![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@JJNito197: I have thought for a while that the “Origins” section of the Palestinians article is far too long – rather than deleting this article, perhaps we bring all that text into here and replace it with a short single paragraph summary? Onceinawhile (talk) 09:07, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Examples of writing off the top of one's head composition, each illustrating a Zionist message.
(1) The Palestinian population, despite being predominantly Arab and Muslim, is not a homogeneous entity, and there is diversity within the population in terms of religious, linguistic, and cultural practices.
(2)The demographic history of Palestine is complex and has been shaped by various historical events and migrations. Throughout history, the region has been subject to the influence and control of various imperial powers, leading to political, social, and economic changes that have affected the demographic composition of the region. Wars, revolts and religious developments have also played a significant demographic role in encouraging immigration, emigration and conversion.
(3) Muslim settlement. This ultimately led to the creation of an Arab Muslim population, which, despite being considerably smaller than the area's population in late antiquity,
(4)the Israelites emerged as a separate ethnoreligious group in the region, forming the two related kingdoms of Israel and Judah. The fall of those kingdoms toAssyrian and Babylonian conquests was accompanied by forced exile
I was merging the sections but I see Tombah has beaten me to it. I will leave it to Tombah to avoid any confusion. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:35, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
What is "Muṣṭafá Murād Dabbāgh, 1965"? Of course one can guess that this is a reference to the Arabic work that Dabbagh published in that year, but that has multiple volumes. Without a title, volume number, and page numbers, this is not a citation at all. Moreover, we need an editor who has personally checked that the source supports the text it is applied to. I believe this is most likely a WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT violation and the citation should be changed to indicate where the information actually comes from. At the moment deletion is the only option available. Zerotalk 01:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
There are multiple citations to Salim Tamari, Lepers, Lunatics and Saints, Jerusalem Quarterly File, Iss. 20 (Jan 2004). They all need checking. Here are three examples of misquotes:
Ben Zvi stated in a later writing that "Obviously, it would be incorrect to claim that all fellahin are descended from the ancient Jews; rather, we are discussing their majority or their foundation", and that "The vast majority of the fellahin are not descended from Arab conquerors but rather from the Jewish peasants who made up the majority in the region before the Islamic conquest". Tamari notes that "the ideological implications of this claim became very problematic and were soon withdrawn from circulation." — That sentence does appear in Tamari but not in the context of descent from Jews.
Salim Tamari notes the paradoxes produced by the search for "nativist" roots among these Zionist figures, particularly the Canaanist followers of Yonatan Ratosh,..." — Actually Tamari distinguishes the Zionists from the Canaanites: "both among the Zionists and the so-called Canaanite (anti-Zionist) followers of Yonatan Ratosh".
[Borochov] further believed that the Palestinian peasantry would embrace Zionism and that the lack of a crystallized national consciousness among Palestinian Arabs would result in their likely assimilation into the new Hebrew nationalism, and that Arabs and Jews would unite in class struggle." — This is cited to Tamari, which doesn't have it, and the Marxist Internet Archive, which is dubious wrt RS. It is also off-topic for this page.
