Talk:Israel/Archive 2013-2017

Map color issue

No idea how to fix it but the disputed territories are striped on the map but show as gray on the key. The gray on the key is same as other counties. JadeDragon (talk) 10:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

This is not supposed to be fixed, it's impossible to make a striped "key", so this is intended usage. Globe-trotter (talk) 13:52, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Based on our discussion at Wikivoyage talk:Regions map Expedition#Handling of disputed/claimed territories, the Israel-annexed portion of the Golan should be shown as part of Israel. I realize Syrians will be upset by this, but the traveller comes first, and it's important for travellers to know they need an Israeli, and not a Syrian visa to go to the Israeli-annexed portion of the Golan. Do you disagree? If so, why? Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Mistake Map

Mistakes in the map. the Shefela it is an area between the Judaean Mountains and the Coast area. the Judaean Mountains starting in the end of the Shefela Hills into the Jerusalem Mountains and continue to the 1967 borders.

The Galilee starting at the Mount Carmel in Haifa.

The area between Tel Aviv and Ceasera called: The Sharon. פארוק (talk) 19:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Consistent time formats

It would be nice to get this article to star status.

I don't speak Hebrew and (sadly) I've never been to Israel but I did notice a mixture of the (unambiguous, shorter and common in Europe) 24-hour clock style of 22:30-23:45 and the (US) 12-hour clock style of 10:30PM-11:45PM. In some articles there is also the less ugly (but as yet unapproved) "Commonwealth" style of 10:30pm-11:45pm.

Which time format is the best to use in Israel articles (where there is already a mixture), please? --W. Frank^email_talk 17:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Israel generally writes 24h - and that's how it should be written here. TaBaZzz (talk) 21:12, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikivoyage:Spelling

Just to be ready for some Star nominations (I hope) and to prevent unproductive reverts, I have proposed at the above page that I think we should add both Israel and Saudi Arabia to our list of countries that prefer US English. Before I add them, does anyone object and, if so, why? --W. Frank^email_talk 17:39, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Seems sensible to me - but then I keep being accused of being your sock/meatpuppet, Frank... (Feel free to delete this)... --118.93nzp (talk) 02:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Since, after more than one year, there have been no objections, I have now made the appropriate change. --W. Frank^email_talk 17:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Suggested improved Israeli regions map

In my opinion, the division to regions in the map currently in use is inaccurate and not done very well. As such I've created a new version of this map with several changes which I thought were necessary for it to be more accurate, detailed, and useful to the travelers whom would use it in the future.

The map currently in use

The regions of the map currently in use are as follows: Galilee Israeli North Coast Israeli Coastal Plain Shfela Negev Golan Heights West Bank and Gaza Strip

The map currently in use

Suggested improved map

The regions appearing in my improved map are as follows: Galilee (Upper Galilee, Lower Galilee) Northern Jordan Valley (Kinarot Valley, Sea of Galilee, Beit Shean Valley) Jezreel Valley and Mount Gilboa Mount Carmel Coastal plain (Northern coastal plain, Sharon plain, Judean Coastal Plain, and Southern Coastal Plain) Jerusalem Mountains Shfela Southern Dead Sea Valley Negev, Southern Judean Hills, South Judean desert, and the Arava Valley Golan Heights West Bank and Gaza Strip

Suggested improved map

A few notes:

• The region of the Galilee in the new map is as highly accurate as I could do it (as opposed to the way this region appears in the map currently in use).
• The Shfela region in the new map is as highly accurate as I could do it (as opposed to the way this region appears in the map currently in use). Check for yourself and you'll see that the city of Jerusalem is not included in this region.
• The Israeli Coastal Plain includes both the North Coast, The Sharon region, The Judean Coastal Plain, and the Southern Coastal Plain (In the map currently in use this region is split into two - "Israeli North Coast" and the "Israeli Coastal Plain" even though everyone knows the Israeli North Coast is part of the Israeli Coastal Plain. Please note that in the new map this region is much more accurately drawn.
• Even though ideally this map would only show a division to the actual natural regions, since the Palestinian Territories regions cut off several of these natural regions (specifically, the regions - Judean Hills, Judean desert, Dead Sea valley, Jordan Valley, and Samaria), and since the Arava Valley is not very big by itself or of much interest to the average tourist, I have merged these regions to other regions in my alternative map.
• In my opinion the regions "Southern Dead Sea Valley" and "Northern Jordan Valley" should not be merged with bigger adjacent regions as they are essentially very different from the adjacent regions and since they are amongst the most popular regions to travel to among the local travelers as well as the foreign tourists in the country.

ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 06:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Just let me suggest using the term "Krayot" region, not "northern coast". TaBaZzz (talk) 06:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree in principle, great work. But as far as I'm aware, regions crossing multiple countries are allowed (and already exist), so I think we should just work with those instead of artificially splitting them up. So how about the following changes:

• Dead Sea Valley instead of southern Dead Sea Valley.
• Judaean Mountains instead of Jerusalem Mountains.
• Jordan Valley instead of northern Jordan Valley.
• Judaean Desert to be added as a full region.
• The North Coast looks strange on the map, as it is not physically connected to the rest of the coastal plain. It doesn't make a logical travel region that way. I'm not sure how to solve this. It could either be a separate region (North Coast? Krayot? Western Galilee?) or maybe be added to Galilee?

Globe-trotter (talk) 12:02, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

While I agree with many of the suggestions (especially the redrawing of existing regions and the separation of Jerusalem Mountains), it seems too split up for such a small area. Does the north really have to be this split up? Does the Dead Sea valley really need its own separate page, when there already is a page for the Israeli section of the Dead Sea? It seems like this map is a lot more accurate on the natural geographic regions front, but is a bit unnecessarily complicated from a traveller's point of view. --Buzzy (talk) 12:08, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

It's not as complicated as it seems I think. The Dead Valley, Carmel Range, and Jezreel Valley are already just articles: no underlying articles need to be made. It's just confusing to add these to other regions they're not a part of, travellers won't be able to know where to find them. So just bumping them to top-level regions makes sense I think. Globe-trotter (talk) 15:32, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

The discussion is stalled since last year and I think it may take more time but please do let me know once we've finalised a region-list. I'll be happy to craft a nice map for Israel. --Saqib (talk) 02:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Having thought it over, the main thing that really bothers me is having one Coastal Plain page that is not concinous, when the northern section is a lot more related to Haifa or the Galilee (it's sometimes refered to in Israel as the "Western Galilee". The north coast needs to be separated from the rest of the coast, and joined with either the Carmel (under a different name, like "north coast") or the Galilee. Also, perhaps having Northern Jordan Valley as a separate page is a bit much, but it doesn't bother me as much. --Buzzy (talk) 16:58, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

The regions defined in this map were wrong. As such, I went ahead and made the change discussed above (the new map is based on this source). I understand that some people might want to make additional minor changes - I can definitely make more adjustments based on the consensus reached here. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 14:52, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I will also note that I pointed out the problems with the map way back n March 2014... we need a better way to move forward with important stuff like this. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 14:54, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I have some suggestions for improvements to the map, particularly regarding the discontinuous coastal plain:

• The "North Coast" (north of Haifa) is also known as the Western Galilee, so I suggest it be combined into the Galilee region.
• The coast opposite the Carmel range is often called the Carmel Coast, so I suggest to combine it with the Carmel Range into one article, perhaps called "Carmel" or "Carmel area" (suggestions welcome).
• This will leave the Coastal Plain stretching from Caesarea south. Thus it will no longer be necessary to divide the Sharon and Israeli South Coast into separate articles, which is confusing because the Tel Aviv metropolis is right on the border between them.
• I suggest minor modifications of the borders between Negev, Shfela, and Coastal Plain. I would move the boundary of the Negev roughly up to the northern edge of the Gaza Strip. This would make all three regions more closely correspond to their common definitions (based on the terrain and urban characteristics).
• Beth Shean Valley should be renamed "Beth Shean Region" so that it can explicitly include the Gilboa mountain (which does not fit in any of the other articles).

Thoughts? Ar2332 (talk) 13:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

usable

How do we get this page to usable? Some issues are covered rather well already (though rail travel needs a bit of work imho), but there is probably just one city or subregion that lacks a listing or something... Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:40, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

History

Israel has an incredibly rich and eventful history. Recognizing that this is a travel guide, there's no reason to be exhaustive. So let's talk about whether any additional history is actually related to the interests of some travelers and potentially visible to them (or conversely, whether any background currently in the "History" section is unnecessary for sufficient context for a decent visit).

