Talk:Bethlehem

Edit request - first phrase

Hi, many people wonder if Bethlehem is in Israel or Palestine, that’s why I liked the previous opening sentence - “Bethlehem is a city in the West Bank, in the State of Palestine…”, but I see that it has recently been changed to “…is a city in the Israeli-occupied West Bank”, which of course is factually correct, but in my opinion saying first thing that it is Israeli-occupied makes it seem like it is Israeli, more so than Palestinian. What about removing the “Israeli” from the first line, only to make it clear it is Palestinian, and leaving the part about Israeli occupation where it is already mentioned, further down? Thank you. 2A00:A041:3B9A:AC00:11E2:7CD6:40A5:1A3C (talk) 18:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I suggest we change the introduction to "Bethlehem is a Palestinian city in the Israeli-occupied West Bank". This adds clarity to the legal status of the city. Zoozoor (talk) 21:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Remsense

Hello, I see that you reverted the first sentence to include "Israeli-occupied" before West Bank.

-

While this is an accurate description, some of us would prefer it be rephrased, so that the UN legal status of the city (Palestinian) is more obvious to readers who wish to skim the article.

-

I'd like your input on this discussion so we can make an informal consensus about the lead. Zoozoor (talk) 23:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I think the present phrasing is pretty clear and doesn't really create the problem you describe. Remsense ‥ 论 05:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Re: this article post-revert:

This phrasing is surprising. Look at the lede for most any other page describing some city, say, Barcelona or Donetsk Oblast. I expect the first link naming the country/region/etc. a city is in to link to the page on that country/region/etc. Using a phrasing like "...is a city in Palestine, in the West Bank" is obviously factually correct and links directly to the appropriate containing region with two useful levels of granularity. Note, for example, that the third paragraph on Donetsk also describes how that region is currently under military occupation in quite some detail: it is and has been relevant enough to deserve that kind of placement. Maybe the opening or the lede of this article deserves more detail about the impacts of this occupation, but that sounds more like an enhancement someone could make than a flaw in what stood.

I think the version in my edit was better on those fronts, so I'm currently feeling like we should just let that version rock, and let anyone so interested improve it further. If you've got any objections, I'd like to see something more constructive than "I think it was pretty clear before" or "I don't feel like this an improvement." Why? nfd9001 (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Etymology

'לחם' in any context does not mean food.

'בית לחם' can only mean 'house of bread'.

I wanted to edit it, but since it is closed I can not, so here I am. Hwndqkjep (talk) 16:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit request - failed source verification

The article includes the line, "Christian families that have lived in Bethlehem for hundreds of years are being forced to leave as land in Bethlehem is seized, and homes bulldozed, for construction of thousands of new Israeli homes." The citation, source [11], does not corroborate this. The closest the article (which is not directly hyperlinked for some reason?) comes is in the paragraph: "Down in Beit Sahour, which is mostly Christian, residents of one housing development have been living under the threat of demolition for more than a decade since an Israeli court ruled its building illegal. The order was frozen but never lifted, leaving families in limbo, wondering if or when the bulldozers will arrive and where they will go if they do. “This is the only place left for us,” says William Sahouri, whose family has lived in the area for more than 300 years. “There are no lands to expand.”"

As you can see, this article does not allege that even a single Christian family was actually forced anywhere. The "lived in Bethlehem for hundreds of years" is in reference to a single family, that had lived "in the area", whose presence as far as the article is concerned is still in Bethlehem, and they are not even explicitly identified as Christian. The claim that Christian families are being forced out is not substantiated by the article, for reasons of constructing new Israeli homes or for any other reason.

I request that the article be edited to reflect what the source actually says.

Here is the article: https://www.thetimes.com/article/settlements-choke-peace-in-the-little-town-of-bethlehem-mkczz7vgvvz 2600:1700:67A8:230:43:4E0C:6A70:7096 (talk) 05:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I think that is it almost universally agreed upon that Palestinian Christians have had their homes seized and bulldozed in order for Israel to create and expand settlements. Regardless of somebody's political opinion in this area, removing information about the pressure placed on Palestinian Christians by the Israeli occupation would result in a presentation of the conflict that is not based in reality. If your issue is the source provided, there are several sources you can find that describe the theft of Palestinian Christian land and places of living in order to create or expand Israeli settlements. SirCapybara (talk) 05:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Add those sources you found, then. Assuming OP here is correct (I haven't read deeply) , see WP:BURDEN. nfd9001 (talk) 19:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Edit request - "effected"

Please can someone effect this change in the lead:

Aspects of life in and around Bethlehem are effected by the Israeli occupation of the West Bank. → Aspects of life in and around Bethlehem are affected by the Israeli occupation of the West Bank

Per widely accepted usage, see affect and effect. Mediocre.marsupial (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed by undoing the recent edit that happened to introduce the error, and I found not to be an improvement regardless. Remsense ‥ 论 02:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

section 'Economy' : dead calm since 7 October 2023

on 7 October 2023, Hamas and other terror groups launched the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel. Since then, there is almost no tourism in Israel. Bethlehem haslost two peak seasons: Christmas 2023 and 2024. poverty and unemployment have risen.

https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/asien/weihnachten-bethlehem-krieg-nahost-102.html (2023)

https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/korrespondenten/bethlehem-im-westjordanland-weihnachten-im-krieg-100.html (2024) 178.203.109.225 (talk) 09:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

An English-language source: Associated Press. Donald Albury 15:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

section 'Modern era': Biased sources and inaccurate information

Hello, best wishes to you all. Under the 'Modern era' section of the article, there are several pieces of information included that are not factually based or are only supported by extremely biased sources. First, it is claimed that "When the Palestinian Authority assumed control in 1995, it publicly extended the boundaries of Bethlehem, allegedly to secure a Muslim majority". However, the source provided for this claim is a pro-Israel website that argues against the positions of Jerusalem's Latin Patriarch, the Archbishop of Westminster, and other supporters of Palestinian Christians. Often times, the source quotes its own author as sources for its claims, and it does not provide any legitimate evidence for its claim. The author clearly has a pro-Israel viewpoint, and is writing in order to support this viewpoint.

Second, it is claimed that "According to International Christian Concern, there are reports of Christians suffering sexual harassments, kidnappings, forced marriages, extortion and murder of converts by Muslims and PA officials". However, both sources provided for this claim are blatantly biased and do not present the facts in a balanced manner. For instance, the first source from International Christian Concern portrays the secular Palestinian Authority as "The Muslim Fatah-controlled authority in Judea and Samaria". The usage of the term "Judea and Samaria" in order to describe the internationally-recognized West Bank represents a clear pro-Israel bias in the supposed source. Furthermore, describing the Palestinian Authority as "Muslim Fatah-controlled" clearly ignores the fact that Fatah is a secular Palestinian political party that includes many Christians, including Anton Salman, the former Mayor of Bethlehem. As a result, the claim being made is biased and does not portray the conflict in a fair, neutral manner.

Therefore, I am requesting for both of these claims to be removed from the page. I appreciate your help with this matter, as well as your interest in keeping the page neutral. SirCapybara (talk) 05:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

The claim about extending the boundaries was sourced to WorldNetDaily, which has been deprecated since 2018. Zero^talk 05:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC)