Talk:West Bank closures

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this 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.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Palestine Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I've just added this pae, will update soon with pictures of the type of closures and more detailed information on each governate as well as impact of the closures.Pockets23 19:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it extremely POV (and therefore against WP policy) to state matter-of-factly in the opening sentence that this is a "counter-terrorism measure", which is the classic Israeli tag-line? The stated position of one party should not be stated as fact. The people to whom the closure applies do not see this as anything more than collective punishment and land grabs. The "similar" checkpoints in Israel do not block Israeli individuals from crossing by reason of the religion stated on their ID cards. Ramallite ^(talk) 13:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This all article is POV to begin with. I wrote that in order to balance it a little because it seems Israel was placing all sort of obstructions for fun. The checkpoints in Israel are exactly the same - anybody suspect shows ID card and so on. In fact, every shopping center, central bus station and so on in Israel have rigorous checks and check belongings, car baggage, bags with x-ray sometimes as in airports (Jerusalem central bus station for example) and so on. If palestinian "militants" didn't go around blowing themselves up, there wouldn't be any checkpoints or anything else and we would all live happily and quitely. anyhoo, changed to "claims". Amoruso 14:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check points are one thing, but the West Bank has CLOSURES. In other words, if you are not Jewish you cannot travel through the checkpoint. Or if you have a private car you are not allowed through, period. In Israel you are checked, and if you are okay you go through. In Palestine you are not checked, you are just turned back because you are Palestinian. That's the difference. This article is about "closures" not "checkpoints". Checkpoints are just one method of closure. Oh and by the way, these closures were there long before 'militants' started to blow themselves up, so the argument that these would not exist if there were no bombers is absolutely false. Ramallite ^(talk) 15:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The closures were then since threats of terrorism. Before suicide bombers, they carried the bombs in bags, and carried knives, guns, rifles and so on. Of course it's the only reason. Well obviously Palestinians won't be allowed in certain places, it is also illegal for Jews to drive their car into areas "A" in the westbank. It is all a security measure. Tens of thousands of Palestinians enter the green line every day while no Jew is allowed to travel back to Palestinian "A" areas I wonder why. Perhaps because Palestinians can walk freely in Israel, which is the reason one needs to check their permits, while Jews will be killed on spot in Palestinian territories. Amoruso 15:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(sigh) Before the intifada, young Israelis used to spend New Years eve parties in Ramallah hotels, regularly. There was a restaurant in Ramallah (Flamingo's, since closed) that had a "Jazz" group every Saturday night, with an Israeli on the saxophone and a Palestinian vocalist, among others. These are two of countless examples. Now I noticed from our conversation on your talk page that you are one of those people who must believe what you believe in order to preserve your ideology (or so it seems to me), even if what you believe is false. So I can't argue with that. But this article is about closures, and the fact that Palestinians are not allowed to move around freely within our territories (forget about Palestine to Israel). This is a real humanitarian problem for us, something which I do not expect people who don't live in Palestine (even on the other side of the beautiful gader) to even remotely begin to comprehend. So let this article be what it is, a description and not yet another Palestinian-bashing blog like Palestinian political violence. Ramallite ^(talk) 15:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

before the intifada, it's true, israelis could move in, including me, always moved through Jerhicho when travelling to the dead sea, and there was far less threat of terrorism and so far less road blocks and checks. Your other comments are false irrelevant and provocative. It's also a huge humanitarian issue for us not to be blown up and I do expect others to understand this. Amoruso 16:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article as I originally wrote it had no POV, it simply stated that the number and type of closures in the West Bank. If you want to include why Israel says it has the closures in place then please go ahead and try to balance your article with why the Palestinians and much of the International community believe they are there. Pockets23 14:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

of course it had POV. Amoruso 14:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. If someone really wants to include the "counter-terrorism" statement it should be clear that this is one view and the other view should also be included. As for the similar checkpoints I don't see these as being even close to the ones in the West Bank... Pockets23 14:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no other view. What possible motive could be instead of this ? Amoruso 14:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's all part of a grander scheme, including the scheme described in this article. (Yes I can imagine what you may feel about Amira, but everything in the article is accurate). Ramallite ^(talk) 15:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

not only is that article utterly ridicilous and badly written, it also has nothing to do with the matter here. Amoruso 15:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unrelated, but it shows a larger scheme of discrimination. One of the people mentioned in the article is a close friend of mine (the doctor), and the fact that his wife is no longer allowed to join him because she's not Jewish (and has never broken any Israeli laws) is far from 'utterly ridiculous' to him. Ramallite ^(talk) 15:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I love your WP:OR. If there are innocents who suffer from this, it is still because of the terrorist threat. Your friend needs to vote for a non terrorist government next time. Amoruso 16:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no OR in the article (from me, anyway), I haven't even edited it once. And my friend can't even vote in Israel :) Ramallite ^(talk) 16:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. bummer. Amoruso 16:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

