Talk:Tomb of Samuel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] "in Israel"
Categories such as "Category:Archaeological sites in Israel" do not belong on articles about locations seized during the Six-Day War. Those territories are regarded by virtually all reliable sources, up to and including the International Court of Justice, as being foreign territory under Israeli military occupation, not a part of Israel. Even Israel's own Supreme Court regards it as an occupation. Also, avoid reverting without so much as an edit summary. <eleland/talkedits> 18:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- I disagree. It can be categorized as 'in Israel', as long as it is also categorized as 'in the Palestinian territories'. The status of these territories is disputed, and they don't officially belong to any country, so it's not wrong to categorize it under the country which de facto administers the archeological site. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 21:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
The status is "disputed" according to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, FOX news, and possibly the Voice of America. It's "occupied" according to the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Financial Times of London, the Associated Press, Agence France Presse, the BBC, CNN, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, six United Nations Security council resolutions, countless UNGA resolutions, the European Union, and most importantly the recent 14-1 decision of the International Court of Justice that "The West Bank, including East Jerusalem" are "Occupied Palestinian Territories."
Views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views. To give undue weight to a significant-minority view, or to include a tiny-minority view, might be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. <eleland/talkedits> 06:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)