Talk:Jordanian annexation of the West Bank/Archive 5

1252:“There has never been a single resolution about the decades-long repression of the civil and political rights of 1.3 billion people in China, or the more than a million female migrant workers in Saudi Arabia being kept as virtual slaves, or the virulent racism which has brought 600,000 people to the brink of starvation in Zimbabwe. Every year, UN bodies are required to produce at least 25 reports on alleged human rights violations by Israel, but not one on an Iranian criminal justice system which mandates punishments like crucifixion, stoning, and cross-amputation. This is not legitimate critique of states with equal or worse human rights records. It is demonization of the Jewish state.” Bayefsky, Anne. "Perspectives on Anti-Semitism Today". Lecture at conference "Confronting Anti-Semitism: Education for Tolerance and Understanding", United Nations Department of Information, New York, June 21, 2004. We are more than welcome to use UNSC regulations as a basis; that is after all, international law. However all I would like is a recognition that, similar to Jim Crow, apartheid and many nazi era laws, that the law is not always just or right. 164:“Occupation” refers to system of governance before annexation. If we want to be strictly true to article name, then we should either just completely ignore period before annexation or say something along lines of “Jordanian annexation occurred after the occupation of West Bank following capture of area during war.” The whitewashing of the occupation period needs to stop though. Also, where’s the ping? If pinged I should get notification right? Or are you referring to ping from days ago, not recent? Also, more appropriate for this chat to be on my talk page? Idk, I am just asking 1740: 2238: 1798:

Kingdom formally recognized the annexation of the West Bank, de facto in the case of East Jerusalem. The United States Department of State also recognized this extension of Jordanian sovereignty. Pakistan is often claimed to have recognized Jordan's annexation too, but this is dubious." with citations and links. Perhaps those links could be added to the lede citations. In addition it would be useful for the unrestricted access Silverburg link

31: 2239:

https://books.google.co.il/books?id=r9lIAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA934&lpg=PA934&dq=%E2%80%9Cas+a+trust+pending+the+final+settlement+of+the+Palestine+problem.%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=SMUpSjxWpK&sig=ACfU3U3YZsgODunaghfTa-oXPJ4LxquaSA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiTxcvcsYr4AhU5i_0HHfzBCmAQ6AF6BAgCEAM#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9Cas%20a%20trust%20pending%20the%20final%20settlement%20of%20the%20Palestine%20problem.%E2%80%9D&f=false

899:

we have editors denying same, also on a technicality, that a PM consensus doesn't count for the content on the page even though it is about the exact same thing. You can also see from the edit summaries that I am not doing the edit warring. From May 2 to now, I have made just two small edits, both of which were reverted with a demand that I gain consensus (again) for removing "occupation" so I can hardly be blamed for doing just that.

1004:. And as I said before, virtually the entire talk page is concerned with little else, although I accept that outside editors might not realize that at first glance. I just noticed that this RFC as well seems to have been made a subsection of the edit warring section (by Redrose), I guess that's OK too, that is also part of the same discussion, it's all of a piece, this hasn't just happened yesterday, it's been going on for a while. 2192:

every time a foreign country changed its territorial area" and Quigley "However, a merger is not the kind of action that necessarily leads to formal recognition by other states." Instead, what countries frequently do is line up to condemn something they disapprove of, as the League did. Theoretically, the UN could have denounced it but didn't probably because with US and UK backing, in those days it would have gone nowhere.

2271: 410:, Weak oppose. Jordan annexed the West Bank and made it part of its country, so wasn't a military occupation, but so is East Jerusalem. The idea of Israeli occupation was born in 1967 and is applied in hindsight to Jordan's occupation of Gaza. Even if it does change to move, I think it is important to note that Jordan's occupation was just the same as Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem.-- 1670: 1841:

recognizing its expansion — although not a single Arab state has ever recognized it officially. The United States and Britain also declared their recognition of 'Abdullah’s annexation, except for Jerusalem.". The footnote following that passage cites Jordan: A Political Study, 1948–1957 by Aqil Hyder Hasan Abidi pp. 55–56 but I haven't been able to find those pages online.

2174: 2272:

https://books.google.co.il/books?id=ZcrklZI51OQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22Foreign+relations+of+the+United+States+1950%22+%22The+Near+East,+South+Asia,+and+Africa%22&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22Foreign%20relations%20of%20the%20United%20States%201950%22%20%22The%20Near%20East%2C%20South%20Asia%2C%20and%20Africa%22&f=false

2249: 2175:

https://www.google.co.il/search?q=%22challenged+by+Silverburg%22&newwindow=1&hl=en&tbm=bks&ei=uvDVYoeWEZTwa-yqutAG&ved=0ahUKEwiH29nDz4P5AhUU-BoKHWyVDmoQ4dUDCAg&oq=%22challenged+by+Silverburg%22&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LWJvb2tzEAxQnAhYnAhg7x5oAHAAeACAAa8BiAHdApIBAzAuMpgBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-books

2149:

historical evidence to support this assertion, a number of Israeli scholars and commentators have repeatedly accused Pakistan of endorsing Jordan’s former claims to the West Bank. 3". Note 3: "A serious and pioneering refutation of this allegation can be found in Sanford R. Silverburg . The allegation, however, persists."

521:, people of the Golan have equal rights. Will you change the Golan from occupied to rule throughout Knowledge? Also, the only apartheid state in the West Bank is the one operated by the Palestinian Authority. Further, Jordan's annexation was not recognized by the international community, so are we going to go there as well? 2250:

https://books.google.co.il/books?id=L2YUAQAAMAAJ&q=%22the+other+Arab+countries+had+never+recognized+the+union+of+Palestine+and+Trans-jordan%22&dq=%22the+other+Arab+countries+had+never+recognized+the+union+of+Palestine+and+Trans-jordan%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwixkIzF5fz4AhXqSEEAHV0bDNwQ6AF6BAgCEAI

2103:

I think the Caffery/Glubb sources are insufficient, they don't mention Iraq specifically. The first is about something else anyway. It does say in this article that when the Arab states wanted to boot Jordan out of the league, Iraq vetoed that. What we want is a more modern source specifically saying

1793:

The 3rd paragraph of section 3.2 Jordanian disengagement is "The West Bank territories which were conquered by Jordan in 1948 during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War after the British mandate ended on that territory and Israel declared independent, were annexed to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan on 24 April

893:

Let me phrase it differently, no matter how the RFC question would be phrased (and I am certain it could be phrased in a manner that would address the technicality) all of the responses would be exactly the same. I have not abused any RFC on this page afaik and if you consult the edit summary for the

2392:

Okay, then if this article specifically deals with the 1950 annexation act (with a 1948 background and up to 1988 aftermath), then shouldn't we have an article on the history of Jordan and the West Bank as a unified state? If so, what would that article be called? There are many things that could be

2148:

Since Kumaraswamy has been referred to on this page but not quoted I'm doing so here. In his 2000 Beyond the Veil, p.9, he wrote "Pakistan is often accused of being the only country apart from the United Kingdom to have recognized Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank in 1950. Even though there is no

1874:

Currently the text of footnote #10 is "Joseph Massad said that the members of the Arab League granted de facto recognition and that the United States had formally recognized the annexation, except for Jerusalem. See Massad, Joseph A. (2001). Colonial Effects ... p. 229.". Since at least part of that

1821:

I cut paste the first suggestion, still needs some work to integrate it properly into the section. May I ask why you do not edit the article yourself? If there are citations in the article body, you don't strictly need them again in the lead but go ahead if you like it better that way, I don't think

898:

that you say you have read. Do you not agree with me that that discussion (along with the one just above the edit warring section), both very recent discussions, deal with the question we are again discussing here? To me those discussions are clear that there is no consensus for "occupation" and yet

2191:

We have covered Pakistan in the article with "disputed". As for Iraq, unless we have a Silverburg or equivalent contesting Benvenisti, that needs to stay. This is not really a major issue, as the US representative said "it was not the custom of this country to issue formal statements of recognition

1086:

Why does the name of this section have to appear there? You started this discussion by reference to RFCBEFORE which talks about the need for prior discussion, which we have had. I still have no idea what it is you are trying to get at, can you not just explain in plain English what it is you want?

840:

I made the RFC in a form that allows for the discussion of the subject in a free form way and that seems to be the way that the editors up to now are interpreting it. If you would like to suggest a better way of summarizing all of the above talk page discussion (as well as the edit warring) into an

2553:

Agree; "rule" just about covers everything; administration, annexation, occupation, etc. I think, in general, this is a bit of a problem for Knowledge; we try to be as accurate and precise as possible. But some situations/events/states cannot be described accurately (at least not in terms everyone

1805:

Iraq, along with the rest of the Arab League states, didn't recognise the annexation. See the Arab League resolution as reported to US Ambassador to Egypt Caffery by Arab League Secretary-General Azzam Pasha in June 1950 at the Department of State Office of the Historian's site or Google Books and

1537:

I registered at jstor 2 years ago when noticing the option but even if people are still able to register and read 100 articles a month for free now according to the brief statement the option is "through the COVID-19 crisis" and the detailed statement "JSTOR has temporarily increased the number of

934:

Yes, I do. And I am saying that we have had that. What you appear to be saying is that because the RFC uses a short simple summary of all of these prior discussions, it invalidates the RFC. What do you want me to do, close it and do it again with a more lengthy summary of all of the discussions on

2377:

It was called an annexation by many sources, including the Arab League, making that a common name. There is a subsidiary argument that it was not really an annex but a Jordanian trusteeship and indeed eventually Jordan's rights were handed to Palestine. All the material previously in this article

1269:

Regardless, the crux of the matter is that it is bias (and takes quite a bit of legalistic finesse) to call Jordanian governance of the area “annexation” but not “occupation” (the author glosses over the Kong’s ruling that the term “Palestine” be scrubbed from official documents after annexation,

146:

Therefore the opening sentence of the lead "The Jordanian annexation of the West Bank was the occupation of the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) by Jordan (formerly Transjordan) following the 1948 Arab–Israeli War and its subsequent annexation" is in direct contradiction of the PM result. Yet

1797:

In addition the lede includes "Recognition of Jordan's declaration of annexation was granted only by the United Kingdom, the United States, and Iraq, with dubious claims that Pakistan also recognized the annexation." (with citations but no links) while section 2.2 Annexation includes "The United

949:

If we have had that discussion on this talk page, please identify it with a link to the talk page archives or the section heading on this page. This is the second time I have asked you to do that. You have only previously provided other discussions on other pages. Why do you keep bringing up the

2361:

Is the article name really descriptive? I know there was multiple discussions regarding the name. But now I am feeling the article scope does not fit the title. Occupation 1948-1950, annexation in 1950, and then what about 1950-1967? Some sources use "Jordanian administration of the West Bank",

1840:

Since then I've been looking for the source of the Massad's reference (mentioned in citation 10) - Colonial Effects: The Making of National Identity in Jordan p.229 where the following appears: "Soon after, however, all member states established diplomatic relations with the kingdom, implicitly

1894:

recognition to new Transjordan on 31 January 1949." However the formal annexation did not occur until the following year, so the question is whether the US recognition of 31 January 1949 implied approval of the annexation agreement that had not yet been carried out. It is known that after the

1784:

I think current name is only a part of the intended scope. If the scope is to cover 1948-1967 or even background on 1921 colonial divisions and aftermath until 1987’s disengagement, then this article deserves another name. Perhaps, “Jordanian West Bank” or “West Bank under Jordanian control”.

821:

article prior to you starting an RfC. Because I have looked at "pretty much the entire talk page" and found zero mention of it. Only two discussions on other pages that haven't even been closed yet, right? So I'm assuming you don't mind if I terminate the RfC so that we can have the necessary

862:

Yes, but that's irrelevant because you failed to institute a local discussion before commencing an RfC, on a talk page with a recent history of editors abusing the RfC process. So, what conclusion should I draw about your intentions? Did you make a mistake, or are you editing tendentiously?

1266:@selfstudier, By the same logic, given by the author regarding Jordanian sovereignty, that Jordan was in Union with the west bank, given that Israel never used the term annex with regards to east Jerusalem and the Golan, would they not also be considered merely in “Union” and not occupied? 584:

occupation is occupation. Are you going to change how we call the West Bank, Golan, East Jerusalem? Consider that the Golan and East Jerusalem is not "occupied" in the traditional sense and its residents have full citizenship rights, yet on Knowledge it still says "occupied" not "rule."

242:, could you please point me towards the RfC you mentioned? I can't find it. As for the first sentence, I have reworded my formulation to include explicit mention of the occupation, while still flowing better with the rest of the first paragraph. Does that address whitewashing issues? 1889:

That is what Massad wrote, but some interpretation is needed (which Massad is qualified to make). The Congress that called for the unification of both banks of the Jordan, and its approval by the Transjordanian cabinet, was in December 1948. Abidi writes "The United States granted

1295:

has now been closed and should be read in it's entirety. The close includes the statement "Although I do not agree that the no-consensus outcome of a requested move discussion in April 2020 should affect our word choices, editors do prefer "annexation" over both "occupation" and

1107:

Internationally, UNSC 478 declared the Jerusalem annex "null and void" and UNSC 497 declared the Golan annex "null and void". (ie, internationally, those areas are considered to have the same status as if the annex had not occurred). No such resolution exists for the Jordanian

1979:

I changed it to disputed rather than disproven. Silverburg's main points are that no original source can be found and that the claim seems to have arisen only after 1967. He asked the two earliest writers where they got it from and neither could provide evidence. One of them,

1409:

I mean, who came up with the idea to add this to the info box? There's a significant Christian minority in the West Bank/Palestine. It's not only Islamic or Sunni and they weren't any Islamic organizations fighting back them, all of them were leftists or secular nationalists.