Zerotalk 11:46, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
I know articles related to Palestinian topics are accused of POV on this website a lot but the sentences "In order to strengthen Palestinian historical claims to the territory and counter Israeli-Zionist arguments, the Palestinian discourse attempts to employ origin ideas as a weapon in the ongoing conflict with Israel. Academic standards for the use of historical evidence are rarely followed in the Palestinian historical discourse, and evidence that is antagonistic to the national cause is either disregarded or dismissed as false or hostile." do not seem like a summary of the articles text and strongly implies that Palestinians are not a valid ethnicity. It feels a bit like Israeli nationalist POV, implying that Palestinians do not have historical ties to the area, which would be a claim the article doesn't substantiate. The term "Employ origin ideas as a weapon" particularly egregious. Instead of accusing Palestinians of weaponizing dubious origin stories, the article should mention that the topic Palestinian origin is used politically by both Israeli nationalists and Palestinian nationalists, which is what the article says. So I think the sentences should either be cut, moved to the "in zionist thinking" section or edited to add that Zionists also use dubious theories of Palestinian origin to justify political views. Always beleive in hope (talk) 20:11, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Nowhere in this reference article says that Turks have Sub-Saharan genes. Who is writing such BS here really? Zartus (talk) 15:16, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
The sources are overwhelming in the article so why the tag? Makeandtoss (talk) 11:28, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
The story of Abraham and Sarah includes a part about GOD or Yahweh (YHWH) coming and speaking to Abraham about his family's future and says something like "Your descendants shall inherit the land of Israel". The story tells of how his wife Sarah gave her maidservant, Hagar, to Abraham to have children with because she feared she was too old. After Hagar has children for Abraham Sarah becomes pregnant and exiles Hagar and her children for her own reasons. Is it not probable that Hagar's children are the ancestors of todays' Palestinians? Gods' will cannot be forced and never includes or needs any peoples will or effort to come to light and real Jews know this. The thing confusing so many for so long is simply that Zionists are NOT Jews. A person is as they live and a person acts according to their thoughts made primarily of their selfish desires unless truly Loving and All Inclusive, as He wants Csaw7 (talk) 03:53, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
63.249.60.155 (talk) 16:21, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Citation 106 is questionable. Consider known cartographic place names. When did Israel fall of the maps. Palestine was there hundreds of years back.
1) "Haber et al.'s 2013 study's PCA map with Palestinians clustering with Saudis and other Arabian defined populations"
Yet : the shaded area is defined as "core Levantine area" , and the study did not state that Palestinians are Arabians (actually classified them as "Levantine" ) , rather than a portion of thier genomes coming from the Arabian Peninsula ; just like it didn't say Egyptians are sub-Saharan people due to admixture from Africa proper .
2)"Principal Components Analysis of ancient and modern populations, with Palestinians clustering with Arabian populations."
The graph actually shows the closest samples to Palestinians are Yementine and Libyan Jews , Syrians , and Jordanians (whom many of them are actually Palestinian ..sadly the study didn't state the sources of its samples ) , with a minority of Lebanese and Bedouin A being close to the Palestinian samples .
The one who wrote that line either confused Bedouin A (the red dots . ) , with Palestinian samples (The red diamonds ♦ ) , or deliberately distorted it due to politically charged bias .
The captions below the two images should ideally be the same as the file name . ( PCA map of ancient and modern populations for 1) , and "Main plot shows global diversity using 50 populations . The Levantine core cluster is shaded in pink." for 2)).
..I don't know if this is allowed in Wikipedia , but it would be sweet if it mentions the forth-coming study which will analyze Ancient Israelite DNA (Ha-Aretz source)
Hope editors quickly respond . 188.48.96.198 (talk) 15:10, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
In the section about jewish and Palestinians genetic relations the following sentence is present: “Genetic studies on Jews have shown that Jews and Palestinians are closer to each other than the Jews are to their host countries.“ The two references provided 96,97 do not mention anything to suggest it. The first study didn’t compare Jewish populations to their host countries, while the second study didn’t include Palestinians. HarelTau (talk) 14:05, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
There is a claim in the article as follows;
"Much of the local Palestinian population in the area of Nablus is believed to be descended from Samaritans who converted to Islam."
The citation only says Ireton, 2003. Initially I couldn't find any such book. With some more digging I discovered it is an unpublished MA dissertation from the University of Kent. Having done a history masters at Cambridge myself, I can tell you with certainty this would struggle to even get a passing grade.
The origin of the claim (because the wiki article source provides no page numbers, because there are no page numbers, and no page number, or a direct quote), is this;
"Much of the local Palestinian population is believed to be descended from Samaritans who converted to Islam. Certain Nabulsi family names are associated with Samaritan ancestry - Muslimani, Yaish, and Shakshir among others."
