• Palestine associated categories listed on January 15, 2005. No clear consensus. Marked as unresolved.

Palestine/West Bank & Gaza Strip/Palestinian Authority categories:

West Bank and Gaza Strip:

• of Palestine

  I strongly disagree here. "Palestine" is a historic geographical term, and is not interchangeable with "West Bank and Gaza Strip". I suggest using "of the West Bank and Gaza Strip" for geographical issues, and "of the Palestinian National Authority" for political issues (such as "political parties"). -- uriber 12:13, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  Generally agree. Also "Palestinians" for the people. All of which gets trickier in historical contexts, especially pre-1948. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

• Uriber, you are not making sense here. I do not follow what you are trying to do here. There were and are various contexts for the use of Palestine and they may all be correct. You cannot "standardize" various periods of history.IZAK 11:36, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  In short, what I'm trying to do is to keep the concepts of Palestine, Palestinian, and Palestinian national Authority apart, as they are three distinct concepts, which are often confused. Palestine is a historic region, the Palestinians are (arguably) a people (which appeared only many centuries after "Palestine" was a well-known term), and the Palestinian national Authority is an autonimous state-like political entity governing parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (which, in turn, happen to be parts of Palestine, and the home of some of the Palestinians). This is complicated, but not without precedent: cf.: Jews/Judea/Land of Israel/Israel, United States/American. -- uriber 13:11, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  I would agree with Uriber here. BTW, must we always say "the Gaza Strip" instead of just "Gaza"? Especially in the phrase "The West Bank and Gaza" I would think the shorter phrase is entirely clear. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

• Let's make this more concrete...

Huh? How is the following making anything" more "concrete"? IZAK 11:36, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I included the list here so that instead of arguing abstractly about classes like "geographical" and "political", we could just deal with the actual categories we have to rename.

Excellent idea -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• • Category:Airports_of_Palestine

    Should be Category:Airports_of_the_West_Bank_and_the_Gaza_Strip (unsigned comment)

• • This category contains the following disclaimer:

Note: Palestine is not a country. These airports are located in the contested Gaza Strip and West Bank. Airports of Israel can be found under Category:Airports of Israel

• • Is this appropriate? Should Category:Airports of Israel also contain a cross-reference? I guess if the name is changed, the disclaimer is no longer necessary. -- Beland 03:16, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    Certainly Category:Airports of Israel should also contain a cross-reference. It is a matter of indifference to me whether this is called Category:Airports of Palestine, Category:Airports of the West Bank and Gaza, Category:Airports of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. I think all will be understood identically by any normal reader. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

    I agree that Category:Airports of the West Bank and Gaza is better; "Airports of Palestine" could, as someone noted, include Haifa... - - Mustafaa 20:28, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• • Category:Arab_localities_in_Palestine_1948 -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    No problem here (except for the category itself being dubious - but that's another issue). "Palestine" was a concrete political entity in 1948. -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    • Nothing dubious at all about this. - Mustafaa 20:28, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Category:Elections_in_Palestine

    Should be Category:Elections_in_the_Palestinian_Authority (or Category:Elections_in_the_Palestinian_National_Authority). -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    Agree Gangulf 18:27, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    Agree -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

    • Disagree. These were officially called "Palestinian" elections[1], and with good reason - Palestinians outside the PA's administration, eg in East Jerusalem, were permitted to vote in it. - Mustafaa 20:28, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Category:Palestine

    Depends on what's in it. I would keep this category for the historical stuff, but also create Category:Palestinian_National_Authority -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    Agree. And Category:Palestinian_National_Authority should be a subcategory of Category:Palestine. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

    Keep, of course.

  • Category:Palestinian_Cities

    Should be Category:Cities_of_the_West_Bank_and_the_Gaza_Strip

    Probably that is clearer. Otherwise, I could make a damn strong case that Haifa belongs in this category. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

    Agree - or, as Jmabel says, add Haifa et al... - Mustafaa 20:28, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Category:Palestinian_history

    Once again, depends on what's in it. If it's stuff about the history of the Palestinians, the current name is fine. But there should probably also be Category:History_of_Palestine for articles about the history of the region. -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    Concur, with Category:Palestinian_history as a subcategory of Category:History_of_Palestine, and a clear comment in each about their scope. And I'm wondering if it wouldn't be useful to have a Category:History of Israel and Palestine containing both Category:History_of_Palestine and Category:History_of_Israel, because the two cannot readily be extricated from one another, and plenty of articles really belong in that more abstract category. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Jmabel: Please note there is already an extensive Category:Israeli history as well as Category:Israel and Zionism. The conflict between the two is covered by Category:Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There is also already Category:Palestinian history. To mix the "Israeli" with the "Palestinian" histories TOO much would not be helpful nor accurate at all, and would only confuse matters. IZAK 02:36, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• • Category:Palestinian_people.

    This should remain as it is, since it's about Palestinian people, not about Palestine. -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    Concur. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

    Keep. MathKnight 12:18, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  • Category:Palestinian_political_parties

    Should be Category:Political_parties_of_the_Palestinian_Authority. -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    Isn't the Palestinian Authority a government? This should be Category:Political parties in terroritory administered by the Palestinian Authority or similar. 132.205.95.68 22:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    The official article's title is Palestinian National Authority. -- Beland 03:16, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    This should remain as it is, since it's about Palestinian parties, not about Palestine. Gangulf 18:27, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    I think Gangulf has a point here. I'd include any specifically Palestinian parties in this category, regardless of geography. Maybe we also need a category Category:Political parties in terroritory administered by the Palestinian Authority or similar. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

    Agree with Gangulf. - Mustafaa 20:28, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Category:Palestinian_sport

    Should be Category:Sport_in_the_Palestinian_Authority. -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    The official article's title is Palestinian National Authority. Is this category about government employees who play sports? -- Beland 03:16, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    I see nothing misleading about the present name of this category. What is the perceived problem? -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

    Keep, of course. Are we to exclude Palestinian sportsmen from Lebanese camps? - Mustafaa 20:28, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Category:Palestinian_suicide_bombers

    This one and the three below it should remain as they are, for the same reason given in Category:Palestinian_people. -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Category:Palestinian_terrorist_organizations
    • I dislike the category, but for reasons having nothing to do with the topic currently under discussion. I object to the entire use of "terrorist" in the category scheme. But I know I have a losing battle here. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep. MathKnight 12:18, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Category:Palestinian_terrorists
    • As for Category:Palestinian_terrorist_organizations -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep. MathKnight 12:18, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Category:Palestinian_writers
    • Clearly an appropriate category

I realize this seems complicated and non-consistent, but you have to remember that unlike other cases discussed here, there is no independent state called "Palestine", so it's natural that "Palestine" does not fit into a template designed for independent states. -- uriber 12:58, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Given the overloading of the term "Palestine", I can definitely see your point. I'm going to remain neutral here, but I would like to request some clarification...for each of the above categories, what would be the preferred new name? -- Beland 20:35, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Good question, I agree, what the heck is goin on here??? IZAK 11:36, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• • Category:Battles_of_the_Sinai_and_Palestine_Campaign

    The above is correct for the episodes of World War I IZAK 11:36, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Category:Israeli-Palestinian_conflict

    The above is the name of the main article in Wikipedia on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. IZAK 11:36, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    And I would place this as a subcategory of Category:History of Israel and Palestine

  • Category:Jews_in_Ottoman_and_British_Palestine

What would you call the areas of Ottoman aand British Palestine, if not "Palestine"? IZAK 11:36, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

OK, so I take it these 3 can remain the same. Do the others need to change, to e.g. "Category:People of the West Bank and Gaza Strip"? -- Beland 11:57, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Is West Bank an appropriate name for that piece of territory? Isn't there a more complete name? (West Bank of Transjordan, or West Bank of the Jordan River) 132.205.95.68 22:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, but "The West Bank and Gaza" is unambiguous and terse. Just like we do not always say "the United States of America". -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

Having read though this discussion, I generally agree with uriber's position. Issues dealing with the region of Palestine (generally pre-1948) should be in "Palestine" categories. Post 1948 geographical articles should be in the "West Bank and Gaza Strip" category, and political articles should be in the "Palestinian Authority" category. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:01, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Mostly ditto. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:00, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

The ceaseless wrangling over Palestine is one of the main reasons I'm doing less Wikipedia stuff lately, but once more unto the breach... The term "Palestine" has two meanings in English. The primary meaning - and by far the most widely used one, as Google easily confirms - is the modern political sense: a homeland for the Palestinians. The less commonly used, but arguably more "academic", meaning is the geographical region long known as Palestine. More precise categories are good, where they can be created; after all, "West Bank and Gaza Strip" can and should be a subcategory of "Palestine". Attempting to arbitrarily restrict the term "Palestine" to only one of these two meanings, however, is not. Even if we arbitrarily pick the latter meaning as primary for Wikipedia purposes, there is no good reason to reserve "Palestine" solely for pre-1948 articles. We have a Category:Western Sahara, a Category:Chechnya, and a Category:Tibet; in no case have these categories been absurdly restricted only to pre-conquest-related articles (which would be impossible in the case of the Western Sahara anyway.) - Mustafaa 20:09, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Leave the categories as they are. Palestine/Palestinian should be the primary designation. Everyone is familiar with it. despite all the complications it is the best label for inclusive categories. Philip 14:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)