Talk:Besor Stream

  1. Home
  2. Wiki
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on HaBesor Stream. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stream or wadi

[edit]

Is this watercourse a stream or a wadi? I note that a change in the opening paragraph was made anonymously yesterday. Both terms are referred to in the alternative names in use. BobKilcoyne (talk) 04:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BobKilcoyne realistically it seems to be an Israeli stream, Besor Stream, flowing into a Palestinian river valley, Wadi Gaza? I don't know why this describes them as one thing? If this is about both, there might be a name for the whole system that the page should have? BottleOfSoup (talk) 22:49, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Synonyms or different things?

[edit]

Is Besor Stream really the same as Wadi Gaza? Or is Besor Steam a tributary that runs into Wadi Gaza valley / wetlands? BottleOfSoup (talk) 22:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Geography Section

[edit]

The geography section is a bit of a mess. It needs to be put on order to follow along the course of the river, down stream probably works best. But I'm not sure what order that would be without a better map? BottleOfSoup (talk) 05:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of my lede rewrite

[edit]

The common name is the Besor, as evidenced by the sources. Similar to Jerusalem. The river is in the Gaza Strip and Israel and divides the Strip in half. It is one river and does not have a tributary that spills out at the Israel-Gaza border. The Wadi Gaza reserve is not relevant to the lede and is mentioned in the body, especially because it has been severly damaged in the Gaza war. Closetside (talk) 18:55, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further thought, we don't need the fact that it divides the Gaza Strip in half in the lede. This is evident from the map and from the Geography section. Closetside (talk) 19:03, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While boldness is part of Wikipedia, given the topic area I think that consensus should have been established before moving the page. Richard Nevell (talk) 19:06, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The new title was moved without consensus en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wadi_Gaza_and_Besor_Stream&diff=prev&oldid=1217251590 Closetside (talk) 19:11, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Heck, by a sockpuppet BottleOfSoup. Closetside (talk) 19:13, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

M.Bitton please give the quote saying the Nahal Besor's source is in the West Bank. Also please ensure you are not referring to the Nahal Gerar or the Nahal Beersheba. From the map in Nahal Gerar it seems to be inaccurate. Closetside (talk) 19:50, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 March 2025

[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 discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. No consensus have been reached for this discussion despite the lengthened discussion. As a no consensus closure, per WP:RMNCREV, the article shall be moved to its most recent stable title: Besor Stream where it was for 3 years or so before being moved to Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream by a sock account. Prior to this, it was at HaBesor Stream and Besor Stream for 12 years, and since the "Ha" is similar to "The" in Hebrew, I am taking "HaBesor" as "Besor" per WP:THE in this evaluation, which would established further Besor Stream as the stable title.

Move history:

Besor → Besor Stream → HaBesor Stream → Besor Stream → Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream → Besor Stream → Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream → Besor Stream → Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream

Date From Performer Comment
To
2009-03-06
T02:24:59Z 		Besor Ynhockey
(talk | contribs) 		Clearer title
Besor Stream
2010-04-02
T23:07:10Z 		Besor Stream Ynhockey
(talk | contribs) 		This river's name cannot be separated from the definitive article.
HaBesor Stream
2021-11-23
T17:35:03Z 		HaBesor Stream Dan Palraz
(talk | contribs) 		English name, Ha is the Hebrew definite article ("The")
Besor Stream
2024-04-04
T18:35:50Z 		Besor Stream BottleOfSoup
(talk | contribs)
Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream
2025-03-06
T18:32:59Z 		Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream Closetside
(talk | contribs)
Besor Stream
2025-03-06
T19:07:45Z 		Besor Stream M.Bitton
(talk | contribs) 		undiscussed move
Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream
2025-03-06
T19:12:25Z 		Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream Closetside
(talk | contribs) 		Make shorter (WP:CONCISE, WP:PRECISE)
Besor Stream
2025-03-06
T19:15:11Z 		Besor Stream M.Bitton
(talk | contribs) 		Undiscussed move. Feel free to start a move request
Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream
– robertsky (talk) 04:30, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wadi Gaza and Besor Stream → Nahal Besor – This is the common name of the stream and an anglicized variant (Besor Stream) was the name until it was moved without consensus or discussion. There is no other tributary of the Wadi Gaza; it is the same stream as the Besor Closetside (talk) 19:26, 6 March 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:22, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Split The evidence presented above shows that both names for the river are in common use. Google Scholar is a crude measure, but it doesn't indicate that one is overwhelmingly more common than the other to the point that it should be the default title. If we were considering two topics vying for a single spot there would be a good case for a disambiguation page with neither bring the primary topic. Where I have encountered the topic is in literature about archaeological sites in the Gaza Strip, and they commonly refer to the Wadi Gaza. When referring to the feature as such in one Wikipedia article it does not seem appropriate to direct readers to one titled Nahal Besor. I have gone through sources used in the articles on Tell es-Sakan, Al-Moghraqa, and Taur Ikhbeineh

Just wadi Gaza

  • Andreou, Georgia M. (2023). Gaza Maritime Archaeology Project (PDF) (Report). Honor Frost Foundation. Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 August 2024.
  • Andreou, Georgia M.; Fradley, Michael; Blue, Lucy; Breen, Colin (2024). "Establishing a baseline for the study of maritime cultural heritage in the Gaza Strip" (PDF). Palestine Exploration Quarterly. 156 (1): 4–42. doi:10.1080/00310328.2022.2037923. ISSN 0031-0328.
  • Andreou, Georgia M.; Elkhoudary, Yasmeen; Hassouna, Ayman (2024). "New investigations in Gaza's heritage landscapes: the Gaza Maritime Archaeology Project (GAZAMAP)" (PDF). Antiquity. 98 (400): 1–9. doi:10.15184/aqy.2024.68. ISSN 0003-598X.
  • Armaly, Fareed (2008). "Crossroads and Contexts: Interviews on Archaeology in Gaza". Journal of Palestine Studies. 37 (2): 43–81. doi:10.1525/jps.2008.37.2.43. ISSN 0377-919X.
  • Clarke, Joanne; Steel, Louise (1999). "Demographic patterns and differential settlement in the Bronze Age landscape of Palestine". The Landscape of Palestine: Equivocal Poetry (PDF). Birzeit: Birzeit University. pp. 211–231. hdl:20.500.11889/4685. Free access icon
  • Bergoffen, Celia J. (2023), "The Middle to Late Bronze Age Transition at Tell el-ʿAjjul in the light of exchanges between Cyprus and the Eastern Mediterranean", in Hausleiter, Arnulf (ed.), Material Worlds: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Contacts and Exchange in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the Workshop held at the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World (ISAW), New York University 7th March 2016, Archaeopress, pp. 45–52, doi:10.2307/JJ.15135934.11
  • de Miroschedji, Pierre; Sadeq, Mo'ain (2005). "The frontier of Egypt in the Early Bronze Age: preliminary soundings at Tell es-Sakan (Gaza Strip)". In Clarke, Joanne (ed.). Archaeological Perspectives on the Transmission and Transformation of Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean. Council for British Research in the Levant. pp. 155–169. JSTOR j.ctv310vqks.24.
  • Morhange, Christophe; Hamdan Taha, Mohamed; Humbert, Jean-Baptiste; Marriner, Nick (2005). "Human settlement and coastal change in Gaza since the Bronze Age". Méditerranée: Revue géographique des pays méditerranéens. 104 (104): 75–78. doi:10.4000/mediterranee.2252.
  • Steel, Louise; Clarke, Joanne; Sadeq, Moain; Manley, Bill; McCarthy, Andrew; Munro, R. Neil (2004a), "Gaza Research Project. Report on the 1999 and 2000 seasons at al-Moghraqa", Levant, 36: 37–88, doi:10.1179/lev.2004.36.1.37
  • Steel, Louise; Manley, Bill; Clarke, Joanne; Sadeq, Moain (2004b). "Egyptian 'Funerary Cones' from El-Moghraqa, Gaza". The Antiquaries Journal. 84: 319–333. doi:10.1017/S0003581500045856.
  • Steel, Louise; Manley, Bill; Clarke, Joanne; Sadeq, Moain (2002), "Late Bronze Age Gaza: prestige production at el-Moghraqa", Antiquity, 76 (294): 939–940, doi:10.1017/S0003598X00091663

Uses both

  • Horwitz, Liora Kolska; Tchernov, Eitan; Mienis, Henk K.; Hakker-Orion, Dalia; Bar-Yosef Mayer, Daniella (2002). "The archaeozoology of three Early Bronze Age sites in Nahal Besor, northwestern Negev". In van den Brink, Edwin C. M.; Yannai, Eli (eds.). In Quest of Ancient Settlement and Landscapes: Archaeological Studies in Honour of Ram Gophna. Ramot Publishing and Tel Aviv University. pp. 107–133.
    Covers length of the watercourse beyond Gaza. “Nahal Besor (also known as Wadi Ghazzah), is a seasonal stream forming the major drainage channel of the Beersheva basin”
  • Oren, Eliezer D.; Yekutieli, Yuval (1992). "Taur Ikhbeineh: Earliest Evidence for Egyptian Interconnections". In van den Brink, Edwin C. M. (ed.). The Nile Delta in Transition: 4th–3rd Millennium B.C. Tel Aviv: Israel Exploration Society. pp. 361–384.
    Written when Gaza was an occupied territory, and a different toponymy appears to have been preferred by the researchers. The Arabic name is given on the first occurrence: “Taur Ikhbeineh is located … on the west bank of Nahal Besor (Wadi Gaza, Wady Ghazzeh), about 3 km from the Mediterranean”
  • de Miroschedji, Pierre; Sadeq, Moain (2008). "Sakan, Tell es-". The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 5: Supplementary Volume. Israel Exploration Society/Biblical Archaeology Society (BAS). Archived from the original on 23 June 2024. Retrieved 23 June 2024 – via BAS Library.
    ”Located on the northern bank of Naḥal Besor (Wadi ‘Azza)”. This contrasts with De Miroschedji and Sadeq’s other publications on Tell es-Sakan which mention the Wadi Gaza but not the Nahal Besor. Those in French are not listed above, but their 2005 paper in English is. The contrast may be due to a different editorial process as the New Encyclopaedia of Archaeological Excavation in the Holy Land is published by the Israel exploration Society.

This is what informs my thinking. I do not present it as comprehensive, but it appears to me that there is generally a consensus that when the stretch of the watercourse in the Gaza Strip is being referred to it is named the Wadi Gaza. Oren 1992 is the exception amongst the above, but was written in a political context where the local name was given secondary consideration.

The other side of the equation is that given that Nahal Besor is commonly used by Israel readers at articles referring to the Nahal Besor would expect the article they arrive at when following a link to reflect that.

As both terms are in use and used in different contexts, I think there is scope for a significant change: splitting this page into two so there is an article on the Wadi Gaza and another on Nahal Besor. They can have different scopes. The article on the Wadi Gaza can note its historical usage while focusing on the present day extent, ie: the watercourse within the Gaza Strip. There are well documented challenges with sewage discharging into the Wadi Gaza, and that poses ecological problems that aren't faced upstream. It also appears prone to flooding whereas the portion of the watercourse further upstream is less so. And I don't think the part in Gaza has any dams or reservoirs, contrasting with the stretch in Israel. By necessity there would be overlap between the two pages, and they should signpost clearly to each other, but this is consistent with the principle of writing in a summary style; each could have a section summarising key points of the other article and different articles can have different levels of detail. Richard Nevell (talk) 01:02, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear from the uses both section they are the same stream; hence I oppose splitting. More formally, a split would violate WP:REDUNDANTFORK, because the articles would be about the same stream. Splitting would also deviate from the standard set by Nahal Alexander, Nahal Sorek, Hadera Stream, or the Lakhish River, or any other stream in Israel, Palestine, or both, with an etymologically different Hebrew and Arabic name.
From every example where both terms are used, Besor is preferred to Gaza. Furthermore, the scholarly literature slightly favors Besor to Gaza. Hence, move to Besor. Closetside (talk) 04:39, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As outlined above, the proposed split would create two pages with different scope. By a strict reading the terms are interchangeable, but their use in the literature shows that they are used in different contexts. It is similar to how we have an article on châteaux and one on castles. Changing the emphasis to be about the use of the terms makes them distinct subjects. Richard Nevell (talk) 07:42, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is different. Chateaus are a subset of castles, but there is only one Nahal Besor. See WP:NCRIVER which clearly suggests one page with Nahal Besor as its name. The relevant section is quoted below.

Some rivers have names with multiple spellings which vary with the different countries the rivers pass through. An example would be the Cunene River in Angola, which is known as the Kunene River in Namibia. Occasionally, a river can have several genuinely distinct names. For example, the Cuando River not only has the variant spelling Kwando, it's also called the Linyanti and the Chobe. The following rules are suggested for choosing a primary name for such a river:

  • If the river is particularly famous or most commonly mentioned under one name, then choose that name.
  • If the section of the river that uses a particular name is much longer than other sections, then use that as the name.
  • If everything else is equal, then choose the name for the section of the river closest to the river's mouth, since generally that is where the river is widest.
It is important that all the alternate names redirect to the name chosen for the article title. This helps prevent the creation of duplicate articles.
It is clear that Besor is preferred to Gaza (it outnumbers Gaza in the literature and when both are mentioned, Besor is always given precedence). Considering that, even if the advantage isn't significant enough, Gaza is not the common name. If so, because the upper section (where Besor is used) is much longer than the lower section (where Gaza is used), Nahal Besor should be the name. Closetside (talk) 02:42, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Rivers has been notified of this discussion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:22, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give you an example. The lower (Israeli) portion of the Hasbani River is referred to as Nahal Snir (see he:נחל שניר). Should I restrict the Hasbani article to the upper (Lebanese) portion and create a standalone Nahal Snir article for the lower portion? I don't think so and in order for your position to be consistent, you must defend this spinoff, in my opinion. Closetside (talk) 02:45, 2 April 2025 (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.

Lede content discussion

[edit]
That doesn't explain why you removed the sourced content. Was it to make it fit the title that you're after? M.Bitton (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Alright, I will include the Arabic name in the title as infobox as well. Closetside (talk) 19:36, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't come close to explaining the sourced content removal. M.Bitton (talk) 19:42, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing I didn't restore was the nature reserve's rehabilitation in 2022 which is not pertinent, considering the Gaza war. Closetside (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is in the body Closetside (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I restored the source content. I've got other things to do and I will rewrite if and after this RM succeeds. Closetside (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton The article title, which was imposed by a neutral closer, implies one wadi, not a river system. Therefore, the introduction should say the Besor Stream, or Wadi Gaza, is a wadi in Israel and the Gaza Strip... Second, the coverage of the Wadi Gaza Nature Reserve is undue. It was never a de facto nature reserve and is not one today due to the war. Should the Eshkol National Park, a de jure and de facto nature reserve and the wadi's headwaters, get even more coverage? Third, we need not say it divides the Gaza Strip, any user can see from looking at the map or reading the Geography section's final line (it flows to the Israel-Gaza border and then to the Mediterranean Sea, of course it bisects the Gaza Strip) Closetside (talk) 01:11, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just rephrased the history section, making it clear the evacuation orders applied to all Palestinians living north of the Wadi Gaza. So a reader could also find it through there. I don't think we need it in the lede - it belongs in the Geography section if you don't think it is implied, which I think it is. Closetside (talk) 01:16, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@M.Bitton assuming the problem was "removing source content", I resolved point 1 without doing so. There is no source that the Besor Stream is a tributary of the Wadi Gaza, in fact sources say they are one stream. The lede reflects the title - that's a long standing rule per WP:LEDE and specifically WP:FIRSTSENTENCE. Closetside (talk) 01:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm too tired to give a long answer, but the short of it is that you need to refrain from trying to impose the POV that you've been after for months. 1) The RM closer didn't say anything about content and 2) I will remind you that you removed the sourced content that mentions the fact that the Besor stream originates in the Palestinian territory. M.Bitton (talk) 01:48, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1) It's clearly against policy for the WP:FIRSTSENTENCE to go against the tile.
2) You are talking about the Nahal Hevron tributary, which is a tributary of Nahal Beersheva, which is a tributary of Nahal Gerar, which is a tributary of the Besor Stream. Nahal Hevron does originate in the West Bank, but the Nahal Besor originates near Midreshet Ben Gurion; in Israel, not the West Bank. And show me how my edits contradict the notion that it originates in the West Bank?
Let's get a 3O. Closetside (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are talking about.. you don't tell me what I'm talking about.
It's not about the title, it's about you removing content that you clearly disagree with. You even removed the cn tags that you could have easily addressed had you not removed the scholarly source that I added.
No need for a 3O (there is already another editor involved who can weigh in) or any discussion that involves OR and unsourced content. M.Bitton (talk) 02:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So is the source near Midreshet Ben Gurion in the West Bank? It is not; the wadi's source is in pre-1967 Israel.
What is the scholarly source that I removed?
Please explain further.
Lastly there is no other editor on this thread in particular. I guess we could ask @Richard Nevell but having a fresh pair of eyes can only help. Closetside (talk) 02:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a quote from the scholarly source that you obliterated: "the Hebron /Besor Stream that originates in the Palestinian Authority territory (West Bank), flows westward, crossing into Israel, and ultimately crosses again into the Palestinian Authority territory in Gaza Strip on the Mediterranean coast."[1] M.Bitton (talk) 02:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The source even says Hebron/Besor Stream, making it clear it is referring to the West Bank portion of the Nahal Hevron. Per the Ariel Encyclopedia, it is an indirect tributary of the Besor Stream, not part of the Besor Stream, which originates near Midreshet Ben Gurion. Closetside (talk) 02:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not interested in your WP:OR (the source says "Besor Stream" and that's all I care about). Here's another source for good measure:

the Besor, the largest watershed in the region, flows through three political entities from Hebron to Beersheva and then into the Gaza Strip and eventually to the Mediterranean. [2]

M.Bitton (talk) 02:20, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is not OR. This is per the Ariel Encyclopedia written by Zev Vilnay, which places the source of the Besor near Elusa (Haluza), not the source of the Nahal Hevron. Both Arabic and Hebrew Wikipedias agree with this assessment.
Regarding your first quote, suppose "the Missouri / Mississippi River originates at Brower's Spring and flows into the Gulf of Mexico." This does not prove they are the same river, just like your first quote does not prove the Nahal Hevron (and Nahal Beersheba) is the Besor Stream.
It is true that the stream's watershed includes Nahal Hevron, but watershed is defined as the watercourse and all of its tributaries. The Missouri River is not part of the Mississippi River, though the former is part of the latter's watershed.
Also, this proves my point that Wadi Gaza is not a tributary of the Besor Stream - it is its Arabic name. If you disagree, what is the stream in Elusa called? Provide a source. It can't be the Besor as Vilnay says it is, for the Besor's source is in the Hebron Mountains. Closetside (talk) 03:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Both Arabic and Hebrew Wikipedias agree unreliable sources don't count.
suppose.. I'm not interested in your WP:OR.
The scholarly sources says:

the Hebron /Besor Stream that originates in the Palestinian Authority territory (West Bank), flows westward, crossing into Israel, and ultimately crosses again into the Palestinian Authority territory in Gaza Strip on the Mediterranean coast.

That's all that matters. M.Bitton (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[This academic paper] (see map on page 3) clearly confirms the Besor Stream originates in the northwest Negev. Closetside (talk) 03:24, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a working link to the paper. Closetside (talk) 03:41, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the map: [3] Closetside (talk) 03:43, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not just Vilay, but 120 scholarly papers. The way to reconcile this research, clearly placing the source near Elusa and research that says the Hebron / Besor [/Gaza ] stream is that the former is the literal source of the stream and the latter is a waterflow path used in scholarly research about Israeli-Palestinian water cooperation, for the term is not used outside of that matter. Closetside (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have zero interest in WP:OR, what other wiki projects say and links to some Google search.
I have provided a reliable scholarly source (about "water management") that says: "the Hebron /Besor Stream that originates in the Palestinian Authority territory (West Bank), flows westward, crossing into Israel, and ultimately crosses again into the Palestinian Authority territory in Gaza Strip on the Mediterranean coast." M.Bitton (talk) 03:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Google Scholar is Google for academic papers. Check the link and you'll get academic papers confirming Elusa is on the Besor's watercourse, 120 of them, the first three I quoted below. Closetside (talk) 03:16, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A few quotes establishing Elusa as close to the source, not Hebron:
"Elusa was the most important urban center in the northern Negev during the Roman and Byzantine periods. Situated on a rock plateau at the confluence of two wadis, Nahal Besor and Nahal Atadim, ca. 45 km south-east of Gaza, the site provided year-round availability of groundwater that was made accessible by deep wells."
"such as Elusa (in Nahal Besor)"
"Investigations of the extra-urban area of Elusa aimed at obtaining a better understanding of the
development of the city and its hinterland, from the establishment of the settlement in the third century
BCE to its end in the eighth century CE. The extra-urban survey focused on four belts (1–4; for Belts 1–
3 see Fig. 1) surrounding the city. The interior belt (Belt 1; width 50–200 m) comprises mainly large
waste mounds arranged in a distinct ring configuration. Investigations then progressed farther from the
city, to a belt of mainly horticultural land use of a less well-defined aerial shape (Belt 2; width 80–400 m).
Floodplain horticulture was practiced in suitable locations, such as the banks of Nahal Besor (Wadi el-
Khalaṣa)"
These are from the first Google Scholar results. And so on.
Find me a paper outside of Israel/Palestine water cooperation that places the Hebron Mountains within the Besor's watercourse (it specifically, not a tributary). Closetside (talk) 03:15, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What did I tell you? When we remove Israel from the search, the Besor Stream is never mentioned in connection with Hebron or settlements near Hebron. (["israel"&btnG|//scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=hebron+besor+-"israel"&btnG]). Closetside (talk) 03:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

separating the sourced content (about the origin of the Besor stream) from the wall of text.

  • the Hebron /Besor Stream that originates in the Palestinian Authority territory (West Bank), flows westward, crossing into Israel, and ultimately crosses again into the Palestinian Authority territory in Gaza Strip on the Mediterranean coast."[1]


  • The Khalil Besor river originates in the West Bank, flows through Israel and then reaches the Mediterranean in the Gaza Strip.[2]

    M.Bitton (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here are my sources:

Elusa was the most important urban center in the northern Negev during the Roman and Byzantine periods. Situated on a rock plateau at the confluence of two wadis, Nahal Besor and Nahal Atadim, ca. 45 km south-east of Gaza, the site provided year-round availability of groundwater that was made accessible by deep wells.[3]

Also consult the map on page 2. Elusa is south of the Nahal Beersheva's mouth where it spills into the Besor. (My position is the Nahal Beersheva is a tributary, M.Bitton's position is it is part of the Besor while the portion that originates near Sde Boker and flows through Elusa is a tributary)

The situation in the Negev Highlands was quite different from that of Edom and Moab. Here, precipitation is limited to between 80 and 100 mm. annually and water was obtained from wells in a handful of places with high groundwater such as Elusa (in Nahal Besor), Rehovot-in-the-Negev (Nahal Shunra) and Nessana (Nahal Ezuz).[4]

Nahal Eshtemoa, an un-named first-order headwa ter tributary of the nearby Nahal Bikhra, and Nahal Sekher are tributaries of Nahal Be’er Sheva, one of the largest tributaries of Nahal Besor (Fig. 1).[5]

Also consult the map on page 3, which the quote references. Here is another link to it. Closetside (talk) 17:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1) Your analysis of a map cannot contradict properly sourced text. 2) That map was uploaded by Nathaniel Bergman, who co-published an article that says:

Nahal Besor is a large transboundary ephemeral river shared between Israel, the West Bank (Palestinian and Israeli territories) in the northeast, and finally, its western outlet into the Mediterranean Sea is in the Gaza Strip.[6]

Further cementing what the first two sources say about the Besor stream and its origin (in the West Bank). Moreover, the statement (about the origin of the Besor stream and its course) isn't contradicted by any of the sources that you cited (including the ones that you added after this comment).
M.Bitton's position is.. I already stated what the RS say. Your interpretation of my so-called "position" is neither wanted nor appreciated. M.Bitton (talk) 22:40, 28 April 2025 (UTC) M.Bitton (talk) 22:40, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, the map clearly shows where the Besor Stream originates, and that is in the northwest Negev. Reading a map, just like reading text, is not OR.
It seems that the Besor stream has two definitions in the literature:
1) Within Israeli-Palestinian water relations, it is defined as the Nahal Hevron > Nahal Beersheva > Lower Besor Stream. This is done out of convenience, because that path is most important to the topic. The upper Besor Stream remains unnamed, as it is not important to the topic.
2) Everywhere else, including when the upper Besor is discussed (such as digs of Elusa), it is defined as originating near Sde Boker in the northwest Negev, not in the Hebron mountains.
If you believe this hypothesis is incorrect, the answer to these questions should be trivial:
What is the name of the tributary of the Besor stream Elusa (Haluza) was adjacent to?
Provide an example of a paper not discussing Israeli-Palestinian water relations referring to the stream in the Hebron mountains as the Besor stream.
However, these tasks are impossible. Elusa was built on the upper Besor stream and the stream in the Hebron mountains is called the Nahal Hevron. Closetside (talk) 23:09, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another one for good measure, proving it originates near Sde Boker northwest Negev, not the Hebron mountains.

"Three excavation areas (A–C; Fig. 2) were opened on a moderate hill near the confluence of Upper Nahal Besor and Nahal Boqer, yielding flint items dating from the Middle Paleolithic, Epipaleolithic and Chalcolithic periods."

