User talk:Galatz/Archive 2014

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi Galatz, I just wanted to say that I appreciate your balanced approach and civilised writings that I've recently came across here & there in the WP. I like and do appreciate it :) Universal Life (talk) 19:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Gaza Strip smuggling tunnels

Your recent edits to Gaza Strip smuggling tunnels assume that this article covers all tunnels under Gaza. It does not. Rather it refers to tunnels that cross the Egypt-Gaza border. To my knowledge, none of these tunnels have been targeted by Protective Edge. Rather than revert your tags and changes, I would ask you to reconsider which ones are necessary and undo those that are based on a misunderstanding.--Carwil (talk) 19:37, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks I guess then the title is not clear. I know its not the ones used for terror, but there are smuggling tunnels in more than just the Gaza/Egypt border. When I look at the article I would expect it to be about all smuggling tunnels, and since there is no way of knowing if these tunnels would have been used for terror or smuggling. I guess the article wasn't clear to me in general which is why I added the clarify tag too. - Galatz (talk) 20:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

No border (or other legal regime banning movement, like prison regulations), no smuggling. I'm pretty sure that the types of Gaza Strip tunnels I listed under "Scope" on Palestinian tunnel warfare in the Gaza Strip is comprehensive. Seemingly, all the internal tunnels are on that page now.--Carwil (talk) 13:58, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Tagging

Hi Galatz. I see you are tagging numerous articles for citation needed for the population and council jurisdiction. Here you can find a list of all the settlements under Bikat HaYarden council (and then subpages which detail their history, perhaps answering more of your tags), and here you can find the populations (2011). Cheers, Number 57 22:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll go through them tomorrow and try and add some stuff from those - Galatz (talk) 22:11, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:YESPOV and WP:PRESERVE

Given your edit here[1] I thought it worthwhile to remind you of WP:YESPOV and WP:PRESERVE as two of our core content policies. In short, you should endeavor to add new reliably sourced POVs, not to remove reliably sourced POVs you happen to disagree with. -- Kendrick7^talk 02:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Israeli ship articles

Hi, I'm not sure how to write you back so I put my words here. There is no much source in English or Hebrew about the subject on the internet. The references I found on the net is not completely correct, yet much of it is correct. Because I familiar with the subject from close I allow myself to correct it. So I have 2 choices: 1. To delete the reference from the page. 2.Keep the reference but to correct it on the wiki page. Not all the information is from the web. Lots of it from an internal book that didn't go public and other info is from the field itself. However, I will appreciate your attention for my English grammar and vocabulary. In the end there a lot of info, I cross between them, choose the best I found and correct the spare. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sokuya (talk • contribs) 19:57, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Bodies in exchange for prisoners

I believe that due to the ongoing interest in the two possible captive/slain soldiers, and the current, intense negotiations between Israel and Hamas over the exchange of bodies for prisoners, Oron Shaul can now support an article, which I have created. Hadar Goldin can probably support an article now, too. What do you think?ShulMaven (talk) 16:54, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion they should consistent with others in the past. The general consensus was however they didn't and both were deleted. Its tough to say much has changed since then though - Galatz (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	In Appreciation of your diligent, well-sourced editing.ShulMaven (talk) 14:13, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Dates

Hi. What is your basis for asserting that Israel uses solely DMY format? My understanding is that it uses both MDY and DMY formats. --Epeefleche (talk) 18:51, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

@Epeefleche: If you look at any Hebrew language news site they use DMY format, for example [ynet] or [haaretz]. For their English language websites they use MDY to appeal to their American target. I have never seen anything in Israel not use DMY. Also if you look at Date_format_by_country you will see they only list DMY for Israel. - Galatz (talk) 19:38, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

As you say, they use MDY on English language sites. I believe that just as they have three national languages, they also accept both the MDY and DMY date formats. This is -- of course -- an English language website, so conforming to what they do in English language websites certainly seems acceptable, at minimum. --Epeefleche (talk) 06:25, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

@Epeefleche: If you look at MOS:DATE TIES it says whats used in the country most common. Because an Israeli website has an Americanized version doesn't really mean much in my opinion. Additionally if you check List_of_official_languages English is not an official language in Israel. - Galatz (talk) 18:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Sometimes we have multiple languages in that status. Road signs are a good reflection. As I expect you know and will agree, road signs in Israel are most commonly set forth in all three languages.

As to your (again) referencing a Wikipedia article for support, I always find it a good starting place. But sometimes, as here, not any better than a wiki generally is (especially the case, when as here, the text you point to lacks any ref whatsoever -- I'm not sure how that makes it something we should rely on).

It's a curious matter, but as far as what Israel's official language is, the answer apparently stems from Mandate times. According to Article 82 of the Palestine Order in Council, passed in 1922, “All Ordinances, official notices, and official forms of the Government and all official notices of local authorities and municipalities in areas to be prescribed by order of the High Commissioner, shall be published in English, Arabic, and Hebrew. The three languages may be used in debates and discussions in the Legislative Council, and, subject to any regulations to be made from time to time, in the Government offices and the Law Courts.”[2]

Interestingly, as well, from the same source, "Last year ... 150,000 Israeli teenagers took their Bagrut, or matriculation exam, in English".

In any event, I would go with the test of road signs, and what the English papers use as a format (without even getting into the mandatory law and Bagrut, though they are supportive), to reflect that the MDY usage is an acceptable alternative (I could also rely on non-acceptable experience, which I imagine is driving you, in the opposite direction, as well). I don't accept that it is irrelevant what Israeli papers use as a format -- I think it is of great moment. The fact that you ascribe reasons for such usage is interesting as guesses go but not pertinent -- we should allow editors to follow any country's common usage, whatever the country's papers' assumed rationales may be. I would go with the approach we use in Canada, and - as the country usage does - accept either approach, but require that the usage be consistent. Epeefleche (talk) 01:47, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikilinks and abbreviations

BTW, I'm pretty certain -- though I haven't looked for the basis right now -- that the rule is that the lede and the text both should be viewed as stand-alones when it comes to wikilinking and abbreviations. Thus, a wikilink and/or abbreviation in the lede does not result in us failing to wikilink the first instance of the phrase in the body (same with an abbreviation). --Epeefleche (talk) 18:37, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

@Epeefleche: I may be mistaken I thought that wikilinking more than once when in lead was only for longer articles, but it is possible I am remembering it wrong. I did not think that applied to abbreviations. The article in question had PFLP wikilinked more than once in the body of the article itself however, so I know one of the removals was definitely correct. I will confirm with the policy and put it back if I am wrong - Galatz (talk) 18:53, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

@Epeefleche: This is what I am basing it on WP:OVERLINK. Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead. It says should appear once unless helpful for the reader to have it more than once. I am not sure if that article qualifies for needing it more than once, but correct me if I am wrong. - Galatz (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the legwork. First -- yes, I was prompted to leave my note by that article. Second -- I agree with some of your changes, as you indicated above there were further instances of wikilinking than those I was focusing on. And yes, wp:overlink captures my understanding. Following it, a wikilink in the lede is fine, a second link after that in the article text following the link is fine, and there should be no further links. I believe the same holds for abbreviations. I think it helpful for that article to have them both once in the lede, and once in the body of the article. Also, I believe that what you wikilinked was not just the org name, but the name+abbreviation together; I think just the name should be wikilinked. Best. Epeefleche (talk) 19:17, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

I guess based on the reading of it, its really up to the editors personal feelings on whether or not its needed. Thanks for bringing it to my attention - Galatz (talk) 19:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)