So the core of this claim above is based on an MA dissertation that was never considered good enough to be published, let alone become a more substantial standalone book (which the best masters dissert. are, a friend of mine had hers published to great acclaim), and the nature of the assertion is "X is believed". Believed by who? What proportion is "much" when you've found three family names that may or not point to such a conclusion (we don't have any anthropological linguist providing support for it in the MA).
I do not believe this source is consistent with Wikipedia rules, nor is it properly cited, nor does the citation allow you to find the work (or disclose it's only an MA thesis), nor when checked does the Wikipedia article claim that "Much of the local Palestinian population..." track with 'There are three families with names that a masters student who doesn't speak Arabic or Hebrew fluently believes indicates that they may have Samaritan origins".
This is simply not good enough for Wikipedia. 2A02:6B6D:10A3:0:B89E:E8D4:1683:90DA (talk) 15:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Origin of the Palestinians's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Masalha":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. Feel free to remove this comment after fixing the refs. AnomieBOT⚡ 13:11, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
What's the reason for deleting all this following info Today?[1]
"Historical records as well as genetic studies indicate that modern Palestinians mostly descend from local ancient levantines who converted from judaism and other levantine mythologies to christianity and later to islam.[1][2][3][4][5]" 49.186.90.214 (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Under the "In Zionist Thinking" section, source 114 is repeatedly used, but the links attached are broken. I can't edit it to add the source, though, and making such claims should involve deeper digging into the attached paper. 212.199.108.186 (talk) 08:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Anecdotes about individual villages don't belong here, especially when no indication is given the significance of migration. These things will in time be removed from the article, so putting in more of them is a waste of time. Zerotalk 13:26, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
With all due respect : what exactly is the point of the "Israeli-statements" section ? . Many Israeli-Jews don't even recognize Palestinians as a nation , let alone dabble in their history (or even recognize such ) . These notions belong to their relevant article ("Palestinian Identity" , "Denial of Palestinian identity" section ) .
Here is a brief break down of the sources used :
1)A reflection on the 2015 study on the Philistine cemetery in Ashkelon. This should instead be used in either the Philistines article , or the Canaan article in the Legacy section . Netanyahu's whining and snotting don't belong here .
2)Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs : Essentially a think-tank on Netenyahu's payrolls . Obviously not an RS on almost most claims and charges against Israeli Public-relations , let alone anything regarding the Palestinians' history. Besides : this is Original content : an editor summarized the article , rather than directly quoting from it . The vast majority of its points don't deal with the ethnographical or ancestral origins of Palestinians .
It simply parrots the talking point of "They are vanilla Arabush" , "Their nationalism is "rootless" , "No Filastin before 19XX" ; with the usual cherry-picking of evidence , and inflation of the significance of the Nasserist-Baathist "artificial Middle East" narratives .
3)An article by Jonathan S. Tobin . A Journalist , who is the Editor of the Jewish News Syndicate . Even a superficial look at their so-called "articles" shows they are petty-scribbles . Of course he will offer the Apologia for a discredited fraud that refuses to die for Ideological reasons rather than evidence . Like his beloved author : he is lying to people's faces by claiming that the work was originally Palestinian-biased (1977 Congressional Record) . The rest simply quotes a 1980s article by a fellow apologist , trying to defend the discredited thesis by making a casual and numerical false equivalence between Jewish and Foreign Muslim migration to Palestine in the late 19th-early 20th centuries , and make it seem Yehoshua Porath was silent on the predominance of natural increase (Which he actually affirmed , in the first volume of The Emergence of the Palestinian Arab national Movement (1) , as well as his review on the work , implicitly reject migration of mass-levels , rather than individual cases . ) , or things alongside the lines of "Nobody listens to us : let Peters be an example for "rejected" Truth-seekers" .
4)Blaming the Victims . More Ink on the Peter scam .
