Talk:Battle of Anabta

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Battle of Nur Shams)

Copyvio[edit]

Blatant cut-and-paste from cited sources. MSJapan (talk) 03:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Ag.pale (talk) 18:23, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a page talking about the battle of the Nur Shams historical

Name change battle[edit]

I think it is better to change the name of the article to battle of Anabta. All evidence indicates that (Battle of Nour Shams) and is popularly named, have occurred in the history of May 23, 1936, either (Battle of Anabta) has signed on the date of June 21, 1936.

Rename discussion[edit]

As per the AfD, some of the keep votes requested a rename, but it is unclear as to what it should be renamed to. There is nothing stated in the article that this engagement was referred to as either the "Battle of Nur Shams" or the "Attack at Anabta". You'd think with 15 sources, someone would give it a name if it was really all that important, but apparently not. Therefore, we need ot figure out what it should be called in a historically accurate manner consistent, not with opinion, but with sources. MSJapan (talk) 16:57, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what exactly would be the name of this. This is specifically the reason why I think stuff like this ought to be merged into a broader article. I also noticed that the sources covering this incident are quite short. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:03, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I want to point out that it not at all unusual for battles to have multiple names. Even important battles regularly do. For those who haven't read a lot of military history, here is an typical Wikipedia article on a typical battle in what is often described as the most written-up war in history (not the most important war, just the one with most books and articles about the war): Battle of Marmiton River.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:15, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sonia Nimr (as per cite in article), who describes the Arab actors here as "Abdul Rahim and his guerillas" and is referring to the period "April - October 1936" puts it this way: "Perhaps the most important engagement was the battle of Bala'a on 21 June 1936, when the rebels ambushed a Jewish convoy protected by a British force." She continues, describing events in what she refers to as "the battle" and then goes on to say that "Abdul Rahim became a wanted man, and a reward was set for his arrest." Unfortunately, I have no idea who Abdul Rahim is, nor can I identify Bala'a.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:24, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • This battle was called the Battle of Anabta, according to the newspaper Palestine issued June 22, 1936, as well as newspaper Morning News June 22, 1936, all these sources said that the battle took place inside the village of Anabta, and the battle was starting point 2.4 km west from Anabta Center, Journal of Scottish soldiers have indicated that the clash was a point in the defile "Windy Corner" which is the same distance of 2.4 km west of Anabta.

As for Nur Shams 5 km west from Anabta and this occurred clashes by 23 May 1936. please an amendment would be called the Battle of Anabta and not a battle of Nour Shams. 82.205.73.123 (talk) 20:47, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think Nur Shams is a bad title, then, but, this is the overall concern - there's a big difference between a skirmish and a named battle, and the lack of scholarly consensus on either is a problem. It's also a bit disingenuous to call it the "biggest battle to that point" - the whole revolt had only been going for at most 8 weeks, and it went on for another three years. I mean, the Battles of Lexington and Concord was the "biggest battle" of the American Revolution "up to the point at which it happened" as well, wasn't it? I find it very interesting that Nimr, who is your cited historian, is dealing with it in a five-month block. Also, another supposed point of notability is an arrest warrant for a person that "can't be identified"? Really? So basically, this guy was assumed to be notable, and yet we have no idea who he is? It certainly looks like the extent of the coverage has been overemphasized and puffed up to create a "battle" that didn't exist as such, and wasn't all that important in the grand scheme of things. Do we have an overall article on the revolt we can put this content into? MSJapan (talk) 18:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rename battle[edit]

The oldest texts that talked about the battle of Anabta, which took place on June 21, 1936 were: (1) Palestine newspaper in its edition on June 22, 1936 and named for (violent battle In the vicinity of Anabta). (2) the book manuscript: Iliad Palestine war of 1937, authored by Mohammad Hijaz in front of the village of Anabta Mosque, named her (the battle of Anabta great) in more than one location in the page r 21 r 40 r 248, described what happened to the detailed accurate, and that you would like to receive the book we offered you. (3) Morning News newspaper issued on June 22, 1936. The text stated that "two british soldiers and at least 10 arabs were known to have been killed at the village of Anabta on the haifa tel Aviv road during heavy fighting this afternoon."

217.78.55.195 (talk) 10:56, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss the battle name[edit]

All evidence indicates that this battle called the Battle of Anabta, and it occurred within the village, has been named the Battle of Anabta in all ancient sources, including newspapers, books, the manuscript.

Anabta.s (talk) 08:47, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Anabta.s You would be well advised to post links to the articles you cite. And also some validation of the identity of sources like "Morning News".E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can see why partisans of Islamism and Palestinian causes would prefer to call this a "battle', whereas British forces and the civilians in the vehicles being convoyed would be more likely to have seen this as an "ambush." I found sources using both descriptions, but more using "ambush," which, frankly, is a better fit for an insurgent terror attack during peacetime - even though the British did have to call in reinforcements and air power, and even though it took all day for the British army to regain control of area (and another day to mop up and hunt down some of the perpetrators.) I would support a move to something like 1936 Anabta ambush.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is just the same user who created the article in the first place socking, who notably complained about "lack of freedom" because he broke the rules and got caught. This is why everything hinges on the same repasted set of copyvio material. MSJapan (talk) 16:52, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you User:MSJapan. Yes, it does appear to be the article creator, returning under IPs and various names, the one who was blocked, always with the same arguments, sources.E.M.Gregory (talk) 09:19, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Cincinnati Enquirer - June 21, 1936

Two of English Known To have Been Killed in Fighting JERUSALEMS , June 21 ,1936 - two british soldiers and at least 10 arabs were known to have been killed at the village of Anabta on the haifa tel Aviv road during heavy fighting this afternoon. https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/103045933/

Anabta.s (talk) 19:22, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mohammad Hijaz in his book (Iliada 7arb palestine algraa', 1937 ) describes the battle.

named her (the battle of Anabta great) in more than one location in the page r 21 r 40 r 248, described what happened to the detailed accurate. The book is in the site (4shared) under the title: (الياذة حرب فلسطين الغراء) It was written in 1937.

Anabta.s (talk) 19:42, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


  • The evidence I've put in the discussion page for Battle of Nur Shams to change the name of the battle to battle of Anabta. it is inappropriate to retain the label wrong Battle of Nur Shams, after the submission of all adequate evidence that this battle called the Battle of Anabta. User:MSJapan. User:E.M.Gregory.

Anabta.s (talk) 08:51, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not convinced this is a battle. A battle usually is organized troop movements. Your argument is basically based on Mohammad Hijaz, and that is all. There are many scholars of the history of conflicts in the area, and no one seems to have considered it a "battle" other than one person. The article on Anabta calls it a "shooting". this book mentions that it occurred, and doesn't call it a battle,nor does this. I'm just not seeing a reason that this is a "battle", and I still think we're mixing several distinct events to create this "battle" in the first place. Do we really not have a survey article on this? It seems to be how every historian has dealt with incidents in the early revolt. MSJapan (talk) 06:09, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Also notice all the sources are contemporary primary sources. We really should find a few secondary ones. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 15:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@E.M.Gregory: Any opinion on this? It seems, by the way, that we have a bunch of articles that should mention this if it was notable, and they don't: 1936 Tulkarm shooting was the events in April that were also here at one point, and doesn't mention this as a related consequence; 1936-39 Arab revolt in Palestine is the general article, which also doesn't even mention this, despite a large number of sources. Given the events in April, I'm not buying notability for this as "the beginning of the revolt" - no scholar says this, neither of those articles says this, and it's not like it's some niche conflict no one has researched. If we say that, we're in WP:OR territory as a result. MSJapan (talk) 04:57, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@No More Mr Nice Guy: Please note that I did not create either the name or the article, I happened on it at AFD, where my error was to fail to notice the name of the editor who had nominated it for deletion. Simply, I saw the article, ran a search to see if such a battle was discussed in significant sources, and added the sources to the page, rewriting it as I went. (I often do that sort of thing at AFD; on a wide range of articles (Eamon Delaney, John Witherspoon College, Douglas Al-Bazi). This ambush was extensively covered in the press the summer when it took place, I attempted to reflect that coverage faithfully. I also found and added 2 modern secondary sources to the article. I am writing to ask if you are familiar with the secondary literature on the 1936 Arab uprising in Palestine? E.M.Gregory (talk) 09:16, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am familiar with the literature and have some books which I will gladly check when I have some time to do so. I'd be surprised if this event isn't mentioned, but I don't recall it receiving much prominence.
The copy of this article that the sock created just changing Nur Shams to Anabta was declined speedy deletion, by the way. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 18:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

it's now G5 for socks. That aside, I'd really like to see some significance demonstrated here, and I'm not seeing that. A whole bunch of primary newspapers is not what we base articles on (except here, apparently). If this is so significant, why hasn't it been covered? My take is that it's not, and that trumping up a few contemporary newspapers into "significant coverage" and making up a name for the event aren't acceptable substitutes for actual notability. I would definitely like to see the literature review. MSJapan (talk) 19:51, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • The battle name wrong, the correct name is the Battle of Anabta according to many sources.

The battle name wrong, the correct name is the Battle of Anabta according to many sources.

An error in the title of the article[edit]

The evidence I've put in the discussion page for Battle of Nur Shams to change the name of the battle to battle of Anabta. it is inappropriate to retain the label wrong Battle of Nur Shams, after the submission of all adequate evidence that this battle called the Battle of Anabta.

The oldest texts that talked about the battle of Anabta, which took place on June 21, 1936 were: (1) Palestine newspaper in its edition on June 22, 1936 and named for (violent battle In the vicinity of Anabta). (2) the book manuscript: Iliad Palestine war of 1937, authored by Mohammad Hijaz in front of the village of Anabta Mosque, named her (the battle of Anabta great) in more than one location in the page r 21 r 40 r 248, described what happened to the detailed accurate, and that you would like to receive the book we offered you. (3) Morning News newspaper issued on June 22, 1936. The text stated that "two british soldiers and at least 10 arabs were known to have been killed at the village of Anabta on the haifa tel Aviv road during heavy fighting this afternoon."

This battle was called the Battle of Anabta, according to the newspaper Palestine issued June 22, 1936, as well as newspaper Morning News June 22, 1936, all these sources said that the battle took place inside the village of Anabta, and the battle was starting point 2.4 km west from Anabta Center, Journal of Scottish soldiers have indicated that the clash was a point in the defile "Windy Corner" which is the same distance of 2.4 km west of Anabta.

As for Nur Shams 5.5 km west from Anabta and this occurred clashes by 23 May 1936. please an amendment would be called the Battle of Anabta and not a battle of Nour Shams. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.102.253.37 (talk) 11:02, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Anabta The correct name of the article 217.78.51.3 (talk) 09:09, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest that following the procedure listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves would be the best way to propose a move. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:29, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Naming error[edit]

Hello, I have put the above evidence to change the name of the battle, from the Battle of Nur Shams, a misnomer, to the battle of Anabta or ambush Anabta which is the correct name. The name has not been changed so far, wait for an answer. Huldra (talk) 212.33.96.107 (talk) 07:18, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, as per my post above, please follow the procedure at WP:Requested moves (under the heading "Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves"). That will then create a proposal which others can debate to determine consensus. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:52, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know how to put it. I hope you put them in the page referred to to discuss the views?AustralianRupert (talk) E.M.Gregory (talk) 217.21.12.80 (talk) 20:14, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another source of the Battle of Anabta in the book (Chapters of heroism of the literature of Israel), 1944. https://books.google.ps/books?id=ktQVAAAAMAAJ&q=%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%91+%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%91%D7%AA%D7%90&dq=%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%91+%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%91%D7%AA%D7%90&hl=ar&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjF-Zf8iqfTAhWEkiwKHccPD8IQ6AEIITAA 82.205.37.230 (talk) 18:25, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, if you wish for a page move to be discussed, please use the requested move process. To start this, simply copy the below code to a new section of this talk page, substituting your rationale in the reason field: {{subst:Requested move|Battle of Anabta|reason= }}. I also suggest that you invite previous editors of this talk page to discuss the proposed move once you have made it live. Regards, 23:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Discuss Rename[edit]

Requested move 16 April 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Battle of Anabta. There was a consensus to move Yashovardhan (talk) 11:28, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Nur Shams → Battle of Anabta – It is appropriate to rename this battle to the Battle of Anabta, where I provide sufficient evidence to support this trend: The oldest texts that talked about the battle of Anabta, which took place on June 21, 1936 were: (1) Palestine newspaper in its edition on June 22, 1936 and named for (violent battle In the vicinity of Anabta). (2) the book manuscript: Iliad Palestine war of 1937, authored by Mohammad Hijaz in front of the village of Anabta Mosque, named her (the battle of Anabta great) June 21, 1936in more than one location in the page r 21 r 40 r 248, described what happened to the detailed accurate. (3) Morning News newspaper issued on June 22, 1936. The text stated that "two british soldiers and at least 10 arabs were known to have been killed at the village of Anabta on the haifa tel Aviv road during heavy fighting this afternoon." (4) Another source of the Battle of Anabta in the book (Chapters of heroism of the literature of Israel), 1944.[1] This battle was called the Battle of Anabta, according to the newspaper Palestine issued June 22, 1936, as well as newspaper Morning News June 22, 1936,And in literature as well, all these sources said that the battle took place inside the village of Anabta, and the battle was starting point 2.4 km west from Anabta Center, Journal of Scottish soldiers have indicated that the clash was a point in the defile "Windy Corner" which is the same distance of 2.4 km west of Anabta. As for Nur Shams 5.5 km west from Anabta and this occurred clashes by 23 May 1936. please an amendment would be called the Battle of Anabta and not a battle of Nour Shams 37.8.104.44 (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2017 (UTC) 37.8.104.44 (talk) 07:51, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is difficult to adjudicate, given the accessibility of the sources. I have looked at this and none of the accessible sources give a name to the engagement - ie The Battle of whatever. It appears that the naming is a construct of Wiki rather than other reliable sources but nonetheless, Wiki needs to give it a name. I would comment that, notwithstanding the argument proposed, the one accessible source refers to Nur Shams. Perhaps, a compromise is to refer to both localities - Battle of Nur Shams (Battle of Anabta) or vice versa. Taken on good faith, the alternative might be better and redirects can be put in place. I note that the lead does not use the name? In the absence of a clear direction (a battle in the vicinity of is not a clear direction but an opinion), it is somewhat arbitrary as to what it is called. For what it is worth Cinderella157 (talk) 10:38, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are two sources that clearly refer to the name of the battle: Mohammad Hijaz in his book (Iliada 7arb palestine algraa', 1937 ) (Iliad famous Palestine War) describes the battle, named her (the battle of Anabta great) in more than one location in the page r 21 r 40 r 248, described what happened to the detailed accurate. The book is in the site (4shared) under the title: (الياذة حرب فلسطين الغراء) It was written in 1937. Another source of the Battle of Anabta in the book (Chapters of heroism of the literature of Israel), 1944. The text - translated - in the book on page 223 reads as follows: "One by one, foreign names of British soldiers who had left for the mountains did not return. The Battle of Umm al-Fahm and the Battle of Anabta. 82.205.73.43 (talk) 11:22, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • and the battle was starting point 2.4 km west from Anabta Center, Journal of Scottish soldiers have indicated that the clash was a point in the defile "Windy Corner" which is the same distance of 2.4 km west of Anabta. As for Nur Shams 5.5 km west from Anabta and this occurred clashes by 23 May 1936. Here are details about the battle in the magazine and its location at the "Windy Corner" point west of Anabta: [2]. This is the map and shows the location of the battle at the "Windy Corner" point west of the center of Anabta 2.4 km [3] 82.205.73.43 (talk) 11:33, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here, you indicate that "Windy Corner" is about 2.4 km west of Anabta and therefore about half-way between Nur Shams and Anabata, though you later argue that it (Windy Corner) is within Anabta. I have done searches in n-gram for the different possibilities of "Battle of ... " in different language sets, with no returns. The only secondary source that calls it "The Battle of ... " is this[4], which calls it the Battle of Windy Corner. Other references quoted, refer to a "battle at" and therfore, donot name the battle. I observe that, while Anabta might now encompass Windy corner, a "vilage" does not reasonably encompass 2.4 km - what is now, is not what was likely then. Furthermore, I have already pointed out that while the sources presented are not questioned as reliable sources, they are difficult to adjudicate and the accessible source refers to a battle at Nur Shims. I think that the weight lays with "Windy Corner". Having said that, I have no particular barrow to push. I think a third opinion (at least) might be valuable. Up to you @AustralianRupert. I'm not going to loose any sleep over this. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
G'day, thanks for your comments, Cinderella. Frankly, this is not an area I know much about, but I think "Battle of Windy Corner" would be potentially problematic as a primary title as it appears "Windy Corner" has been used by British troops to describe a number of areas on relatively famous battlefields: [5] On the balance, I'd probably lean towards maintaining the status quo at the moment (I'm not seeing anything definitive), with a compromise being the creation of a redirect at Battle of Anabta, and mentions of the alternative name in the lead of this article. Additionally, I'd suggest adding mention of the name "Windy Corner" (making it clear that it was the British that named it thusly) to the body of the article somewhere. Anyway, that's my opinion. Would like to here other opinions, of course. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sources presented suggest a third title "The Battle of Windy Corner". The point is, it is difficult for anybody to adjudicate on this. I was proposing a compromise, given the difficulty in adjudicating on a definitive answer. Certainly, it would appear that there now needs to be three redirects, regardless of what final title is settled for the page. Cinderella157 (talk) 12:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • "Windy Corner" is a point inside the village of Anabta, which is a "sharp turn" at the western entrance of Anabta, which is within the boundaries of Anabta. "Windy Corner" a mysterious and anonymous name is not mentioned in the literature as if it was a battle. 82.205.73.43 (talk) 12:49, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
          • A source has been presented that suggests otherwise (by you) and you acknowledge it is a POV, which touches on wp:OR. Cinderella157 (talk) 13:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
            • the "Windy Corner" is a painting placed on the western entrance of the village of Anabta to illustrate that this entrance is a sharp turn and is a traffic signal only! This painting does not exist now, and has been removed. 82.205.73.43 (talk) 13:17, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
              • I hope you will participate and express your opinion to reach a compromise solution. AustralianRupert (talk).E.M.Gregory (talk). MSJapan (talk). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.213.48.212 (talk) 10:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
                • To illustrate, I put a link to a detailed map of the battle, and the location of the sharp corner:[6]. Anabta was inhabited during that period:In the 1931 census of Palestine, the combined population of Anabta, Iktaba and Nur ash Shams was 2498, living in 502 houses;[7] (Anabta accounted for 90%, Iktaba 8%, Nour Shams 2%).Cinderella157 (talk). 82.102.223.21 (talk) 20:06, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
                  • The name of Battle of Anabta (קרב בענבתא) was mentioned in the book "פרקי גבורה מספרות ישראל" (p. 223), 1944. Is this a source ?! Cinderella157 (talk) The text reads as follows: (בזה אחר זה הופיעו גם שמות נכרים של חיילים בריטיים אשר יצאו להרים ולא חזרו. קרב באול־ אל־פחם וקרב בענבתא, קרב ליד ג׳נין ובצפון הארץ ובדרך עכו־צפת..) This source: [8] The translation is as follows: One after the other, the names of foreign soldiers who had left for the mountains did not return, and the battle of Umm al-Fahm and the battle of Anabta, a battle near Jenin and the north of the country, and On the Acre-Safed route continued. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.102.223.21 (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Telegraph clearly indicates that the battle was in the village of Anabta, and that the demonstrators in the village carried out an attack on British troops.