2156:

In his 2010 India's Israel Policy, p.120, he wrote "Other than a handful of Arab states, no major power inside or outside the Middle East had recognized the APG . Great Britain is an exception, and it tacitly recognized the Jordanian annexation of the West Bank.82"

1836:

Basically it seemed a big change to make and I wasn't sure what the best wording would be. Additionally I noticed the problem when it was early morning and I wasn't sure how long it would take; discovering the Glubb quote and its original source had already taken

2600:

I agree, it does not really make much sense to create a million articles. One article dealing with everything seems just about appropriate. Hence, I would propose expanding the scope of this article and renaming this to "Jordanian rule of the West Bank".

1475:

Since access to Silverburg's Middle Eastern Studies article via the link in (currently) reference 34 is restricted {#12 mentions it without a link} it would be useful to add the link to this unrestricted site and/or the article itself. Is that feasible?

1988:, but Pakistan did so "sometime later in connection with an official visit by King Husayn to Pakistan". If this is the correct story then the claim is true but misreported. Someone should do a thorough search of Pakistani and Jordanian newspapers. 1875:

may be Abidi's words or Abidi based on Glubb and/or others Abidi should be checked and the text changed if Massad is just repeating what others said. Just started to read Abidi at Internet Archive {thanks; I couldn't find it there before}.

1794:

1950, and all the Arab residents were given Jordanian citizenship. The annexation of these territories was recognized only by Pakistan, Iraq and the United Kingdom." It would be better for that to be integrated into section 2.2 Annexation.

2054:

The link from citation #9 United States Department of State / Foreign relations of the United States, 1950. The Near East, South Asia, and Africa p. 921 doesn't lead me to any DOS document. If the reference is to the paragraph above the

2319:

The entire end note is tendentious bs. "In reality"??? Beyond that, we dont need to get in to administrative districts, or divisions of the Oslo Accords, it simply is not relevant. I simplified the endnote dramatically.

1946:

Uh huh, but Bienvenesti/Quigley decided not to repeat what Silverburg/Kumaraswamy said, right? OK, if it's not just Silverburg, then we have to say something along the lines "There is disagreement over..blah". Agreed?

206:“Also, more appropriate for this chat to be on my talk page? Idk, I am just asking” just saw “am required to attempt a resolution on this page”, my failure to read critically, apologies. Thx for notification on page 1538:

total available articles you can read online for free from 6 to 100 per month". Once JSTOR decides the crisis is over the increase will disappear. Apart from that many people prefer not to register on any website.

2059:

on page 921 of the June 5, 1950 784A.00/6–550 document Memorandum of Conversations, by Mr. Stuart W. Rockwell it would be better for the link to be to to the Department of State Office of the Historian's site.

1541:

I was notified a few months ago I was eligible to to use the WP library and have used it several times since discovering (including to read articles at jstor) but not all WP users or editors have access to the

493:

Both Jordan and Israel did their very best to gobble up the land that were for the Palestinian Arab state. That Israel got lots more international acceptance for its land-grabbing than Jordan did, only tells us

1904:

Not sure why we are preferring Silverburg (1983) for his view that Pakistan recognition is dubious. We have Benvenisti (2004, cite 8 in the article) and Quigley (2010 not yet in) both saying that Pakistan did.

1270:

between 1950-1967) and refer to the analogous Israeli governance over east Jerusalem as an “occupation”. Please also note, unlike Jordan, Israel never used the term “annexation” in regard to east Jerusalem.

143:

to change the name of this article to "Jordanian occupation and annexation of the West Bank" was closed "not moved" on 13 April (there were no yes votes other than that of the proposer (Zarcademan 123456).

1933:

To the best of my knowledge, Silverburg is the only one who has investigated the matter rather than just repeating what earlier authors claimed. An example of a specialist who agrees is Kumaraswamy,

1701:

that essentially convey the same, but squishes the text and pushes everything to the left, seems unnecessary. Also it looks horrible. I think it would be better to get rid of one of them (either

710:. The military occupation was 2 years long and the annexation was 17 years long, so have an "Occupation" section (now the part called "The road to annexation") and make "Annexation" a section. 1440: 1391: 441:

had equal rights with the rest of Jordan. This is a silly game by pro-Israel editors to make the Jordanian era (1948-1967) sound "equal" with the Israeli occupation, (which for sure would

1368: 1292: 1709:). Also the template below doesn't make things better, since it causes more squished text, but getting rid of one of those two unnecessary images will fix the problem for good. Thanks.-- 72: 67: 59: 1364: 920:

Again, that is all irrelevant. Do you understand the difference between a local discussion and an RfC? Do you understand that the former is a prerequisite for the latter? --

1045:

The idea of using Jordanian rule was brought up in the first of these (not by me) and it is as well discussed on pages other than this one that are related to it.

780:

Pretty much the entire talk page is of relevance, most of it is about or related to this issue and you can also find more of the discussion (with some repetition)

1702: 1860:

Seems like a reasonable summary on the face of it, usually we would not need to drill down through the citations, do you have some specific reason for doing so?

1035:

For additional clarity and to save you clicking about, the two section links that I gave you (both on this page) deal with the following page move discussions:

894:

page you will see that I have made major improvements to it quite recently in response to a semi-consensus achieved in a page move discussion on this page,

47: 17: 2075:

They must have changed this since I last looked, it used to be possible to directly access FRUS. Cite 21 is the same problem I think. I'll do it later.

1570:

WP cannot prevent individual users accessing these sites, perhaps another editor would edit it for you, I would prefer not do it myself, no offense.

136:

In order to take the matter to the appropriate forum I am required to attempt a resolution on this page, I did ping you and you have now responded.

2165:. Note 82: "Suggestions that Pakistan had recognized the Jordanian annexation has been challenged by Silverburg, “Pakistan and the West Bank.”" 1649: 1724:

Personally, I would rather keep them both, I rearranged them a bit, idk if it is better or not. Let's see what other editors think about it.

1698: 1068:

I don't see anywhere in that requested move discussion where anyone refers to the name of this section. Could you point that out please? --

2130:. There "Britain (with a reservation regarding East Jerusalem) and Pakistan remained the only States to recognize the annexation" appears 221:

I have also now informed you directly on your talk page about the edit warring policy (you are already aware of the 1R policy on IP pages)

147:

attempts to alter this sentence so as to remove the word occupation in line with the outcome are being reverted without any justification.

1425:

There are always minority religions. I see no problem to go by the majority religion. Not doing so would make the parameter meaningless.

547: 1491:

Silverburg, Sanford R. “Pakistan and the West Bank: A Research Note.” Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 19, no. 2, 1983, pp. 261–63. JSTOR,

1232: 1181:

The Legal Status of the West Bank and Gaza, UN 1982] describes the events leading up to and including the Jordanian annex (Section II).

543: 2039:

booksc is just Zlib again, I already commented on that in the previous section. If you have Jstor (usual in WP), then there's no need.

1638: 1444: 1395: 2158: 1759: 785: 2514: 2496: 539: 382: 1919:

OK, I added Quigley, if this is all we are using Silverburg for and he is the only one saying this, I think it should go out.

1545:

Since there's at least one site accessible without the need to register users should be be given the possibility of doing so.

2572:

We are only talking about the post annexation period, not changing the title of this article, I'm fine with rule as well.

1962: 1340: 1288: 781: 433:

For the nth time: it was occupied 1948-1950, annexed 1950-67. Two years do not trumph 17 years. Also: occupation implies "

264: 192:

This section is about "edit warring", my notifying you about it and attempting resolution as required. I have now done so.

2378:

post 50 was moved to West Bank iirc because people felt this article should only deal with events around the annexation.

1214:, it is referred to as "Jordanian West Bank". So this particular article needs to say "Jordanian occupation" because why? 2513:

I never liked the name "Jordanian annexation of the West Bank", the name only covers the period after 1950. I suggested

2586:

Well, there is no need to spin off the 1948-50 era into a specific article (unless someone feels like it, of course),

2518: 342:

at first is was military occupation till 1950 then it was illegal annexation unrecognized by international community --

2522: 2150: 2610: 2595: 2581: 2567: 2548: 2534: 2508: 2490: 2476: 2462: 2387: 2371: 2351: 2330: 2313: 2201: 2186: 2143: 2113: 2098: 2089:

OK, done those. Quigley doesn't say anything about Iraq, only Benvenisti does. Look into that a bit more, I think.

2084: 2069: 2048: 2014: 1992: 1974: 1956: 1941: 1928: 1914: 1899: 1884: 1869: 1850: 1831: 1815: 1773: 1733: 1718: 1579: 1562: 1532: 1518: 1504: 1485: 1464: 1448: 1434: 1419: 1399: 1380: 1352: 1334: 1320: 1305: 1279: 1275: 1261: 1257: 1244: 1223: 1190: 1162: 1136: 1117: 1096: 1077: 1054: 1013: 959: 944: 929: 908: 872: 850: 835: 797: 767: 736: 719: 698: 661: 644: 625: 621: 606: 589: 568: 559: 525: 507: 462: 425: 397: 378: 351: 334: 311: 292: 288: 275: 251: 233: 215: 211: 201: 187: 183: 173: 169: 159: 123: 119: 38: 1343:

refers, a second leg of the RFC (established by Debresser, in fact and certainly relevant to the discussion here).

178:

If by ping you mean “@zarcademan” then while I notice you did that for whatever reason I didn’t get notification

1207: 377:, a subsequent annexation not recognized by other countries does not end the status of a territory as occupied. 1178: 1627: 2118:

Quigley's basis for "Of the states of the world, only Britain and Pakistan formally recognized the merger.46"

1000:. I didn't link the second one, I just said it is in the section above the edit warring section of this RFC, 996:

I already linked the main discussion on this page in my comment above, it's on this page, not another page. [

1752: 1676: 715: 247: 114:

LOL I missed a whole day apparently. Thought today was Tuesday. Next time please note on my wall, thank you

1961:

In a footnote at the end of his 1987 article Origins of the 1950 Tripartite Declaration on the Middle East

1714: 1650:

https://support.jstor.org/hc/en-us/articles/360000585347-How-to-Use-Your-Free-Reads-with-a-Personal-Account

1271: 1253: 617: 284: 239: 207: 179: 165: 131: 115: 95: 2301: 1415: 263:

He means the PM I linked above, the one that you commented on, he says that your comment is a "ruling",

2260: 2131: 2127: 2119: 2606: 2577: 2544: 2504: 2486: 2472: 2458: 2383: 2367: 2347: 2309: 2197: 2109: 2094: 2080: 2044: 1965:

Shlomo Slonim uses the phrase "Pakistan's alleged recognition" and then refers to Silverburg's article.

1952: 1924: 1910: 1865: 1855: 1827: 1729: 1575: 1528: 1500: 1376: 1348: 1301: 1240: 1219: 1186: 1158: 1113: 1092: 1050: 1009: 940: 904: 846: 793: 393: 330: 307: 271: 229: 197: 155: 1411: 1710: 1001: 997: 895: 140: 1769: 1747: 1639:

https://support.jstor.org/hc/en-us/articles/115004760028-How-to-Register-Get-Free-Access-to-Content

1430: 1316: 755: 732: 657: 602: 475:

that the Jordanian annexation was "not recognised by the international community". BUT: Jordan had

2001:

said "Can't find a single item on Arabic Google about Pakistan recognizing Jordan's annexation."

1523:

You can register and read for free, also access via WP library, jstor is used all the time on WP.

2323: 2282: 2227: 2178: 2135: 2061: 2006: 1966: 1876: 1842: 1807: 1554: 1546: 1510: 1477: 711: 419: 258: 243: 1706: 1249:

If we are using UNSC resolutions as a basis, please keep in mind this quote I found from 2002:

1042:

2) Jordanian annexation of the West Bank → Jordanian occupation and annexation of the West Bank

2159:

https://www-degruyter-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/document/doi/10.7312/kuma15204-006/pdf

1806:

what Glubb wrote in A soldier with the Arabs published in 1957 (in snippet); (in whole book).

2602: 2591: 2573: 2563: 2540: 2530: 2500: 2482: 2468: 2454: 2448: 2432: 2398: 2379: 2363: 2343: 2305: 2193: 2182: 2139: 2105: 2090: 2076: 2065: 2040: 2010: 1970: 1948: 1920: 1906: 1880: 1861: 1846: 1823: 1811: 1725: 1571: 1558: 1550: 1524: 1514: 1496: 1481: 1460: 1372: 1344: 1330: 1297: 1236: 1215: 1182: 1154: 1132: 1109: 1088: 1073: 1063: 1046: 1005: 955: 936: 925: 915: 900: 868: 857: 842: 831: 804: 789: 763: 749: 694: 639: 555: 503: 458: 389: 347: 326: 303: 267: 225: 193: 151: 2402: 2134:. Malanczuk doesn't cite any source and neither he nor Quigley mention Iraqi recognition. 586: 565: 522: 1895:

annexation, the US conveyed its approval in an informal way to the Jordanian government.

437:

equal rights" as the citizens of the occupier. That was not the case here: People of the

2394: 1998: 1963:

https://pluto.huji.ac.il/~slonims/publications/Origins_of_50_Tripartite_decleration.pdf

1765: 1426: 1312: 1203: 728: 653: 598: 450: 370: 2440: 2416: 2406: 1989: 1938: 1896: 411: 374: 2151:

https://www.inss.org.il/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/systemfiles/(FILE)1190278291.pdf

2002: 1455:

I changed it into "Sunni Islam (majority) Christian (minority)", hope that is ok,

302:

Should the section titled "Jordanian occupation" be changed to "Jordanian rule"?

2587: 2559: 2526: 2424: 2410: 1981: 1456: 1326: 1128: 1069: 1039:

1) Jordanian annexation of the West Bank → Jordanian occupation of the West Bank

951: 921: 864: 827: 775: 759: 707: 690: 670: 634: 551: 518: 499: 454: 366: 343: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

483:) and the other parts which were supposed to go the new Palestinian Arab state. 2555: 2170: 2162: 758:, where is the discussion of this issue on this talk page prior to the RfC? -- 472: 2166: 1984:, wrote to him that Britain was the only country to recognize the annexation 1179:

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/9614F8FC82DCA5DF852575D80069E0C0

673:'s point here. The majority of content in the section in question covers the 1628:

https://p303.zlibcdn.com/dtoken/03e9bba8fb60f2102214fbdd114c7ed4/4282940.pdf

1605: 1567: 1211: 1199: 446: 438: 2558:, using a more "vague term", or "broader" term, could solve the conundrum. 1386:"Arab Legion soldier posing in the ruins of the Hurva Synagogue, Jerusalem" 1799: 1616: 950:

summary of the RfC? I don't see where I have made any mention of that. --

498:

thing: Israel had lots of more powerful foreign friends than Jordan had,

480: 1856:

Jordan: A Political Study, 1948–1957 by Aqil Hyder Hasan Abidi pp. 55–56

479:

as much right to the West Bank, as Israel had to the Galilee (including

1802:

to be included since there's restricted access from the current link.

2261:

https://archive.org/details/soldierwitharabs0000glub/page/289/mode/2up

2132:

https://books-library.net/files/books-library.online-02262150Fq5K3.pdf

2128:

https://archive.org/details/statehoodofpales0000quig/page/276/mode/2up

2120:

https://archive.org/details/statehoodofpales0000quig/page/118/mode/2up

1492: 2300:

is obvious POV, the only purpose of it is to add in the expression

1235:(p12 onwards) for a review of actual sources rather than opinions. 1231:

As to whether it is or isn't an annex, one might like to consult

2413:

beauty pageant. Basically a history of Jordan and the West Bank.

2122:

is Malanczuk, Israel: Status, Territory and Occupied Territories

788:. It has been going on for a while now and we need to resolve it. 2283:

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1950v05/d484

2228:

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1950v05/d497

2003:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk%3AWest_Bank%2FArchive_1#Pakistan

1664: 681:

West Bank. Ideally I think the section would be called simply

445:

dream of giving equal rights to the Palestinian people on the

25: 2539:

Jordanian rule sounds more descriptive than administration.

1311:

And how do you think that part of the Rfc is relevant here?

1210:, it is referred to as "Jordanian rule" and in the article 1439:

Wait, the Zionist likes "majority religion"? I'm shocked!

2342:

Map in infobox is horrible to look at. Any alternatives?

1661:

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 July 2022

1369:

Islamization of East Jerusalem under Jordanian occupation

1293:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration

1127:

How many countries recognized the illegal annexation? --

449:, but instead have introduced an apartheid state), (And 2297: 109: 106: 103: 1937:(Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, 2000), page 9. 100:

is in breach of 1R (and quite possibly 3R as well).

1789:

Annexation and recognition in the lede and sections

1367:, and following a move review, has been moved from 1365:

Islamization of East Jerusalem under Jordanian rule

1153:

There is no resolution declaring it illegal either.

548:

Template:Golan Regional Council occupied by Israel

2453:and other active editors here, what do you think? 325:Because the Jordanian annex is not an occupation. 2362:"Unification of the two banks". Any suggestions? 564:No. We're talking about a section in an article. 544:Template:Golan Regional Council annexed by Israel 2525:etc); then we could have it all in one article, 1325:Its only about Arab villages not this article -- 2481:A major problem would be the name of course..? 817:talk page about changing the section header in 1509:There's also restricted access via that link. 1495:. Accessed 28 May 2022 would be more usual. 8: 841:RFC dealing with the question, I'm all ears. 809:Okay, so just to be totally clear, there is 2171:https://epdf.tips/indias-israel-policy.html 2163:https://epdf.tips/indias-israel-policy.html 1390:"Posing" is POV trash. Take out the trash. 2167:https://www-degruyter-com.wikipedialibrary 1935:Beyond the Veil: Israel-Pakistan Relations 18:Talk:Jordanian annexation of the West Bank 2497:Jordanian administration of the West Bank 1606:https://doi.org/10.1080/00263208308700547 1371:. This seems relevant to this discussion. 1363:I see this is still going on. Meanwhile, 2401:democratically elected government, 1958 2124:Encyclopedia of Public International Law 2220: 1598: 1800:https://booksc.eu/book/27206765/d3a943 1617:https://booksc.eu/book/27206765/d3a943 453:is but a small pert of the West Bank) 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1441:2607:FEA8:BFA0:BD0:7C84:C06:A3C1:2409 1392:2607:FEA8:BFA0:BD0:7C84:C06:A3C1:2409 265:Bottom of this section as well refers 7: 1493:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4282940 24: 2519:Jordanian rule over the West Bank 2495:What's wrong with your suggested 471:Another thing: Israel reminds us 2523:Jordanian' West Bank (1948-1967) 1738: 1668: 538:To compare it would be if, say, 29: 2515:Jordanian rule of the West Bank 2393:included in such article. 1953 1697:Having two redundant images in 550:. It isn't, as you well know. 540:Template:Golan Regional Council 1: 689:, but "Rule" could work too. 283:Sure works for me. Thank you 652:per discussions made above. 369:. Compare with how we treat 2611:10:50, 4 January 2023 (UTC) 2596:22:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2582:21:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2568:21:48, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2549:21:17, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2535:21:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2509:12:27, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2491:12:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2477:12:10, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2463:12:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2388:11:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2372:10:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 2352:12:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC) 1691:to reactivate your request. 1679:has been answered. Set the 1553:) 22:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC) 1341:"Change rule to occupation" 826:discussion first, right? -- 2647: 1449:05:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC) 1400:05:20, 16 April 2021 (UTC) 385:) 16:52, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 2331:04:15, 24 July 2022 (UTC) 2314:10:05, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 2202:09:09, 19 July 2022 (UTC) 2187:23:59, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 2144:18:58, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 2114:17:24, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 2099:15:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 2085:11:28, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 2070:20:31, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 2049:17:53, 16 July 2022 (UTC) 2015:02:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC) 1993:02:00, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 1975:00:16, 18 July 2022 (UTC) 1957:15:04, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1942:14:44, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1929:11:24, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1915:11:16, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1900:05:35, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1885:00:57, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1870:23:22, 16 July 2022 (UTC) 1851:21:06, 16 July 2022 (UTC) 1832:17:29, 16 July 2022 (UTC) 1816:08:18, 16 July 2022 (UTC) 1774:17:26, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1734:11:02, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1719:08:15, 17 July 2022 (UTC) 1465:21:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC) 1405:Religion = Sunni Islam??? 1381:12:49, 21 July 2020 (UTC) 1353:09:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC) 1335:21:07, 17 June 2020 (UTC) 1321:20:22, 17 June 2020 (UTC) 1306:18:35, 17 June 2020 (UTC) 1208:Islamization of Jerusalem 685:and the first subsection 1580:23:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC) 1563:22:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC) 1533:15:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC) 1519:15:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC) 1505:15:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC) 1486:15:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC) 1435:18:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 1420:14:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 1280:01:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 1262:01:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 1245:00:59, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 1224:00:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 1191:18:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 1163:18:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 1137:18:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 1118:18:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 1097:16:42, 15 May 2020 (UTC) 1078:16:20, 15 May 2020 (UTC) 1055:18:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 1014:17:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 960:16:11, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 945:15:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 930:15:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 909:23:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 873:22:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 851:21:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 836:20:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 798:17:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 768:16:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 737:00:30, 8 June 2020 (UTC) 720:07:37, 6 June 2020 (UTC) 699:10:10, 19 May 2020 (UTC) 662:23:08, 18 May 2020 (UTC) 645:15:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC) 626:00:51, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 607:23:18, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 590:22:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 569:23:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 560:23:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 526:22:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 508:23:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 463:22:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 426:18:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 398:14:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 352:14:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 335:13:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 312:13:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 298:RFC: Rule or Occupation? 293:22:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 276:13:21, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 252:13:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 234:12:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 216:12:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 202:11:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 188:11:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 174:11:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 160:11:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 124:11:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 2298:This edit, ignoring BRD 1760:edit extended-protected 1002:here if you need a link 813:discussion anywhere on 2302:Judea and Samaria area 727:It was an occupation. 2554:agree to.) As I said 2409:, even the 1959-1966 1471:Recognition: Pakistan 669:- Think I agree with 379:JungerMan Chips Ahoy! 42:of past discussions. 2499:, maybe with dates? 2104:that Iraq did not.. 1750:for this alteration 1198:In the articles for 1822:anyone will object. 1746:please establish a 1289:closely related RFC 677:West Bank. Not the 542:was instead called 2333: 1744:Not done for now: 1695: 1694: 424: 400: 85: 84: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2638: 2452: 2444: 2436: 2428: 2420: 2405:with Iraq, 1966 2399:Suleiman Nabulsi 2326: 2321: 2285: 2280: 2274: 2269: 2263: 2258: 2252: 2247: 2241: 2236: 2230: 2225: 1763: 1742: 1741: 1686: 1682: 1672: 1671: 1665: 1653: 1647: 1641: 1636: 1630: 1625: 1619: 1614: 1608: 1603: 1272:Zarcademan123456 1254:Zarcademan123456 1067: 998:Here it is again 919: 861: 808: 779: 753: 642: 637: 618:Zarcademan123456 486:That is to say: 416: 387: 285:Zarcademan123456 262: 240:Zarcademan123456 208:Zarcademan123456 180:Zarcademan123456 166:Zarcademan123456 135: 132:Zarcademan123456 116:Zarcademan123456 99: 96:Zarcademan123456 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 2646: 2645: 2641: 2640: 2639: 2637: 2636: 2635: 2446: 2438: 2430: 2422: 2414: 2403:Arab Federation 2359: 2340: 2324: 2295: 2290: 2289: 2288: 2281: 2277: 2270: 2266: 2259: 2255: 2248: 2244: 2237: 2233: 2226: 2222: 1791: 1782: 1757: 1739: 1684: 1680: 1669: 1663: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1648: 1644: 1637: 1633: 1626: 1622: 1615: 1611: 1604: 1600: 1473: 1407: 1388: 1061: 913: 855: 802: 773: 747: 745: 640: 635: 319: 300: 256: 129: 93: 92:Afaics, editor 90: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2644: 2642: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2621: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2617: 2616: 2615: 2614: 2613: 2395:Qibya massacre 2358: 2355: 2339: 2336: 2335: 2334: 2294: 2291: 2287: 2286: 2275: 2264: 2253: 2242: 2231: 2219: 2218: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2189: 2154: 2126:(1990) p. 171 2057:Editorial Note 2052: 2051: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 1999:User:Ramallite 1977: 1858: 1838: 1790: 1787: 1781: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1736: 1693: 1692: 1673: 1662: 1659: 1655: 1654: 1642: 1631: 1620: 1609: 1597: 1596: 1592: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1543: 1539: 1472: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1406: 1403: 1387: 1384: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1323: 1204:East Jerusalem 1172: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1141: 1140: 1139: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1081: 1080: 1058: 1057: 1043: 1040: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 977: 976: 975: 974: 973: 972: 971: 970: 969: 968: 967: 966: 965: 964: 963: 962: 882: 881: 880: 879: 878: 877: 876: 875: 744: 741: 740: 739: 722: 701: 664: 647: 633:per @shrike ~ 628: 610: 609: 592: 578: 577: 576: 575: 574: 573: 572: 571: 531: 530: 529: 528: 513: 512: 511: 510: 491: 484: 466: 465: 451:East Jerusalem 431:Yes, obviously 428: 404: 403: 402: 401: 371:East Jerusalem 355: 354: 337: 318: 315: 299: 296: 281: 280: 279: 278: 223: 222: 149: 148: 144: 137: 89: 86: 83: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2643: 2612: 2608: 2604: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2593: 2589: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2579: 2575: 2571: 2570: 2569: 2565: 2561: 2557: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2546: 2542: 2538: 2537: 2536: 2532: 2528: 2524: 2520: 2516: 2512: 2511: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2498: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2488: 2484: 2480: 2479: 2478: 2474: 2470: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2460: 2456: 2450: 2442: 2434: 2426: 2418: 2412: 2408: 2407:Samu incident 2404: 2400: 2396: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2376: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2369: 2365: 2356: 2354: 2353: 2349: 2345: 2337: 2332: 2328: 2327: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2303: 2299: 2292: 2284: 2279: 2276: 2273: 2268: 2265: 2262: 2257: 2254: 2251: 2246: 2243: 2240: 2235: 2232: 2229: 2224: 2221: 2217: 2203: 2199: 2195: 2190: 2188: 2184: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2168: 2164: 2160: 2155: 2152: 2147: 2146: 2145: 2141: 2137: 2133: 2129: 2125: 2121: 2117: 2116: 2115: 2111: 2107: 2102: 2101: 2100: 2096: 2092: 2088: 2087: 2086: 2082: 2078: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2067: 2063: 2058: 2050: 2046: 2042: 2038: 2016: 2012: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1997:In July 2005 1996: 1995: 1994: 1991: 1987: 1983: 1978: 1976: 1972: 1968: 1964: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1954: 1950: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1940: 1936: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1926: 1922: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1912: 1908: 1903: 1902: 1901: 1898: 1893: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1882: 1878: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1867: 1863: 1859: 1857: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1848: 1844: 1839: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1803: 1801: 1795: 1788: 1786: 1779: 1775: 1771: 1767: 1761: 1755: 1754: 1749: 1745: 1737: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1716: 1712: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1690: 1687:parameter to 1678: 1674: 1667: 1666: 1660: 1651: 1646: 1643: 1640: 1635: 1632: 1629: 1624: 1621: 1618: 1613: 1610: 1607: 1602: 1599: 1595: 1581: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1566: 1565: 1564: 1560: 1556: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1507: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1494: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1470: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1450: 1446: 1442: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1417: 1413: 1404: 1402: 1401: 1397: 1393: 1385: 1383: 1382: 1378: 1374: 1370: 1366: 1362: 1354: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1332: 1328: 1324: 1322: 1318: 1314: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1303: 1299: 1294: 1290: 1286: 1282: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1267: 1264: 1263: 1259: 1255: 1250: 1247: 1246: 1242: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1226: 1225: 1221: 1217: 1213: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1192: 1188: 1184: 1180: 1176: 1164: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1138: 1134: 1130: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1106: 1098: 1094: 