[7] See also the first figure, the location map.
Until both my challenges are answered - which should be trivial if your position is correct - I will rest my case. Closetside (talk) 23:23, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:M.Bitton has provided sources explicitly saying the river originates in the West Bank. The quotes provided by User:Closetside are less direct, which is part of the challenge. Taking the example of the quote from Oron 2017 immediately above this comment, it doesn't state where the source of the Besor stream is.
If we have disagreeing sources perhaps the answer is to present the information from both sets in the article, explaining to the reader that different groups approach the river in different ways? Richard Nevell (talk) 19:34, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are two sources with completes map of the Besor Stream drainage basin (see refs 5 and 8 in 3O disagreements below), including all major tributaries labelled. These sources explicitly show the stream originating near Sde Boker, with Nahal Be'er Sheva as a tributary and the Nahal Hevron as a tributary of the Nahal Be'er Sheva. Here is another one for good measure

The Hebron Stream originates in the mountainous Wadi system of the Hebron Hills in the West Bank, f lowing downstream into the Israeli city of Be’er Sheva where it merges with the Be’er Sheva Stream and joins the Besor that originates in Israel’s Southern Negev [8]

. This is a report about I/P (Israeli-Palestinian) water relations which describes the drainage basin as I prefer.
I have yet to see a paper outside of I/P water relations (i.e. about general geography history, archaeology, etc.) which describes the drainage basin as M.Bitton prefers. Furthermore, the papers which they cite do not give a name to supposed tributary of the Besor that originates at Mount Boker and ends at Hamifgash or the supposed tributary of the Besor that originates south of the Yatir Forest and ends east of Beersheba. If M.Bitton's preferred description is an alternate model, they should be able to provide the papers and the names of the two supposed tributaries (which my preferred description names as the Upper Besor and Upper Be'er Sheva respectively) fairly easily, although despite this dispute going on for 5 days, they are still emptyhanded.
It seems that the three papers M.Bitton cites to support their conclusion uses a style which sacrifices technical accuracy for convenience considering the uniqueness of the path (West Bank --> pre-1967 Israel --> Gaza Strip). Furthermore, the first one using the Hebron / Besor Stream and the second similarly uses Khalil (i.e. Hebron) Besor river, implying a specifically defined path different from the typical definition. Otherwise, they would have just said Besor as opposed to Hebron/Besor. The last paper is a comment that is not peer reviewed and just like a preprint is not RS.
So I suggest the typical description, which is my preference in the lede and a paragraph about the unique path in the body. Closetside (talk) 03:45, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See below where I respond to @M.Bitton's sources, showing that each describe the Besor originating near Sde Boker, and not near Hebron. Tldr: The first source identifies the Nahal Hevron as one of the Besor's [indirect] tributaries, the second refers to the course once as a variant of the first's without further elaboration (Khalil Besor vs Hebron/Besor) and the Bergman comment explicitly shows the source near Sde Boker. So the notion that the Besor originates near Hebron has no RS to back it up. Closetside (talk) 23:37, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Closetside has indeed failed to provide reliable sources that contradict what the RS say "in plain English", and worse, they insist on presenting their pov as the only viable option. M.Bitton (talk) 13:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

3O disagreements

[edit]

@M.Bitton we have hashed out the fourth point of disagreement listed at 3O, but not really the first three. If you have a response, please state it. I contend the Besor Stream is one stream, there is undue coverage of the Wadi Gaza national reserve, and the fact that it divides the Gaza Strip need not be mentioned because it can trivially be derived from the article. If you disagree, please let me and the 3O know. Closetside (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only point that I aware of is the one that have has been discussed. I wasn't aware that you actually asked for a 3O, but since you did, we might as well wait for a volunteer; assuming Richard Nevell (who participated in the discussion) isn't interested. M.Bitton (talk) 20:50, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you disagree with me on the first three points? It seems you do but you are reverting without any explanation. Closetside (talk) 21:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You asked for a 3O and I pinged Richard Nevell, so we wait (there is no rush and certainly no excuse for you to impose your POV). M.Bitton (talk) 21:12, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Without a reason, this is DONTLIKEIT. I thought you disagree with me on the first three points but apparently you don't or you do without reason. In order for 3O to work, both sides must disagree and explain their rationale. If you don't disagree or can't explain why you disagree with me on the first three points, kindly self-revert. Closetside (talk) 21:18, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since you clearly prefer your WP:OR over properly sourced content, I see no point in wasting time arguing with you. I'm done here (until another editor weighs in). M.Bitton (talk) 21:19, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How was my content OR? The MOS recommends not citing in the lede if the points are cited in the body later. Closetside (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I admit to having some trouble following the discussion, is the issue that there is one source that describes the stream the way M.Bitton prefers, but all the other sources describe it the way Closetside prefers? MilesVorkosigan (talk) 19:11, 2 May 2025 (UTC) WP:ECR M.Bitton (talk) 20:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remember that I am a biased participant, although here's how I'd summarize it.
There are a few sources, all having to do with Israeli-Palestinian water relations that describe the Besor stream as M.Bitton prefers. However, this is done out of convenience for the path chosen the only water path that starts in the West Bank, traverses through pre-1967 Israel and ends in the Gaza Strip.
In all other cases, including when the upper Besor Stream is discussed, or when the Nahal Be'er Sheva or the Nahal Hevron are discussed outside the context of Israeli-Palestinian water relations the sources always describe it how I prefer. I have challenged M.Bitton to give a single counterexample, a challenge they have not fulfilled.
Therefore, I suggest the lede describing it how I prefer and including a section in the article about the special water path. Closetside (talk) 19:18, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even within Israeli-Palestinian water relations, this special definition is not universal. For example, this article[9], which is about Israeli-Palestinian water relations but describes it how I prefer it (see map on page 31). The map is based on the International Journal of River Basin Management - Volume 8, 2010 - Issue 2. Closetside (talk) 19:22, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
M.Bitton has not disputed my position on the other three points in the 3O request although they insisted on me leaving the article until I get one so here we are. Closetside (talk) 19:26, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what 3 points you're referring to. In any case, once what the RS say (instead of some irrelevant editor's OR) is taken into account, everything else will fall into place. M.Bitton (talk) 19:58, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry I won't be able to provide any help, M. Bitton has declared themselves the owner of this talk page and that discussing the name of a stream on a talk page is somehow implicated in the Arab-Israeli Conflict, so I'm not allowed to talk to you.
It's too bad they won't even let me fix the typos, but I guess when an article belongs to an editor like this, even that is too much.
You may need to have them topic-banned, show them this edit-warring and the request should be fairly straightforward. Good luck! MilesVorkosigan (talk) 20:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's more like there are RS (that I cited) that describe the Stream (its course and its origin) and nothing else that contradict them. M.Bitton (talk) 19:56, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So if I understand you correctly, you have chosen to just ignore all of the other sources, and believe that only your source is reliable? MilesVorkosigan (talk) 19:59, 2 May 2025 (UTC) WP:ECR M.Bitton (talk) 20:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which other sources describe the Stream's course and origin? BTW, there are two sources (three we include the one about the author of the map) that describe this. They are all cited above. M.Bitton (talk) 20:02, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was just trying to provide a third opinion, telling me that you are unable to see the other sources that have been mentioned here on the discussion page is not helpful. I'm not going to repeat them for you. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 20:17, 2 May 2025 (UTC) WP:ECR M.Bitton (talk) 20:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're accusing me of ignoring some sources, that's why I asked you a "which other sources describe the Stream's course and origin?". M.Bitton (talk) 20:20, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the sources that describe the River's course and its origin (which is at the centre of the dispute).

  • the Hebron /Besor Stream that originates in the Palestinian Authority territory (West Bank), flows westward, crossing into Israel, and ultimately crosses again into the Palestinian Authority territory in Gaza Strip on the Mediterranean coast."[1]


  • The Khalil Besor river originates in the West Bank, flows through Israel and then reaches the Mediterranean in the Gaza Strip.[2]

    M.Bitton (talk) 20:23, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's go over these sources:
1) A quote from later on in the page

The magnitude of cross-boundary pollution was demonstrated in joint Israeli Palestinian research in which the authors participated, assessing conditions in two major streams and their upper Palestinian tributaries: Hebron (El-Halil)-Besor and Shekhem (Nablus)-Alexander (Tal et al. 2008).

From this quote, the Nahal Hevron is an (indirect) tributary of the Besor, not part of it.
Later on, the Besor is identified independently, making it clear the Hebron / Besor stream is not an alternate name for the Besor Stream, but rather shorthand for the Nahal Hevron, [the lower Nahal Be'er Sheva] and the lower Besor.

A relevant example is “greening the desert” by modifying an ephemeral stream into a perennial one, usually by discharging sewage or effluent (e.g., the Besor Stream). For the past 15 years effort has been made to restore streams in Israel. Such effort is yet to be implemented in the Palestinian Authority territory.