See text: JERUSALEM, June 21.  A British sergeant and 10 Arabs were killed near Nablus in the first major engage-ment between British troops and Arab ter-irorists. Demonstrators at the village of Anabta, in the Tulkeram district also fired upon a convoy, wounding three soldiers. The major conflict directed from 70 Arabs Ambushing a convoy proceeding to Telaviv. The escort of Scots Fusiliers and police promptly opened fire on Fix this text'i the Arabs, being reinforced by troops and aeroplanes I rushed from Tulkeram, 20 miles north-west of Nablus. The planes, flying low, trained machine-guns on the L- raiders, driving them into the hills after several hours' fighting. The Arabs lost 10 dead and many wounded. Then the link below: [9] 82.205.73.43 (talk) 18:34, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • G'day, not sure at this stage, but I'm not against renaming the article if there is consensus to do so. Regardless, a redirect option probably should be used, either creating "Battle of Anabta" as a redirect to this article, or moving "Battle of Nur Shams" and then creating a redirect at that title. The alternative name could also be mentioned in the lead as is standard with many other battles (e.g. Battle of Passchendaele). BTW, I don't think your ping worked (I didn't receive a notification, and I assume neither would have MSJapan or E.M.Gregory. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename 1936 Anabta Ambush. To be clear this was an attack on a civilian convoy under the military guard of a legal government in peacetime Mandatory Palestine. It was attacked by militants, what we would now call a terror attack, and I suppose that we could call it the 1936 Anabta Attack. I prefer 1936 Anabta Ambush because "Ambush" is how it was described by sources in 1936. "battle" is simply inaccurate, exaggerating the nature and scale of the engagement. Irregulars and militants often exaggerate attacks and ambushes in this manner, but we are not discussing armed militants ambushing an imperial convoy, not a war.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:16, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "Battle of Anabta" (קרב בענבתא) was clearly stated in Hebrew, in the book: Chapters of heroism of the literature of Israel, [10] Why is not such a source taken?82.102.223.21 (talk) 11:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why British sources claim to be a battle ? Morning News[11], Mansfield News Journal[12], The Gettysburg Times[13]. 82.102.223.21 (talk) 11:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Battle of Anabta was mentioned in Commonweal,1936, Volume 24, p. 266 [14]:The most serious occur-rence was a minor pitched battle at Anabta in which bombing planes were used. 82.102.223.21 (talk) 12:38, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

which road[edit]

Although there is at least one source which says this ambush was on the Tel Aviv-Haifa road, that only proves that newspapers often get simple facts wrong. Look at the map and find Anabta east of Tulkarm. It is nowhere near the TA-Haifa road, which is and was parallel to the coast. Zerotalk 04:50, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We should prefer local sources for local geography, when there is no COI. The Palestine Post of June 22, page 1, has this: "The engagement began shortly after eleven o'clock when a military escort for a convoy of buses was ambushed and fired on from both sides of the road near Nur es Shems, outside Tulkarm. The convoy was travelling between Kfar Saba, Tulkarm and Deir Sharaf to join the northbound convoy from Jerusalem when it was attacked." That's also confusing, since Kfar Saba is not on the way to any of these places. The other places are consistent: on the Nablus-Tulkarm road at approximately even spacing are Deir Sharaf, Anabta, and Nur es Shems. I'm guessing that this battle was close to Nur es Shems like it says, but that it is named after Anabta because Nur es Shems at that time was only a prison. Zerotalk 05:38, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Anabta&oldid=1205820158"