Talk:Kalya
 | 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:
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.
|
Settlement edit
Gilabrand, could you please explain why you removed the reference to Israeli settlement from the article?--Doron (talk) 11:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- The references call it a kibbutz. When you bring a reference to it being an Israeli settlement, you are welcome to put it in, but not in the format you previously used. It is first of all a kibbutz, with a history that predates what you are calling "Israeli settlements" by many years. --Gilabrand (talk) 12:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- It is an Israeli settlement according to the definition in that article, being a community inhabited by Israelis in territory that was captured during the 1967 Six-Day War. Are these references sufficient? [1] (under [2]), [3], [4]--Doron (talk) 13:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- May I remind you that it was a village depopulated and destroyed by the Arabs before it was an Israeli settlement. Why don't you put that in the lead?--Gilabrand (talk) 13:32, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Is that a "yes"?--Doron (talk) 13:49, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Description of ICJ's ruling edit
The standard is to write "This view has been rejected by the International Court of Justice and the International Committee of the Red Cross". This was changed, along with other biased changes one year ago, to include "in a non-binding opinion". This is trying to diminish the ruling and there is no reason to not use the standard wording here. --IRISZOOM (talk) 18:01, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
I have removed it now. --IRISZOOM (talk) 21:09, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Was the opinion non-binding, or not? Truth would be what matters, not whether someone thinks something ‘diminishes’ something. 2A00:23C3:E284:900:9C06:8F6B:1483:9464 (talk) 07:14, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kalya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100706021237/http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf to http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC)