Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:17, 13 May 2018

Template:Vital article

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Palestine. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Palestine at the Reference desk.

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Palestine Top‑importance 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Limited recognition High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Limited recognition, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the coverage of entities with limited recognition on Misplaced Pages by contributing to articles relating to unrecognized states and separatist movements. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join our WikiProject by signing your name at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.Limited recognitionWikipedia:WikiProject Limited recognitionTemplate:WikiProject Limited recognitionLimited recognition High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Arab world High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Haviv Rettig Gur (16 May 2010). "Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Rages on Misplaced Pages". The Jerusalem Post.

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 Misplaced Pages, 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 Misplaced Pages, 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!

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on November 15, 2015.

This article was nominated for deletion on November 17, 2007. The result of the discussion was redirect to Proposals for a Palestinian state.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

East Jerusalem as capital of Palestine

According to these news:

• Muslim Leaders Declare East Jerusalem the Palestinian Capital New York Times
• ‘Recognise Palestine, Jerusalem as capital’ – ‘No US role in peace process’ Arab Times Online
• 'Muslim world to unite under Turkey's leadership' Anadolu Agency
• Turkey's Erdogan: Muslim nations to go to UN over Jerusalem Fox News

The OIC members through representative leaders and officials of 57 sovereign states, made an official declaration about "East Jerusalem the Palestinian capital" on 13 December 2017 at an extraordinary summit meeting in Istanbul, Turkey. — MusenInvincible (talk) 11:40, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

OIC declared Jerusalem capital of SoP. It does not mean that all 57 states did. “WarKosign” 12:20, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

WarKosign is absolutely right. If the United Nations adopts a resolution, it doesn't mean that every member of the UN has adopted that as their foreign policy. The OIC adopted a resolution, not each of its 57 member states. They may recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine in time, but they haven't done so yet. — MShabazz /_Stalk 13:24, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

"It does not mean that all 57 states did." Are you sure? Then, who are the people did make the declaration? a leader of a sovereign state, a partial group of an organization, or a collective voice of all 57 leaders and officials of 57 states through an OIC summit.

Of course "If the United Nations adopts a resolution, it doesn't mean that every member of the UN has adopted that as their foreign policy." However, you forgot to notice that in a resolution, every member can show a stance either to approve or to reject, or even to abstain. In this OIC resolution, every representation of 57 member states in the summit has an agreement to approve the resolution.
Let be clear, see this comparison:

UN General Assembly = 193 sovereign states, mostly approve the denial of status of Jerusalem recognition (with 128 in favour - 9 against - 35 abstain - 21 absent) It is only a partial of an organization, not all of them, decide status of Jerusalem as Israel's capital as "null and void"

OIC = 57 sovereign states (or Muslim nations), they (all the representations of countries) unified in making "East Jerusalem the Palestinian capital" declaration (with 57 (all members) in favour - 0 against - 0 abstain - 0 absent) All of them, (without any rejection or absention) made a single stance on the East Jerusalem the Palestinian capital declaration in an OIC summit.

"Leaders and officials of Muslim nations declared East Jerusalem the Palestinian capital..." — New York Times

"...Wednesday's summit of Muslim and Arab nations — the 57-member (state) Organization of Islamic Cooperation — which declared east Jerusalem the capital of occupied Palestine." - Fox News — MusenInvincible (talk) 13:49, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Fifty-seven states' recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine needs to be stated by reliable sources. Jumping to the conclusion that because the OIC agreed, each of its member states therefore recognizes Jerusalem is original research. Please see WP:REDFLAG: "Exceptional claims require exceptional sources". — MShabazz /_Stalk 14:10, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Haven't you read this article, "Leaders and officials of Muslim nations declared....Among the 30 leaders present were Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader; King Abdullah II of Jordan; President Michel Aoun of Lebanon; President Hassan Rouhani of Iran; and the emirs of Kuwait and Qatar. Officials were present representing the full 57 members, Mr. Erdogan said. President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela also attended by special invitation of Mr. Erdogan." — New York Times
When a president of United States declared Jerusalem as capital of Israel, the state (United States) is considered as an official state recognition. Actually there are 30 heads of state and 27 officials declared together that East Jerusalem is the Palestinian capital in an OIC meeting. You may count a head of state (President of United States) declaration as a state recognition, then you only count this declaration as 'OIC recognition', but you failed to count 30 heads of state and 27 officials in a meeting declaration as the '57 states' recognition'.
The sources are from The New York Times and Fox News ("News reporting" from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact — WP:NEWSORG) with one official news agency Anadolu Agency, are they not "reliable" in your opinion? — MusenInvincible (talk) 14:59, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Those reliable sources *do not* say that each of the 57 member states recognized Jerusalem as SoP capital. “WarKosign” 15:03, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

If so, can you mention any of the 57 member states that do not recognize East Jerusalem ('not Jerusalem') as Palestine capital in the meeting? — MusenInvincible (talk) 15:10, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

The burden to provide sources for your edits is on you. Can you prove that each of the 57 states does recognize East Jerusalem ? “WarKosign” 15:21, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Briefly, Leaders and officials of Muslim nations declared East Jerusalem the Palestinian capital, (How many leader attend the meeting?)...Among the 30 leaders present... (How many official attend the meeting?) ...Officials were present representing the full 57 members...(/27 officials).
The representatives of 57 states attend the meeting to declare East Jerusalem the Palestinian capital, When they declare, surely they recognize. If they do not recognize, what are 30 leaders and 27 officials doing in "an extraordinary summit meeting" in Istanbul? then why they came and made an official declaration? Read "Istanbul Declaration on Freedom for Al Quds" "While we reaffirm that we recognize the State of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital, we invite the whole world to recognize East Jerusalem as the occupied capital of the State of Palestine."
By the way, you did not answer my question Among the 30 leaders and 27 officials, which one that opposing the declaration? — MusenInvincible (talk) 15:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Was the stmt binding or declaratory? Were all officials (e.g. the 27 officials) with appropriate accreditation to making binding decisions regarding their countries?Icewhiz (talk) 16:06, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Of course, this declaration called "Istanbul Declaration on Freedom for Al Quds" with the Final Communique that was officialy adopted.
Actually, the meeting is "The extraordinary meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM) of Member States" Unexpectedly, some heads of state also came to Istanbul. Therefore, the officials mostly are Foreign Ministers of OIC member states who represent their countries in the meeting — MusenInvincible (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

My reading of the text is that this (clause 8) is a non-binding declaration of the OIC, that doesn't bind the members of OIC. You would need a RS specifying this was binding to the members to insert this.Icewhiz (talk) 17:15, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

The problem is subjective understanding ("My reading of the text") that you think the declaration is a non-binding statement. The official communique is the original source/primary source to show fact (it is reliable). Whatsoever, the declaration is the official proof and the result of 57 member states meeting, that they (in a joint action) officially recognize "the State of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital" — MusenInvincible (talk) 18:06, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

This is simply a matter of phrasing.

8- Declare East Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Palestine and invite all countries to recognize the State of Palestine and East Jerusalem as its occupied capital.

This should translate into our article as

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, representing 57 member states, convened in response to Trump's declaration and, in its closing statement declared in turn that East Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Palestine.

It is totally errant to require evidence for each single member state. There is no room for subjectively (mis)reading the self-evident sense of the words in point 8. Nishidani (talk) 18:24, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

I agree, Nishidani, and I will support the addition of such a statement because it is supported by the sources. Unfortunately, MusenInvincible is fighting to add a much broader statement that is not supported by the sources: that each of the 57 member states has recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine. — MShabazz /_Stalk 20:55, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Read from the first sentence of FINAL COMMUNIQUÉ OF THE EXTRAORDINARY ISLAMIC SUMMIT CONFERENCE:

We, the Kings and Heads of State and Government of the Member States of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), gathering at the 6th Extraordinary Session......Declare East Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Palestine and invite all countries to recognize the State of Palestine and East Jerusalem as its occupied capital.

Look at the word "We" that refers to The Kings (of some member of states), Heads of State (of some member states) and Goverment (Foreign Ministers) of Member states {They who attend the meeting}

While in the Istanbul Declaration on Freedom for Al Quds:

We, in our capacity as Kings and Heads of State and Government of Member States of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) coming together...We call upon all countries which have not yet recognized the State of Palestine...While we reaffirm that we recognize the State of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital, we invite the whole world to recognize East Jerusalem as the occupied capital of the State of Palestine.

