Talk:1948 Palestinian expulsion from Lydda and Ramle

Ethnic cleansing

There's some lines in this other page with citations where Benny Morris calls this an ethnic cleansing that he argues was necessary for creating a Jewish state (and to avoid genocide). It may be worth copying those lines into here too https://www.qudswiki.org/?query=Zionism?wprov=sfti1#Characterization_as_colonialist_and_racist Hovsepig (talk) 12:29, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Lydda massacre

The Lydda massacre should probably have its own article. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Name change

Should this article be renamed to include the attack on the towns as well?, since the article covers both the military attack on the towns as well as the expulsion of the residents. Something like "Attack on Lydda and Ramle and expulsion of Arab/Palestinian residents/population" would be more accurate but presumably too long.

"The ethnic cleansing of Lydda and Ramle" would arguably cover the article adequately, including both the attack and the expulsion (especially considering all the residents were not expelled but only the Arab residents - so it wasn't just an expulsion of the residents of the towns, but an ethnic cleansing). Obviously that would be controversial and there would be NPOV concerns but it could be the most accurate title according to the best available sources on the topic. WP:BESTSOURCES "When writing about a topic, basing content on the best respected and most authoritative reliable sources helps to prevent bias, undue weight, and other NPOV disagreements."

IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:25, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

There's a similar discussion for comparison here Talk:Flight of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians#More neutral wording in the name of the article, instead of "flight of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians" a better name would be "Exodus of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians". IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 06:50, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Maybe something like the Conquest of Lydda and Ramle would be a more encompassing title as well. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

The scope here is reasonably consistent, and the title has only varied with time, not seriously deviated in scope. You can check the previous RM for details. There is, however, nothing preventing anyone from creating an article on the specifically military narrative leading up to the expulsion. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the link to the previous requested move. I agree that the title is totally appropriate as it currently is.

- IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 09:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

{{Infobox historical event}} is not appropriate

The article presently uses {{Infobox historical event}}. This is inappropriate; it should be changed to {{Infobox civilian attack}}. This is the standard for articles on anthropogenic forced displacements of civilians (those of soldiers use {{Infobox military conflict}}), to wit: Indian removal, Trail of Tears, Long Walk of the Navajo, Exodus of Muslims from Serbia (1862), Expulsion of the Albanians, 1877–1878, Yugoslav colonization of Kosovo, Expulsion of Poles by Nazi Germany, Expulsion of Cham Albanians, Exodus of Turks from Bulgaria (1950–1951)...I could go on. The point of my enumerating these other events, by the way, is not to draw any connections or parallels (although there are indubitably many) beyond the fact they are articles primarily or exclusively about incidents of forced (anthropogenic) displacement (of civilians); I have zero interest in getting into the weeds about whether this particular incident is "ethnic cleansing" or "genocide"; there are similar debates about all the events I gave as examples, but the precedent on Wikipedia is clear, as far as the use of infoboxes go. As this is a contentious topic, I am announcing this on the talk page first, but if no one objects, I will likely go ahead and make the change to the infobox myself soon (though others are welcome to as well, of course). Brusquedandelion (talk) 22:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)