstudier (talk) 18:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And Brothers Apart Palestinian Citizens of Israel and the Arab World "Examining these texts within the context of decolonization also helps us comprehend the evolving debates about what term best describes this community. For decades, the terms “Arab Israelis” and “Arabs in Israel” had been the most common appellations, relecting both the official Israeli designation of this group as a fully integrated minority and the pan-Arab inclinations of the intellectuals themselves. More recently, growing numbers of Palestinian citizens of Israel have preferred the terms "Palestinians in Israel" and "Palestinian Arabs in Israel,"viewing the term "Arab Israeli" as one that denies their Palestinian national affiliation and functions as a form of settler-colonial erasure. Many of the more nationally conscious intellectuals and activists refer to themselves (and are referred to by other Arabs) as "Palestinians Inside/Inside People" (Filastiniyun i’l- dakhil/ahl al-dakhil) or "48 Arabs/48 Palestinians," both of which refer to those Palestinians living on land inside the Green Line, which became part of the Israeli state in 1948. While the term “Arab Israeli” is still commonly used in Israel, recently scholars have preferred using a combination of these other terms that take into account this group’s own subjectivity and outlook." Selfstudier (talk) 18:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think so. A large part of Manna's 2022 book is about Arab Communists (inside and outside of Israel), and IIRC he explicitly says that Arab Communists promoted Arab identity and suppressed Palestinian identity in Israel. So I think he uses the term when he talks about Arabs in general and not Palestinians in particular, but I think elsewhere in the book he uses different terms when talking specifically about Palestinians. I will double check in the next day or two and post some quotes so we can put that book in one column or the other.
    Thanks for posting more sources, I think you'll agree 12-10 is a different situation than 12-5, and 12-24 would be different still. I don't see how we resolve this without basically cataloguing "the highest quality most recent works" to determine which, if any, term is predominant in modern scholarship. Levivich (talk) 15:15, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Looking through Manna, I also see Kusa revealed in that article the varieties of discrimination from which Arab citizens of Israel suffered on page 215 (no communist context). It also uses "Palestinians in Israel" eleven times, but "Arabs in Israel" 27 times - I hadn't previously been looking for either of these formats, as I think I misread your "Palestinians in Israel" as "Palestinian citizens of Israel" or maybe "Palestinian Israelis".
    I would agree; unfortunately, there are too many for us to reasonably catalogue - it's part of the reason I lean on ngrams, because while it does include lower-quality sources it hopefully does so in equal proportion for all options. BilledMammal (talk) 15:30, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Arabs in Israel" -- great, another variation, I also hadn't looked at that one. Well, I pulled together all the various terms that Manna 2022 used in the #Discussion section below, excluding instances where he is quoting someone else. My take away is that he uses both "Palestinians in Israel" and "Arabs in Israel", but he also says the former is a subset of the latter (p. 56, quoted below) and talks about "Arabs in Israel" as "obscuring Palestinian identity" (p. 233, quoted below). Not that we should give too much weight to any one source, but this well illustrates the complexity of this issue. Levivich (talk) 00:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In past discussions, the special position of the Druze has come up as being the issue that breaks the logic (Arab but not Palestinian), if we remove the Druze from consideration (they have their own article anyway) then all the Arab citizenry are essentially Palestinian even if some of them do not want to be called so. Selfstudier (talk) 09:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think the 2023 Itamar Rabinovich book supports "Israeli Arabs". Chapter 10 has a section called From "Israeli Arabs" through "Israel's Palestinian Citizens" to Participation in Israel's Government that starts on page 280 and says:

    Israel’s own Arab or Palestinian citizens were strictly referred to as “Israeli Arabs,” as members of Israel’s “Arab minority” or “sector.” This curious choice of terms well expressed Israelis’ uneasiness about the Palestinian issue. It was, in a way, easier to cope with a national minority pertaining to an amorphous Arab world than with a people who laid specific claim to Israel’s own land. For twenty years or so, Israel’s Arab citizens accepted this terminology and used it themselves, but by the 1970s, they began to refer to themselves as Palestinians or as Palestinians who happened to be Israeli citizens. This was but one of many profound changes in the complex relationship between the Israeli state and its Arab citizens.

    * * *

    As in so many other respects, 1967 was a watershed year in the evolution of Israel’s Arab minority. The reemergence of an authentic and effective Palestinian nationalist movement and the removal of the physical barrier that had once separated them from the Palestinian and Arab worlds beyond Israel’s borders induced a process of Palestinianization. But the balance that had been achieved in practice between Israeli and Arab nationalist components in the community was upset. It was a measure of this change that the term “Israeli Arab” was discarded, and Israel’s Arab citizens came to refer to themselves as Palestinians.

