Talk:United States recognition of the Golan Heights as part of Israel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Requested move 26 March 2019[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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page moved Even though I !voted, I'm closing this since the page is already moved and a bot keeps adding the move template. (non-admin closure) Nice4What (talk) 22:26, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Proclamation on Recognizing the Golan Heights as Part of the State of IsraelUnited States recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights
Wikipedia's policy on article titles clearly states that:


"A good Wikipedia article title has the five following characteristics:

  • Recognizability – The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize.
  • Naturalness – The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles. Such a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English."

The subject of this article is that the United States government recognized Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights so it should not be just about Donald Trump's proclamation. This article should be like the article about United States recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital meaning that it should provide a background of the decision to recognize the Golan Heights as part of Israel that includes the interactions between the United States and Israel regarding the Golan Heights since Israel's establishment in 1948. Also, I believe it's reasonable to think that visitors of Wikipedia will most likely search for "United States recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights" instead of "Proclamation on Recognizing the Golan Heights as Part of the State of Israel".

  • "Precision – The title unambiguously identifies the article's subject and distinguishes it from other subjects.
  • Conciseness – The title is no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects.
  • Consistency – The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles."

A similar article's title is: United States recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel so this article's title should be: United States recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights.


Therefore, I propose renaming this article to United States recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights. 2600:1700:BBD0:8050:3C78:A0BB:680D:657F (talk) 01:28, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • OPPOSE. I would support a change to "United States recognition of Israel's claim to sovereignty over the Golan Heights". We have to remember that all the other countries don't recognise that Israel has sovereignty, nor that the US has the right to bestow it, and it is unlikely that the issue will ever cease to be contentious. ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ Talk 02:22, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @L'Origine du monde: While your proposed title is slightly more accurate, it's just as awkward. Nice4What (talk) 12:32, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I was the one who renamed the article because the title "United States recognition of Israel's claim to sovereignty over the Golan Heights" is long and sounds awkward. We have a formal name for the proclamation, so I believe it can be best used as the official title. Nice4What (talk) 12:31, 26 March 2019 (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.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


The aforementioned article is about the same subject so I propose merging that article into this article because this article has more content and more sources than that article.2600:1700:BBD0:8050:3C78:A0BB:680D:657F (talk) 06:09, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"deprecated source"[edit]

HalfdanRagnarsson, what do you mean by "deprecated source" ? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 04:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Supreme Deliciousness: Please look at WP:RSPSS. The Electronic Intifada is marked down as an unreliable source (ok, deprecated may have been the wrong word); it should be used only when absolutely necessary, and certainly not on sensitive articles that are covered by DS. Also, if you want me to engage in discussion, please ping me next time; otherwise I will obviously be unaware of a discussion going on.

Also, I must add that a single quote "in response" is a very poor reason for inclusion, especially when it's the only source; given that it's an unreliable source, it should certainly never be used in this context. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 02:41, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 November 2023[edit]

Under the paragraph American officials Hezbollah is misspelled as Hizballah Thanks Jrspsb8055 (talk) 04:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Hizballah is an alternative spelling of Hezbollah. The spelling is also the one used in the official proclamation. Liu1126 (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]