I was surprised to see no mention of the Suez Crisis and the 1957 War, but that might not be important for travelers.

However, what about the fact that there were a bunch of Canaanite peoples who made interesting figurines? What about some mention of the two Temples? How about the effect of Rome, including the city of Caesarea? And the erection of the Al Aqsa Mosque isn't even mentioned - that's surely a very important historical milestone in the history of the land.

I'd like to see this section have more links to things people can see. There are all sorts of places that are mentioned in the Bible (Tanakh) and New Testament. Shouldn't some of them be mentioned?

Your thoughts, everyone? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:19, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

As long as there is a good introductory opening to the History section that gives the salient features, I can think of few disadvantages to going into things in a bit more detail. It might be preferable to break it up with tertiary and quaternary headings if things get very large. Of course it would also be useful to link to relevant sections and pages of our sister projects but I understand that is still forbidden for historical reasons. BushelCandle (talk) 12:17, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

It's forbidden for policy reasons that we needn't discuss here, but if someone has a link to the main discussion(s) on whether or how to insert more Wikipedia links into Wikivoyage articles, please provide them for reference. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Gay and lesbian travel

I did a bit of rewording, after one IP edit draw me to this topic. It seemed to me that the old version was a bit outdated and also clumsily worded. Would someone who has more knowledge on the subject please have a look at the section in question? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:05, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Intifada of the knives

I'm posting this message on Talk:Israel and Talk:Palestinian territories: Should there be a new warning about the rash of knifings and other attacks by young Palestinians on Israelis, and attacks by Israelis on Palestinians and also in some cases of mistaken identity, on non-Palestinians they have mistaken for terrorists? The danger seems greatest in Jerusalem, based on media reports, but attacks have also occurred elsewhere in Israel and on the West Bank. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:23, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I'd add that this may be even more relevant to the Jerusalem guide, but I'd like some discussion here and in the talk page for the Palestinian Territories guide before broaching it at Talk:Jerusalem, because the current violence goes beyond the borders of Jerusalem. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:51, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I suppose a brief mention of the increase in attacks on individuals can't harm. I would make it just that though; a clear but brief mention, no more than a sentence. JuliasTravels (talk) 13:12, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I put this sentence (italicized here to set it off from the others) at the end of the first paragraph of Jerusalem#Stay safe:

Despite alarming news headlines, Jerusalem is relatively safe for tourists. Street crime is nearly nonexistent, although pickpockets may work in crowds in the Old City. However, there has recently (2015) been an upsurge in violence some are calling the "Intifada of the Knives", in which individual Palestinian youths have attacked both Israeli police officers and Jewish civilians, primarily with knives, and some Jews have also committed violent attacks on Arabs and in one notable case, on a girl who was murdered at the 2015 Jerusalem Gay Pride Parade, so check on current conditions before you go.

How does that strike you? Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I'd prefer to leave the term "knife intifada" out - it's a rousing word to me, a media thing, and adds no real value to the warning. I would also leave out the case of the young girl. While tragic and terrible, I'm not sure why we should single that one out (2 others were attacked at the same incident). My suggestion would be something like (and yes, now it's two sentences then ;)) :

Despite alarming news headlines, Jerusalem is relatively safe for tourists. Nonetheless, 2015 has seen an upsurge of violence, in which individual Palestinian youths have attacked Israeli police officers and Jewish civilians, primarily with knives. Jews committed similar attacks on Arabs, and in one case even on random visitors of the Gay Pride Parade - so check on current conditions before you go. Regular street crime is nearly nonexistent, although pickpockets may work in crowds in the Old City. Just my two cents though, I have no strong feelings about the matter. JuliasTravels (talk) 14:17, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I prefer JuliasTravels' suggestion. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 14:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion such warning boxes should probably be added both to Jerusalem and Israel articles (and maybe Tel Aviv as well). ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 14:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Please go ahead and insert this language. Also, please have a look at the Jerusalem/East article, where I inserted some language you'll probably prefer to change. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:00, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I think we should stay well clear of the term "Intifada" for all the "baggage" that is associated in it. More than one wiki has gone down in flames over conflicts on the issues in this region and WV has largely avoided this fate thus far. Let's keep it that way. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Steer clear of it even in the Palestinian Territories article, and even in describing for historical purposes what are widely known as the First and Second Intifadas? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

I've added the text JuliasTravels suggested above to "Stay safe" in the Jerusalem article. If it should be in a warningbox, please put it there. How should this text be phrased in Israel, Palestinian Territories, Jerusalem/East and Tel Aviv? I'll trust any of you to edit it accordingly and insert it, but the phrasing probably can't be identical in every article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:10, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Sorry, I misspoke somewhat: The first and second Intifadas are acknowledged to have happened by all sides in the conflict and are universally known under this name (unlike - say - the war of 1973 which has several different names in different places) a "third Intifada" has neither been officially declared (to my knowledge) by any Palestinian authority or major group, nor does Israel currently call it thus. As such, I think we should stay clear of giving a name to the events currently in progress before the major players do. Calling it "violence" is bound to be accepted even by the most rabid anti-one side or pro-the other side people. Calling it "Intifada" might not. Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

OK, I get your point now. But the question of how to phrase this text in the other articles I linked and whether to make this a warningbox are still unresolved. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

under "respect" - on Holocaust day we are not looking at the sky, we think about the lost. —The preceding comment was added by 95.86.119.65 (talk • contribs)

Passport stamping

I would like to edit the Middle East article to provide current information, but this article is unhelpful. Which one of these is true?

"this is no longer a problem since in most cases Israeli passport control no longer stamps visitors' passports. Under a new system, visitors entering through Ben Gurion International Airport are given special entry cards by passport control."

"If arriving by air or by sea and wishing to go to Arab states with the same passport, try asking the Israeli immigration officer to put their stamp onto a separate piece of paper. Depending on the current situation, they are often willing to do this."

Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:00, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, they are now handing out a small paper with information, your picture and barcodes that you have to keep for the whole of your trip. This is true for at least Ben Gurion International Airport and the Eilat border crossing. When leaving the country, one gets another such paper, stating that you have left. You can keep both papers but they are not put (or glued for that matter) into your passport.

I remember at least the Eilat crossing on WikiVoyage is still stating that old advice for people to ask the guards not to stamp.

Nevertheless, it should probably be highlighted again, that having a stamp of the neighboring countries (e.g. Jordan) doesn't do the trick with the separate paper.

Ceever (talk) 10:17, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

I was apparently many months too late with that answer. ;-) Nevertheless, I cleaned up some other articles still referring to the old stamp issue and updated Israel on the fact that the new system also works for land border crossings. Cheers. Ceever (talk) 12:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Ceever, it's good to know the details of this. Is there any clear list of the countries banning people with Israeli stamps? (as opposed to Israeli passports which seem to be a pretty fixed list of 16 countries; at least according to stuff I heard in light of Trump's Muslim ban) It would be helpful to know so that our readers can decide whether they want to travel to those places and whether they want to avoid an Israeli stamp to do so. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:09, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I am not sure about this. I basically added those countries already mentioned under Israel to Visa trouble. Ceever (talk) 18:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Rail routeboxes

Given that there has been a lot of rail construction in the last twenty years or so and neither that nor the growth in rail travel shows signs of stopping, should we have routeboxes for rail lines in the cities where major lines pass through? If so, which symbols should we use for them? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Region Discussion - second round

Given that User:Ceever and User:Ar2332 are not in accordance as to whether the region discussion has been properly resolved, let's have this discussion here as the one above did die down (though it's arguable whether it was resolved). What would you like changed and why? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:46, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

That was my thought, it was resolved and the change was realised. Ceever (talk) 19:50, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

One round of changes was made, but other changes were discussed and not decided on.

Here are changes I think are still needed:

1. Include Sea of Galilee region in Galilee
2. Merge "North Coast" sights into neighboring regions with which they form a common destination: Carmel and (Western) Galilee. This leaves the coastal plain from about Caesarea southward, and it can be renamed the "central coastal plain"
3. Include the Gilboa mountain in "Beit Shean region" (it's a mountain so does not fit in "Jezreel Valley", also it's mostly accessed from Beit Shean)
4. Extend "Negev" up to approximately the Gaza-Hebron line to better fit the climate and common usage. Ar2332 (talk) 19:58, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

[unindent] to avoid possible confusion. Ar2332 (talk) 19:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I have to say, editing the Galilee region with its additional sub regions is really a pain. One can hardly understand where exactly to put the relevant information, on Galilee level or Galilee Panhandle level? This is prone to create duplications and confustion.

Thus, my proposal:

1. Merge the "North Coast" and "Western Galilee" into one region.
2. Mention "Western Galilee" and "Galilee Panhandle" as part of the Galilee region under the Israel article, but keep them mostly out of the Galilee region article with just a reference to where the information about them is covered.
3. Keep "Sea of Galilee region" part of Northern Jordan Valley mentioning under Israel.
4. Include the Gilboa mountain in "Beit Shean region"
5. Keep the Negev within its political boundaries (to avoid potential duplicates, confusion on where to put information (West Bank or Negev), and to help travellers to understand that it might require additional planing effort when entering the West Bank.)

Ceever (talk) 17:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

My comments on your suggestions, following your numbers:

1. Agree, same as my suggestion #2 above.
2. I think the Galilee article should really just be an overview, with five sub-region articles containing specifics. Two of these 5 articles already exist (Sea of Galilee and Galilee Panhandle), while Western Galilee mostly exists in the form of North Coast. Upper Galilee and Lower Galilee would have to be created as new articles.
3. This is a judgment call, but I think it would be more logical for Sea of Galilee region to be listed under Galilee than under Jordan Valley. It has "Galilee" in the name, and it has a much longer border (i.e. more accessible/touching) with the rest of Galilee than with the Beit Shean area.
4. Agree, same as my suggestion #3 above.
5. My proposal to extend Negev north was intended to include only the parts in Israel, not the West Bank/Gaza. So I think we might be agreeing here.

Ar2332 (talk) 19:54, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Agreed, but can we skip the intermediate region. I believe there is no point having Galilee with not much content, prone to be filled with duplicate information and causing too much confusion for editors and travellers likewise. Instead lets on the Israel level point out that it consists of 5 subregions and also lets use one colour with clear "borders". Likewise, I would like to do the same for Carmel, Beit Shean and Jezreel Valley.

Ceever (talk) 20:13, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree to this. Ar2332 (talk) 21:16, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Chapters and subchapters

I noticed that there is a given structure that puts learn, work, respect, talk onto the top hierachy level although there is not many subchapters to expect from them. So, for the sake of readability and clearer structure, would you generally support the following:

• put learn and work under do
• put talk, respect, connect (& alike) under cope

? Ceever (talk) 09:57, 28 March 2017 (UTC) Ceever (talk) 09:57, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

I have raised the issue of non standard use of chapters in this article in the pub where you are welcome to join the discussion. We might wish to change our standard layout, but deviating from it just for one or a few articles doesn't seem advisable. Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:40, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

I pinged you. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Fixed. I rearranged the sections to follow the standard order shown in Wikivoyage:Country article template and Wikivoyage:Article templates. --Bigpeteb (talk) 18:52, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I would like to hear some input from Ceever, as I perceive there to be some dissatisfaction with the current standard layout. Unfortunately, you'll have to make that case somewhere where more people can weigh in to get a policy changing consensus going. Your points may have merit, but currently it's just two pages that go against policy which is otherwise followed (more or less) by dozens, if not hundreds of pages. So either we get consensus on these pages not having to follow policy for some reason unique to them, or you'll have to convince a consensus of a need to change policy. I for one am relatively neutral on the issue. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:27, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Let's stick with the standard. Everything else causes too much stress and extra work. I guess I am happy with the region and city articles anyhow and the country one is really a matter of taste. Nevertheless, thanks for your support. Ceever (talk) 13:07, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Move "Visa requirements" and "What to do when the rocket siren ..." into regular subchapters

Any objects to move "Visa requirements" and "What to do when the rocket siren ..." into regular sub-chapters of the same chapter? To issue is when generating a PDF or a book via WikiVoyage, this information is actually lost from the article, probably due to a fault PDF renderer or template definition. Cheers Ceever (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I object. I find it much easier to fix any fault with the pdf converter than to give up on the design and layout choice that boxes offer us. Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Ok for VISA requirements. Though, I don't understand what's the point of having "What to do when the rocket siren ..." in a box. This information is not less or more important from the rest of this chapter. (Why not put everything into boxes? ... just a joke)

What is the result of this practice can be seen under [Israel#Respect] ... duplicate information regarding covering the body in holy places. This doesn't help. Furthermore, the box about "Media" is floating there, but actually more relevant as a regular sub chapter under "Understand".

Thus, I am still pro moving at least these two boxes into regular sub chapter.

Ceever (talk) 16:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Traditional dead trees travel guides use boxes - both to draw attention to (sub)topics and to enable readers to skip what does not concern them. I think that can both be said for visa requirements and background on Israeli media. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Region: Southern Dead Sea Valley >> Dead Sea Valley?

I understand that parts of the Dead Sea Valley are within the West Bank, but does it really make sense to call the region "Southern Dead Sea Valley" (The area of the Dead Sea which is not located within the West Bank.) and then link to an article that actually also refers to the area of the West Bank?
I would prefer if we just skip politics here and refer to the whole region. After all the West Bank topics is not really very relevant when it comes to the Dead Sea. I would shortly mention the fact but besides the check points you don’t really feel much of Palestine in this region.
Ceever (talk) 17:02, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Agree Ar2332 (talk) 20:20, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Are you suggesting an extra-region? Because if not, there's the problem of which country you breadcrumb it to. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Isn't that technically already a problem with the content of the article? Ar2332 (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Agree TaBaZzz (talk) 10:08, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

If this is already an extra-region and you all think it's most useful to travelers to have just one extra-region for both Israel and the West Bank, by all means go ahead. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:40, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's currently treated as an extraregion. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

It should be, if it's in substantial part in both Israel and the West Bank. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Well it has been tagged extraregion on the bottom, but I'm not sure what the regionmap and overall regional subdivision does about it... Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Non-standard use of "Cope" in West Bank and Israel

Swept in from the pub

Have a look at the mentioned articles. There "talk", "respect" and "connect" are treated as three dep subsections of "cope" instead of two deep section headings of their own. This goes against the current standard layout. I previously changed this for Israel but was reverted, so I'm bringing this up here. Do we change the articles in question or our standard layout for country articles? Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:55, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Change the articles, of course. Why would we change the standard layout, which would then necessitate changing the other 180-some country articles? These two articles are the ones that are wrong. Obviously whoever reverted it isn't familiar with WV policy, so point them to it. Also, I see in your edit that you just changed the levels of the headers, but didn't rearrange them to be in the standard place in the article; doing the more thorough fix might draw more attention to the fact that those sections were wrongly placed to begin with. --Bigpeteb (talk) 14:18, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ceever: this is what I alluded to at Talk:Israel. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:30, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Israel needs a new region map

Swept in from the pub

Quietly and slowly without many here noticing - or so it seems - the regions of Israel have been changed. However, the map hasn't. I think we should remedy this. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:31, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Where are the tools to properly make region maps? I remade Africa as an ugly hack, but East Africa and East African Islands need work. /Yvwv (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

I can do this in Inkscape. It's not hard if you use the original SVG file. Ar2332 (talk) 15:58, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Demographics

I am not sure I am sold on this edit - true, Ethiopian Jews are an ethnic group in Israel, but Soviet Jews are such a huge factor that they single-handedly made Russian one of the top three languages in Israel (after Hebrew and Arab and probably ahead of Yiddish), which the Beta Israel did not to my knowledge do. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

No, but there are some 125,000 Ethiopian Jews in Israel, and they tend to vote for Shas, so they also have some partisan political importance. Their arrival has changed the face of Israel to a significant extent. Edit "massive" for their immigration if you like, but it surely deserves mention. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:20, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

I lean toward Hobbitschuster's approach. Ethiopian immigration was notable, but wasn't really "massive". Ar2332 (talk) 18:42, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not really in disagreement; I just think it should be mentioned. How's this?

The immigration of 125,000 Ethiopian Jews in the 1980s and especially of tremendous numbers of Russian-speaking Jews in the 1990s have added other notable demographics to Israel's population. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:08, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

By the way, it might help to have the numbers of ex-Soviet Jews who immigrated to Israel in the 90s. From w:1990s Post-Soviet aliyah

Between 1989 and 2006, about 1.6 million Soviet Jews and their non-Jewish relatives and spouses, as defined by the Law of Return, emigrated from the former Soviet Union.[1] About 979,000, or 61%, migrated to Israel.

So how about this, then?