    Levivich (talk) 15:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Here are my thoughts on the rest of these 10 sources (posted by BM):
    1. Manna 2022, see #Discussion below for a bunch of quotes; uses both "Palestinians in Israel" and "Arabs in Israel"; but on p. 233 he writes: "The communists contributed to obscuring the Palestinian identity of the remaining Arabs and promoted in its place the government’s line about 'the Arab minority,' 'the Arabs in Israel,' or even 'the Israeli Arabs.'"
    2. Exile and the Jews: Literature, History, and Identity - I cannot get my hands on a copy of this book which means I'm really unable to evaluate it in any meaningful way. But what I notice are that the authors are Nancy Berg, a professor of Hebrew language and literature, and Marc Saperstein, a professor of Jewish history and Judaic Studies. These aren't Israel-Palestine conflict historians, or scholars of Arabs/Palestinians. Also, the book is published by the Jewish Publication Society via U of Nebraska Press, which means UNP is basically the printer and JPS is the publisher. JPS is a publisher of religions works (Judaic Studies). I question whether this book is a great source about Arabs/Palestinians or Israel-Palestinian conflict, or whether this is a book about Jews and Jewish history, which shouldn't get much weight when it comes to the question of how to label Arabs and Palestinians in Israel.
    3. Rabinovich 2023, see quote above, has a section all about the shift from "Israeli Arabs" to "Israel's Palestinian Citizens", in which he writes that "the term 'Israeli Arab' was discarded, and Israel's Arab citizens came to refer to themselves as Palestinians." When I said in my vote that the term was obsolete, Rabinovich says the same thing (as do others in my list above).
    4. Ehud Eiran is an int'l relations prof, on the board of Mitvim, worked in the Israeli gov't, but those sorts of affiliations aren't unusual amongst I/P scholars. Still, it's a chapter about Trump, Jews, and Israel in a book about Trump/Jews/Israel, and it has one mention: "After the most recent battle between Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs, citizens of Israel both, have demonstrated the urgency of moderation and peaceful co-existence." In fairness, the Huber 2021 cite on my list also only has one mention. Low weight in my view--similar to the weight that should be accorded Huber 2021.
    5. Michael Keren is a professor of communications, writing a chapter about Netanyahu's communications during his 2018-2019 campaign, in a book about political communication. He does use the terms "Israeli Arabs" and "Arab citizens," but it's not a historian of I/P history or a book about I/P history. I'd give this more weight than the single mention in Eiran 2021, but less weight than works by someone like Pappe or Rabinovich (I/P scholars writing about I/P conflict).
    6. Sander Gilman is a professor of psychiatry, culture, and history with PhD in German language and literature. He writes a chapter about Israel and COVID in a book called "Jews and Science." The chapter does not contain the word "Palestinian" in it, which is an indication that it's not about Palestinians. He mentions Arabs in Israel once, on p. 158: "The marginality of non-Israeli Arabs, especially in the West Bank communities and the sporadic resistance of some Israeli Arab groups, as with the heightened resistance of Haredi communities, was quickly replaced in the global press with the notion that Israel was the testing site for those measures that would defeat the pandemic." I'd also give this low weight, even less than Eiran 2021 or Huber 2021, because Gilman 2022 is a brief mention by a non-I/P scholar writing in a non-I/P book.
    7. Ehud Olmert's memoirs is not scholarship :-P
    8. This is like an encyclopedia of radicalism in the US 1973-2001. It only contains mention, "Israeli Arabs" on p. 325, which is in a reprint of an article from 1990, which is way too old to represent the modern view and outside of our last-five-years search criteria.
    9. Ghada Karmi 2023 published by Pluto Press... c'mon we know where this one is going to land :-) I'd give it the same weight as other I/P scholars writing about I/P, but of course Karmi is on the "Palestinian" side of the ledger:
      • 2x "Palestinian citizens of Israel" (ch. 5: "Those under occupation in the post-1967 territories are being subjected to hardships that would have destroyed a less tenacious people; the refugees remain in their UN-supported camps in and around Palestine; millions of other exiles have made homes in various countries around the globe, and the Palestinian citizens of Israel are living anomalous lives amongst their usurpers ... The Palestinians for their part would regard an equal rights proposal as a defeat of the national project and the end of resistance to Israel. Whatever the rhetoric about equality, they would fear becoming second-class citizens, alongside the current Palestinian citizens of Israel.")
      • 1x "Israeli Palestinians" (ch. 5: "The result is that Israel/Palestine in 2022 was already one state, but it was an unequal one with differential rights and classes of citizenship. Its population comprised 6.6 million Israeli Jews with full citizenship and rights, 1.8 million Israeli Palestinians, also with citizenship but restricted rights, and 4.7 million Palestinians with no citizenship and no rights.")
      • Uses "Israeli Arabs" once when conveying the views of Uri Avnery in ch. 5: "The late Israeli writer and campaigner, Uri Avnery, thought it was foolish to abandon the fight for Palestinian independence in return for a chimera. In a well-argued essay, he laid out a list of objections to the one-state solution that were hard to refute.82 The struggle for a two-state solution had already gained the Palestinian movement a territorial base in the homeland, which, with patience and struggle, he argued, could be expanded, ‘dunum by dunum’, just as in the Zionist case. Bi-nationalism, on the other hand, condemned Palestinians to life as an underclass in a vastly superior Israeli society, not much different from the fate of the 20 per cent disadvantaged Israeli Arabs already living there."
    10. The Rock of Ages book by published by Archaeopress is another example of non-I/P scholarship, and the only relevant mention is on p. 45: "Negev Highland Bedouin tribespeople are Arab-Israelis who reside on lands in the Mitzpe Ramon vicinity and constitute an additional community associated with local tourism development." I don't know anything about Bedouin, but I think Negev Bedouin are not the same as Palestinian Bedouin, and so calling Negev Bedouin "Arab-Israeli" may be correct, but that doesn't mean the label applies to all Arabs in Israel, and certainly doesn't mean it applies to Palestinian Arabs in Israel.
    We have Cook 2024, Rabinovich 2023, Manna 2022, Ross 2021, and Caplan 2019 expressly saying that "Israeli Palestinian" is preferred and/or that "Israeli Arab" is obsolete. Over a dozen I/P scholars we've looked at here are using "Palestinian" over "Arab." On the other hand, we have 2 I/P works and 4 non-I/P works using "Arab" over "Palestinian." That certainly rebuts my "could not find a single one" statement, but on balance I still think "Arab citizens of Israel" is not the right terminology for Palestinians in Israel. Levivich (talk) 04:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes per Levivich (t · c) buidhe 05:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No – "Arab citizens of Israel" is the widely accepted term for this population. The majority identify as Arab (rather than Palestinian), and they hold Israeli citizenship, so that is the most suited name per WP:NPOV and WP:PRECISE. Galamore (talk) 09:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "The majority identify as Arab (rather than Palestinian)" - - I think you just made that up. Got a source for that? Levivich (talk) 14:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Assume good faith.
    2. I provided the source in the Discussion. https://jppi.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2020-Index-English.pdf
    In 2019, 27% identified as "Arab" and 18% as "Palestinian. In 2020, 15% identified as "Arab" and 7% as "Palestinian." By far the biggest demographic in both of these was "Arab-Israeli" which polled at 48% in 2019 and 51% in 2020. Noah 💬 21:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah and who is more reliable for polling Palestinian views than the Jewish People Policy Institute? :-P Levivich (talk) 00:01, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, don't be ridiculous. By that logic we can't trust anything from a Palestinian source. Noah 💬 20:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, per my above source analysis, and ngrams. BilledMammal (talk) 11:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, the predominant identity among Arab Israelis is Arab rather than Palestinian (including Muslims, not just Druze and Christians). As demonstrated convincingly, this term is also more common shown above on ngrams. I believe the term 'Arab citizens of Israel' better reflects their identity and status, and is more commonly used in sources. HaOfa (talk) 12:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "the predominant identity among Arab Israelis is Arab rather than Palestinian" - I think you just made that up. Got a source for that? Levivich (talk) 14:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In-depth Survey of Arab Society’s Views on the War between Israel and Hamas was provided in a different discussion where it asks about "the most important component of their personal identity". It says that for 33.2%, the most important component is Israeli citizenship, for 32.1% it is their Arab identity, for 22.6% it is their religious affiliation, and for 8.2% it is their Palestinian identity - it doesn't quite support HaOfa's claim, but I think it is close? BilledMammal (talk) 15:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm extremely skeptical of surveys of Palestinians, especially by Israeli institutions like Tel Aviv University. But even if you take that survey as accurate, it found that for 67% of Palestinians in Israel, their predominant identity is NOT Arab. And anyway, the term we use isn't "the most popular identity," it's the term most often used by RS, which surveys of Palestinians won't tell us anything about. Levivich (talk) 15:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm skeptical of its appropriateness as a guideline, but WP:NCET would be relevant, which tells us How the group self-identifies should be considered. If their autonym is commonly used in English, it would be the best article title. BilledMammal (talk) 15:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So, what, you're telling me that a respected professor at an Israeli university simply completely made up an extensive, in-depth study? By that logic we can just say that any and all studies from Palestinian or Arab researchers are unreliable. Don't be ridiculous. Noah 💬 21:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Size of the sample: 502. Sample error: ±4.35 percent. Over the telephone. Big deal. Selfstudier (talk) 22:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Plus, polls are primary sources, and interpreting their results is what secondary sources do, so I'd rather