Talk:Jenin refugee camp

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 19:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the first refugees at the Jenin refugee camp lived at former barracks evacuated by the British Army? Source: “Early refugees lived at evacuated British Army barracks, then at the abandoned Ottoman train station, then in UNRWA tents,” said Abd al-Jaleel al-Noursi, who arrived at the Jenin camp in the early 1950s after fleeing Haifa. - [1]
  • ALT1: ... that out of thirty-five Palestinians killed in the West Bank in January 2023 by Israeli forces and settlers, twenty were from the Jenin refugee camp? Source: "Palestinian Ministry of Health said that Israeli forces and settlers have killed 35 Palestinians ... during January, 2023, in the occupied West Bank ... It added that 20 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces came from Jenin. - [2]
  • Reviewed:

5x expanded by The Bestagon (talk). Self-nominated at 14:46, 19 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jenin Camp; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: - not needed
Overall: No qpq is needed. Article is just over five times expanded. I like ALT1 best. I read through and the article appears neutral as well. Good work! Lightburst (talk) 16:05, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

The Bestagon I see some continued editing so will have to watch that the article remains stable. Also I will change ALT1 from "twenty were in" to "twenty were from" because that is what the source says. "It added that 20 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces came from Jenin." It does not demostrably change the context or meaning so we will not need another reviewer to approve. Bruxton (talk) 19:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Why isn't this article at "Jenin refugee camp"?

As the DYK ALTs above make plain, the way one most naturally refers to the "Jenin Camp" is as the "Jenin refugee camp" - it's there in the first sentence, it's there on Ngrams and it's there on scholar, with hits plummeting away if you enforce "Jenin Camp" as a set term, but holding steadier at three times the number of hits if you lock in the term "Jenin refugee camp". The WP:COMMONNAME argument appear strong. Is there something that I'm missing here, or is the page just massively overdue a bold move to the more prevalent name? Iskandar323 (talk) 08:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree. Somehow I haven't thought about this before; this should be moved. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 08:37, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Probably because UNWRA call it Jenin camp. None of the camps in their list at the bottom are called refugee camps by them and WP mostly seems to be following that, see Palestinian refugee camps. Still, if it is common in sources, then that trumps official names of course. Selfstudier (talk) 11:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I suspect that the UNWRA might have made a slightly stylistic/editorial choice to avoid iteratively repeating the word 'refugee' again and again, such as in the list of camps at the bottom that linked page, but the website also hops a bit between the two, with the link just below the main text reading: "Read more about Jenin refugee camp", and for any of the other "Camp" profiles, the "Read more about" text similarly reads "X refugee camp", so it seems very much of an avoidance of repetition issue on that site/with that organization. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I think the overreliance on UNRWA here has also led to too many descriptive names for camps being rendered as proper names. Even within the usage of the simplified term "Jenin camp", the uncapitalized 'camp' version is more prevalent than "Jenin Camp" all caps by a significant margin in Ngrams, and this in reflected in scholar too, where few sources capitalize 'camp'. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:47, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Sure, but if we change one, should we not change them all? To (Blah) refugee camp. Selfstudier (talk) 12:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

TBH, for most of them, there might not be that many sources. Jenin is obviously one of the larger, more discussed and more prominent examples historically, hence the focus on its in academic literature. On the other hand, most of the other pages linked to at Palestinian refugee camps are underdeveloped stubs. Even so, it is already a complete mishmash of capitalized and uncapitalized 'camp's, so if your concern is inconsistency, that's already the par for the course here. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

But in theory, yes, maybe. Here's Dheisheh, plucked at random, on Ngrams. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Or Far'a, which has been in the news recently. Selfstudier (talk) 12:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Then again, where the place name is not an existing settlement, as with Jenin, perhaps the name itself is sufficient, per WP:CONCISE, such as with Dheisheh, where there is not much else that name can mean. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be awkward, I don't have any objection to the move (or any of them) as such. Selfstudier (talk) 12:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

With Dheisheh, short of other meanings, the lone use has support. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:28, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 20 February 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved; doesn't seem controversial enough for an RM discussion. (non-admin closure) The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 12:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

---

Jenin Camp → Jenin refugee camp – "Jenin refugee camp" is the WP:COMMONNAME. See further discussion here. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 16:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

• Pinging Iskandar323 and Selfstudier, who took part in the previously mentioned discussion. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 16:14, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

For no reason

Hey you better check sources before telling something as propaganda... 13:41, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

True, however, you do realize that neither of you are allowed to edit this article because neither of you meet the requirements to do so. If you want to edit the page then you can make a request right here on this talk page. Selfstudier (talk) 14:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion 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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jenin refugee camp/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: M3ATH (talk · contribs) 21:10, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Reviewer: Abo Yemen (talk · contribs) 04:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

This is my first ever review, hopefully it goes well! Abo Yemen✉ 04:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	3=Had to fix some mistakes
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	3=(Nothing that I am aware of)
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	3=No edit wars after the page got protected
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	3=Congrats!

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.