Evidence for each single member state: The witnesses of 30 heads of state and 27 officials (of 57 member states). This declaration is decided by "We" who attend The extraordinary meeting in Istanbul. Also remember that they (Kings, Heads of State, Goverment) are together declaring in the meeting. — MusenInvincible (talk) 18:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Lots of pomp. This is exactly how a non binding declaration (i.e. formaal declaration that does not bind the members) is phrased.Icewhiz (talk) 19:12, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Whether it is non-binding declaration or not, The extraordinary summit meeting showed a proof of joint action that 30 heads of state officially recognized the State of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital. — MusenInvincible (talk) 19:24, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

No. They agreed to the OIC publishing the declarative stmt.Icewhiz (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Just to "publish" through "extraordinary" OIC meeting? then, who were the people that proposing, making and reaffirming the statement? — MusenInvincible (talk) 20:06, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

You are making unnecessary heavy weather of this, MusenInvincible. Don't overreach, go for the compromise offered (seconded by Malik Shabazz) above, and, just be patient. If sources emerge that corroborate your inference, then the picture changes.Nishidani (talk) 21:15, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

You are just underestimating the participating nations in a "special OIC summit" (not a common annual or yearly summit).

If you said: "The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, representing 57 member states, convened in response to Trump's declaration and, in its closing statement declared in turn that East Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Palestine."
How about this:"The 57 member states of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation held an extraordinary summit to make a joint action in response to Trump's declaration and, in their Istanbul declaration they reaffirm to recognize that East Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Palestine." — MusenInvincible (talk) 02:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

You're engaging in original research (not to mention purple prose). We can't include material that is not directly supported by the sources. — MShabazz /_Stalk 14:40, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I might add that, unfortunately, the purple prose is not idiomatic or acceptable English. 'make a joint action' sounds to a smoker like myself like getting together to smoke some hash. But making a statement is not tantamount to undertaking a joint action. Secondly, 'reaffirm to recognize' fails all tests (what, one asks also, is that 're-' doing in 'reaffirm'? No, look. Just stick to what looks like a consensually accepted wording, as above. It ain't the end of the world (for that, you will have to wait a few more months, on present indications). Nishidani (talk) 17:33, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Original research? not directly supported by the sources? Which part?
The 57 member states of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation - Fact (Officials were present representing the full 57 members), Referenced Muslim Leaders Declare East Jerusalem the Palestinian Capital, Verifiable.
(they) held an extraordinary summit - Fact, Referenced 'Muslim world to unite under Turkey's leadership', Verifiable
to make a joint action in response to Trump's declaration - Fact, Referenced, Istanbul declaration, Verifiable
and, in their Istanbul declaration they reaffirm to recognize that East Jerusalem is the capital of the State of Palestine. - Fact, Referenced, Istanbul declaration, Verifiable.
Futhermore, I realize that this statement "The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, representing 57 member states, convened..." is unsourced statement and more questionable. Just see the phrase "The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, representing? 57 member states" Which one is more logic;
a single organization (OIC) was representing 57 nations {#Who is OIC? a leader, a nation or a group of nations?}
or 57 officials (leaders and foreign ministers) were present representing 57 nations.New York Times

I am pretty sure that you did not read the whole document of Istanbul declaration.
Joint action of "an official political decision" compared to "a smoker getting together to smoke some hash"? They were not only making a statement, but their official international declaration to contend Trump's declaration. According to the declaration: "Underlining the importance of "joint action against the statement" of the US President Trump, together with all like-minded international partners on the basis of international law and legitimacy" Istanbul declaration
'reaffirm to recognize' is not my phrase, it is based on the content of declaration itself. Read the whole of Istanbul declaration — MusenInvincible (talk) 18:54, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

'make' as a verb should never be used to govern an expression like 'joint action'. One 'makes' a statement, one doesn't 'make' an action, unless that abstract 'action' is specified (peace, etc). 'if reaffirm to recognize' is in the source, then the source was written by someone not wholly at home in the English language. In any case, I can't see any support for your suggestion. So you might consider adopting a compromise, since as it stands it will be reverted. The compromise says everything without frills.Nishidani (talk) 20:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Should a Wikipedian compromise a published fact and verifiable statement because of the personal belief of other editor who cannot provide supporting source? WP:VERIFYOR

Misplaced Pages's content is determined by previously published information rather than by the personal beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it.

