Talk:Sheikh Jarrah: Difference between revisions
WhisperToMe (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Per Wikipedia standards regarding reliable sources, opinion pieces in newspapers can not be used as reliable sources about historical facts, but only about what the author believes. It's also interesting to note that Frantzman is neither a historian or an academic but a somewhat controversial journalist. I will remove the material until an adequate source can be found to support it. [[User:Factsontheground|Factsontheground]] ([[User talk:Factsontheground|talk]]) 08:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC) |
Per Wikipedia standards regarding reliable sources, opinion pieces in newspapers can not be used as reliable sources about historical facts, but only about what the author believes. It's also interesting to note that Frantzman is neither a historian or an academic but a somewhat controversial journalist. I will remove the material until an adequate source can be found to support it. [[User:Factsontheground|Factsontheground]] ([[User talk:Factsontheground|talk]]) 08:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
: Doesn't the editor of the newspaper that publishes the opinion pieces post responses that can verify or discredit what is said in the opinion piece? [[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] ([[User talk:WhisperToMe|talk]]) 12:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC) |
: Doesn't the editor of the newspaper that publishes the opinion pieces post responses that can verify or discredit what is said in the opinion piece? [[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] ([[User talk:WhisperToMe|talk]]) 12:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
This is completely ridiculous. Everyone knows that Sheikh Jarrah was predominantly an Arab neighborhood of Jerusalem before 1948. Just because some settler spokesman gets to publish some propaganda in JP doesn't make any difference. The editors of JP only have to consult their own newspaper to see the truth. Practically every mention of Sheikh Jarrah before 1948 was in relation to Arab affairs and it is regularly referred to as an Arab quarter (example: JP Jan 21, 1948, p2). As for "Sheikh Jarrah incorporated the Jewish neighborhoods...Nahalat Shimon", this is just puffery. Sheikh Jarrah was not an administrative district, so what does "incorporated" mean? (Answer: nothing.) And how does one explain the clear distinction made in reports, for example "inhabitants of the Nahlat Shimon Quarter of Jerusalem told the police following a heavy attack from the nearby Sheikh Jarrah Quarter" (JP, Mar 7, 1948, p4)? It contradicts Franzman's crazy claims. Also see [[:File:Jerusalem1947.png]]. Etc etc. [[User:Zero0000|Zero]]<sup><small>[[User_talk:Zero0000|talk]]</small></sup> 06:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:03, 10 March 2010
Palestine Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Seth Frantzman opinion piece being reported as fact
The following is being sourced entirely from a Seth Frantzman opinion piece in the Jerusalem Post:
- In the late 19th century, Sheikh Jarrah incorporated the Jewish neighborhoods of Shimon HaTzadik, founded in 1876; Nahalat Shimon, founded in 1891, and villas owned by leading Arab families. The Husseini family owned six homes east of Saladin Street. In 1918 there were eighteen Arab families living in Sheikh Jarrah. The neighborhood was predominately Jewish until 1948 when the Jews fled following attacks by Arab militiamen.
Per Wikipedia standards regarding reliable sources, opinion pieces in newspapers can not be used as reliable sources about historical facts, but only about what the author believes. It's also interesting to note that Frantzman is neither a historian or an academic but a somewhat controversial journalist. I will remove the material until an adequate source can be found to support it. Factsontheground (talk) 08:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- Doesn't the editor of the newspaper that publishes the opinion pieces post responses that can verify or discredit what is said in the opinion piece? WhisperToMe (talk) 12:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
This is completely ridiculous. Everyone knows that Sheikh Jarrah was predominantly an Arab neighborhood of Jerusalem before 1948. Just because some settler spokesman gets to publish some propaganda in JP doesn't make any difference. The editors of JP only have to consult their own newspaper to see the truth. Practically every mention of Sheikh Jarrah before 1948 was in relation to Arab affairs and it is regularly referred to as an Arab quarter (example: JP Jan 21, 1948, p2). As for "Sheikh Jarrah incorporated the Jewish neighborhoods...Nahalat Shimon", this is just puffery. Sheikh Jarrah was not an administrative district, so what does "incorporated" mean? (Answer: nothing.) And how does one explain the clear distinction made in reports, for example "inhabitants of the Nahlat Shimon Quarter of Jerusalem told the police following a heavy attack from the nearby Sheikh Jarrah Quarter" (JP, Mar 7, 1948, p4)? It contradicts Franzman's crazy claims. Also see File:Jerusalem1947.png. Etc etc. Zerotalk 06:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Start-Class Palestine-related articles
- Mid-importance Palestine-related articles
- WikiProject Palestine articles
- Start-Class Israel-related articles
- Mid-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel
- Wikipedia requested photographs in the Palestinian territories