Talk:Ein ad-Duyuk at-Tahta

Palestine Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Any particular reason[edit]

we're pretending there's an Ein ad-... and ...at-Tahta on this name when the official maps and the Arabic here just say Duyuk? — LlywelynII 22:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment moved here from User_talk:Huldra at their request, for those who don't understand how close these villages are:

If you got confused by thinking 3 km was a long distance, here's a map helping to see exactly how close all these places actually are to one another and how they are all sharing the same general name around. Notice in particular how the cartographer thinks that DUYŪK is the general name for the foot of Jebel Quruntul that got picked up by two separate springs, one to the northeast and one to the southeast. I'm not sure he's right about that but these places are absolutely adjacent; the locals just call them Duyuk; the longer names are just useful for WP:NATURALDAB and not because they are the WP:COMMON names; and... most importantly, never blanket revert improvements and expansions to an article. I'm not a newbie so I can't be bitten but it's incredibly rude and WP:POINTy. You're wrong here, but in the future even if you are right, if there's just some little point that needs working on, fix that instead.

Cheers and thanks for keeping an eye on these pages!

— LlywelynII 23:42, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you mixing up this place and Ein ad-Duyuk al-Foqa? Huldra (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Palestinian Authority maps and OHCA maps show Ein ad Duyuk al Fauqa and Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta separately. The separate population figures from PCBS on these pages also indicates separate existence, though the most recent table I can find just has عِيْن الدْيوك الفُوقا (Ein ad Duyuk al Fauqa). I read in a few places that Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta is a "recently amended neighborhood of Jericho" but don't understand that and wonder if "amended" is a mistranslation of "incorporated". If Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta is now officially part of Jericho, that would explain why it isn't listed separately by PCBS. I found a regional development plan from 2006 recommending the incorporation of Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta into Jericho (the built-up areas are contiguous) but I haven't been able to find documentation that it happened. Zero^talk 08:27, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, here are results from the 2006 PA elections, showing the two Duyuks separately. The ARIJ profile of Jericho mentions that Ein ad Duyuk al Fauqa and Ad Nuwei'ma were merged into one local council, which makes sense as they are adjacent, and not adjacent to Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta. Zero^talk 08:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ARIH profile of Ein ad Duyuk al Fauqa and Ad Nuwei'ma confirms merger into one local council in 1994 (p11). There is also a map which shows the local council stopping well north of Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta. A location map is here. Currently I see no reason to call both locations merely "Duyuk", especially as they are administratively separate. What the locals call it (for which we have no source anyway) is not much relevant to WP:COMMONNAME; otherwise we would have articles named Roma and Moskva. Zero^talk 10:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The map on page 4 of the ARIJ Jericho profile shows Ein ad Duyuk at Tahta within the Jericho town boundary and Ein ad Duyuk al Fauqa outside it. So my analysis was correct. What remains is to determine when it was incorporated into Jericho. Zero^talk 10:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have probably rushed to start a discussion at Talk:Ein ad-Duyuk al-Foqa#Spring: at which village? (pls check there), because looking at this page it seems almost sure that that's the old site with the spring, not this one. But this must be clearly stated on both pages, and it isn't.

Is this a modern-only settlement? Established when exactly? It's missing and would solve the confusion re the site with ancient history to it. Thanks! Arminden (talk) 15:37, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]