— MusenInvincible (talk) 20:43, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Excellent quotation. You should follow it - find a previously published information that supports what you want to add, and then you can add it. You believe it's true, but it must be verifiable before you can add it.“WarKosign” 08:03, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposal to remove citation 17, Jan 18 2018

Source #17, which links to https://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-palestine-now-a-state/, is presently being cited to support the assertion that Palestine is a de jure sovereign state. But the source never makes that assertion, and in fact it specifically and repeatedly cautions that the news event it describes "does not necessarily mean independent statehood. . . does not recognize Palestine as a state.". Whether or not the assertion itself is retained, the citation is an extremely poor match for what it's purporting to establish, and should be moved, revised, or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.41.213 (talk) 21:28, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

+ Linkrot

This article uses bare URLs, which are uninformative and vulnerable to link rot. Please consider converting them to full citations to ensure the article remains verifiable and maintains a consistent citation style. Several templates and tools are available to assist in formatting, such as reFill (documentation) and Citation bot (documentation). (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Please add tag. Thanks. 207.35.33.162 (talk) 21:05, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I only saw two raw URLs. Instead of adding the template, I just fixed the two footnotes. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 01:35, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Map

The unhighlighted countries of the rest of the world is not inline with the recognised international borders. For example the horn of afria, the map of Somalia as shown on this article is the pre 1960 borders of Somalia and not the current one. Can this be changed to show the correct map, i know the focus is on Palestine, everything else should remain the samePepsmiand (talk) 17:31, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Unsourced claim that Iran is the only state that recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine

יניב הורון, MusenInvincible, would either of you care to provide reliable sources that say Iran is the only state that recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine? If not, the garbage in the footnote is going to be removed again. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 01:07, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

First of all, calm down. Your rudeness and WP:incivility to other editors' contributions is not appropriate for Misplaced Pages. Here are the sources: --יניב הורון (talk) 01:32, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

References

1. "Iran says Jerusalem 'unchangeable' capital of Palestine". Al-Jazeera. Retrieved 12 May 2018.
2. "Iran Recognizes Jerusalem as Palestinian Capital City in Response to Trump Declaration". Newsweek. Retrieved 12 May 2018.
3. "Iran votes to declare Jerusalem 'capital of Palestine". The Hill. Retrieved 12 May 2018.

First of all, I'm calm. Second of all, not one of those sources says that Iran is the only state that recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 01:37, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

You are right. I didn't pay attention to that.--יניב הורון (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I have no objection to adding a footnote with a list of states that recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the state of Palestine, but MusenInvincible seems eager to assert that Iran is the only such state. Such an assertion requires reliable secondary sources, and we have none. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 01:43, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I agree with your (Malik Shabazz) objection that none of the news informed that "Iran is the only nation" to recognize Jerusalem as capital of Palestine. But let's be proportional, you included the objection in Iran article while this is State of Palestine article. So you should've written your objection In Talk:Iran, not here (Talk:State of Palestine).

Also If there is another nation that recognize Jerusalem as capital of Palestine, Can you show me 'which nation' it is? Because, until today, Iran is the first and only nation (no other) in the world that officially recognized Jerusalem as Palestinian capital, — MusenInvincible (talk) 04:33, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, some other Latine America and Arab League countries. Numerous other ones have calle to a recognition of Jerusalem as Palestine's capital since Trump's declaration. But that's not the point. The whole majority and the Security Council have stated that East-Jerusalem is a Palestinian territory, occupied by Israel. And before Trump's declaration, the huge majority (close to unanimity consensus) was to state that Jerusalem was not the capital of Israel nor Palestine and that the future status had to be part the I-P conflict resolution. Pluto2012 (talk) 09:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• All unassessed articles
• C-Class Palestine-related articles
• Top-importance Palestine-related articles
• WikiProject Palestine articles
• C-Class Limited recognition articles
• High-importance Limited recognition articles
• WikiProject Limited recognition articles
• C-Class Arab world articles
• High-importance Arab world articles
• WikiProject Arab world articles
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press
• Selected anniversaries (November 2015)