rely on a secondary source that interprets polls than trying to have us Wikipedia editors interpret polls. Levivich (talk) 00:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am going to attempt to collect up the polling info in some kind of sensible fashion, it seems that much depends on who is doing the asking and how the question is asked. Selfstudier (talk) 15:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies is highly partisan, the most widely respected and cited survey of Arab citizens is conducted by Sammy Smooha and the Israel Democracy Institute. The 2019 survey found The three of the nine most attractive identities to the Arabs are: Palestinian Arabs in Israel – 27.1%, Israeli Arabs – 14.9% and Palestinian Arabs – 12.8% and that 35.9% of the Arabs in 2019 (unchanged from 31.6% in 2017) chose Israeli Arab identities without a Palestinian component (Israeli, Arab, Arab in Israel, Israeli Arab), 47.1% (increase from 38.4%) chose Palestinian identities with an Israeli component (Israeli Palestinian, Palestinian in Israel, Palestinian Arab in Israel), and 14.8% (down from 21.9%) chose Palestinian identities without an Israeli component (Palestinian, Palestinian-Arab). The identity of 83.0% of the Arabs in 2019 (up from 75.5% in 2017) has an Israeli component and 61.9% (unchanged from 60.3%) has a Palestinian component. However, when these two components were presented as competitors, 69.0% of the Arabs in 2019 chose exclusive or primary Palestinian identity, compared with 29.8% who chose exclusive or primary Israeli Arab identity (Table 5.14). Also, a majority of 65.9% of the Arabs in 2019 (down from 71.8% in 2017) said that "the identity of 'Palestinian Arab in Israel' is appropriate to most Arabs in Israel". The idea that the predominant identity among Arab Israelis is Arab rather than Palestinian is untrue, and had not been true and has never been true. It is an identity that has been forced on that population by Israel, and also by Wikipedia. nableezy - 01:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Are the Druze in the Golan Palestinians? And what about the Beduins? Sir Joseph (talk) 01:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No The current title is a neutral title and balanced between Israeli POV ("Israeli Arabs") and Palestinian POV ("Palestinians"). Describing people who do not identify as Palestinian as such would be an NPOV violation. Number 57 13:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Non-Palestinian Arabs living in Israel is not the topic of this article or any of the RSes we've looked at. "'48 Arabs" are Palestinians. Levivich (talk) 14:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Summoned by bot) Yes - Levivich's list convinced me. Borsoka (talk) 16:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, it's factual and NPOV. This article is about all the Arab citizens of Israel. All others are POV, but they may have an article on their own identity. Sir Joseph (talk) 01:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes (current title is POV) in the particularly odious sense of being a racialized term/category imposed on some Israeli citizens by the Israeli state. One could probably come up with some unpleasant parallels in colonial history. Putting aside that most modern countries don't actually divide their people by race and ethnicity (except in the rare exception of the occasional census), pan-Arabist identity was last a thing in the 70s, which does indeed feel like where this conflict is often locked (not least with Biden at the wheel). It has been shown, fairly incontrivertibly, that most of the individuals in the group in question do not actually identify first-and-foremost as Arab, so what else can this title be except a POV slant, narrow framing and rather shameful imposition? Iskandar323 (talk) 04:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, it is NPOV, as per Noah, Galamore and Sir Joseph. "israeli Arabs" is a much more common term than israeli palestinians". GidiD (talk) 07:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No or more accurately, it is the least POV title available (so far). It is clear that they are used synonymously by many, and that preference and best practice use is disputed. In case there is consensus against the current phrasing, an attempt at finding a (less conciseI) compromise could be made, perhaps "Israeli arabs of Palestinian decent" (sounds fine in my native language, not sure how well it works in english), or alternatively the earlier suggested use of "Palestinian Identity" as a separate article? FortunateSons (talk) 08:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. This article is about Arab citizens of Israel, who , according to the article, self-identify in a wide range of intersectional civic (Israeli or "in Israel"), national (Arab, Palestinian, Israeli), and religious (Muslim, Christian, Druze) identities. The naming "Arab citizens of Israel" is simply a statement of fact. Marokwitz (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes The current title is Israeli POV, clearly so, as to a degree are simple alternative suggestions. I'm not surprised if large numbers of these citizens choose to not argue with their 'official' name in a state whose founding principles are built around the premise that they, the previous numerically dominant group inhabiting the area, simply did not exist, they were part of some amorphous larger group whose real 'home' implicitly was elsewhere. I am also convinced from the sources proferred that a growing number of sources, and growing numbers of these citizens reject the 'Arab' label, for a variety of reasons. It is not our business to ignore or denigrate that identification. However 'Arab citizens of/Arab Israelis' or similar remain commonly used terms and are possibly the terms most accessible to the lay reader, therefore 'Arab' needs to remain part of the title until the overwhelming majority of sources, no longer employ it. Brevity in most circumstances is a virtue, accuracy is a greater one though. Pincrete (talk) 05:38, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. Per the exhaustive examination of sources above, clearly there is enough divergence among them that "Arab Citizens" cannot be considered a neutral descriptor. --Aquillion (talk) 06:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Arab citizens of Israel is NPOV After reading through the opinions above, I find myself confused what "yes" and "no" reference (especially given the rather confusing edit to the initial question). Not all Arab citizens of Israel identify as Palestinian and the term includes Christians, Druze, and others. It's the accepted and factual description of this group of people. Also: even if one argues that this is "Israeli POV" which is questionable, I'm not sure why an article about a subject related to a specific country can't use that country's common nomenclature. While WP:TIES and WP:TITLEVAR are in relation to titles and English varient, I think a similar principle applies when there's a clear national tie to a topic. Avgeekamfot (talk) 15:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Avgeekamfot: It's not a variant of English; it's a different terminology of identity. And no, it's not an "accepted and factual description". Talk of facts and talk of ethnic identities rarely belong in the same sentence. And what you're hypothetically proposing (going along with government POV just because it's locally utilised) would be analogous to, say, accepting the Myanmar gov's description of the Rohingya as "Bengali", i.e. it's an extremely slippery slope from an NPOV perspective. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hard to make the case that it's "accepted" in the face of multiple RS quoted on this page saying it's no longer accepted. While there are some RS using the term (though a minority I think), I don't see any that outright say it's accepted (unless I missed some). Levivich (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've read your arguments above, they are not convincing. I don't intend engage further on this topic (unless I come across it on a noticeboard) but I would suggest that care to avoid WP:OWN concerns. As an outside observer, it does appear as though there is a cohort of editors who are committed to pushing a specific agenda, as evidenced by multiple argumentative replies when an "outsider" disagrees with their positions, which I think undermines the collaboration expected on Wikipedia. Avgeekamfot (talk) 11:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The term 'Arab citizens of Israel' doesn't sit right with me. It feels like it oversimplifies the identities of this community in a way that many don't vibe with. From what I've been reading lately in academic sources and media coverage, a lot of these folks identify more as Palestinian than Arab-Israeli. Their ethnic, national, and cultural ties are just more complex than that simple label allows for. I think we need a title that reflects the reality of their identity a bit more accurately. So my vote is 'Yes' to change the current title to something that more authentic sounding. FailedMusician (talk) 17:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current title is NPOV - I find the ngrams link above most telling. Arab is consistently used more often than Palestinian. Yes, some say Palestinian, but even amongst those identifying themselves this does not seem to be the majority. I have seen no WP:RS that shows that the Palestinian label is more appropriate. As far as I can tell from the WP:RS, the Palestinian label is a smaller subset of the larger group of "Arab citizens of Israel". The article can discuss this in more detail, but the title should remain as is. Fieari (talk) 06:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes because in nearly every other instance we treat self-identity as determining over what some majority wishes to impose on a minority. And the question isnt one of balancing an Israeli POV and a Palestinian POV, it is a question of balancing the POV of the people themselves and that of a state which has largely treated them as either a fifth column, a ticking demographic timebomb, or a disadvantaged minority that should remain disadvantaged. I dont know why the "Israeli POV" matters at all here, what matters are what they call themselves and what the best sources call them. And that is, largely, Palestinian citizens of Israel. The question on is the term "Palestinian Arab in Israel appropriate for most Arabs in Israel" has been posed to that population by Sammy Smooha for years. The results are:
Appropriateness of the Identity “Palestinian Arab in Israel” to Arabs, Arabs, 2003, 2012–2019 (Percentages)
2003 2012 2013 2015 2017 2019
62.2 63.8 64.4 63.2 71.8 65.9
We are imposing on a people an identity they do not accept themselves, and we are doing so largely on the backs of the views of the state that has been accused by a number of human rights organizations of committing human rights violations up to and including apartheid against that population. I dont find that remotely "neutral", regardless of how "neutral" is defined, be it the Wikipedia way or that of a dictionary. nableezy - 01:48, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, because WP:NPOV and WP:RS support it. Hogo-2020 (talk) 07:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Example sourcing:

...what label should be attached to them? Much more than merely semantics is at stake. how one chooses to identify the Arab minority in Israel is often indicative of one’s politics. Supporters of Israel generally refer to the Arab community in Israel as "Israeli Arabs" or "Arab Israelis" – using the terms commonly used by Israeli governments, the Hebrew-language media in Israel, and most Israeli Jews. Critics of Israel, by contrast, tend to describe Israel’s Arab citizens simply as Palestinians or Palestinian Arabs. in doing so, they emphasize the Palestinian national identity of the Arab population in Israel and clearly reject the Israeli state’s longstanding avoidance of that label. Which, if any, of these names is correct? Are Arabs in Israel "Israeli Arabs" or "Palestinian Arabs"? Are they Israelis or Palestinians? Ilan Peleg; Dov Waxman (2011). Israel's Palestinians: The Conflict Within (illustrated ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 26. ISBN 978-0-521-15702-5.

Selfstudier (talk) 17:54, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A study of loanwords and code switching in spoken and online written Arabic by Palestinian Israelis (pp. 4-5)(2019)]: "In this dissertation I use the term Palestinian Israelis to refer to Palestinian Arabs who are citizens of Israel. The issue of naming this group of people is controversial, and there are many debates and arguments when it comes to how to introduce them and what to call their dialect of Arabic. [...] In addition, according to Peleg and Waxman (2011, pp. 27-28), Palestinian Israeli society has undergone “Palestinization” since the year 1967, whereby the national consciousness has spread, and Palestinian Israelis have increasingly refused Israeli-Arab identity. [...] According to Peleg and Waxman (2011), however, both “Palestinization” and “Israelization” can take place simultaneously and reinforce each other; they are not essentially paradoxical. The authors assert that “Arabs in Israel, especially younger generations, have become more Palestinian in their self-identity, and at the same time they have been deeply influenced by Israeli culture – a process of acculturation” (p. 28). Lauer (2007) shares Peleg and Waxman’s (2011) view and declares that identifying as a Palestinian does not necessarily require rejecting Israeli citizenship or avoiding Israeli culture. In this dissertation, I adopt the perspective of Lauer, Peleg, and Waxman. Accordingly, I consider Palestinian Israelis a suitable label for this group, as it reflects their dual identity." Selfstudier (talk) 13:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Long overlooked, Israel’s Arab citizens are increasingly asserting their Palestinian identity (WAPO 2021) "In just the past month, Palestinian citizens of Israel — also known as Israeli Arabs..."·

"Those who stayed, and their descendants, were dubbed "Israeli Arabs" by the nascent Jewish state, which uses the term to this day.

"But surveys show that the people that term is meant to describe favor "Palestinian citizens of Israel,""

"Scholars who study the issue say that preference for an explicit recognition of Palestinian identity has grown with time, especially in the past two decades. It is particularly strong, they say, among younger generations who did not experience the trauma of Israel’s birth — to Palestinians, the “Nakba,” or catastrophe."

Riots Shatter Veneer of Coexistence in Israel’s Mixed Towns (NYT)

"The people most Israelis have long referred to as “Israeli Arabs” — or colloquially by the demeaning “Arab sector” — now often self-identify as Palestinians, a term many Israeli Jews resent, viewing it as a rejection of Israel."

"Always a hybrid community — Israeli by citizenship, Palestinian by heritage, Muslim or Christian or Druze in religion, bilingual in Arabic and Hebrew, viewed with suspicion by some diaspora Palestinians, scarred by the trauma of their compatriots’ expulsion — they developed a sharper sense of Palestinian identity even as their demands for full rights as Israeli citizens grew."

Why Are Israelis Scared of Palestinian Identity? (Haaretz)

"Research and surveys consistently show that the Arab mainstream in Israel identifies as Palestinian; in particular, elected Arab leaders identify as Palestinian."

Palestine’s Emerging National Movement: "Questions On My Mind" (Carnegie)

"Indeed, social media provided the venue for Palestinian activists to insist on dropping “Oslo vocabulary” and refrain from calling Palestinians “Arab Israelis,” a label the state deliberately uses to erase Palestinian identity for those within Israel’s borders (because it would seem to deny their specifically Palestinian identity and links with Palestinian communities elsewhere)."

Selfstudier (talk) 13:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The quotes you provided do not provide data about Arab-Israeli self-identification. I provided data which shows that by 2020, 51% of Arab-Israelis explicitly identified as Arab-Israeli or simply "Arab" over Palestinian. Noah 💬 21:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's Reuters in 2023 "Most Arab citizens in Israel are descendants of Palestinians who stayed in the new Israeli state after a 1948 war. Largely self-identifying as Palestinian, they have long pondered their place in politics, balancing their heritage with Israeli nationality." Selfstudier (talk) 21:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, Reuters does not cite a source for their claim that they largely self-identify as Palestinian. Noah 💬 21:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, I am citing Reuters for the claim. Selfstudier (talk) 21:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And here I am citing Cfr as of October 2023 What to Know About the Arab Citizens of Israel "Israeli government documents and media refer to Arab citizens as “Arabs” or “Israeli Arabs,” and some Arabs use those terms themselves. Global news media usually use similar phrasing to distinguish these residents from Arabs who live in the Palestinian territories. Most members of this community self-identify as "Palestinian citizens of Israel," and some identify just as “Palestinian” to indicate their rejection of Israeli identity. Others prefer to be referred to as Arab citizens of Israel for various reasons. The phrase is used in this Backgrounder, as it represents the current political and legal reality." Selfstudier (talk) 21:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And here the FT as of December 2023 "In the other corner, the 2mn Arab-Israelis, most of whom identify as Palestinians and are sympathetic to the decades-old Palestinian cause, have been outraged by the death and destruction caused by Israel’s bombardment of Gaza." Selfstudier (talk) 22:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And round it off with the NYT as of October 2023 Palestinian Citizens of Israel Are Wary, Weary and Afraid "Arab citizens of Israel, many of whom want to be identified as Palestinians, make up some 18 percent of the population. They have been caught for years between their loyalty to the state and their desire for an end to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands, the creation of an independent Palestine and a better life for themselves." Selfstudier (talk) 22:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Might as well throw in the Guardian as of October 2023 as well, Arabs in Israel face reprisals over online solidarity with Gaza "Israeli Arabs, many of whom identify as Palestinian citizens of Israel, have expressed solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza amid Israel’s aerial bombing campaign" Selfstudier (talk) 09:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the discussion above, here is a deep dive of Manna 2022 quotes:

Manna 2022 quotes

Manna, Adel (2022). Nakba and Survival: The Story of Palestinians Who Remained in Haifa and the Galilee, 1948-1956. University of California Press. doi:10.1525/luminos.129. ISBN 978-0-520-38936-6.

  • p. xv: "The Palestinians in Israel did not have universities or research institutions that could tackle these and other important issues."
  • p. 2: "This book also renews the investigation of issues which are disputed by researchers, and not confined solely to the history of Palestinians in Israel"
  • p. 3: "But little has been written concerning the actions of Israeli authorities in the early 1950s against many of the Palestinians who remained and whom it tried to expel as infiltrators. Like most published studies on the 1948 war that ignored the fate of the “remainers,” studies on the “border wars” also ignored the consequences for the Arabs in Israel from 1949 to 1956."
  • p. 4: "This study offers a new and different reading of the history of Arabs in Israel from their own perspective, based on Arabic sources to which researchers have rarely paid attention."
  • p. 5: "The second context for the history of Palestinians in Israel is the Arab world. Until 1948, the Palestinians who remained in Israel were considered an organic part of the Palestinian people and the Arab world in general, but the Nakba isolated them from their people and the neighboring Arab states."
  • p. 6: "This research study is based on the argument that the war period was the real beginning of the history of the Palestinian minority in the Jewish state, the details of which are absent from most of the historical literature about the circumstances of Palestinians in Israel."
  • p. 11: "In the early 1950s, many statements by the leaders of the Jewish state were published to the effect that the fate of Arabs in Israel was not yet decided ... In general, the 1956 events showed that Palestinians in Israel had learned the lesson of the Nakba, and became a resilient and permanent part of the population."
  • p. 12: "As for the Palestinians in Israel, the Arab boycott of the Zionist entity was a barrier that disrupted the possibility of attending to what had befallen them ... It may be surprising that Arab academics who were themselves among the Palestinians who remained paid scarce attention to the history of the Nakba and its consequences for them. However, that surprise dissipates once we realize that this remnant of the Palestinian people produced only a few historians, most of whom stayed far away from chronicling the Nakba and its results. Furthermore, the Arabs in Israel are without a university or research institution with a strong interest in history. Consequently, this double marginalization and fear of unearthing sensitive and complicated matters relating to the 1948 war led them to distance themselves from the subject."
  • p. 13: "Following the establishment of a number of Palestinian institutions for study and research in Beirut, some researchers began to devote attention to the Palestinians in Israel, drawn first to the poetry of resistance and the maintaining of the Arab identity of the population of the Galilee. In the mid-1960s, resistance poets such as Mahmoud Darwish, Samih al-Qasim, and others became popularized and expressions of admiration came from Beirut and Cairo and other Arab capitals; some raised their voices in praise of the steadfastness of the Arabs in Israel and their adherence to their Arab identity."
  • p. 15: "Interest in the conditions of Arabs in Israel increased considerably in the 1980s ... In 1949: The First Israelis Tom Segev, contrary to the practice in much of this literature, allocates an appropriate place to the Arabs who remained in Israel,18 not just in terms of the number of pages dedicated to the conditions of Arabs in Israel during 1948–49, but in exposing the policy of systematic repression and harassment of this minority ... Following these, Arab and Jewish researchers published studies on the Arabs in Israel and the treatment doled out to them since 1948."
  • p. 16: "Two of these, Ahmad Sa‘di and Nur Masalha, specialize in the Palestinian Nakba and its effects on the lives of Arabs in Israel during the 1950s and have contributed, separately, a number of important studies on this subject. ... Their studies are excellent models for documenting and chronicling forgotten aspects of the history of Palestinians in Israel. Hillel Cohen is a prolific Israeli researcher who has published a significant number of books and articles on the Arabs in Israel. He devoted his master’s thesis to the study of 'The Present Absentees.'"
  • p. 20: "This thought kept returning to me at the beginning of my study of the history of Arabs in Israel after the Nakba."
  • p. 47: "Prominent among them was Sayf al-Din al-Zu‘bi, whom Israel set up as a leader of the Arabs in Israel after its establishment, as a reward for his services."
  • p. 53: "The history of Arabs in Israel begins with the “gentle manner” in which Nazareth was occupied, and the cooperation of its city leaders with the military governor and the Israeli government."
  • p. 56: "Indeed, the seventy thousand Palestinians who were counted in the survey of Israel at that time were the nucleus or the beating heart of the Arabs in Israel."
  • p. 131: "In 1950 in one cabinet meeting discussion on the issue of the Arabs in Israel and the refugee question, Ben-Gurion declared frankly: 'Of course we should not allow 600,000 to return; not even 600.' ... This sort of resistance has been studied and illuminated in the specialized literature on the history of Arabs in Israel, but other less organized and quieter forms of local steadfastness and resistance have not been discussed, invisible to the eyes of the researchers."
  • p. 198: "As we saw in previous chapters, the army and other Israeli institutions did what was in their power to reduce the number of Palestinians in Israel as far as possible."
  • p. 218: "One important work of research on the relationship between the law and the judicial system in Israel and Arab citizens was Alina Korn’s doctoral dissertation at Hebrew University which showed clearly how the law and the judicial system were activated by state institutions to serve the system of monitoring and control over Palestinians in Israel."
  • p. 228: "Ben-Gurion’s reply to the proposals of the leaders of Maki in general, and Tubi in particular, was that their position did not represent the opinion of Israeli Arabs."
  • p. 233: "The communists contributed to obscuring the Palestinian identity of the remaining Arabs and promoted in its place the government’s line about 'the Arab minority,' 'the Arabs in Israel,' or even 'the Israeli Arabs.'"
  • p. 239: "Overall, Maki won 28 percent of the votes of Arabs in Israel."
  • p. 261: "Indeed Maki’s discourse in 1957 drew closer to nationalist thought, which was evident in the resolutions of the party’s thirteenth congress.118 What had been said at the congress—that the Arabs in Israel were an inseparable part of the Palestinian people, and an affirmation of this people’s 'right to self-determination, even separation'—had crossed a red line in the view of Israeli intelligence, and represented a revolution in the positions the party had adopted since 1948."
  • p. 269: "Most of the published studies and research on Arabs in Israel center on the policies of the government and its institutions towards the Arab minority."
  • p. 270: "One mechanism that the authorities used to try to reengineer the national consciousness of Arabs in Israel was to make them participate in the Independence Day festivities."
  • p. 290 n. 2: "Israeli researchers, with Morris at their head, estimate that the number of Arabs who were killed in the 'border wars' and labeled as 'infiltrators' was between three and five thousand individuals. This study demonstrates that tens, if not hundreds, of them were 'Israeli Arabs.'"
  • p. 290 n. 3: " Morris, who devoted serious study to the Israeli war on “infiltration” by Palestinian refugees, treated it as a fight to protect Israel’s borders from the neighboring Arab countries, without devoting much attention to its repercussions and daily impact on the lives of Arabs in Israel."
  • p. 305 n. 19: "There is a rich literature in this field in the form of political and social theories critical of the diminished form of citizenship for Arabs in Israel."