REmoved "notes that road obstacles, checkpoints and towers also exist within the green line for the same purposes of limiting the threat of terrorism."

Who notes this? These obstacles are nothing like the ones in the West Bank, neither in number or the way they're used. The word 'terrorism' is very POV Pockets23 15:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Israel says this. refs will be provided in time seeing how WP:NPOV the article will develop or not. terrorism is WP:POV of Israel which is noted. That's ok. Amoruso 15:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm OK with "Israel claims that the obstacles are there for counter-terrorism purposes" but the other POV should be presented with it. I'll try and get on it soon unless you'd like to do it yourself?

I'm not OK with "road obstacles, checkpoints and towers also exist within the green line for the same purposes of limiting the threat of terrorism" because it may give the impression to readers that the obstacles on both sides of the Green Line operate in a similar manner which they do not. I travelled between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv many times in just around an hour and never encountered any checkpoints (i'm not saying they don't exist) but travelling from Nablus to Al Quds (Jerusalem) in cars with Palestinian licence plates never took less than 7 hours and involved crossing 4 permanent checkpoints as well as flying checkpoints with long queues. These are just my personal experiences but I'll get some referenced sources of information showing the impact of these obstacles in the West Bank. If you have any information on the obstacles in Israel we can compare them to then we can see if that sentence is worth including. For the moment I think we should remove it because of irrelevancy.Pockets23 16:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

there are checkpoints when you exit Jerusalem (before 443 road) , there is a checkpoint before Neve Yaakov, there is a checkpoint in ramot, there are checkpoints all around jerusalem. There is also a checkpoint on the Ashkelon-Ashdod road, there are checkpoints in the north too. It's very relevant, since not putting them suggest that there's discrimination in this and there isn't. Obviously most checkpoints are in the westbank or close because that's where the danger of terror is mostly congested. Amoruso 16:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those checkpoints around Jerusalem are on the West Bank side of the Green Line though...

There are 518 obstacles in the West Bank - how many in Israel?

"road obstacles also effect all Israelis (Jews&non Jews)" - this is not true as settler vehicles do not get the same treatment as Palestinian vehicles.

sometimes they do, sometimes they don't, it depends on the urgency of bomb threats and so on. There are still queues and questions and so on. I don't know how many obstacles exist or how many of them are in the green line or not (don't think it's relevant for the jerusalem area atleast), but temporary roadblocks and checkpoints are everywhere when there are threats. One can't ignore it. Amoruso 16:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

un-encyclopedic

btw, I just looked at the maps. All the blocks in your map seem to be on the fence or where settlements are. Obvious why they are there. I think the whole article is un-encyclopedic especially if expanded in the political fashion way. Road blocks are mentioned already in other articles, no need to make up fantasies about them also in a wikipedia article. Amoruso 17:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the fence OR where the settlements are... yes that pretty much sums up all the West Bank, doesn't it? Ramallite ^(talk) 17:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wish it did, I wish it did. Anyway, it completely refutes everything you said earlier. And it refutes the whole point of the article as well. Amoruso 17:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm coming to realise that I'm wasting my time on this talk page with you. I'll work on the article. You can argue your POV here... Pockets23 21:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I guess you'll argue your POV in the article. Try to avoid that in future articles. Amoruso 21:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OR thesis

This entry is premised on the existence of some Israeli "program of closure", and under that umbrella it juxtaposes so many details about Israeli checkpoints, the West Bank barrier, and other Israeli restrictions that are or can be covered at those entries and at others like Human rights in Israel. Furthermore, virtually every reference is to a solitary report by the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, outside of which I have not found evidence for this novel grouping. Unless someone can produce evidence this idea is acknowledged by Israel or some other body, and then make the case for why it should be covered seperately, this should be merged into the above-mentioned articles. Cheers, Tewfik^Talk 04:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]