The dispute about Mitchell Bard, the number of Palestinian refugees, and the report of the UN Mediator (prepared 24 hours before his assassination), is a good example of the difficulties faced by editors who must rely on secondary or tertiary sources of doubtful veracity. Personally I would not mention Bard's claim because he obviously doesn't know what he is talking about. For example he claims results of a British census in 1945 when everyone knows that the last census was in 1931. Worse than that, his failure to note that the date of the Mediator's report meant that it was only a partial count is proof of his dishonesty; no nicer way to put it.
Nevertheless....I offer to consult the original UN documents (if I have them; I think I do) to see if the 472,000 figure appears there and in what context. If the number is not there, I'll refute the claim that it is. If it is there, I'll quote it in context.
Zero.
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
zero 0000 said:
For example he claims results of a British census in 1945 when everyone knows that the last census was in 1931.
Well actually there was an extraordinary census in 1939, so the information for 1945 wasn't entirely useless. Only somewhat useless, given the intervening war and the associated rapid social changes.
Nevertheless....I offer to consult the original UN documents (if I have them; I think I do) to see if the 472,000 figure appears there and in what context. If the number is not there, I'll refute the claim that it is. If it is there, I'll quote it in context.
Thanks, Zero. Your return to these pages would be most welcome, though I understand your reasons for leaving.
Jay.
There are a number of libraries around that are depositories of UN documents, the Denver Public Library for one. But to get this back on track as far as it being a mailing list topic. A reference given to support something in Wikipedia should be to a page in a readily accessable document, not to something that might be found if one searches an extensive document.
In this case there is a middleman, which one might use if that person gave an adequate reference. (In his written work, not after calling him up and asking for one).
Fred
From: "JAY JG" jayjg@hotmail.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 20:25:00 -0500 To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Situation deadlocked, how to solve it?
Nevertheless....I offer to consult the original UN documents (if I have them; I think I do) to see if the 472,000 figure appears there and in what context. If the number is not there, I'll refute the claim that it is. If it is there, I'll quote it in context.
Thanks, Zero. Your return to these pages would be most welcome, though I understand your reasons for leaving.
Jay.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Again, thank you all for your replies.
zero 0000: Personally I would not mention Bard's claim because he obviously doesn't know what he is talking about. For example he claims
You have a point in that, but I must disagree. Because the only way to avoid this circus repeating itself the next time someone jayjg-like comes around and inserts the 472,000 claim, is to already have it there explained with the caveats.
zero 0000: Nevertheless....I offer to consult the original UN documents (if I have them; I think I do) to see if the 472,000 figure appears there and in what context.
Yes, that would be very useful! But even *if* the number is there, it doesn't change the fact that the report was written before September 16, 1948. Noone should have to read "472,000" and "UN Mediator" and falsely believe that that was an *estimate* for the *total* number of Palestinian refugees created. I believe someone who doesn't know very much about the Palestine war will get that impression. That suspicion I base on this:
"As for the date [September 16, 1948], as I understand it most Palestinians had left by then."
That is what this issue is really about since both me and Jayjg has edited from the assumption that Mitchell Bard is not lying. But how we want to present Bard's number differ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Estimates_of_the_Palestinian_Refug...
The green in that diff is how I want it presented and the yellow is how Jayjg wants it presented.
Bjorn, Jayjg's description is correct here. Your version suggests that the figure is Mitchell Bard's, but it isn't (he gives his own estimate elsewhere). The figure is from the UN mediator's progress report, which Mitchell Bard says he is quoting.
Would you please post your correspondence with him on the Talk page, as you indicated you would, so that other editors can judge whether he was evasive in response to your enquiry? Your claims about Mitchell Bard as a source have implications for a number of Wikipedia articles in which he is quoted.
Slim
On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 03:15:42 +0100, BJörn Lindqvist bjourne@gmail.com wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Estimates_of_the_Palestinian_Refug...
The green in that diff is how I want it presented and the yellow is how Jayjg wants it presented.
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:27:18 -0700, slimvirgin@gmail.com slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
Bjorn, Jayjg's description is correct here. Your version suggests that the figure is Mitchell Bard's, but it isn't (he gives his own estimate elsewhere). The figure is from the UN mediator's progress report, which Mitchell Bard says he is quoting.
My version suggests that the only source to the claim that there were 472,000 Palestinian refugees in total created in the Palestine war is Mitchell Bard. In fact the only source has to be him since Count Folke Bernadotte cannot by applying pure logic have done such a claim. So, while the figure 472,000 might very well have appeared in Bernadotte's report, it *must* have been used in an entierly different context than in which Bard uses it in. It can *not* be written that Bernadotte estimated that the total number of refugees was 472,000 because that is completely false. That is what is done in Jayjg's version.
Bjorn, Jayjg's description is correct here. Your version suggests that the figure is Mitchell Bard's, but it isn't (he gives his own estimate elsewhere). The figure is from the UN mediator's progress report, which Mitchell Bard says he is quoting.
Well let's wait until we can say that the figure is in the UN mediator's report. Those of us who have checked on the UN copy have not found the figure.