It seems to me he uses both "Palestinians in Israel" and "Arabs in Israel," recognizing that the former is a subset of the latter. He does not really use "Israeli Palestinians" or "Arab Israelis." On page 233 (quoted in the box above) is where he talks about "obscuring the Palestinian identity of the remaining Arabs" by the use of terms like "Arabs in Israel" and "Israeli Arabs" (yet he uses the former multiple times throughout the book as quoted in the box above). Levivich (talk) 00:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • 1) Shouldn't this be an RM instead of an RFC, since it is asking to change the title? 2) The RFC question can be paraphrased as "is the current title neutral?", yet it seems like folks are responding yes/no to this question in an opposite manner. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:26, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    All the answers are the other way about so no problem but since all the answers are reversed, I edited to read POV instead of NPOV. The problem with prior RMs has been covered in the RFC before (contradictory closes (yes, it is PCI and no it isn't, and simply ignoring any neutrality issues in others) so a need for a wider and more in depth discussion. It is isn't asking to change the title as such, since one outcome is that it is NPOV and no change required and only if it is not, then suggestions for an appropriate title. There might need to be another RM following. Selfstudier (talk) 09:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is pretty silly seeing comments here that assert that the current title is not POV given that we have literal sources on the page clearly stating that it is the Israeli government's terminology and POV, and sources from as early as 1999 stating that those categorised under the term were increasingly at odds with it. So that it's POV is actually a sourced quality, not a purely subjective one, while the claim that it is NPOV is unevidenced. A better argument in defence of the current title might be that it's a WP:POVTITLE, but I haven't seen that proposed. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The recent merge

The current difficulties arise by virtue of the recent merge of Palestinian citizens of Israel into this article. The close said

"While there's no consensus that the article is a POVFORK, all seem to agree that there's a fair amount of content overlap between the two articles, even if the two population groups are not identical. This is a key criterion under WP:MERGE. Once we discard the views that are based on the "not the exact same population group" argument, we are left with a policy-based consensus to merge"

However, this argument is reversible, the merge could just as easily have been carried out in the other direction with the same logic. It was done that way because the editor proposing the merge asked for it, forcefully arguing (and editing) that there was no difference between PCI and ACI (which may well be true if one excludes the Druze). Selfstudier (talk) 12:38, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge was a mistake. I don't even agree that "merge" was the consensus of that AFD. In any event, since that AFD closed, I think something like 30+ new (as in not previously considered) sources, academic and news media, all modern (as in last five years or at least 21st century), have been analyzed/quoted by various editors here, which is grounds for revisiting the merge. If this article stays titled/scoped as "Arabs in Israel" it seems there are plenty of sources to support a separate child article specifically about "Palestinians in Israel". Levivich (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That last was my thought too. Selfstudier (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure merge was the consensus either. Is a review in order? Iskandar323 (talk) 17:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about DRV but was hesitant because of the passage of time and now there's an RM and an RFC. Levivich (talk) 19:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, get all the relevant stuff out on the table in one place, the better to decide a course of action. Selfstudier (talk) 20:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Levivich, I agree that much of the media has switched usage and there is greater consensus that "PCI" is the preferred term by PCIs themselves, instead of "'48 Arabs" or "Israeli Arabs". However, I still insist that there is little to no evidence that separate articles are warranted for "ACI"s and "PCIs". Articles are not about what terms mean, that's what a dictionary is for. Articles are about "a people". In this case the two terms ACI and PCI refer in 99%+ of cases to the exact same group of people, similar to "black" vs. "African-American" in the US refer to exactly the same group of people. The Druze are PCI, too (i.e. descended from the non-Jewish residents of Palestine in 1947) even if they don't prefer the term PCI. Really the only ACIs that are not PCIs are a few thousand Lebanese, a few tens of thousands Golanis (as they are descended from Syrian citizens), or the odd unique case of non-Jewish immigrants from other Arab countries (if there even are any). Those exceptions can be handled with a brief mention in the "terminology" part of the article. It should be one article and in my opinion it should be under the name of the preference of the people themselves, which is now majority "PCI".Keizers (talk) 21:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One PCI article makes sense to me. Levivich (talk) 01:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source Issues