Bergman comment: Later on a map (figure 1) clearly shows the main stream originates near Sde Boker and the part of its watershed that is in the West Bank consists entirely of tributaries.
Now to your second source. Khalil Besor river is a variant of Hebron / Besor. There is no reason to think that those authors dispute the first source, which clearly identifies them as tributary and stream as opposed to one stream. They most definitely don't do so explicitly. Closetside (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is nothing more than a continuation of what you have been doing from the get go. I suggest you read Richard Nevell's comment. M.Bitton (talk) 13:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are you outright ignoring my sources and my analysis of your sources which demonstrate the source is on Mount Boker and not in Hebron? There is no requirement the RS must communicate in text form, although Report on the Status of the Hebron-Besor-Wadi Gaza Basin Besor Stream/Flooding, January Charlotte De Bruyne) Besor 2018 explicitly spells out what I have previously said (Nahal Hevron, Nahal Be'er Sheva, Besor Stream). Every one of my sources (6 in total) is incompatible with the Hebron origin notion. So is the Bergman comment and your first source. Your second source uses a variant of a term in the first source (Khalil Besor river for Hebron / Besor stream). Your first source subsequently identifies the Nahal Hevron as a tributary of the Besor (see above), and your second source doesn't dispute your first source's statement.
This is straight-up disruptive editing, so I am giving you three options:
1) Acknowledge my sources and analysis, and give a thorough response to it.
2) Concede the dispute
3) Get reported at AE
The choice is yours. Closetside (talk) 14:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AE it is. In fact, I already asked the admins to include you in the open report. M.Bitton (talk) 14:45, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to it and I will formally present my evidence and respond to your arguments. Closetside (talk) 14:48, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b c Alon Tal, Alfred Abed Rabbo (2010). Water Wisdom Preparing the Groundwork for Cooperative and Sustainable Water Management in the Middle East. Rutgers University Press. p. 142. ISBN 978-0-8135-4770-1.
  2. ^ a b Brooks, David; Trottier, Julie (2010). "Confronting water in an Israeli–Palestinian peace agreement". Journal of Hydrology. 382 (1–4). Elsevier BV: 103–114. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.12.021. ISSN 0022-1694.
  3. ^ Wozniok, Tali Erickson-Gini–Diana. "Elusa–Urban Development and Economy of a City in the Desert." Archaeology and Economy in the Ancient World: 141.
  4. ^ Erickson-Gini, Tali. "Nabataean agriculture: Myth and reality." Journal of Arid Environments 86 (2012): 50-54.
  5. ^ Alexandrov, Yulia, et al. "Differentiated suspended sediment transport in headwater basins of the Besor catchment, northern Negev." Israel Journal of Earth Sciences 57 (2008).
  6. ^ Bergman, N., Roskin, J., Greenbaum, N. et al. Comment on “Analysis of extreme rainfall trend and mapping of the Wadi pluvial flood in the Gaza coastal plain of Palestine”. Acta Geophys. 72, 4333–4340 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-024-01446-9
  7. ^ Oron, Maya. “Upper Nahal Besor: Final Report.” Hadashot Arkheologiyot: Excavations and Surveys in Israel / חדשות ארכיאולוגיות: חפירות וסקרים בישראל, vol. 129, 2017. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26693802. Accessed 28 Apr. 2025.
  8. ^ Report on the Status of the Hebron-Besor-Wadi Gaza Basin Besor Stream/Flooding, January Charlotte De Bruyne) Besor 2018
  9. ^ Advancing Sanitation Solutions and Reuse in the Hebron Stream: Shared Waters / Geographic Description (PDF). Vol. November, 2016. Amman, Bethlehem and Tel Aviv: EcoPeace Middle East. p. 29. Retrieved 23 February 2021. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)

DRN

[edit]

Since 3O appears to be a waste of time, I suggest we use WP:DRN. Let me know what you think. M.Bitton (talk) 22:38, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about you withdraw your opposition to me acting on the first three points you supposedly don’t disagree with and respond to my scholarly sources that show the Besor originates near Sde Bokor and have complete labelled maps of the stream and its tributaries? If you do, I will withdraw my statement at ANI. If not, DRN will almost certainly come to the same conclusion. Closetside (talk) 22:47, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How about you withdraw your opposition to me adding reliably sourced content? I see no point in discussing the details of a river whose very course and origin are disputed. Anyway, does that mean that you're not interested in resolving the issue through DRN? M.Bitton (talk) 22:52, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See, complete ignorance of my sources. I have acknowledged your sources and given an explanation (convenience over technical correctness due to I/P water relations). I'm not opposed to going on DRN, just be advised all the 3O's points were valid and DRN will almost certainly give the same result. Closetside (talk) 23:08, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The most important part is that you're not opposed to going to DRN (where you will justify why you removed the reliable source). M.Bitton (talk) 23:10, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Main source of the Besor stream

[edit]

Is the main source of the Besor stream Does the channel designated as the Nahal Besor start in the northwestern Negev (Mount Boker) or in the Hebron Hills of the West Bank? Or should both sources be treated equally (i.e. there is no main source)? Closetside (talk) 22:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would be wise to wait until the discussion is concluded at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, unless there is particular urgency? Richard Nevell (talk) 22:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AE is about M.Bitton's conduct not about content so I see no reason to wait. Closetside (talk) 22:37, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This may be a skill issue, but I tried to check reference 2, "Confronting water in an Israeli–Palestinian peace agreement" I don't see the referenced definition in the summary. Looks like any discussion of the stream would be behind the WP:PAYWALL. Does anyone have access to sciencedirect?
I think it would be useful to see what the document says about the definition and how it was chosen. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 23:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mount Boker. Every RS cited above that explicitly takes a position places the source at Mount Boker and the Hebron Hills as the source of an indirect tributary, the Nahal Hevron. Hevron-Besor stream is similar to Missouri-Mississippi river and not equivalent to Besor just like Missouri-Mississippi is not equivalent to Mississippi. Closetside (talk) 22:40, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I could ony find sources talking about the streams source being at Mount Boker. Durraz0 (talk) 07:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We should probably look for a good source for usage of nahal to help clarify things a bit. What's clear tho is that nahal (and wadi) can be used to describe landforms, similar to gulch or valley and both tell us that these are ephemeral waters. That's important, these waters only reach the Med six or seven times a year. Neither term has the exact same meaning as stream.

It is evident that most of the drainage area of Nahal Besor is an Israeli territory, only a small portion of it is actually Palestinian in the West Bank and Gaza (less than 10% of the total basin’s area).

— Bergman et al 2024
I think this quote makes it clear that those who write about the area can use the proper name "Besor" and refer to the basin or watershed.
But the article has stream in the title and that imposes certain conventions and understanding on readers. Most will probably think of this similar to a river system. We draw a blue line on a map from source to outlet and give that channel a name or names. If we are discussing the channel named Besor that line clearly runs from Boker to the Med in Gaza. Lesser waters (tributaries) join along that path and are given names as well. We can never say that Hebron Hills is the source of the named "stream" here, nor could we call it the source of headwaters of the basin. If describing the basin the headwaters are all those most distal to the outlet and include both Mount Boker and Hebron Hills.
One important channel in our basin is Hebron-Beersheva-Besor following the names from source to outlet. A source cited by that Bergman paper calls this the "main channel" of the basin, so we might be somewhat justified in stating that this is the "main source" for the Basin. That we have two papers differing as to what is the main channel is really not that big of a difficulty. One is seemingly going by how the channel has been named and perhaps the area drained and the other possibly by the amount of water which flows (such as it is) through the channel. In the context of modern water use issues it is readily apparent that this channel is the most interesting or "notable" in WP terms because it is transboundary. But this channel does not carry the name "Besor" throughout it length. The channel which does carry the name "Besor" for its length does not pass through the West Bank.
So for the RfC question what is the "source"? Well what are you talking about, the named channel or the basin? Our sources are really pretty clear here from context as to what they are describing and i'm a little surprised at the seeming difficulties here on the talk page. The important thing tho is that the resulting article ends up being clear about what it is describing when it mentions "source" or "headwaters" fiveby(zero) 15:40, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fully agree. If you go up to the RM, my dispute with @Richard Nevell was about should there be an additional article called Wadi Gaza for the portion in the Gaza Strip and this article should be about the portion of Israel. To the best of my knowledge, he did not oppose the Nahal Besor naming of this article. In hindsight, the RM discussion was a waste of time; we both agreed this article should be named Nahal Besor, not Besor Stream, and your comment only strengthens the case for the renaming. Considering there is no opposition, I suggest a page mover should move this page to Nahal Besor. If Richard Nevell wants to expand Wadi Gaza into an article from a redirect, let him (it's against WP:NCRIVER imo) and a separate merge discussion would take place. Closetside (talk) 02:19, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since the Hebron-Beersheva-Besor is the main channel, doesn't that explain the following statement by Bergman (the same source cited above)?

Nahal Besor is a large transboundary ephemeral river shared between Israel, the West Bank (Palestinian and Israeli territories) in the northeast, and finally, its western outlet into the Mediterranean Sea is in the Gaza Strip.[1]

You also raised an important point about the notability: if this article is about the notable part of the Besor/Wadi Gaza, i.e., the basin/watershed, then the sourcing will be a lot easier. M.Bitton (talk) 19:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Abstracts are not reliable and often contradict the body of a research paper. From the Wikipedia article (emphasis mine):

It is generally agreed that one must not base reference citations on the abstract alone, but the content of an entire paper.[2][3] This is because abstracts may not be fully representative of the full report or article. Therefore, basing reference citations solely on the information present in the abstract could be misleading.[2][3]
According to the results of a study published in PLOS Medicine, the "exaggerated and inappropriate coverage of research findings in the news media" is ultimately related to inaccurately reporting or over-interpreting research results in many abstract conclusions.[4] A study published in JAMA concluded that "inconsistencies in data between abstract and body and reporting of data and other information solely in the abstract are relatively common and that a simple educational intervention directed to the author is ineffective in reducing that frequency."[5] Other "studies comparing the accuracy of information reported in a journal abstract with that reported in the text of the full publication have found claims that are inconsistent with, or missing from, the body of the full article."[2][6][7]
According to the Modern Language Association, there are almost no circumstances in which it is acceptable to cite an abstract: "It only makes sense to cite an abstract if you are writing about the abstract as an abstract and not about the work it summarizes: for instance, if you are writing about different styles of writing abstracts used in the sciences and humanities."[8]

In the article's body, the map clearly shows the stream originating at Mount Boker in the southern Negev, not in the Hebron Hills. Closetside (talk) 19:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a definition in the text of the full article? MilesVorkosigan (talk) 19:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Within Israel and the West Bank and Gaza Strip (WBGS) there are 15 streams that cross the Palestinian/Israeli Green Line. Twelve of these are major streams that flow year-round in a westward direction toward the Mediterranean Sea and the other three flow east to the Dead Sea or the Jordan River. All of them originate in watersheds located in the Palestinian Authority, or in lands that will eventually be outside Israeli jurisdiction, and then flow into Israel (these include: the Na’aman, Zipori, Kishon, Taninim, Hadera, Alexander, Yarkon, Ayalon, Soreq, Lachish, Besor, and Beer Sheva streams).[9]

As I said, making this article about the Besor basin/watershed (a notable subject, unlike the stream) will solve the problem. M.Bitton (talk) 19:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC) M.Bitton (talk) 19:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All of them originate in watersheds. The drainage basin of the Besor originates in the West Bank, not the stream itself. Closetside (talk) 19:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In that very paper (use Springer on the Wikipedia Library), figure 2 on page 5 of the pdf clearly shows a northwestern Negev origin. Closetside (talk) 19:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know the reliability of government sites for this particular issue, but these people seem pretty confident:
Drainage administration site: River drainage authority
  • Background – The catchment basin of Nahal HaBsor is one of the largest in the basins of Nahal HaBsor. Its total area is about 3,500 square kilometers, and the Besor River crosses and connects a special variety of landscapes and geographical units. It descends from the high Negev Mountains in the south, through the arid plains of the Negev Plateau, to the "Green Negev" and the Gaza Strip. In the center – Nahal Be'er Sheva descends from the Hebron Mountains through Be'er Sheva and connects to Nahal HaBsor in the area of Be'er Osnat – Tze'elim in the north – Nahal Gerar – from the hills of Lahav, Rahat and the western Negev until it connects to Nahal HaBsor near Tel Jama – Re'im. The main streambeds in the entire area create a dramatic contrast in the structure of the landscape and serve as connecting arteries to the units of landscape, nature, settlements and populations, history and agriculture. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 20:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's an Israeli government site. Considering the State of Palestine doesn't disagree, it's a valid source. Regardless, there is a preponderance of sources with a northwestern Negev origin and none for a Hebron Hills origin. Closetside (talk) 20:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These sources (as well as others) disagree with your none assertion:

the Hebron /Besor Stream that originates in the Palestinian Authority territory (West Bank), flows westward, crossing into Israel, and ultimately crosses again into the Palestinian Authority territory in Gaza Strip on the Mediterranean coast."[10]

The Khalil Besor river originates in the West Bank, flows through Israel and then reaches the Mediterranean in the Gaza Strip.[11]

M.Bitton (talk) 21:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC) M.Bitton (talk) 21:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those sources seem much more general than the specific ones such as the drainage authority. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 21:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are specific, secondary reliable sources about the subject (water management and hydrology). They are also WP:THIRDPARTY. M.Bitton (talk) 21:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See above where I rebut the use of those sources. I'd entertain a response but repeating the argument without acknowledging the rebuttal is problematic and won't get you anywhere. Closetside (talk) 21:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See above where an editor agrees with me. Moreover, I'm suggesting a compromise that will solve the issue of what is barely covered in RS. M.Bitton (talk) 21:42, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You assert that without addressing the fact that '...Water Management in the Middle East' and "Confronting water in an Israeli–Palestinian peace agreement" are much more general than ones specifically discussing the Besor and/or this specific basin.
As you've been told by neutral editors before, ignoring sources that you don't like isn't how Wikipedia works. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 22:30, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1) The RS dictate what is a fact and what isn't, and when they disagree, we state what they say and let the readers decide by themselves. 2) Nobody's ignoring anything. 3) I also made a suggestion about the scope of the article. M.Bitton (talk) 22:41, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you prefer that I say 'read but then refuse to engage with in a constructive manner' instead of 'ignore', that's fine. Either way, this is why you keep getting blocked by admins. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 23:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:NPA. M.Bitton (talk) 23:32, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, the paper uses the terms Beer Sheva Stream and Hebron Stream many times, implying that they are separate from the Besor Stream. Your position would support the articles for those streams into this one and new articles for what my position calls the upper Besor and perhaps the upper Be'er Sheva. Closetside (talk) 20:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please refer to my suggestion (regarding the notability of the subject). M.Bitton (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This violates convention per WP:NCRIVER, where the article is titled by the principal watercourse and tributaries (i.e. its watershed) are discussed within the article. I have no opposition to writing that it has tributaries in the West Bank, or its drainage basin extends into the Hebron Hills of the West Bank (it's true and should be written); my only opposition is that those tributaries are not part of the Besor stream itself so therefore the Besor doesn't originate in the West Bank. See my on-deck version where I mention it. Closetside (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The reliable sources decide what's WP:NOTABLE and what's not, and when they certain terms interchangeably, it's usually a good sign that whatever they keep referring to (the watershed in this instance) is the notable subject. M.Bitton (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Find me another river or stream where the river is not the name of the article but rather its watershed. Rather, WP:RIVER clearly says the article should be about the main river or stream and the article should talk about its drainage basin. Closetside (talk) 21:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I said what I needed to say. I'll await input from uninvolved editors (especially, with regard to the scope of the article). M.Bitton (talk) 21:43, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is an "on-deck version"? Richard Nevell (talk) 23:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The second-most recent version; which I plan to instate once consensus emerges that the main stream of the Besor originates at Mount Boker, not the Hebron Hills. Your position is unclear so could you please restate it, considering my rebuttal of M.Bitton's sources? Closetside (talk) 23:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a link [4]. On-deck is an expression that comes from baseball. Closetside (talk) 23:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please let us know what you think of my suggestion (regarding the scope of the article). M.Bitton (talk) 23:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Framing the article around the basin sounds feasible. It would probably mean renaming this article to reflect that, but given there was no consensus on the title last time around that may not be a bad thing. Richard Nevell (talk) 22:41, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Our disagreement was about whether there should be a separate Wadi Gaza article, not whether the Besor article should be Nahal Besor (which is the most common name per the analysis above I did and you did not dispute). Regardless "Besor basin" would violate NCRIVER and is a middle ground between what the RS say and a notion without unambiguous support from RS. Closetside (talk) 23:26, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment suggest that you get editors who have more experience with how river sources are usually determined in cases of conflicting evidence and who are au fait with the technical literature from Wikipedia:WikiProject Geography and Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers (and at all costs avoid pinging Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel or Wikipedia:WikiProject Palestine). Samuelshraga (talk) 18:04, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is no source that unambiguously places the origin of the Besor in the Hebron Hills, and many sources unambiguously place the origin near Sde Boker through maps and text. Meanwhile, no map places the origin in the Hebron Hills. Finally, the Nahal Be'er Sheva and Nahal Hevron exist, but no Hebrew name exists for the supposed tributary that starts near Sde Boker (it is the Upper Besor per the RS). Therefore, any compromise between these 2 notions is the middle-ground fallacy. Nobody opposes discussing the West Bank part of the watershed in the article (see the on-deck version). Numerically, 4 editors support Sde Boker, and 1-2 support the "middle-ground". Assuming no further comments, I say close this RfC and move to Nahal Besor while we're at it; this is the common name and there seems to be no opposition from anyone but M.Bitton for it. Renaming this article Besor watershed or keeping it as Besor Stream violates NCRIVER and COMMONNAME IMO. Closetside (talk) 22:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This Differentiated suspended sediment transport in headwater basins of the Beso...: The Wikipedia Library. has, on page 179, both a map and text that show the Besor running generally SE from the coast while the tributaries from the east and northeast are given different names. As you can see by the name, it is specifically about the Besor system. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That source says: "Nahal Besor drains a large part of the northern Negev and the Hebron Mountains". M.Bitton (talk) 12:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Regardless of what is claimed above, numerous RS (about the subject) describe, in no uncertain terms, the stream as originating in the West Bank. Obviously, that doesn't mean that the stream can't have another origin (this is the part that some editors seem to be struggling with).
Framing the article around the basin sounds feasible. Indeed. It will also allow us to address the root of the problem (the issue of the terms that are used interchangeably in various contexts). M.Bitton (talk) 12:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop trying to pretend that anyone is not "getting" something just because they disagree with your feelings of ownership around this article. Remember WP:AGF. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 16:17, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:NPA and WP:ASPERSIONS. M.Bitton (talk) 16:22, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this reply did not include an apology for the way M.Bitton chose to pretend that disagreeing with them means that people are struggling with something.
At some point you're going to need to read and start following all the articles you throw around in response to everyone else, or you're going to get blocked again. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 19:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
M.Bitton, since the AE admins seem incapable, i'll say that either you are either purposefully misrepresenting sources or lack the competence to edit articles concerning physical geography. Regardless, you should not be editing this article. fiveby(zero) 18:22, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Fiveby: You cannot just throw accusations without substantiating them:
Which source am I misrepresenting and how? M.Bitton (talk) 18:54, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As has been explained to you ad nauseam the sources you are using to try to alter the origin concern the watershed, catchments, or tributaries as the one you quoted above. You keep insisting as you said above the source says "Besor Stream" and that's all I care about and continue to fail to read and understand the sources or educate yourself in basic physical geography. A river or stream drains it watershed. The Hebron Hills are a source of the Besor watershed or basin, the Hebron/Besor catchment, the Hebron-Beersheva-Besor tributary, but they are not the origin of the Besor. This ain't the fucking Nile. fiveby(zero) 19:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, there is at least one editor who agrees with me, so your opinion is just that and nothing else.
This ain't the fucking Nile. this is what I call a super-unconvincing argument. I will also note that you have failed to substantiate your uncalled for and totally baseless accusation of "source misrepresentation".
Now, since the editor who started this RfC insists that "Wadi Gaza" and the "Besor stream" are one and the same, can you explain to me (ideally, using reliable sources) how one can claim that "Wadi Gaza" has just one origin (which happens to be the one that the OP thinks it is)? M.Bitton (talk) 19:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's not get distracted by strawman arguments, the RFC is not about whether Wadi Gaza has "just one origin".
Please stick to the topic and try to address what people are actually saying without attacking them. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 19:43, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the RFC is not about whether Wadi Gaza has "just one origin" Does that mean that you agree with the fact that it has more than one (which would mean that this RfC is badly framed)? M.Bitton (talk) 19:46, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In future, please assume that I mean the words I posted, and not some set of different words that you'd prefer I had posted, it will save us all a lot of time. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 16:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To set the record straight, the Wadi Gaza is not equivalent with the Nahal Besor. This is because the Western and Arab way of naming watercourses is different.
In the West, watercourses of a drainage basin are named in a tree-like manner, with the root being the watercourse's ultimate mouth (the Med here) and side branches (tributaries) break of the main branch (the principal watercourse). Sometimes at a fork, the main branch terminates and both feeding watercourses recieve a different name. Here, the Nahal Besor is the main branch, going from the Med to Mount Boker, and the Nahal Gerar, Nahal Be'er Sheva, etc. are tributaries branching off the main stream.
In the Arab world, the names of watercourses are more fluid with residents of a settlement naming the watercourses around them, without coordination from distant settlements. Hence, the Nahal Besor is Wadi al-Shammen near Mount Boker, Wadi al-Khalasa in Elusa and Wadi Gaza in Gaza. The Wadi Gaza originates at Mount Boker as much as it originates in the Hebron Hills for both are tributaries and the watercourse is no longer called the Wadi Gaza east of the Gaza Strip.
On the English Wikipedia, we use the Western way because English RS use the Western way. Not saying the Arab way is inferior, but it's bizarre to most English speakers who are used to the Western way and unfamiliar with the Arab way. Here too, most of us are used to the Western way, while @M.Bitton is familiar with the Arab way due to his background and @Richard Nevell through his research.
That's why I kept asking: "What is the tributary of the Besor Stream that originates at Mount Boker?" If the Besor originates in the Hebron Hills, the Western way requires a label for the branch that originates at Mount Boker. The Arab way does not for names are fluid. Nothing has ever been provided, despite a major archaeological site (Elusa (Haluza)) on its banks. This refutes a non-Mount Boker origin for the Besor.
I hope this is a nice explanation that explains both the majority and minority position and why they differ. Closetside (talk) 20:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the Wadi Gaza is not equivalent with the Nahal Besor Then why did you write this (to oppose the split that was proposed by Richard Nevell)?
You also wrote: There is no other tributary of the Wadi Gaza; it is the same stream as the Besor. M.Bitton (talk) 20:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your question is answered in the Requested Move discussion if you read the whole thing in context. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 20:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Replace "The Nahal Besor and Wadi Gaza are the same stream" with "the Wadi Gaza is part of the Nahal Besor, not a different stream" and the rest of my rationale reads fine. I wasn't aware of Arab hydrology nomenclature at the time, and most of our readers aren't aware of it either. Closetside (talk) 23:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First, that's an unsourced claim, and second, it doesn't address the issue that I raised above.
I wasn't aware of Arab hydrology do you have a reliable source that links the subject to "Arab hydrology"?
You also said (after being aware of Arab hydrology) that the Wadi Gaza is not equivalent with the Nahal Besor. M.Bitton (talk) 00:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is an observation. For example, Wadi Qelt has three names despite being a small wadi. Same for Nahal Hevron in Arabic and here as well (see above). Nahal Og is named after its Hebrew name because in Arabic it has multiple names which leads to the Hebrew name being the COMMONNAME. The multiple names correspond to different sections of the wadi. In contrast, in Hebrew there is only one name from source to mouth.
Of course after knowing Arab hydrology the Nahal Besor is not the Wadi Gaza, the latter is a section of a former that ends somewhere on the Gaza Strip-Israel border.
Yes, the Wadi Gaza has multiple origins. This is because no headwater of the Besor basin is labelled the Wadi Gaza in Arabic. However, Besor is the common name of the watercourse and RS identify its source as Mount Boker. When you tell me the tributary name (in Hebrew) that goes from Mount Boker, we can talk. Otherwise it is clear where the Besor originates. Closetside (talk) 03:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a more interesting observation:
  1. To prevent the article from being split, you argued at length that "Wadi Gaza is the same as the Besor stream".
  2. To deny a sourced origin that you disagree with, you claimed that "Wadi Gaza is not equivalent with the Nahal Besor".
  3. To justify the above contradictory claims (after being confronted with them), you claimed that you weren't aware of "Arab hydrology".
  4. When asked to provide a reliable source that links "Arab hydrology" to the subject, you ignored the request.
  5. You then stated that "the Nahal Besor is not the Wadi Gaza" while mentioning "Arab hydrology" again (without a source in sight).
  6. After wrapping the lot in more unsubstantiated claims, you are now setting some irrelevant condition which needs to be met (in the language of your choice) before "we can talk".
M.Bitton (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how widespread this phenomenon is; all I know is that the Wadi Gaza definitely loses its name by the Eshkol National Park, where the Besor is known as Wadi Shellal (see brill.com/display/book/edcoll/9789004400504/BP000016.xml; www.kkl-jnf.org/tourism-and-recreation/israeli-heritage-sites/anzac-trail/sites/eshkol-park-nahal-besor/). Further south, at Elusa, the Besor is known as Wadi al-Khalassa (see www.researchgate.net/figure/Preliminary-layout-of-the-city_fig2_350453543).
This is also true for several other streams (see above); I am not a hydrologist and can't confirm if this is universal. However, that is irrelevant; the point is that the Besor has multiple names in Arabic and Gaza is only the name of its most downstream section; Shellal (even per your notion) and al-Khalassa (per the RS but not your notion). In English and Hebrew, the entire stream is the Nahal Besor (see sources above) and per WP:NCRIVER, we write articles about streams, not sections of streams.
If Mount Boker is not the origin of the Besor, it is the origin of a tributary. What is this tributary called (in Hebrew)? Meanwhile Nahal Hevron and Nahal Be'er Sheva are tributaries of the Besor (see the articles with sources). Closetside (talk) 16:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given that this observation (which speaks for itself) is followed by another pile of unsubstantiated claims (about what is what and what isn't), I'd say it's high time to let the RS and the polices do the talk (ideally, by some editors who haven't been invited to this RfC). M.Bitton (talk) 16:51, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have 3 editors already that came on their own volition (Fiveby, MilesVorkosigan, and Durraz0) which all agree with me. With Richard Nevell agreeing with you it is 4-2 and considering your side hasn't provided one map in your favor or named the alleged Mount Boker tributary, I look forward to a closing in my favor. Closetside (talk) 17:02, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please read this very important observation, as well as what I said here. M.Bitton (talk) 17:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the Besor has multiple names in Arabic based on sections is based on RS (see my post above); whether Arab hydrology generally does this is conjuncture (at least to me, a non-hydrologist) and not relevant here. A preponderance of maps and scholarly papers have shown a Mount Boker origin. Not a single map shows a Hebron origin, nor does a single paper communicate that unambiguously. No paper has named the alleged tributary, which would have been trivial to find because Elusa is a major archeological site. With this, I rest my case. Closetside (talk) 17:11, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All in all, I'd say that this a further proof that as long as the issues that have been raised by Richard Nevell and myself haven't been addressed, we will have conflicting claims that we will need to represent per WP:NPOV. I will also note that so far, I only listed the sources that mention the word "Besor", but should this article end up conflating the Besor stream with Wadi Gaza, then the situation will become worse (a lot worse, since the latter is more notable, and the RS covering it much clearer). I'm done here. M.Bitton (talk) 17:15, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This paper[12] equates the downstream Besor with the Wadi Gaza. Countless sources show the Hebrew name for the Wadi Gaza is the [lower] Nahal Besor. Here's another paper [13].
Once again, I have rebutted all your sources as ambiguous at best, not been shown a single map or a name of a tributary that must exist per your notion. There is no other POV. I have shown here that Arab hydrology divides the Besor into sections through RS. You have a tendency to ignore my arguments and beat the same drum like a proponent of a canard long after it has been refuted. I truly rest my case here until I can get an unambiguous source, a map and the name. Closetside (talk) 17:28, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You have a tendency to ignore my arguments you have a tendency to contradict yourself and make unsubstantiated claims (depending on what you're after).
You also seem to be conflating the "Wadi Gaza/Nahal Besor" (the watershed) with the stream (above source). Incidentally, making the article about the watershed is one of solutions that was proposed above.
Anyway, you'll be glad to know that WP:NPOV is non-negotiable and the principles upon which it is based cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, nor by editor consensus. M.Bitton (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any idea what you're trying to claim is non-neutral here? You implied before that you're trying to bludgeon this discussion because it has some vital connection to politics, but I don't think you ever said specifically what it is.
Or are you just bringing up NPOV to wave policies around because you can't answer the question about what the stream is named at Mt. Boker? MilesVorkosigan (talk) 22:55, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1) According to M.Bitton, my position somehow "erase[s] Palestine". Steelmanning his argument, relegating the West Bank portion of its drainage basin to its tributaries would draw less attention to this fact. However, the Mt. Boker origin is not my invention, it is the position of the RS with no unambiguous dissent. Furthermore, the Mt. Boker definition pre-existed the State of Israel and the West Bank so "erasing Palestine" cannot be the motive. In fact, the explicitly pro-Palestinian Arabic Wikipedia does not dispute the Mount Boker origin.
2) Pretty much. NPOV considers actual POVs, not mere ruminations of anonymous Wikipedia editors, and if it actually existed, its proponents would have several unambiguous statements, maps, and a name for what they would consider the Mount Boker tributary to the Besor.
I recommend that both of us ( @MilesVorkosigan and I) rest our cases in this dispute. Any closer will realize the "undetermined source" is a false middle ground between the RS position and an unsupported position. Furthermore, this editor got blocked two months ago for this exact behavior and will probably get blocked again. Thanks for having my back. Closetside (talk) 23:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, got it. Gotta right the great wrongs. That would explain it. Good idea, I have nothing further to add. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 23:26, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The mere mention of the NPOV policy,
And the air thickens, they can't see.

— Unknown author, who also coined "veni, vidi, risi"
. M.Bitton (talk) 00:42, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please remember that the talk pages are for discussing the article, not taunting other editors. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 00:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't much discussion in the above walls of mumbo jumbo and aspersions from those who panicked at the mere mention of a policy. M.Bitton (talk) 00:53, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Bergman, N., Roskin, J., Greenbaum, N. et al. Comment on “Analysis of extreme rainfall trend and mapping of the Wadi pluvial flood in the Gaza coastal plain of Palestine”. Acta Geophys. 72, 4333–4340 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-024-01446-9
  2. ^ a b c Cite error: The named reference kamel2023 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ a b Pavlovic, Vedrana; Weissgerber, Tracey; Stanisavljevic, Dejana; Pekmezovic, Tatjana; Milicevic, Ognjen; Lazovic, Jelena Milin; Cirkovic, Andja; Savic, Marko; Rajovic, Nina; Piperac, Pavle; Djuric, Nemanja; Madzarevic, Petar; Dimitrijevic, Ana; Randjelovic, Simona; Nestorovic, Emilija; Akinyombo, Remi; Pavlovic, Andrija; Ghamrawi, Ranine; Garovic, Vesna; Milic, Natasa (12 March 2021). "How accurate are citations of frequently cited papers in biomedical literature?". Clinical Science. 135 (5): 671–681. doi:10.1042/CS20201573. PMC 8048031. PMID 33599711.
  4. ^ Yavchitz, Amélie; Boutron, Isabelle; Bafeta, Aida; Marroun, Ibrahim; Charles, Pierre; Mantz, Jean; Ravaud, Philippe; Bero, Lisa A. (11 September 2012). "Misrepresentation of randomized controlled trials in press releases and news coverage: a cohort study". PLOS Medicine. 9 (9): e1001308. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001308. PMC 3439420. PMID 22984354.
  5. ^ Pitkin, Roy M.; Branagan, Mary Ann (15 July 1998). "Can the accuracy of abstracts be improved by providing specific instructions? A randomized controlled trial". JAMA. 280 (3): 267–9. doi:10.1001/jama.280.3.267. PMID 9676677.Open access icon
  6. ^ Hopewell, Sally; Clarke, Mike; Moher, David; Wager, Elizabeth; Middleton, Philippa; Altman, Douglas G; Schulz, Kenneth F; von Elm, Erik (22 January 2008). "CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration". PLOS Medicine. 5 (1): e20. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050020. PMC 2211558. PMID 18215107.Open access icon
  7. ^ O'Donohoe, TJ; Dhillon, R; Bridson, TL; Tee, J (1 July 2019). "Reporting Quality of Systematic Review Abstracts Published in Leading Neurosurgical Journals: A Research on Research Study". Neurosurgery. 85 (1): 1–10. doi:10.1093/neuros/nyy615. PMID 30649511.
  8. ^ How do I cite an abstract?
  9. ^ Asaf, L., Negaoker, N., Tal, A., Laronne, J., Khateeb, N.A. (2007). Transboundary Stream Restoration in Israel and the Palestinian Authority. In: Lipchin, C., Pallant, E., Saranga, D., Amster, A. (eds) Integrated Water Resources Management and Security in the Middle East. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5986-5_13
  10. ^ Alon Tal, Alfred Abed Rabbo (2010). Water Wisdom Preparing the Groundwork for Cooperative and Sustainable Water Management in the Middle East. Rutgers University Press. p. 142. ISBN 978-0-8135-4770-1.
  11. ^ Brooks, David; Trottier, Julie (2010). "Confronting water in an Israeli–Palestinian peace agreement". Journal of Hydrology. 382 (1–4). Elsevier BV: 103–114. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.12.021. ISSN 0022-1694.
  12. ^ d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/47936333/SURFACE_WATER_CHARACTERIZATION__UTILIZAT20160810-2551-6sr465-libre.pdf
  13. ^ agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2004WR003344