5)Jerusalem Post . JP is famously "Biased" against Palestinian topics , but it's an RS as to dismiss it immediately . Still : the author is no Historian and Demographer to even warrant having his opinion in an article . He merely replicates the Peter method of selective data and evidence to turn the 19th century into a graveyard on a deserted island , and give a "WTF" vibe of an enormous increase in Ottoman period , using the same source as Peters , Ernst Frankenstein's 1942 Polemic , quoting dubious figures from an early 19th Travel book.
..I am going to suggest either of two things :
A) The section is to be completely removed , as it is irrelevant , and out of place for this article .
B) The section is to be greatly expanded , with some sources replaced . It would be retitled "Denial of Palestinian Antiquity on the land" . This can also be linked with the new Palestinian Genocide Accusation and Nakba Denial articles to reinforce this phenomena of the "Illegitimate nation" within Israeli society .
Readers want balanced ,on-topic , Non-POV historical articles , especially regarding a people in which many act in bad faith either for or against them , prejudicing impartiality for partisan reasons .
A part of that involves separating contemporary politics from History-studies ; there is no need to add 'contrary opinions' section just for the sake of it , especially when they are often Politically-charged rather than out of good-will and the sake of discourse and academic integrity .
Hope editors respond . 2.88.143.222 (talk) 00:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
For the historical analysis section, please consider including this: Moshe Gil argues that even after suppression by Heraclius, Jews and Samaritans were still the majority in Palestine by the time of the Islamic Conquest (638 CE)
"We may reasonably state that at the time of the Muslim conquest, a large Jewish population still lived in Palestine. We do not know whether they formed the majority but we may assume with some certainty that they did so when grouped together with the Samaritans. An important source regarding Palestine's demographic structure during Byzantine rule are the stories of the Christian monk Bar-Sawma. In the biography of this fighting monk, who was born in Samosata in Asia Minor and active in Palestine in the fifth century AD, it is told that the Jews, together with the heathens, constituted the majority in Palestine, Phoenicia and Arabia (which included the south ofPalestine). There were as yet few Christians. The Jews and the Samaritans virtually governed the land and were persecuting the Christians."
This is a recent historical analysis, as compared to other sources which posit that Jews and Samaritans were around a quarter of the population.
Source: Gil, Moshe. "A History of Palestine", p. 3 Gamalny (talk) 04:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
One of the sources here is from ted.com, which is not a reliable source. Suggest either that a better source be added or that the section be deleted HonestEditor51 (talk) 04:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Source 19 is an article about dna origin of ancient people, not modern one. In fact this source doesn't even even include the word Palestinians. It does not support the text in the section refering to source 19. It seems there is no correlation between source 19 and the section. The correct source should be mentioned or the section should be deleted. 147.235.192.176 (talk) 22:05, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
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.
Palestinians, among other Levantine groups, were found to derive 81–87% of their ancestry from Bronze age Levantines, relating to Canaanites as well as Kura–Araxes culture impact from before 2400 BCE (4400 years before present); 8–12% from an East African source and 5–10% from Bronze age Europeans. Results show that a significant European component was added to the region since the Bronze Age (on average ~8.7%), seemingly related to the Sea Peoples, excluding Ashkenazi and Moroccan Jews who harbour ~31–42% European-related ancestry, both populations having a history in Europe.