The immigration of 125,000 Ethiopian Jews in the 1980s and early 90s [not to include in this sentence, but Operation Solomon took place in 1991] and especially of about 1 million Russian-speaking Jews and non-Jewish family members in the 1990s and early 2000s changed the face of Israel. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:13, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia source on Ethiopian aliyah: w:Ethiopian Jews in Israel. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:14, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Holidays

What is the logic behind the "holidays" section? Currently it seems to list every Jewish holiday, major or minor, whether or not it affects travelers in any way. This doesn't make sense. If someone wants to learn about Judaism, there are plenty of other places they can go.

For this reason, I think the fast days (Tsom Gedalyah, Asarah b-Tevet, Ta'anit Ester, Shiva' Asar b-Tammuz) should be removed entirely. I am leaning towards removing Tu bi'shvat and Tu B'av too, since they too do not affect the traveler (no services are closed, and few special activities occur). Similarly Mimouna, which in my experience is home-based and I have not seen any public activities.

As for the holidays which seem significant but on which all services are open (Rabin memorial day, Hanukkah, Purim, Holocaust/soldiers memorial days, Lag ba'omer, Yom Yerushalayim, Tisha b'Av) I would put them in non-bold, so the eye will be drawn to the Shabbat-like holidays where services are closed.

I would also delete the plus signs. Ar2332 (talk) 20:53, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Fasts you mentioned - agreed. Non-bold - agreed. The two Tu's and mimouna - have many events if you only (have WV to tell you to) look for them. Plus signs have little visibility and help to know when clinics, state offices and others are surprisingly closed. Wouldn't change those. TaBaZzz (talk) 18:35, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Dead Sea Valley on the region map

What happened to the Dead Sea Valley? I edited the map for the valley to stretch along the complete Dead Sea including the West Bank. This change is gone.

I thought, this is what we agreed on? The Dead Sea Valley is an extra region, so there is no problem with that. User:Ar2332?

Ceever (talk) 11:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I will fix that. This PNG is based on a SVG file, I am updating the SVG and then exporting to PNG. I didn't notice that change and forgot to put it in the SVG. Ar2332 (talk) 18:48, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Merci. :-) Ceever (talk) 14:17, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Phone numbers

Can someone explain the phone numbers that start with * and just a few numbers. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:33, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

It's either special numbers that work on Israeli phones (i.e. you have to actually start them with the asterisk) or it's shorthand for leaving out the area code (in which case those need to be changed) Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:01, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Generally the former. Those "special numbers" are shortcuts to a longer, harder-to-remember number. Israelis will just call "*1234" or similar, and the call will connect. Ar2332 (talk) 18:05, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Passport stamping in Ovda

Does anyone have proof that they fully stopped passport stamping on Ovda? Or cannot it not guaranteed that they won't stamp?

Just ran a request with Go Israel to verify the situation. But maybe someone got up to date information.

Cheers, Ceever (talk) 12:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

We don't normally ask contributors to "prove" their edits, as we trust travellers to put in the most up-to-date information as they experience it. Why do you doubt this edit? Either way, the Israeli tourist board may be able to confirm or deny. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:30, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Well, just because something does not happen once, does not mean it does not happen in general. But I will try to confirm. Ceever (talk) 14:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Very true, but unless I've misunderstood, there was no suggestion in the edit that it was a one off. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Sure. But there was neither a confirming edit summary to understand whether the editor actually verified the generality of this statement with the local authorities. Can we generally expect such a pro-active behaviour from an one time only editor, or is it more like that the editor just assumes something falsely here due to the lack of addition information? Ceever (talk) 14:48, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

I wrote a message on the IP user's talk page, maybe they would like to comment here. They also added the same information to visa trouble. --ϒpsilon (talk) 15:07, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@Ceever: I think we're on the same page now, and understand the need for clarification. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:23, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Maybe we should also contact the airport about this... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:50, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Sent a message also through the official airport website. Let's see. Ceever (talk) 11:00, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Not receiving any answers. I would tend to soften the statement a little, saying the situation is unclear in Ovda. Anyone against this proposal? Cheers, Ceever (talk) 15:42, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

No objection from me. The answer may still be forthcoming; I imagine December is an incredibly busy time for airports in the so-called "Holy Land". --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:24, 16 December 2017 (UTC)