−
According to several sources, the majority of Arabs in Israel now prefer to be identified as Palestinian citizens of Israel
+
According to several sources, a large number of Arabs in Israel now prefer to be identified as Palestinian citizens of Israel

The provides sources overall do not support the original wording. The first source marked 8 does mention a majority but provides no citation or statistics and is also from 2012 and far less reliable than more current ones. The second source marked 9 references another article. The third source marked 10 uses the same article as the second. The referenced source [1] uses the numbers 30% and 17% which totals 47% or a minority not majority. The source is from 2019 and references a 2017 study. So if there are any newer sources they should be considered first.

Not done. There is an ongoing discussion about this and other issues on this talk page and it is indeed the case that many sources do say a majority even if those are not as yet included in the article. Selfstudier (talk) 17:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/18/palestinian-in-israel/

Factchecker170 (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update Druze in Israel Citizenship Statistic

Under the heading: East Jerusalem and Golan Heights

−
The remaining [[Druze in Israel#Status and position of Golan Heights Druze|Druze population of the Golan Heights]], occupied and administered by Israel in 1967, are considered permanent residents under Isr'aels [[Golan Heights Law]] of 1981. Few have accepted full Israeli citizenship and the vast majority consider themselves citizens of [[Syria]].
+
The remaining [[Druze in Israel#Status and position of Golan Heights Druze|Druze population of the Golan Heights]], occupied and administered by Israel in 1967, are considered permanent residents under Israel's [[Golan Heights Law]] of 1981. By 2017, nearly 5,500 out of 26,500 residents had applied for and received an Israeli passport since 1981. The vast majority consider themselves citizens of [[Syria]].


The proposed change comes verbatim from the Druze in Israel article and clarifies the term "few" from the original version.

The source cited in Druze in Israel is "This Ethnic Minority in Israel Still Swears Allegiance to Syria. But for Many Young People That's Changing.", Haaretz.

More detail is contained in the Druze in Israel paragraph that may be of interest, but I tried to keep the original sentence's brevity.

"After the annexation of the Golan Heights in 1981, the Israeli government offered citizenship to all non-Israelis living in the territory, but (as of 2011), less than 10% of the local Druze accepted it. In 2012, however, due to the Syrian Civil War, dozens of young Druze have applied for Israeli citizenship – a much larger number than in previous years. By 2017, nearly 5,500 out of 26,500 residents had applied for and received an Israeli passport since 1981. The yearly number of applications steadily rose, with 183 applying in 2016, compared to only five in 2000." ShortfallOfGravitas (talk) 20:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. This article is for Arab citizens of Israel and the Golan Heights is not part of Israel. Selfstudier (talk) 22:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. The subsection this is under, East Jerusalem and Golan Heights, is already included in the article. An existing term is clarified, no new point is introduced.
2. The article, as you say, is about Arab citizens of Israel. The sentence being discussed here is about a group of Arabs accepting or abstaining from citizenship of Israel in territory it currently administers/occupies. About 20% of the Druze are in fact Arab citizens of Israel. ShortfallOfGravitas (talk) 23:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I changed the sentence to read "As of mid 2022, 4303 Druze citizens of Syria have been granted Israeli citizenship" together with an updated reference. Selfstudier (talk) 10:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Each of the terms is an imperfect descriptor, but there are several sources (cited in the third sentence of the article's introduction) which suggest that the majority of this community prefer to refer to themselves as "Palestinian citizens of Israel"; this descriptor, if not used as the title of the article, should at least be one of the terms listed in the parentheses with alternate variants in the first sentence.

Separately, there is an error further down the page that should be corrected: in the section "Terminology and identity", under the subheading "Demonym preferences", there is a sentence that contradicts the source that it cites (source 43: https://www.kas.de/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=0e141dca-8ac4-a77f-7045-f3a7d4c30991&groupId=252038). The sentence is: "However, these findings conflict with a 2017 Tel Aviv University poll which showed most Israelis self-identify as either Arab-Israeli or simply Israeli." There are several important errors here. First, the source poll doesn't use the terms "Israeli Arab" or "Arab Israeli", instead using "Arab in Israel / Arab citizen of Israel", which is the category a plurality of respondents preferred (p 22). Likewise, contrary to the assertion in the sentence from the current Wikipedia entry, the proportion who identified as simply "Israeli" was the only the third most common choice after "Arab in Israel / Arab citizen of Israel" and "Palestinian" (p 22). Additionally, regarding the focus groups conducted separately from individual polling, the source notes: "The designation 'Israeli-Arab' aroused great opposition" (p 28), and that "The designation 'Arab citizens of Israel' was acceptable to them ... Conversely, the participants spoke out against the designation 'Arab-Israeli'" (p 25). Hyacinth house (talk) 06:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arab_citizens_of_Israel&oldid=1223924836"