I attempted to find this 81-87% figure in Source 20, but failed to do so. Is it actually in the source? 2600:1700:4002:1C10:84A5:AA65:2C59:6522 (talk) 09:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request to Palestinians has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add the following text to the end of the Genetics, Levantine origins section
In their 2017 paper, Ranajit Das, Paul Wexler, Mehdi Pirooznia and Eran Elhaik analyzed the Lazaridis et al. study (2016) concluding that the Natufians, together with one Neolithic Levantine sample, clustered in the proximity to modern Palestinians and Bedouins, and also "marginally overlapped" with Yemenite Jews.[49] Ferreira et al. in 2021 found that ancient Natufians cluster with modern Saudi Arabians and Yemenis.[50] Sirak et al. 2024 found that medieval Socotra (the Soqotri people), like modern Saudis, Yemenis and Bedouin, have a majority component that is "maximized in Late Pleistocene (Epipaleolithic) Natufian hunter–gatherers from the Levant".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natufian_culture#Archaeogenetics
Sweet Polly Purebred (talk) 15:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
There are uses of the term “majority” in reference to percentages in the range of 30-40. In this case, the correct term to use would be “plurality.” Also, it would be nice to note explicitly that the study (Y-chromosome analysis of Christian and Muslim Palestinians) is rather small: 37% of 44 people is only 16 people, and smaller percentages are even less meaningful. Perhaps there are larger studies in existence now? 97.113.41.188 (talk) 03:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Recently i added some well sourced and important points to the lead and removed an WP:UNDUE passage, but @Skitash reverted me and suggested discussing it here first, so i’ll break each point alone for more organized talk:
Please while discussing write which point exactly you are talking about for a better organized discussion. Stephan rostie (talk) 16:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Recently @Skitash, yet again, reverted another part again where i added Roger Courtney quote about how distinct where the palestinians from what he described as “true arabs of the desert anf transjordan” in 1939, but skitash removed it arguing that it is “WP:UNDUE + outdated personal narrative”, can you elaborate how exactly is a primary eye-witnessing historical source is “outdated” when the point of providing his quote itself is to provide an insight of someone living of this period itself ? It is like providing any quote in general for any past historian or figure in wikipedia.are quotes UNDUE should be instantly deleted ?
lastly, i wonder if skitash had violated the WP:1RR of the article. As he made two separate reverts of two sections, one in the lead , and the other in one of the sections when he reverted the quote that i added after he made his first revert which didn’t contain the quote yet. Stephan rostie (talk) 16:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
This article was created fairly recently by a now blocked sock, probably it should be merged with Palestinians. Selfstudier (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Someone with access, please fix "predominately"—the correct spelling is predominantly. Thank you. 173.18.56.34 (talk) 19:46, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
References
...throughout the 1990s and 2000s a growing number of PAI political organizations have been increasingly promoting Palestinian consciousness, advancing ethnonationalist objectives, and demanding recognition of collective group rights.
They came from Circassia and Chechnya, and were refugees from territories annexed by Russia in 1864, and the Bosnian Muslims, whose province was lost to Serbia in 1878. Belonging to this category were the Algerians (Mughrabis), who arrived in Syria and Palestine in several waves after 1850 in the wake of France's conquest of their country and the waves of Egyptian migration to Palestine and Syria during the rule of Muhammad Ali and his son, Ibrahim Pasha. [...] In most cases the Egyptian army dropouts and the other Egyptian settlers preferred to settle in existing localities, rather than to establish new villages. In the southern coastal plain and Ramla zones there were at least nineteen villages which had families of Egyptian origin, and in the northern part of Samaria, including the 'Ara Valley, there are a number of villages with substantial population of Egyptian stock.
According to historical records part, or perhaps the majority, of the Muslim Arabs in this country descended from local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD (Shaban 1971; Mc Graw Donner 1981). These local inhabitants, in turn, were descendants of the core population that had lived in the area for several centuries, some even since prehistorical times (Gil 1992)... Thus, our findings are in good agreement with the historical record...
The Palestinians are an Arab people, largely Moslem but with important numbers of Christians, who live in, once lived in, or trace their descent through parents or grandparents to the land once known as Palestine, which came under a British mandate in 1922 and now is the land of Israel, the West Bank of the Jordan and the Gaza Strip.
Of course, the notion that the Palestinians are an Arab people, an integral part of the Arab world ('the Arab nation'), is wholly legitimate and natural, given the history and culture of the people in question.