Talk:Litani River
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Rivers, a WikiProject to systematically present information on rivers. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information) |
Contents |
[edit] Disambiguation
Google gives 8500 results for the litani river in lebanon, and 900 for the river in Soith america. So according to the Wikipedia disambiguation policy it's a "Primary topic" disambiguation: if one meaning is clearly predominant...The top of the article provides a link to the other meanings.
I suggest moving back the original litani river to its general name, and putting this phrase on top of the article: There's also the Litani river, South America at the boundary of Suriname and French Guyana.500LL 21:17, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
The headwaters of the Litani are found in the fertile Biqa’a Valley, the purported seat of Hezbollah power. Here, the river runs south and parallel to the Syrian border. As the Litani nears northern Israel and the Golan Heights, the course of the river bends dramatically westward. Near this bend, the Litani comes within 5 km of the Hasbani River and 4 km from the Israeli border. It empties in the Mediterranean Sea just north of Tyre, one of Lebanon’s largest cities. The Hasbani River then runs into the Jordan River and, significantly, into Israel.
As early as 1905, early Zionists considered diverting the Litani. Later, it was hoped that the river would be considered as a northern border, but the League of Nations nixed that proposal. Later still, some suggested leasing the water to the young Israeli state. Long after the Israeli borders were set, Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion still wanted to see the Litani become part of Israel, and as late as the 1967 war Defense Minister Moshe Dayan was disappointed that the river remained entirely in Lebanese hands. The 1978 invasion of Lebanon itself was interestingly named the Litani River Operation. After the 1982 Lebanon War, Israel occupied varying areas of southern Lebanon until 2000. During that time period, rumors led many to fear that Israel had already diverted part of the river, but those allegations remain unsubstantiated.
The water itself is considered of high quality, though somewhat polluted as it reaches the sea. Lebanon uses it for agricultural, recreational and hydroelectric purposes. During recent fighting, Israeli warplanes bombarded bridges along the Litani that would have been used by evacuees from the south. Many have resorted to walking across the river or building earthen causeways to make their escape. On a side note, the last time that Israel threatened Lebanon was in 2002 when the Lebanese diverted the Wazzani River. Even if Israeli Defense Forces are successful in eliminating Hezbollah from southern Lebanon, the increasing stress on water supplies in Israel will likely keep the Litani River as a point of strategic interest for years to come.
[edit] Copyright infringement
Some of the recently dumped text, identifiable by its references in parentheses to authors not noted here, has been lifted from Hussein Amery, "The Litani River of Lebanon". I am adding the reference and deleting the copyright text. --Wetman 07:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 2006
In the second stage of the Libanon crisis the Litani River is one again the aim of IDF. They want to establish a security zone..... This has not worked several times and it would not work this time, but lets see it what happens in the years to come. The estimation from last time, they give it back and establish a security zone in less than 10 years again.--Stone 11:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- Since the river has been extensively mentioned as a sort of demarcation during the current crisis, something about that should be mentioned. -Fsotrain09 23:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Move
{{moveto|Litani River, Lebanon}} See WP:RM - CrazyRussian talk/email 00:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC) WITHDRAWN - CrazyRussian talk/email 21:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is a good case of primary disambiguation. This is clearly the vastly more referenced river and should stay at the simplest name. Rmhermen 18:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Particularly with regard the current political events in the Middle East, the Lebanese river is the more important in terms of inbound links and should stay where it is. The topline disambig respects the existence of the South American river. There is no need for a disambig page so Litani River would just become a redirect to Litani River, Lebanon. I honestly cannot see any benefit in this. Thryduulf 18:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- support article naming in an encyclopedia should not depend on current political events. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