1090: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1065: 1060: 1059: 1056: 1052: 1048: 1044: 1041: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1015: 1011: 1007: 1003: 999: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 983: 982: 981: 980: 979: 978: 961: 957: 953: 948: 947: 946: 942: 938: 933: 932: 931: 927: 923: 917: 912: 911: 910: 906: 902: 897: 892: 891: 890: 889: 888: 887: 886: 885: 884: 883: 874: 870: 866: 859: 854: 853: 852: 848: 844: 839: 838: 837: 833: 829: 825: 820: 816: 812: 806: 801: 800: 799: 795: 791: 787: 783: 777: 772: 771: 770: 769: 765: 761: 757: 751: 742: 738: 734: 730: 726: 723: 721: 717: 713: 712:AnomalousAtom 709: 705: 702: 700: 696: 692: 688: 684: 680: 676: 672: 668: 665: 663: 659: 655: 651: 648: 646: 643: 638: 632: 629: 627: 623: 619: 615: 612: 611: 608: 604: 600: 596: 593: 591: 588: 583: 580: 579: 570: 567: 563: 562: 561: 557: 553: 549: 545: 541: 537: 536: 535: 534: 533: 532: 527: 524: 520: 517: 516: 515: 514: 509: 505: 501: 497: 492: 489: 485: 482: 478: 474: 470: 469: 468: 467: 464: 460: 456: 452: 448: 444: 440: 436: 432: 429: 427: 423: 421: 415: 414: 409: 406: 405: 399: 395: 391: 386: 384: 380: 376: 375:Golan Heights 372: 368: 364: 359: 358: 357: 356: 353: 349: 345: 341: 338: 336: 332: 328: 324: 321: 320: 316: 314: 313: 309: 305: 297: 295: 294: 290: 286: 277: 273: 269: 266: 260: 259:Chipmunkdavis 255: 254: 253: 249: 245: 241: 238: 237: 236: 235: 231: 227: 220: 219: 218: 217: 213: 209: 204: 203: 199: 195: 190: 189: 185: 181: 176: 175: 171: 167: 162: 161: 157: 153: 145: 142: 138: 133: 128: 127: 126: 125: 121: 117: 112: 111: 108: 105: 101: 97: 87: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 2360: 2357:Article name 2341: 2322: 2296: 2278: 2267: 2256: 2245: 2234: 2223: 2215: 2123: 2056: 2053: 1985: 1934: 1891: 1804: 1796: 1792: 1783: 1764:template. – 1751: 1743: 1699:this section 1696: 1688: 1677:edit request 1645: 1634: 1623: 1612: 1601: 1593: 1474: 1412:DerKarthager 1408: 1389: 1360: 1359: 1284: 1283: 1268: 1265: 1251: 1248: 1228: 1227: 1195: 1194: 1177:Note about [ 1174: 1173: 1104: 1103: 1034: 823: 818: 814: 810: 786:here as well 756:WP:RFCBEFORE 746: 724: 703: 686: 682: 678: 674: 666: 649: 630: 613: 597:per Shrike. 594: 581: 495: 487: 476: 442: 434: 430: 417: 412: 407: 388:Blocked sock 362: 360: 339: 322: 301: 282: 224: 205: 191: 177: 163: 150: 139:In addition 113: 102: 91: 88:Edit warring 78: 43: 37: 2603:Makeandtoss 2574:Selfstudier 2541:Makeandtoss 2501:Selfstudier 2483:Makeandtoss 2469:Selfstudier 2467:Go for it. 2455:Makeandtoss 2449:Selfstudier 2433:Oncenawhile 2411:Miss Jordan 2380:Selfstudier 2364:Makeandtoss 2344:Makeandtoss 2306:Selfstudier 2194:Selfstudier 2106:Selfstudier 2091:Selfstudier 2077:Selfstudier 2041:Selfstudier 1986:at the time 1982:Yehuda Blum 1949:Selfstudier 1921:Selfstudier 1907:Selfstudier 1862:Selfstudier 1824:Selfstudier 1726:Selfstudier 1711:Shapurkay09 1572:Selfstudier 1525:Selfstudier 1497:Selfstudier 1373:Selfstudier 1345:Selfstudier 1298:Selfstudier 1237:Selfstudier 1216:Selfstudier 1183:Selfstudier 1155:Selfstudier 1110:Selfstudier 1089:Selfstudier 1064:Selfstudier 1047:Selfstudier 1006:Selfstudier 937:Selfstudier 916:Selfstudier 901:Selfstudier 858:Selfstudier 843:Selfstudier 805:Selfstudier 790:Selfstudier 750:Selfstudier 708:User:Huldra 671:User:Huldra 616:Per @shrike 390:Selfstudier 327:Selfstudier 304:Selfstudier 268:Selfstudier 226:Selfstudier 194:Selfstudier 152:Selfstudier 36:This is an 2216:References 1756:using the 1681:|answered= 1594:References 935:this page? 743:Discussion 687:Occupation 683:Annexation 587:Sir Joseph 566:Sir Joseph 523:Sir Joseph 473:ad nauseam 420:talk to me 2169:p.297 or 1766:Jonesey95 1748:consensus 1568:Z-Library 1427:Debresser 1313:Debresser 1212:West Bank 1200:Jerusalem 729:Smith0124 654:Idealigic 599:Debresser 447:West Bank 439:West Bank 79:Archive 5 73:Archive 4 68:Archive 3 60:Archive 1 2441:Nableezy 2417:Zero0000 2325:nableezy 1707:this one 1703:this one 1652:COVID-19 1542:library. 1296:"rule"." 896:this one 679:occupied 481:Nazareth 413:Bolter21 2397:, 1956 2173:297 or 1892:de jure 1361:Comment 1339:False. 1285:Comment 1229:Comment 1196:Comment 1175:Comment 1105:Comment 704:Neither 675:annexed 477:exactly 39:archive 2588:Huldra 2560:Huldra 2527:Huldra 2425:Huldra 2293:Revert 2179:Mcljlm 2136:Mcljlm 2062:Mcljlm 2007:Mcljlm 1967:Mcljlm 1877:Mcljlm 1843:Mcljlm 1808:Mcljlm 1780:Rename 1753:before 1555:Mcljlm 1547:Mcljlm 1511:Mcljlm 1478:Mcljlm 1457:Huldra 1327:Shrike 1202:, for 1129:Shrike 1108:annex. 1070:Bsherr 952:Bsherr 922:Bsherr 865:Bsherr 828:Bsherr 776:Bsherr 760:Bsherr 691:NickCT 552:Huldra 519:Huldra 500:Huldra 455:Huldra 367:Shrike 365:, per 344:Shrike 110:Diff 3 107:Diff 2 104:Diff 1 2521:, or 1837:time. 1685:|ans= 1675:This 1287:This 824:local 546:, or 443:never 16:< 2607:talk 2592:talk 2578:talk 2564:talk 2556:here 2545:talk 2531:talk 2517:(or 2505:talk 2487:talk 2473:talk 2459:talk 2384:talk 2368:talk 2348:talk 2310:talk 2198:talk 2183:talk 2140:talk 2110:talk 2095:talk 2081:talk 2066:talk 2045:talk 2011:talk 1990:Zero 1971:talk 1953:talk 1939:Zero 1925:talk 1911:talk 1897:Zero 1881:talk 1866:talk 1847:talk 1828:talk 1812:talk 1770:talk 1730:talk 1715:talk 1576:talk 1559:talk 1551:talk 1529:talk 1515:talk 1501:talk 1482:talk 1461:talk 1445:talk 1431:talk 1416:talk 1396:talk 1377:talk 1349:talk 1331:talk 1317:talk 1302:talk 1276:talk 1258:talk 1241:talk 1233:this 1220:talk 1206:and 1187:talk 1159:talk 1133:talk 1114:talk 1093:talk 1074:talk 1051:talk 1010:talk 956:talk 941:talk 926:talk 905:talk 869:talk 847:talk 832:talk 819:this 815:this 794:talk 784:and 782:here 764:talk 754:Per 733:talk 716:talk 706:per 695:talk 658:talk 622:talk 603:talk 556:talk 504:talk 488:None 459:talk 394:talk 383:talk 348:talk 331:talk 317:Vote 308:talk 289:talk 272:talk 248:talk 230:talk 212:talk 198:talk 184:talk 170:talk 156:talk 141:a PM 120:talk 2338:Map 2161:or 1705:or 1683:or 1291:at 667:Yes 641:333 636:HAL 496:one 435:not 373:or 323:Yes 244:CMD 2609:) 2594:) 2580:) 2566:) 2547:) 2533:) 2507:) 2489:) 2475:) 2461:) 2445:, 2437:, 2429:, 2421:, 2386:) 2370:) 2350:) 2329:- 2312:) 2304:. 2200:) 2185:) 2177:. 2142:) 2112:) 2097:) 2083:) 2068:) 2047:) 2013:) 2005:. 1973:) 1955:) 1927:) 1913:) 1883:) 1868:) 1849:) 1830:) 1814:) 1772:) 1762:}} 1758:{{ 1732:) 1717:) 1689:no 1578:) 1561:) 1531:) 1517:) 1503:) 1484:) 1463:) 1447:) 1433:) 1418:) 1398:) 1379:) 1351:) 1333:) 1319:) 1304:) 1278:) 1260:) 1243:) 1222:) 1189:) 1161:) 1135:) 1116:) 1095:) 1076:) 1053:) 1012:) 958:) 943:) 928:) 907:) 871:) 863:-- 849:) 834:) 811:no 796:) 766:) 735:) 725:No 718:) 697:) 660:) 650:No 631:No 624:) 614:No 605:) 595:No 582:No 558:) 506:) 461:) 408:No 396:) 363:No 350:) 340:No 333:) 310:) 291:) 274:) 250:) 232:) 214:) 200:) 186:) 172:) 158:) 122:) 64:← 2605:( 2590:( 2576:( 2562:( 2543:( 2529:( 2503:( 2485:( 2471:( 2457:( 2451:: 2447:@ 2443:: 2439:@ 2435:: 2431:@ 2427:: 2423:@ 2419:: 2415:@ 2382:( 2366:( 2346:( 2308:( 2196:( 2181:( 2153:. 2138:( 2108:( 2093:( 2079:( 2064:( 2043:( 2009:( 1969:( 1951:( 1923:( 1909:( 1879:( 1864:( 1845:( 1826:( 1810:( 1768:( 1728:( 1713:( 1574:( 1557:( 1549:( 1527:( 1513:( 1499:( 1480:( 1459:( 1443:( 1429:( 1414:( 1394:( 1375:( 1347:( 1329:( 1315:( 1300:( 1274:( 1256:( 1239:( 1218:( 1185:( 1157:( 1131:( 1112:( 1091:( 1072:( 1066:: 1062:@ 1049:( 1008:( 954:( 939:( 924:( 918:: 914:@ 903:( 867:( 860:: 856:@ 845:( 830:( 807:: 803:@ 792:( 778:: 774:@ 762:( 752:: 748:@ 731:( 714:( 693:( 656:( 620:( 601:( 554:( 502:( 490:. 457:( 422:) 418:( 392:( 381:( 361:* 346:( 329:( 306:( 287:( 270:( 261:: 257:@ 246:( 228:( 210:( 196:( 182:( 168:( 154:( 134:: 130:@ 118:( 98:: 94:@ 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index