text:
Freiburg im Breisgau

Freiburg im Breisgau (Alemannic: Friburg im Brisgau; Fribourg-en-Brisgau; lit. Freecastle in the Breisgau; mostly called simply Freiburg) is the fourth-largest city of the German state of Baden-Württemberg after Stuttgart, Mannheim and Karlsruhe. With around 236,000 inhabitants, it is Germany's 33rd-largest city. Its built-up area has a population of about 355,000 (2021) while the greater Freiburg metropolitan area ("Einzugsgebiet") has about 660,000 (2018).

Freiburg is located in Baden, at the southwestern foothills of the Black Forest, on the Dreisam River, a tributary of the Elz. It is Germany's southwestern- and southernmost city with a population exceeding 100,000. It lies in the Breisgau, one of Germany's warmest regions, in the south of the Upper Rhine Plain. Its city limits reach from the Schauinsland summit (1284 m) in the Black Forest to 3 km east of the French border, while Switzerland is 42 km to the south. The city is situated in the major wine-growing region of Baden and, together with Offenburg, serves as a tourist entry-point to the scenic Black Forest. According to meteorological statistics, Freiburg held the all-time German temperature record of 40.2 °C from 2003 to 2015.

An old university town and archiepiscopal seat, it was incorporated in the early 12th century and soon became a commercial, intellectual and ecclesiastical center for the Upper Rhine region. The University of Freiburg (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg), founded in 1457, is one of Germany's oldest universities. Freiburg's main landmark is the Freiburg Minster (Freiburger Münster), which was built between c. 1200 and 1513 and has been described as "Gothic architectural masterpiece".

The old town is traversed by an extensive system of runnels called Bächle (lit. small streams), that are fed with water from the Dreisam and run on the side and sometimes in the middle of almost all streets and alleys, giving the city a unique touch. Freiburg has a high standard of living, and is known for its advanced environmental practices, which is embodied by projects like the creation of the sustainable district of Vauban.

The dialect spoken in Freiburg is classified as (Upper Rhenish) Low Alemannic, and therefore most closely related to the other dialects of Baden north of Markgräflerland and south of Karlsruhe, to most dialects historically spoken in Alsace (Alsatian), and to Basel German.

History
Freiburg was founded by Konrad and Duke Berthold III of the House of Zähringen in 1120 as a free market town; hence its name, which translates to "free (or independent) town". Frei means "free", and Burg, like the modern English word "borough", was used in those days for an incorporated city or town, usually one with some degree of autonomy. The German word Burg also means "a fortified town", as in Hamburg. Thus, it is likely that the name of this place means a "fortified town of free citizens".

This town was strategically located at a junction of trade routes between the Mediterranean Sea and the North Sea regions, and the Rhine and Danube rivers. In 1200, Freiburg's population numbered approximately 6,000 people. At about that time, under the rule of Bertold V, the last duke of Zähringen, the city began construction of its Freiburg Minster cathedral on the site of an older parish church. Begun in the Romanesque style, it was continued and completed 1513 for the most part as a Gothic edifice. In 1218, when Bertold V died, then Egino V von Urach, the count of Urach assumed the title of Freiburg's count as Egino I von Freiburg. The city council did not trust the new nobles and wrote down its established rights in a document. At the end of the thirteenth century there was a feud between the citizens of Freiburg and their lord, Count Egino II of Freiburg. Egino II raised taxes and sought to limit the citizens' freedom, after which the Freiburgers used catapults to destroy the count's castle atop the Schloßberg, a hill that overlooks the city center. The furious count called on his brother-in-law the Prince-Bishopric of Strasbourg, Conrad of Lichtenberg, for help. The bishop responded by marching with his army to Freiburg.

According to an old Freiburg legend, a butcher named Hauri stabbed the Bishop of Strasbourg to death on 29 July 1299. It was a Pyrrhic victory, since henceforth the citizens of Freiburg had to pay an annual expiation of 300 marks in silver to the count of Freiburg until 1368. In 1366 the counts of Freiburg made another failed attempt to occupy the city during a night raid. Eventually the citizens were fed up with their lords, and in 1368 Freiburg purchased its independence from them. The city turned itself over to the protection of the Habsburgs, who allowed the city to retain a large measure of freedom. Most of the nobles of the city died in the battle of Sempach (1386). The patrician family Schnewlin took control of the city until the guildsmen revolted. The guilds became more powerful than the patricians by 1389.

The silver mines in Mount Schauinsland provided an important source of capital for Freiburg. This silver made Freiburg one of the richest cities in Europe, and in 1327 Freiburg minted its own coin, the Rappenpfennig. In 1377 the cities of Freiburg, Basel, Colmar, and Breisach entered into a monetary alliance known as the Genossenschaft des Rappenpfennigs (Rappenpfennig Collective). This alliance facilitated commerce among the cities and lasted until the end of the sixteenth century. There were 8,000–9,000 people living in Freiburg between the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and 30 churches and monasteries. At the end of the fourteenth century the veins of silver were dwindling, and by 1460 only approximately 6,000 people still lived within Freiburg's city walls.

A university city, Freiburg evolved from its focus on mining to become a cultural centre for the arts and sciences. It was also a commercial center. The end of the Middle Ages and the dawn of the Renaissance was a time of both advances and tragedy for Freiburg.

In 1457, Albrecht VI, Regent of Further Austria, established Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, one of Germany's oldest universities. In 1498, Emperor Maximilian I held a Reichstag in Freiburg. In 1520, the city ratified a set of legal reforms, widely considered the most progressive of the time. The aim was to find a balance between city traditions and old Roman Law. The reforms were well received, especially the sections dealing with civil process law, punishment, and the city's constitution.

In 1520, Freiburg decided not to take part in the Reformation and became an important centre for Catholicism on the Upper Rhine. Erasmus moved here after Basel accepted the Reformation. In 1536, a strong and persistent belief in witchcraft led to the city's first witch-hunt. The need to find a scapegoat for calamities such as the Black Plague, which claimed 2,000 area residents (25% of the city population) in 1564, led to an escalation in witch-hunting that reached its peak in 1599. A plaque on the old city wall marks the spot where burnings were carried out.

The seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries were turbulent times for Freiburg. At the beginning of the Thirty Years' War in 1618, its population numbered between 10,000 to 14,000; when it ended in 1648, only 2,000 remained. In August 1644, it was the site of the Battle of Freiburg, said to be the bloodiest battle of the war in times of percentage casualties.

Between 1648 and 1805, when the city was not under French occupation it was the administrative headquarters of Further Austria, the Habsburg territories in the southwest of Germany. In 1805, the city, together with the Breisgau and Ortenau areas, became part of Baden. In 1827, when the Archdiocese of Freiburg was founded, Freiburg became the seat of a Catholic archbishop.

Freiburg was heavily bombed during World War II. In May 1940, aircraft of the Luftwaffe mistakenly dropped approximately 60 bombs on Freiburg near the railway station, killing 57 people, most of them civilians and including 22 children. This was reported by the official German news agency as an attack by the Western Allies, and retaliation against them was threatened. The Freiburg police commander subsequently established that the bombs were German, but the full story was not published until many years later. On 27 November 1944, a raid by more than 300 bombers of RAF Bomber Command (Operation Tigerfish) destroyed a large portion of the city centre, with the notable exception of the Münster, which was only lightly damaged. After the war, the city was rebuilt on its medieval plan.

On 22 October 1940, the Nazi Gauleiter of Baden, Robert Heinrich Wagner, ordered the deportation of all of Baden's and 350 of Freiburg's Jewish population. They were deported to Camp Gurs in the south of France, where many died. On 18 July 1942, the remaining Baden and Freiburg Jews were transferred to Auschwitz in German-occupied Poland, where almost all were murdered. A living memorial has been created in the form of the 'footprint' in marble on the site of the city's original synagogue, which was burned down on 9 November 1938, during the pogrom known as Kristallnacht. The memorial is a fountain and contains a bronze plaque commemorating the original building and the Jewish community which perished. The pavements of Freiburg carry memorials to individual victims, in the form of brass plates outside their former residences. There was a camp for Sinti and Romani people (see Romani Holocaust) in the city.

It was occupied by the French Army on 21 April 1945, and Freiburg was soon allotted to the French Zone of Occupation. In December 1945 Freiburg became the seat of government for the German state of Baden, which was merged into Baden-Württemberg in 1952. The French Army maintained a presence in Freiburg until 1991, when the last French Army division left the city, and left Germany.

On the site of the former French Army base, a new neighborhood for 5,000 people, Vauban, began in the late 1990s as a "sustainable model district". Solar power provides electricity to many of the households in this small community.

Points of interest
Because of its scenic beauty, relatively warm and sunny climate, and easy access to the Black Forest, Freiburg is a hub for regional tourism. In 2010, Freiburg was voted as the Academy of Urbanism's European City of the Year in recognition of the exemplary sustainable urbanism it has implemented over the past several decades.

The longest cable car run in Germany, which is 3.6 km long, runs from Günterstal up to a nearby mountain called Schauinsland.

The city has an unusual system of gutters (called Freiburg Bächle) that run throughout its centre. These Bächle, once used to provide water to fight fires and feed livestock, are constantly flowing with water diverted from the Dreisam. They were never intended to be used for sewage, and even in the Middle Ages such use could lead to harsh penalties. During the summer, the running water provides natural cooling of the air, and offers a pleasant gurgling sound. It is said that if one accidentally falls or steps into a Bächle, they will marry a Freiburger, or 'Bobbele'.

The Augustinerplatz is one of the central squares in the old city. Formerly the location of an Augustinian monastery that became the Augustiner Museum in 1921, it is now a popular social space for Freiburg's younger residents. It has a number of restaurants and bars, including the local brewery 'Feierling', which has a Biergarten. On warm summer nights, hundreds of students gather here.

At the centre of the old city is the Münsterplatz or Cathedral Square, Freiburg's largest square. A farmers' market is held here every day except Sundays. This is the site of Freiburg's Münster, a gothic minster cathedral constructed of red sandstone, built between 1200 and 1530 and noted for its towering spire.

The Historical Merchants' Hall (Historisches Kaufhaus), is a Late Gothic building on the south side of Freiburg's Münsterplatz. Built between 1520 and 1530, it was once the center of the financial life of the region. Its façade is decorated with statues and the coat of arms of four Habsburg emperors.

The Altes Rathaus, or old city hall, was completed in 1559 and has a painted façade. The Platz der alten Synagoge "Old Synagogue Square" is one of the more important squares on the outskirts of the historic old city. The square was the location of a synagogue until it was destroyed on Kristallnacht in 1938. Zum Roten Bären, the oldest hotel in Germany, is located along Oberlinden near the Swabian Gate.

The Siegesdenkmal, or victory monument, is a monument to the German victory in the Franco-Prussian War in 1871. It is situated at the northern edge of the historic city center of Freiburg and was built by Karl Friedrich Moest. In everyday language of people living in Freiburg, it serves as an orientation marker or as a meeting place.

To the east of the city centre, the Schlossberg hill provides extensive views over the city and surrounding region. The castle (Schloss) from which the hill takes its name was demolished in the 1740s, and only ruins remain. Schlossberg retained its importance to the city, however, and 150 years ago the city leaders opened up walks and views to make the mountain available to the public. Today, the Schlossbergbahn funicular railway connects the city centre to the hill.

Other museums in the city include the Archaeology Colombischlössle Museum.

List of popular sights

 * Arboretum Freiburg-Günterstal, an arboretum in the suburb of Günterstal
 * Freiburg Botanic Garden
 * University of Freiburg
 * University Library Freiburg, the newly renovated library features a modern design
 * The Whale House, which, in Dario Argento's 1977 horror film Suspiria, served as the Dance Academy, the film's central location
 * Augustiner Museum
 * Freiburg Munster
 * Schauinsland
 * Schlossberg
 * Colombischlössle Archeological Museum
 * Green spaces
 * Vauban, Freiburg, a sustainable eco-community
 * Cobblestone mosaics
 * Kybfelsen Castle

Geography
Freiburg is bordered by the Black Forest mountains Rosskopf and Bromberg to the east, Schönberg and Tuniberg to the south, with the Kaiserstuhl hill region to the west.

Climate
The Köppen climate classification classifies Freiburg's climate as temperate oceanic climate (Cfb). Thus, July and August are, along with Karlsruhe, the warmest within Germany. Winters are moderate but usually with some frosts at night. More year-round rain occurs here than in the Rhine plateau. The city is close to the Kaiserstuhl, a range of hills of volcanic origin located a few kilometers away, which is one of the warmest places in Germany and therefore considered as a viticultural area.

Government
Freiburg is known as an "eco-city". In June 1995, the Freiburg city council adopted a resolution that it would permit construction only of "low-energy buildings" on municipal land, and all new buildings must comply with certain low energy specifications. The neighbourhoods of Vauban and Rieselfeld were developed and built in the late 1990s in accordance with the principles of sustainability. The city is also home to a branch of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection, as well as solar industry and research. The citizens of Freiburg are known in Germany for their love of cycling and recycling. Freiburg is host to a number of international organisations, in particular, ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability, International Solar Energy Society, and the City Mayors Foundation. Politically, it is a longtime stronghold of the Alliance 90/The Greens, who have seen consistent success since the 1990s and have been the largest party on the city council since 2004. For many years, they performed more strongly in Freiburg than any other major city: former mayor Dieter Salomon, who served from 2002 to 2018, was the first member of the Greens to hold such an office in a city of over 100,000 people.

Mayor
The current mayor of Freiburg is Martin Horn since 2018. He was previously a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) but left before running for mayor. In the election, he was supported by the SPD and the Free Democratic Party (FDP). The most recent mayoral election was held on 22 April 2018, with a runoff held on 6 May, and the results were as follows:

! rowspan=2 colspan=2| Candidate ! rowspan=2| Party ! colspan=2| First round ! colspan=2| Second round ! Votes ! % ! Votes ! % ! colspan=3| Valid votes ! 86,693 ! 99.5 ! 87,999 ! 99.8 ! colspan=3| Invalid votes ! 425 ! 0.5 ! 195 ! 0.2 ! colspan=3| Total ! 87,118 ! 100.0 ! 88,194 ! 100.0 ! colspan=3| Electorate/voter turnout ! 170,793 ! 51.0 ! 170,419 ! 51.8
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Martin Horn
 * align=left| Independent (SPD, FDP)
 * 30,067
 * 34.7
 * 38,907
 * 44.2
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Dieter Salomon
 * align=left| Alliance 90/The Greens
 * 27,094
 * 31.3
 * 27,014
 * 30.7
 * bgcolor=#4D8E8A|
 * align=left| Monika Stein
 * align=left| Green Alternative Freiburg (LiSSt/Junges/UFF)
 * 22,726
 * 26.2
 * 21,237
 * 24.1
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Anton Behringer
 * align=left| Independent
 * 3,244
 * 3.7
 * 796
 * 0.9
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Stephan Wermter
 * align=left| Independent
 * 2,252
 * 2.6
 * align=center colspan=2| Withdrew
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Manfred Kröber
 * align=left| Independent (Green)
 * 1,240
 * 1.4
 * align=center colspan=2| Withdrew
 * colspan=3 align=left| Other
 * 70
 * 0.1
 * 45
 * 0.1
 * align=center colspan=2| Withdrew
 * colspan=3 align=left| Other
 * 70
 * 0.1
 * 45
 * 0.1
 * 0.1
 * colspan=7| Source: City of Freiburg (1st round, 2nd round)
 * }
 * }

City council
The Freiburg city council governs the city alongside the Mayor. The most recent city council election was held on 26 May 2019, and the results were as follows:

! colspan=2| Party ! Votes ! % ! +/- ! Seats ! +/- ! colspan=2| Total votes ! 4,652,295 ! 100.0 ! ! ! ! colspan=2| Total ballots ! 107,404 ! 100.0 ! ! 48 ! ±0 ! colspan=2| Electorate/voter turnout ! 170,964 ! 62.8 ! 11.4 ! !
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Alliance 90/The Greens (Grüne)
 * 1,232,198
 * 26.5
 * 2.2
 * 13
 * 2
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Social Democratic Party (SPD)
 * 591,603
 * 12.7
 * 4.0
 * 6
 * 2
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Christian Democratic Union (CDU)
 * 550,572
 * 11.8
 * 6.5
 * 6
 * 3
 * bgcolor=#05636D|
 * align=left| Left List – Solidary City (LiSSt)
 * 322,761
 * 6.9
 * 1.7
 * 3
 * 1
 * bgcolor=#89C832|
 * align=left| Green Alternative Freiburg (GAF)
 * 302,278
 * 6.5
 * 3.3
 * 3
 * 2
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Free Voters Baden-Württemberg (FW)
 * 257,458
 * 5.5
 * 0.4
 * 3
 * ±0
 * bgcolor=#00A657|
 * align=left| Livable Freiburg (FL)
 * 210,173
 * 4.5
 * 1.1
 * 2
 * 1
 * bgcolor=#E17B29|
 * align=left| Young Freiburg (Junges)
 * 178,257
 * 3.8
 * 0.4
 * 2
 * ±0
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Free Democratic Party (FDP)
 * 175,173
 * 3.8
 * 1.0
 * 2
 * ±0
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Alternative for Germany (AfD)
 * 168,120
 * 3.6
 * New
 * 2
 * New
 * bgcolor=#E50069|
 * align=left| Urban Freiburg (Urbanes)
 * 139,011
 * 3.0
 * New
 * 1
 * New
 * bgcolor=|
 * align=left| Die PARTEI
 * 126,790
 * 2.7
 * 1.2
 * 1
 * 1
 * bgcolor=#1E3B4E|
 * align=left| Culture List Freiburg (KULT)
 * 103,182
 * 2.2
 * 1.9
 * 1
 * 1
 * bgcolor=#E13134|
 * align=left| Independent Women Freiburg (UFF)
 * 88,175
 * 1.9
 * 0.5
 * 1
 * ±0
 * bgcolor=#17376F|
 * align=left| Citizens for Freiburg (BFF)
 * 87,291
 * 1.9
 * New
 * 1
 * New
 * align=left| List for Participation and Inclusion (LTI)
 * 63,822
 * 1.4
 * New
 * 1
 * New
 * colspan=7 bgcolor=lightgrey|
 * align=left| For Freiburg – Politics of Christian Perpective (Für Freiburg)
 * 48,145
 * 1.0
 * New
 * 0
 * New
 * align=left| necessary intellectually charging tendency (NICHT)
 * 8,286
 * 0.2
 * New
 * 0
 * New
 * 1.4
 * New
 * 1
 * New
 * colspan=7 bgcolor=lightgrey|
 * align=left| For Freiburg – Politics of Christian Perpective (Für Freiburg)
 * 48,145
 * 1.0
 * New
 * 0
 * New
 * align=left| necessary intellectually charging tendency (NICHT)
 * 8,286
 * 0.2
 * New
 * 0
 * New
 * 8,286
 * 0.2
 * New
 * 0
 * New
 * colspan=7| Source: City of Freiburg
 * }
 * }

Education
Freiburg is a center of academia and research, in which numerous intellectual figures and Nobel Laureates have lived, worked, and taught.

The city houses one of the oldest and most renowned of German universities, the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg, as well as its medical center. Home to some of the greatest minds of the West, including such eminent figures as Johann Eck, Max Weber, Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Friedrich Hayek, it is one of Europe's top research and teaching institutions.

Freiburg also plays host to various other educational and research institutes, such as the Freiburg University of Education, the Protestant University for Applied Sciences Freiburg, Freiburg Music Academy, the Catholic University of Applied Sciences Freiburg, the International University of Cooperative Education IUCE, three Max Planck institutes, five Fraunhofer institutes, and one Leibniz institute.

The city is home to the IES Abroad European Union program, which allows students to study the development and activities of the EU. This is in addition to an Environmental Science and Sustainability program focused on Freiburg's famed green lifestyle and infrastructure. IES Abroad also offers a German Language and Area Studies program where visiting students get to take classes at the University of Freiburg.

The DFG / LFA Freiburg, a French-German high school established by the 1963 Élysée Treaty, is in the city. UWC Robert Bosch College is among the newest members of the United World Colleges (UWC) movement, one of its eighteen colleges around the world, having started accepting students in September 2014.

Religion
Christianity

Freiburg belonged to Austria until 1805 and remained Catholic, although surrounding villages like Haslach, Opfingen, Tiengen, and the surrounding land ruled by the Margrave of Baden became Protestant as a result of the Reformation. The city was part of the Diocese of Konstanz until 1821. That same year, Freiburg became an episcopal see of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Freiburg. Due to a dispute between the government of Baden and the Holy See, the archbishop officially took office in 1827.

The borders of the archdiocese correspond with the borders of the former province of Baden and the former Margraviate of Hohenzollern. The cathedral, in which the bishop resides, is Freiburg Minster. Also, part of the ecclesiastical province of Freiburg are the suffragan dioceses of Mainz and Rottenburg-Stuttgart.

Until 1929, the dioceses of Limburg and Fulda also belonged to this ecclesiastical province. The Archbishop of Freiburg holds the title of metropolitan and the German headquarters of the link to Caritas Germany is in Freiburg.

Saint George (the flag of Freiburg has the cross of George), Lambert of Maastricht and the catacomb saint, Alexander, are the patron saints of Freiburg. Many works of art depicting these saints are in the Freiburg Minster, on the Minster square, just as in the museums and archives of the city, including some by Hans Baldung Grien, Hans Holbein the Younger and Gregorius Sickinger.

In 1805, with the attack of Breisgau on the Grand Duchy of Baden by a Catholic ruler, many Protestants moved into the city. Since 2007, any Protestants who are not part of a 'free church' belong to the newly founded deanery of Freiburg as part of the parish of Südbaden which in itself is a part of the Landeskirche Baden.

The seat of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Baden, a free Lutheran church, is situated in Freiburg. There are multiple other free Protestant churches: e.g., the Calvary Chapel or Chrischona International. An old congregation has existed in Freiburg since the late 1900s, which utilises the old monastery church of the Ursulines in the black monastery at the border of the old city center. The Catholic Church of St. Maria Schutz has been made available for Masses by Greek, Serbian, Russian and Rumanian Orthodox congregations.

Judaism

Jews are said to have lived in the city before 1230, but it was only after 1230 that they supposedly founded an official community in the Webergasse (a small street within the town center). The counts of Freiburg bought the lucrative Schutzjude, which means that all personal information on Jews living in Freiburg was directly sent to Konrad II and his co-reigning son Friedrich. The two issued a comprising letter promising safety and liberty to all local Jews on 12 October 1338. It lost all value shortly after, however, on 1 January 1349. Although the plague had not yet broken out in the city, Jews were accused of having spread it and taken into custody. All Jews except pregnant women were burned alive on 31 January 1349. The remaining children were forced to be baptised. This pogrom left Jews very hesitant to resettle in the city. In 1401, the city council decreed a regulation banning all Jews from Freiburg (orig. Middle High German dialect: “daz dekein Jude ze Friburg niemmerme sin sol” [27]. This was officially reaffirmed by King Sigismund with a ban for life (orig. German: “Ewige Vertreibung”) in 1424. Not until 1809 were Jews again allowed permanent residence within the city. They subsequently founded a Jewish community in 1836.

At the Kristallnacht in 1938, the synagogue, built in 1870, was set afire. Numerous shops and apartments of Jewish citizens of Freiburg were devastated and plundered by National Socialists without the intervention of police or fire department. Male, wealthy, Jewish citizens were kidnapped and taken to concentration camps (in Buchenwald and Dachau) where they were subjected to forced labor or executed and their money and property stolen.

On 22 October 1940, the remaining Jews of Baden and Pfalz were deported to Camp de Gurs in southern France. One among many collecting points was Annaplatz. So-called 'Stolpersteine', tiles with names and dates on them, commemorate the victims of the prosecution of Jews during the Nazi-Era in the city's cobble. Journalist Käthe Vordtriede of the Volkswacht even received two Stolpersteine to commemorate her life. The first one was inserted into the ground in front of the Vordtriede-Haus Freiburg in 2006 and the second one in front of the Basler Hof, the regional authorities, in spring 2013. This was also the seat of the Gestapo until 1941, where unrelenting people were cruelly interrogated, held prisoner or deported. The only solutions were flight or emigration. The Vordtriede family managed to escape in time.

Transport
Freiburg has a large pedestrian zone in the city centre where no motor cars are allowed. Freiburg also has an extensive public transport system, operated by the city-owned VAG Freiburg. The backbone of the system is the Freiburg tramway network, supplemented by feeder buses. The tram network is very popular as the low fares allow for unlimited transport in the city and surrounding area. Furthermore, any ticket for a concert, sports or other event is also valid for use on public transport. The tram network is so vast that 70% of the population live within 500m of a tram stop with a tram every 7–8 mins.

Freiburg is on the main Frankfurt am Main – Basel railway line, with frequent and fast long-distance passenger services from the Freiburg Hauptbahnhof to major German and other European cities. Other railway lines run east into the Black Forest and west to Breisach and are served by the Breisgau S-Bahn. The line to Breisach is the remaining stub of the Freiburg–Colmar international railway, severed in 1945 when the railway bridge over the Rhine at Breisach was destroyed, and was never replaced.

The city also is served by the A5 Frankfurt am Main – Basel motorway.

Freiburg is served by EuroAirport Basel-Mulhouse-Freiburg in France, close to the borders of both Germany and Switzerland, 70 km south of Freiburg. Karlsruhe/Baden-Baden Airport is approximately 100 km north of Freiburg and is also served by several airlines. The nearest larger international airports include Zurich (130 km), Stuttgart (200 km), and Frankfurt/Main (260 km). The nearby Flugplatz Freiburg, a small airfield in the Messe, Freiburg district, lacks commercial service but is used for private aviation.

Car share websites such as BlaBlaCar are commonly used among Freiburg residents, since they are considered relatively safe.

The investment in transport has resulted in a large increase in both cycle, pedestrian and public transport usage with projections of car journeys accounting for 29% of journey times.

Sports
The Freiburger FC won the 1907 German football championship. Afterwards, the city experienced a 115-year drought where no sports team won a national championship again. In 2022, the drought was finally ended by the Eisvögel USC Freiburg who won the 1. Damen-Basketball-Bundesliga title.

Freiburg is home to football teams SC Freiburg, which plays at the Europa-Park Stadion and is represented in the 1. or 2. Bundesliga since 1978, and Freiburger FC. In 2016, SC Freiburg got promoted to the highest league for the fifth time in its club history. The club became generally known in Germany for its steady staffing policy. Achim Stocker was president of the club from 1972 until his death in 2009. Longtime coach was Volker Finke (1991–2007), to whose initiative the football school of the club goes back. In 2004, SC Freiburg celebrated its 100th anniversary. Since December 2011, the coach is Christian Streich. The women's team of SC Freiburg plays in the first Women's Bundesliga.

Freiburg is represented in the first women's basketball league by the Eisvögel (Kingfisher) USC Freiburg. In the season 2005/2006, the Kingfishers took second place after the end of the second round, in the season 2006/2007 it was the fourth place. The men's team of the USC played in the 2009/10 season in the ProA (2nd Bundesliga). The Freiburg men's team played their last first-division season in 1998/1999. Currently, season 2018/19, the men's team plays in the Oberliga and the women's team in the regional league.

Freiburg also has the EHC Freiburg ice hockey team, which plays at the Franz-Siegel Halle. In the season 2003/2004 the EHC Freiburg (the wolves) played in the DEL, the highest German ice hockey league. Currently, season 2018/19, they play in the second league (DEL2).

Additionally, there is the RC Freiburg Rugby union team, which competes in the second Bundesliga South (Baden Württemberg). The home ground of the club, the only rugby sports field in the wider area, is located in March-Hugstetten.

Then, there is the volleyball men's team of the FT 1844 Freiburg, which plays in the second Bundesliga since 2001 and the handball women's team of the HSG Freiburg, which plays in the 3rd Women's Handball League.

From 1925 to 1984, the Schauinsland Races took place on an old logging track. The course is still used periodically for European Hill Climb Championships.

Culture
The Union for Aromanian Language and Culture, an Aromanian cultural organization, was founded in 1985 in Freiburg by the Aromanian professor Vasile Barba.

Press
Badische Zeitung is the main local daily paper, covering the Black Forest region.

Twin towns – sister cities
Freiburg im Breisgau is twinned with:

 * Besançon, France (1959)
 * Granada, Spain (1991)
 * Guildford, United Kingdom (1979)
 * Innsbruck, Austria (1963)
 * Isfahan, Iran (2000)
 * Lviv, Ukraine (1989)
 * Madison, United States (1987)
 * Matsuyama, Japan (1988)
 * Padua, Italy (1967)
 * Suwon, South Korea (2015)
 * Tel Aviv, Israel (2015)
 * Wiwilí de Jinotega, Nicaragua (2015)

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's controversial comments, which included questioning the dimension of the Holocaust, have sparked discussions concerning Freiburg's relationship with Isfahan. Immediately following the comments, Freiburg mayor Salomon postponed a trip to Isfahan, but most people involved, especially those in the Alliance '90/The Greens party, were opposed to cancelling the relationship.

Symbols
The city's coat of arms is Argent a cross Gules, the St George's Cross. Saint George is the city's patron saint. The cross also appears on the city's flag, which dates from about 1368, and is identical to that of England, which has the same patron.

The city also has a seal that can be seen in a few places in the inner city. It is a stylised depiction of the façade of the Wasserschlössle, a castle-like waterworks facility built into a hill that overlooks the residential district of Wiehre. The seal depicts a three-towered red castle on a white background, with green-clad trumpeters atop the two outer towers. Beneath the castle is a gold fleur-de-lis.

Pre-18th century

 * Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466–1536), Dutch Renaissance humanist and theologian
 * Berthold Schwarz (c. 1310–1388), fabled alchemist who introduced gunpowder to Germany
 * Martin Waldseemüller (c.1470–1520), Renaissance cartographer

18th century

 * Joseph von Auffenberg (1798–1857), playwright and poet
 * Aloysius Bellecius (1704–1757), Jesuit ascetic author
 * Jean-Henri Naderman (1734–1799), leading harp-maker and a music publisher
 * Johann Nepomuk Locherer (1773–1837), Roman Catholic priest, theologian and professor
 * Karl von Rotteck (1775–1840), political activist, historian, politician and political scientist
 * Heinrich Schreiber (1793–1872), Catholic theologian and historian, wrote about Freiburg

19th century

 * Sepp Allgeier (1895–1968), cinematographer, worked with Leni Riefenstahl
 * Kurt Bauch (1897–1975), art historian
 * Walter Benjamin (1892–1940), literary critic and philosopher
 * Alfred Döblin (1878–1957), physician and novelist
 * Barney Dreyfuss (1865–1932), baseball entrepreneur, co-founder of the Major League Baseball World Series
 * Walter Eucken (1891–1950), economist of the Freiburg school and father of ordoliberalism
 * Arnold Fanck (1889–1974), film director and pioneer of the mountain film genre
 * Eugen Fischer (1874–1967), physician who influenced Nazi racial hygiene
 * Adolf Furtwangler (1853–1907), archaeologist, teacher, art historian and museum director.
 * Max von Gallwitz (1852–1937), general and politician
 * Friedrich Gempp (1873–1947), Major General and the founder and first director of the Department Defence of Reichswehr
 * Hans F. K. Günther (1891–1968), Nazi eugenicist
 * Friedrich von Hayek (1899–1992), economist, philosopher, Nobel Prize laureate in economics
 * Martin Heidegger (1889–1976), philosopher
 * Edmund Husserl (1859–1938), philosopher who established the school of phenomenology
 * Hans Jantzen (1881–1967), art historian, specialised in Medieval art
 * Wilhelm Lamey (1854–1910), jurist
 * Felix H. Man (1893–1985), photographer, art collector and pioneer photojournalist for Picture Post
 * Carl Christian Mez (1866–1944), botanist
 * Bernhard Sigmund Schultze (1827–1919), obstetrician and gynecologist
 * Hermann Staudinger (1881–1965), Nobel Prize laureate in chemistry "for discoveries about macromolecular chemistry"
 * Edith Stein (1891–1942), nun, Saint of the Catholic Church, martyred by the Nazis, Freiburg university faculty member
 * Bronisław Trentowski (1808–1869) – Polish philosopher, pedagogue, insurgent and Freemason
 * Franz Fischer (1877–1947) – German chemist, discovered the Fischer–Tropsch process process with Hans Tropsch.
 * Otto Heinrich Warburg (1883–1970), recipient in 1931 of Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
 * Max Weber (1864–1920), lawyer, political economist, and sociologist
 * August Weismann (1834–1914), evolutionary biologist
 * Joseph Wirth (1879–1956), politician (center), member of the Reichstag, chancellor, foreign minister, minister of the interior
 * Engelbert Zaschka (1895–1955), inventor and one of the first German helicopter pioneers

20th century

 * Wolfram Aichele (1924–2016), artist
 * Hannah Arendt (1906–1975), political theorist
 * Jürgen Aschoff (1913–1998), physician, biologist and behavioral physiologist, co-founded chronobiology
 * Hans Bender (1907–1991), lecturer on parapsychology
 * Nikolaus Brender (born 1949), journalist
 * Johannes Boesiger (born 1962), scriptwriter and producer
 * Alexander Bonde (born 1975) in the Bundestag for Alliance '90/The Greens 2002 to 2011
 * Borwin, Duke of Mecklenburg (born 1956), head of the House of Mecklenburg
 * Stephan Burger (born 1962), Roman Catholic clergyman, Archbishop of Freiburg since 2014
 * Hoimar von Ditfurth (1921–1989), physician
 * Mohamed Dräger (born 1996), German-Tunisian professional footballer
 * Martin Egel (born 1944), bass-baritone in opera and concert
 * Hedy Epstein (1924–2016), Holocaust refugee and political activist
 * Anna Ewers (born 1993), fashion model from Freiburg
 * Georg Gädker (born 1981), operatic baritone
 * Heiner Garg (born 1966), politician (FDP)
 * Miriam Gebhardt (born 1962), historian and writer
 * Svetlana Geier (1923–2010), translator
 * Michael Glatthaar (born 1953), medieval scholar
 * Heinrich Haussler (born 1984), professional cyclist Cervelo TestTeam
 * Dany Heatley (born 1981), former professional ice hockey winger
 * Peter W. Heller (born 1957), former Deputy Mayor of Freiburg, environmental scientist and venture philanthropist
 * Thomas Hengelbrock (born 1958), violinist, musicologist and conductor; co-founded the Freiburger Barockorchester
 * Andreas Holschneider (1931–2019), music historian
 * Waldemar Hoven (1903–1948), Nazi physician executed for war crimes
 * Marie-Laurence Jungfleisch (born 1990), high-jump athlete
 * Walter Kaufmann (1921–1980), philosopher, translator and poet
 * Fritz Keller (born 1957), football administrator
 * Boris Kodjoe (born 1973), U.S.based model and actor
 * Georges Jean Franz Köhler (1946–1995), geneticist
 * Benjamin Lebert (born 1982), author and newspaper columnist
 * Joachim Löw (born 1960), coach of the Germany national football team from 2006 to 2021
 * Michael Leuschner (born 1948), classical pianist and professor of piano at the Hochschule für Musik Freiburg
 * Hanns Ludin (1905–1947), Nazi diplomat executed for war crimes
 * Andreas Lutz (born 1981), media artist analyzes perception versus reality
 * Christoph von Marschall (born 1959), journalist
 * Christian Meyer (born 1969), track cyclist and gold medallist at the 1992 Summer Olympics
 * Michael Nehls (born 1962), medical doctor, author, and former cyclist
 * Herbert Niebling (1905–1966), master designer of lace knitting
 * Paul Pietsch (1911–2012), racing driver, journalist and publisher of Das Auto
 * Karl Rahner SJ (1904–1984), Jesuit priest and influential Roman Catholic theologian
 * Dieter Salomon (born 1960), Alliance '90/The Greens politician, Mayor of Freiburg until 2018
 * Wolfgang Schäuble (1942–2023), CDU politician
 * Jürgen E. Schrempp (born 1944), former head of DaimlerChrysler
 * Angelika Schrobsdorff (1927–2016), writer and actress
 * Til Schweiger (born 1963), actor and director
 * Klaus Tschira (1940–2015), entrepreneur
 * Bernhard Witkop (1917–2010), organic chemist
 * Joana Zimmer (born 1979), blind pop singer

title: Freiburg im Breisgau


text:
Alfred National Park

The Alfred National Park is a national park located in the East Gippsland region of the Australian state of Victoria. The 3050 ha national park is situated approximately 388 km east of Melbourne and was declared in 1925.

It is currently closed due to widespread bushfire damage.

The park is dissected by the Princes Highway, between and.

Features
The park reserves examples of warm temperate rainforest, particularly the jungle of Mount Drummer. Compared to the tropical rainforests of Queensland and New South Wales, this is a floristically depauperate forest, representing as it does the southern limit of this flora. This region is biogeographically interesting as the meeting point between the subtropical flora of the north of Australia and the cool temperate and arid zone floras of the south and west. The rainforest community consists of a closed canopy of Lilly Pilly Acmena smithii with numerous lianas, ferns, and epiphytes. The park is particularly known for the occurrence of four varieties of tree ferns and epiphytic orchids such as the orange-blossom orchid Sarcochilus falcatus and the rock orchid Dendrobium speciosum. In the 1983 'Ash Wednesday' bushfires, the park was burned very badly.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Alfred National Park


text:
National nature reserves in England

National nature reserves in England are designated by Natural England as key places for wildlife and natural features in England. They were established to protect the most significant areas of habitat and of geological formations. NNRs are managed on behalf of the nation, many by Natural England itself, but also by non-governmental organisations, including the members of The Wildlife Trusts partnership, the National Trust, and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.

There are 221 NNRs in England covering 1100 km2. Often they contain rare or nationally important populations of species, such as birds, plants, insects, reptiles and mammals.

Spotlight NNRs
Natural England has selected 35 as spotlight reserves:

 * 1) Ainsdale Sand Dunes NNR, Merseyside
 * 2) Aston Rowant NNR, Oxfordshire
 * 3) Barnack Hills & Holes NNR, Cambridgeshire
 * 4) Castle Eden Dene, County Durham
 * 5) Derbyshire Dales NNR, Derbyshire
 * 6) Duncombe Park NNR, North Yorkshire
 * 7) Durham Coast, County Durham
 * 8) East Dartmoor Woods and Heaths NNR, Devon
 * 9) Farne Islands NNR, Northumberland
 * 10) Fenn's, Whixall and Bettisfield Mosses NNR, Shropshire/Wales
 * 11) Finglandrigg Woods NNR, Cumbria
 * 12) Gait Barrows NNR, Lancashire
 * 13) Gibraltar Point NNR, Lincolnshire
 * 14) Golitha Falls NNR, Cornwall
 * 15) Holkham NNR, Norfolk
 * 16) Ingleborough NNR, North Yorkshire
 * 17) Kingley Vale NNR, West Sussex
 * 18) Lindisfarne, Northumberland
 * 19) Lower Derwent Valley NNR, East Riding of Yorkshire
 * 20) Moor House-Upper Teesdale, Cumbria & County Durham
 * 21) North Meadow, Cricklade NNR, Wiltshire
 * 22) Old Winchester Hill NNR, Hampshire
 * 23) Redgrave and Lopham Fen, Norfolk & Suffolk
 * 24) Saltfleetby-Theddlethorpe Dunes NNR, Lincolnshire
 * 25) Shapwick Heath NNR, Somerset
 * 26) Slapton Ley NNR, Devon
 * 27) Stiperstones NNR, Shropshire
 * 28) Stodmarsh NNR, Kent
 * 29) Studland and Godlingston Heath NNR, Dorset
 * 30) Teesmouth NNR, Teesside
 * 31) The Lizard NNR, Cornwall
 * 32) Suffolk Coast NNR, Suffolk
 * 33) Thursley NNR, Surrey
 * 34) Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire
 * 35) Wye NNR, Kent

For a full list of English NNRs, see List of national nature reserves in England

title: National nature reserves in England


text:
Talk:1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight

3 May 2024
The list of causes is exhaustive but missing a key cause that has been validated by Benny Morris, a historian cited multiple times in this article.

Benny Morris states, "Birth Revisited describes many more atrocities and expulsions than were recorded in the original version of the book. But, at the same time, a far greater proportion of the 700,000 Arab refugees were ordered or advised by their fellow Arabs to abandon their homes than I had previously registered. It is clear from the new documentation that the Palestinian leadership in principle opposed the Arab flight from December 1947 to April 1948, while at the same time encouraging or ordering a great many villages to send away their women, children and old folk, to be out of harm's way. Whole villages, especially in the Jewish- dominated coastal plain, were also ordered to evacuate. There is no doubt that, throughout, the departure of dependents lowered the morale of the remaining males and paved the way for their eventual departure as well" here.

Given that it is imperative we also add that Arabs also left because of the encouragement of their fellow Arabs. While the amount can be debated, leaving this out is missing an important element of historical accuracy. If Benny Morris can be cited for Israeli atrocities, he should also be cited for this fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lionbear10 (talk • contribs)
 * I believe that's outdated and the current mainstream view is that the "Arab states encouraged Palestinians to flee" theory is now a debunked myth? Levivich (talk) 19:33, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Change Title of Article to "1948 Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians"
Since one ethnicity (european jews) ethnically cleansed another ethnicity (arab muslims) from their land.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 May 2024
change 700 000 to 700,000 MattFry7 (talk) 04:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

 * This change was made throughout the article with no edit summary. @ThurnerRupert, can you clarify the reason for this? It seems less clear to me, though both gaps and commas are apparently acceptable per MOS:DIGITS. Jamedeus (talk) 05:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

NPOV in lede
I think this article’s lede needs to have a paragraph on the Israeli perspective on this conflict and modern attitudes Alexanderkowal (talk) 06:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

 * @Alexanderkowal NPOV does not entail covering every side's perspective in the lead. Were we to do that we could end up with a false balance. TarnishedPathtalk 07:50, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe:
 * (after Nakba day) The expulsion is viewed by the Israeli narrative as necessary, unavoidable, and part of the wider war of independence, and whilst Nakba denial has been increasingly challenged in recent years, the official narrative remains unaffected.
 * Alexanderkowal (talk) 10:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest you'd need some extremely strong sourcing for prose which makes excuses for displacing local inhabitants and which calls the establishment of Israel a "war of independence". TarnishedPathtalk 09:20, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I’m just summarising what’s in the lede of Nakba, there is a danger of false equivalence, the wording needs to be altered a bit Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think this should be part of the lede. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:13, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Surely the content is entirely relevant and due but the wording is very tricky to get the right weight and framing. MOS:LEDE says that a topic with its own section deserves to be mentioned in the lede. Alexanderkowal (talk) 12:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Alexanderkowal can you please quote me the exact wording that says that. I just had a brief flyover of MOS:LEDE doing a ctrl-f on the word "section" and I couldn't find wording that says topics with their own section deserve mention in the lead. TarnishedPathtalk 13:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * My bad, it's at How to create and manage a good lead section Alexanderkowal (talk) 13:04, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Grammar/naming convention
Intro paragraph says "...and after the establishment of the Israel, by its military." Should be "the State of Israel" or possibly "Israel" 24.19.44.221 (talk) 06:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

 * Done. Selfstudier (talk) 13:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Denialism present in article
It seems that there is some Nakba denial present in this article which does not belong.

Specifically:

1. At the beginning of a paragraph about depopulated Palestinian settlements, there is the sentence: "Yoav Gelber wrote that the Arab Liberation Army embarked on a systematic evacuation of non-combatants from several frontier villages in order to turn them into military strongholds." This is WP:FRINGE and undue for inclusion. Gelber is an Old Historian (in contrast with the New Historians and of the work cited, Palestine 1948: War, Escape, and the Emergence of the Palestinian Refugee Problem (2001/2006[2nd edition]), I looked for reviews and found one [here https://www-cambridge-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/16849DA444A9A17EF768C33919FE897C/stamped-S0020743802004075a.pdf/yoav-gelber-palestine-1948-war-escape-and-the-emergence-of-the-palestinian-refugee-problem-portland-ore-sussex-academic-press-2001-pp-410-dollar7950-cloth.pdf] which is quite critical of the work, stating that "Palestine 1948 is a book to be examined by scholars of the period with interest but to be used, if at all, by those who are unfamiliar with the subject with extreme caution." (emphasis mine), that it is "of use to scholars who can evaluate it against other materials. Still, the reader must beware. Gelber's approach to history does not usually allow for discussion of the revisionist views he rejects.", and that "Gelber argues the nationalist version of Israeli history of 1948". If there are no other reliable sources to support the statement that "Arab Liberation Army embarked on a systematic evacuation of non-combatants from several frontier villages in order to turn them into military strongholds." then we oughtn't include it, per WP:FRINGE.

2. In a paragraph describing that "the events of the Nakba were by that point [that is, by the year 2010] "widely described" as involving ethnic cleansing", there follows that "Not all historians accept this characterization. Efraim Karsh is among the few historians who still consider that most of the Arabs who fled left of their own accord or were pressured to leave by their fellow Arabs, despite Israeli attempts to convince them to stay." The ideas here cited to Karsh are plain denialism. We should be presenting these views only in the context of Nakba denial or not presenting them at all per WP:FRINGE: "A Wikipedia article should not make a fringe theory appear more notable or more widely accepted than it is. [...] If discussed in an article about a mainstream idea, a theory that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight."

3. The lead paragraph beginning "The causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus are also a subject of fundamental disagreement among historians." needs to be altered significantly. For one, there only has been legitimate debate among historians, but today there no longer is. Second, the denialist factors listed should be removed, and indeed the inline citations supporting the dubious causes are quite weak here - "disinclination to live under Jewish control" is cited inline to two books which are not even about the 1948 war, and "Arab evacuation orders" is a known myth with its inline citation to Pittsburgh Press May 1948 (terrible source) and to a proper academic work which I can't access but which I can see includes as a footnote "In 1960–61 Walid Khalidi also investigated the BBC and FBIS radio transcripts recorded throughout the 1948 war to look for evidence of Arab evacuation orders but was unable to locate any at all.". This paragraph should be rewritten to state there is significant public and political debate, and should mention Nakba denial as that is cleary for for the lead anyway, but it should not give the impression that there isn't consensus in present day scholarship about the causes of the 1948 Palestinian expulsion. This lead paragraph also does not reflect the body as the dubious causes presented are (rightfully) not covered in the article. (Also note that the page causes of the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight is itself very poorly written and replete with denialism and "Old History" and is not to be used as a source).

-IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

 * I disagree with your assessment. Regarding your first point, the review criticised Gelber's book for omitting various important aspects of the conflict, but not for inaccuracies
 * Gelber’s approach to history does not usually allow for discussion of the revisionist views he rejects... Gelber never mentions Golda Meyerson’s (Meir’s) visit to Abdullah and what was discussed. He simply relegates the matter to a footnote ... As for Dayr Yasin (p. 98 ff), Gelber never identifies the units that attacked the village and questions whether it contributed significantly to the panic that followed
 * It's a normal scholarly discussion. The reviewer believes that the book provides an incomplete picture of the events and suggests that it shouldn't be the only book an uninformed reader should read about this topic. This is irrelevant for this article which uses multiple books by New Historians and others as sources.
 * I'll respond to the other points later. Alaexis¿question? 21:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "not for inaccuracies"? - "No work by an Arab scholar in Arabic is cited, because, as noted, Arab scholars have not been interested in the subject in a serious historical manner.[Summarising/describing Gelber's view] Anyone who peruses the bibliography of Eugene Rogan and Avi Shalim's edited volume The War for Palestine: Rewriting the History of 1948 (Cambridge, 2001) will see how false Gelber's assertion is." IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The assertion he deems false is "Arab scholars have not been interested in the subject in a serious historical manner". How is it related to the way Gelber's book is used here? Alaexis¿question? 14:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I see you've restored "Yoav Gelber wrote that the Arab Liberation Army embarked on a systematic evacuation of non-combatants from several frontier villages in order to turn them into military strongholds. " stating only "no arguments have been presented why this statement is untrue".
 * Since we have an RS which cautions against the use of this work of Gelber, stating it is "of use to scholars who can evaluate it against other materials", and since this material is given such prominence at the beginning of a paragraph about the depopulation of Palestinian villages, I think it is reasonable to ask for another RS that can corroborate this claim of Gelber's. Especially since the claim resembles (and may even be) the myth that Arab evacuation orders were a significant cause of the exodus. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 02:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, otherwise WP:ONUS (no consensus for usage, per discussions here) and WP:WEIGHT (single source, and Gelber as a primary source for his own views) apply – there are your arguments. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Gelber's claim has been corroborated by Benny Morris in "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited". On page 175, he points out how in April 1948,
 * the ALA ordered the inhabitants of Fureidis, south of Haifa, to evacuate their women and children, ‘and make ready to evacuate [the village] completely’. A few kilometres to the north, the women and children of Tira were evacuated with the help of the Arab Legion to Neuherrdorf, near Haifa, and later to Jordan. Similarly, dependents had been evac- uated from Khirbet as Sarkas, near Hadera (to Baqa al Gharbiya and Jatt). The women and children of Qannir were evacuated starting 22 April on ‘orders from on high’. In early May, Umm al Zinat was reported empty of women and children. North of Haifa, Kabri was completely evacuated. A few days earlier, the Arab communities around Rosh Pina, in Eastern Galilee, were ordered to evacuate their women and children, the men staying to guard the sites.
 * He continues to document the many examples of evacuations on Arab orders on p.176-178. Amayorov (talk) 18:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Assume this is all true, how many persons are we talking about? Selfstudier (talk) 18:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It's hard to tell, but Morris says that "all villagers in the Nazareth area", "all the villages between Haifa and Tel Aviv", Coastal Plain villages, neighborhoods bordering the Jewish areas in Jerusalem, were depopulated on orders from the general Arab headquarters or ALA. There was also apparently an evacuation order to Arabs living along the Palestine-Syrian border.
 * Here are some of the examples he gives: Shu'fat, Beit Hanina, al Jib, Judeira, Bir Nabala, Rafat, Dahi, Nein, Tampra, Kafr Misr, al Tira, Taiyiba, Na'ura, Nuqeib, ‘Arab al Satariyya, Beit Dajan, Kafr Manda, Majd al Kurum, Dimra, 'Illut, ‘Arab Mazarib, ‘Arab Sa‘ida, Ma’lul, Mujeidil, Beisan, Qastal, Qalandiya, some Jerusalem neighborhoods (Sheikh Jarrah, Wadi Joz, Musrara, Qatamon, Musara, Beit Hanina and others), Ma'dhar, Hadatha, 'Ulam, Sirin. Amayorov (talk) 18:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * So Morris only corroborates that some villages sent their women and children away (a sensible precaution in hindsight) and stayed on to watch over/guard their property. That is quite a different nuance from Gelber's "military strongholds" – without even asking how turning a rural village into a "stronghold" is even achieved. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oftentimes, such as in Ma'lul and Mujeidil, the ALA ordered evacuation "apparently to make room for incoming ALA contingents and in preparation for anticipated offensive operations." In other places, such as in Beit Dajan, the inhabitants left at the same time as armed irregulars moved in. Morris gives other examples too. So there is, indeed, evidence in support of Gelber's claims. Amayorov (talk) 19:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Be careful that you don't confuse assertions by Morris with "evidence" – even Morris uses caveats like "apparently" when he writes. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm simply responding to a above request for further corroboration:
 * I think it is reasonable to ask for another RS that can corroborate this claim of Gelber's.
 * Amayorov (talk) 19:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * And I'm merely cautioning on the use of the term "evidence", and the dangers of being loose-lipped with it. Corroborating statements are just those. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * 1. Perhaps this could be modified based on Morris 2004? His gives a somewhat more balanced view on this. There is no evidence that the Arab states and the AHC wanted a mass exodus or issued blanket orders or appeals to flee. At the same time, the AHC and the Arab states often encouraged villagers (and, in some places, townspeople) to send their women, children and old people out of harm’s way. Local political and military leaders also ordered some villages to evacuate in order to forestall their (treacherous) acceptance of Jewish rule. In certain areas (around Jerusalem, and along the Syrian border), the Arab states ordered villages to uproot for strategic reasons.
 * 2. I agree that this view of Karsh is on the extreme side. He's still a notable historian and I think it's okay to mention his view with proper framing/attribution. In general I wouldn't be opposed to replacing more extreme sources like Karsh with more moderate ones like Anita Shapira, except that Shapira would be too moderate to be considered part of an "Israeli narrative". Maybe the article can be restructured, but the current "two opposing narratives" structure calls for including less moderate voices such as Karsh.
 * 3. While there's no (serious) debate today that expulsions occurred and were substantial, there is plenty of debate about the role of local commanders vs Zionist leaders, as well as the extent of flight and the reasons for it.
 * — xDanielx  T/C\R 21:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "the role of local commanders vs Zionist leaders."? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Taking Ben-Gurion as an example (perhaps the most important one), there is some lack of clarity over whether he explicitly ordered any expulsions. Yitzhak Rabin signed an expulsion order for Lydda, but gave two conflicting accounts about whether it was based on an explicit order by Ben-Gurion. With that potential exception, Ben-Gurion didn't give any explicit expulsion orders, although Morris argues he was "projecting a message of transfer".
 * Others have emphasized the role of local commanders acting based on military rather than political objectives: At the local level, commanders wanted to remove from the war zone a population that might aid the enemy. Nor did they want to have to deal with the needs of an occupied civilian population, preferring to remove it. (Shapira summarizing Kleiman). — xDanielx  T/C\R 03:13, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Both versions of Rabin's account have BG ordering the expulsion of the inhabitants. The difference may only be due to Bar Zohar. Also, we should be aware of an issue around temporary evacuation of non-combatants, which is a normal feature of wars. Zionist propagandists claim that such evacuations are evidence of "they left at their leaders' orders", while failing to mention that the Jewish side also evacuated non-combatants from the front line. A large number of them, in fact. Zerotalk 04:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Re your lede changes, I think expulsions and violence, and the fear thereof, were the primary causes may be reasonable, since in a way everything stemmed from violence/war of fear thereof. That said, I still feel the sources you added don't back this very clearly or directly. They're just not making it very clear which particular analyses they're rejecting. Clearly they reject certain extreme views like Karsh's, but beyond that they seem unclear, e.g. does chased out include those who left in 1947 in anticipation of fighting?
 * Consider the bit you removed, the demoralizing impact of wealthier classes fleeing. The sources you added don't mention this (purported) factor, so it's not clear if they reject it in some way. According to Morris, No one [...] disputes the fact that much of the Arab middle and upper classes fled Palestine.
 * I'm not sure this is the right place to mention Nakba denial, since the term is generally used for more fringe views (like the ahistorical view that the land was largely empty), not so much for more plausible analyses that are the focus of the article.
 * Also, why unlink causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus? — xDanielx  T/C\R 05:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Unlinked causes of the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight since it is a terriblly written article. This article analyzes the causes much better than that article.
 * "The demoralizing impact of wealthier classes fleeing" can probably be readded, although that's maybe more a part of the flight than a cause of it.
 * Nakba denial seems pretty clear due for the lead.
 * - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Causes of the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight is currently assessed as B-class. I'm aware of your views on it but not sure they're widely shared. Even if there was consensus that it's a terrible article, MOS:L doesn't mention that as a consideration for linking. — xDanielx  T/C\R 21:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't feel strongly about it being linked or not. And I intend to fix that article in the near future anyway. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This stuff might be less active denialism so much as just crappily dated. 2001 is very dated at this point, and 2010 is not exactly young. If there are later sources stating how consensus has changed, or abjectly contradicting these older sources, then we can obviate them. This isn't a historiography. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Changes
I made an edit implementing many changes here and was blanket reverted simply due to "there is a discussion in progress". I made many changes and it's not reasonable to simply revert them all. For instance I added sources and removed cleary bad sources. Please provide the actual reason why any changes are being disputed. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

 * If there's a proper discussion ongoing here, I haven't noticed it. I certainly haven't noticed any serious objections to tamping down the weight of a dated old historian source. I agree that the blanket revert was inappropriate, if not borderline disruptive. Very poor form. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It also isn't ideal to make major controversial changes to the lede when there's an active discussion that hasn't had much time to develop yet, and with concerns that haven't been addressed. — xDanielx  T/C\R 21:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It's a little hard to assess your post above given its lack of supporting links, but if there's something that's off about an edit, common practice is to collegiately tweak it. Better for actual headway. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Reverting many edits across distinct subjects is invariably POV in my experience, or more charitably, lazy. Selfstudier (talk) 11:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Ethnic cleansing
In the lead, there is an equivocating line that says: "The expulsion of the Palestinians has since been described by some historians as ethnic cleansing, while others dispute this charge." The ethnic cleansing sources are newer; the denial sources are older. Somewhat ludicrously, Benny Morris sources are used to support both. However, his 2021 admission of the ethnic cleansing drastically supercedes his 2008 denial. The other two denial sources, from 2002 and 2005, obviously precede Pappé's The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine and the last two decades of scholarship. The question that begs is: are there any current sources that still deny the ethnic cleansing? Iskandar323 (talk) 16:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

 * Good point, this should be rewritten to express that the ethnic cleansing view is the mainstream or majority view and that the denial thereof is a fringe or minority view. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The Morris interview where he implicitly acknowledges ethnic cleansing was from 2004, no? Looks like the archive date was 2021.
 * I don't think Morris has ever denied that ethnic cleansing occurred, so he should probably be removed from that list of references. That said, it's his view that there was no top-down Zionist plan for systematic ethnic cleansing. He also tends to use less loaded language like "expulsions". — xDanielx  T/C\R 21:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah yes. Archive date. Erk. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Lede
"The causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus remain a significantly controversial topic in public and political discourse, with a prominent amount of denialism regarding the responsibility of Israeli/Yishuv forces, although most scholarship today acknowledges that expulsions and violence, and the fear thereof, were the primary causes."

This should be rephrased, where the last part of the sentence, the scholarship is the focus of the paragraph, and not the (unfounded) controversy. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Recent changes
Made changes to lead here though I botched the edit summary.

@Iskandar323 this addresses your concerns per your talk page entry "Ethnic cleansing" and @Makeandtoss this addresses your concerns per your talk page entry "Lede".

- IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

 * 👍 Iskandar323 (talk) 20:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I meant to say that the paragraph should start with "Most scholarship today..."
 * Anyway, the lede could be further improved: first paragraph with a general description, second with the main components and then the chronological details, third paragraph on the scholarship, fourth paragraph on the legacy.
 * This is my suggestion:
 * "In the 1948 Palestine war, more than 700,000 Palestinian Arabs – about half of Mandatory Palestine's predominantly Arab population – were expelled or fled from their homes, at first by Zionist paramilitaries, and after the establishment of Israel, by its military. The expulsion and flight was a central component of the fracturing, dispossession, and displacement of Palestinian society, known as the Nakba."

 * "About 250,000–300,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled during the 1947–1948 civil war in Mandatory Palestine, before the termination of the British Mandate on 14 May 1948. By the end of the 1948 Palestine war, dozens of massacres targeting Arabs were conducted by Israeli military forces and between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were destroyed. Village wells were poisoned in a biological warfare programme and properties were looted to prevent Palestinian refugees from returning. Other sites were subject to Hebraization of Palestinian place names. The precise number of Palestinian refugees, many of whom settled in Palestinian refugee camps in neighboring states, is uncertain, although the number is around 700,000, being approximately 80 percent of the Palestinian Arab inhabitants of what became Israel."

 * "Most scholarship today agrees that expulsions and violence, and the fear thereof, were the primary causes for the displacement. Factors involved in the exodus include direct expulsions by Israeli forces, destruction of Arab villages, psychological warfare including terrorism, massacres such as the widely publicized Deir Yassin massacre which caused many to flee out of fear, typhoid epidemics in some areas caused by Israeli well-poisoning, and the collapse of Palestinian leadership including the demoralizing impact of wealthier classes fleeing. The expulsion of the Palestinians has been described by most historians as ethnic cleansing, while a minority disputes this characterization. Denialism regarding the responsibility of Israeli/Yishuv forces in the displacement of Palestinians, and discourse about the causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus continue to generate controversy."

Makeandtoss (talk) 11:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "A series of land and property laws were later passed by the first Israeli government that prevented displaced Palestinians from returning to their homes or claiming their property. They and many of their descendants remain refugees. The existence of the so-called Law of Return allowing for immigration and naturalization of any Jewish person and their family to Israel, while a Palestinian right of return has been denied, has been cited as an evidence for the charge that Israel practices apartheid. The status of the refugees, and in particular whether Israel will allow them the right to return to their homes, or compensate them, are key issues in the ongoing Israeli–Palestinian conflict."
 * Also I think moving the quotes to the body while keeping in-line refs will make the lede easier to edit and work with. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Actually, is there even a reason why we have this article which seems to be covered by Nakba? Makeandtoss (talk) 12:04, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's more in-depth on the expulsions specifically, as opposed to all of the other aspects of the Nakba page. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. And any thoughts on the proposed changes above? Makeandtoss (talk) 08:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It's a little hard to inspect the proposed changes like that. If any small changes can be made incrementally in separately explained edits, and any bigger changes discussed more specifically, that might be better. I have no idea what past RFCs might inform the current form of the lead. Good idea to take a look. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the fact "orders from the Arab leadership" should be mentioned as a factor to the Arab exodus. In addition to Yoav Gelber, this is corroborated by Benny Morris as being a factor in Haifa (see the subsection below), as well as in a host of other settlements.
 * Morris says that "all villagers in the Nazareth area", "all the villages between Haifa and Tel Aviv", Coastal Plain villages, neighborhoods bordering the Jewish areas in Jerusalem, were depopulated on orders from the general Arab headquarters or ALA. There was also apparently an evacuation order to Arabs living along the Palestine-Syrian border.
 * Here are some of the examples he gives: Shu'fat, Beit Hanina, al Jib, Judeira, Bir Nabala, Rafat, Dahi, Nein, Tampra, Kafr Misr, al Tira, Taiyiba, Na'ura, Nuqeib, ‘Arab al Satariyya, Beit Dajan, Kafr Manda, Majd al Kurum, Dimra, 'Illut, ‘Arab Mazarib, ‘Arab Sa‘ida, Ma’lul, Mujeidil, Beisan, Qastal, Qalandiya, some Jerusalem neighborhoods (Sheikh Jarrah, Wadi Joz, Musrara, Qatamon, Musara, Beit Hanina and others), Ma'dhar, Hadatha, 'Ulam, Sirin.
 * Therefore, while not the main factor as the Israeli scholarship originally claimed, it was definitely a factor, at least according to some (influential) scholars.
 * My suggestion is to change the sentence "Most scholarship today" to
 * Most scholarship today agrees that expulsions and violence, and the fear thereof, along with occasional orders from the Arab leadership, were the primary causes for the displacement.
 * Amayorov (talk) 20:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Are you planning to reference some historians that actually provide any opposing views and balance to Gelber and Morris at any point? Iskandar323 (talk) 20:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Do all the statements in the article provide references to 3+ influential scholars? Is that an official rule now? Amayorov (talk) 20:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Not my point. You appreciate that Gelber and Morris are both on the same side of a wide scholarly divide, yes? Iskandar323 (talk) 21:18, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * First, most sentences in the lead section are sources from a single, Arab or pro-Palestinian, scholar, such as Pappé, Nur, Khalidi, Ghanim.
 * Second, I don't agree that Morris and Gelber are "on the same side". Morris has revealed plenty of unsavoury information about Israel: e.g. the story about the Haganah's secret program of poisoning wells in 1948 was his discovery from a couple years ago. He is also the source of reference for many "pro-Palestinian" historians (e.g. Shlaim, Pappé). In contrast, Gelber is a more traditional Israeli historian.
 * Finally, you can't really seek "concensus across the divide" on every statement. That's partly because all archives of the Arab states, including those of the armies, parties, and diplomats, are still classified. Amayorov (talk) 21:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You're still not getting it. You are adding specific tracts of text without even looking to see what historians with a very different take on these events say about the same events. Yes, Morris is less blinkered than Gelber, but he is still a historian that resolutely produces historiography with a very discernable pitch, and the side that it favours—because it certainly does favour a side—is very clear. Now I'm sure that you can continue to beat around the bush if you like, but now is the point where you have to say, ok, I'll look up some of what I'm putting in in other sources, or you can keep putting in voices from only one side of a partisan divide and we will all have to chase you around the wiki adding POV tags to every page and section that you give the same treatment. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I don't understand what you're suggesting I do.
 * I'm quoting Morris on objective facts, rather than partisan conclusions. Morris references plenty of primary material. Would you want me to quote the primary material directly, bypassing Morris? I could certainly do that.
 * This page already cites plenty Morris (e.g. regarding the Haganah's use of psychological warfare or the well-poisoning). At the same time, it often ignores him, whenever he discusses the Arabs' evacuation orders or that there was no centralised plan of expulsion ever promulgated by the IDF. Selective quoting could certainly be a concern.
 * Besides, this page already includes plenty of "according to Morris' estimates," "according to Ilan Pappé," "in Flapan' opinion," etc. Sometimes, Pappé is quoted without a qualification. Do you have a problem with Morris specifically? Amayorov (talk) 22:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I have a problem with the fact that you think you are getting "objective facts" from Morris, as opposed to his subjective opinions on the whatever any given piece of evidence may be, and in contrast to whatever subjective opinions also significant historians less aligned with his way of thinking have about the same given pieces of evidence. Iskandar323 (talk) 22:07, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Isn't that the case with plenty of other claims on this page? For example, it includes "According to Pappé, this mortar barrage was deliberately aimed at civilians to precipitate their flight from Haifa," while omitting Morris' strong objecting this claim?
 * Another problem is that, while Morris is already cited plenty of times, he's referenced selectively and often ignoring important context in his writing. Amayorov (talk) 22:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is really a fair criticism - Morris is about as mainstream as they come, with critics on both sides. He almost left Israel after Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem made it difficult for him to find a job there. — xDanielx  T/C\R 22:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think you should all follow WP:SOURCESDIFFER and WP:BALANCE. Both Morris and the historians that disagree with him can be cited. Wafflefrites (talk) 22:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Reviewing all this, I think we are at the point, we should review all WP:BESTSOURCES for what happened. It's a historical event, there is no shortage of such sources and so this should not be difficult, just needs a bit of time. And we need to avoid getting bogged down in the weeds, the broad strokes we want, for example, Makeandtoss "Most scholarship today agrees that expulsions and violence, and the fear thereof, were the primary causes for the displacement" above, is that what the balance of bestsources says, or not? Selfstudier (talk) 09:44, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I would change it to
 * Most scholarship today agrees that expulsions and violence, and the fear thereof, along with occasional orders from the Arab leadership, were the primary causes for the displacement.
 * Amayorov (talk) 09:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Haifa
As it currently is, the article only describes Morris' description of the psychological warfare as a factor. However, the quote is taken out of context, and later on, Morris states that

 * The Haganah mortar attacks of 21–22 April were primarily designed to break Arab morale in order to bring about a swift collapse of resistance and speedy surrender. There is no evidence that the commanders involved hoped or expected that it would lead to mass evacuation (though events in Tiberias four days before must have been prominent in their minds).

At the same time, the article ignores the Morris' description of the events of April 22, during which the Arab leaders decided to leave, despite being entreated by the Jews and British to stay. By the nightfall of April 22, there were still 30,000-40,000 Arabs remaining in the town. Therefore, I think adding this information is important. Amayorov (talk) 19:59, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

 * Per my comment in previous section, review all sources and see what the balance of them says, we don't need to get into the weeds on everything. Selfstudier (talk) 09:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * My concrete proposals are:
 * 1. Follow up "According to Pappé, this mortar barrage was deliberately aimed at civilians to precipitate their flight from Haifa" with "while Morris disputes this claim "

 * 2. Add the following sentence following Karsh's assessment.

 * Benny Morris agrees, while also acknowledging "an undercurrent of expulsive thinking."

 * 2. Add the following paragraphs after "I am sending you posters in Arabic; disperse on route."

 * Truce negotiations between Haganah and the Arab leaders took place on April 22. Despite the Haganah's assurances that "Arabs will carry on their work as equal and free citizens of Haifa and will enjoy all services along with the other members of the community," the Arab representatives stated that "the Arab population wished to evacuate Haifa... man, woman and child." According to Morris, this led Jewish officials to (incorrectly) believed that the "unexpected exodus from Haifa" was part of a comprehensive Arab plot to "villify Jews".

 * From April 22 onwards, Morris states that there is "a surfeit of evidence" that the Arab leaders both ordered and encouraged the evacuation Both Morris and Karsh reference British and American intelligence reports, Alan Cunningham's assessment, personal memoirs, and Haganah's assessments, that "the Jews have been making extensive efforts to prevent wholesale evacuation," while the "total evacuation is being urged on the Haifa Arabs from higher Arab quarters and that the townsfolk themselves are against it."    Regarding the reasons for the alleged Arab encouragement of the exodus, they speculate that it was to avoid "possibility of Haifa Arabs being used as hostages in future operations after May 15," and to escape "the gearing of Transjordan's armed force for a wholesale massacre"

 * 3. Add this paragraph at the end.

 * Morris assess that the fall and exodus of Arab Haifa, given the city’s "pivotal political, administrative and economic role," was a major "precipitant" of the subsequent flight from other locations.

 * As always, I'm open to suggestions! Amayorov (talk) 22:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

 * Sounds reasonable. Alaexis¿question? 22:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I've shortened it for conciseness. If there are no objections, I will be adding it in 12 hours. Amayorov (talk) 22:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I've reformatted your references since r doesn't work inside tags. I've no objections to a different, more elegant solution.  Best, Wham2001 (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't have time to get into this right now but I strongly object to these additions. This is pretty blatant denialism being added to the article. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 05:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @TarnishedPath Why did you revert these edits? Amayorov (talk) 06:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Please see what I wrote in the below topic. I don't find Morris's Nakba denialism appropriate or WP:DUE. TarnishedPathtalk 06:38, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't revert the edits before discussing them.
 * Again, what I strongly object to is misrepresentation and selective referencing of Morris' work. You cannot quote a huge paragraph on him regarding Haganah's psychological warfare, while ignoring everything he says above and below it. Besides, Nakba denialism is a strange argument. Nobody denies that it happens, but as Wikipedia article, it should reflect the broad body of research about it, from world-leading academics. Selective quoting them is exactly what would make WP:UNDUE. Amayorov (talk) 06:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Morris is already referenced in the article. You made substantial changes all based on his opinions. That's entirely WP:UNDUE. TarnishedPathtalk 06:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * He's referenced selectively, by placing emphasis on parts of his work, while ignoring everything he says below or after. This is clearly interferes with ensuring a WP:NOV. Do you have any argument for omitting parts of his work, rather than it being a supported Nakba denialism? Amayorov (talk) 06:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ps, there is no policy which requires that I not remove material before discussing it. Please consider WP:ONUS. TarnishedPathtalk 06:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It also says
 * Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in those sources.
 * Given that Morris is the most references author on this page anyway, selectively quoting him or ignoring him is WP:UNDUE. Amayorov (talk) 07:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You make an argument for reducing the amount of quoting of the opinions of one specific source, not for increasing it. I don't think we're going to agree on this so I've posted notices on the three most relevant Wiki Projects talk pates and the Nakba article's talk page. TarnishedPathtalk 07:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Can you link me to them? Amayorov (talk) 07:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * They are at the Israel WikiProject's talk, the Palestine WikiProject's talk, the Israel and Palestine collaboration WikiProject's talk and the Nakba article's talk. TarnishedPathtalk 07:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think we need more discussion here. Morris is quoted outrightly wrongly. An example is regarding the alleged Jewish National Committee's failing to give assurances to the Arab leadership during the truce negotiations in Haifa. In fact, Morris explicitly says that it was the Arab National Committee, which couldn't guarantee that no incidents would occur from their side.
 * I'm also against selective quoting and cherry-picking the bits to promote a particular view. For example, Morris (rightly) quoted on the Haganah's use of psychological warfare, the well-poisoning program, the expulsions from Lydda and Ramle, etc. At the same time, he's ignored when it comes to the Arab evacuation orders, that the Haganah's mortars didn't target civilians at Haifa, and plenty of other important instances.
 * I've seen people say that certain parts from Morris cannot be included because they're "Nakba minimising". We cannot separate a historian's work into "Nakba minimising" and "Nakba maximising", and only quote the latter, if we want to build a neutral unbiased encyclopaedia. Of course, any historians disagreeing with him should be included too.
 * @IOHANNVSVERVS @Wafflefrites @XDanielx @Iskandar323 @BilledMammal @Wham2001 Amayorov (talk) 11:34, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Rather than assume that he is routinely selectively quoted, alternatives include that he is mentioned more where his input provides particular insight and less where his input may be contradicted by other sources. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Regarding the first issue, I've added a tag to the sentence in question. If no sources are provided confirming it then it can't stay in the article.
 * Let's discuss selective quoting and cherry-picking on a case-by-case basis in dedicated threads, otherwise it's very hard to follow the discussion.
 * In any case the arguments for or against using a given source should be policy-based, e.g., that there is another reliable source saying the opposite. Alaexis¿question? 20:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Unconditional surrender at Haifa: gross misrepresentation
The article currently states

 * On 21–22 April in Haifa, after the Haganah waged a day-and-a-half battle including psychological warfare, the Jewish National Committee was unable to offer the Palestinian council assurance that an unconditional surrender would proceed without incident.

I cannot find this confirmed by any of the provided references, to Benny Morris or otherwise. In fact, Morris refers to the Haifa Arab National Committee (NC), who, in response to a truce deal, responded "that they were not in a position to sign a truce, as they had no control over the Arab military elements in the town and that . . . they could not fulfill the terms of the truce, even if they were to sign. They then said as an alternative that the Arab population wished to evacuate Haifa . . . man, woman and child."

That is the same Haifa Arab National Committee that, in communique number 7 (dated February 22 1948), and with approval from the Arab Higher Committee, demanded that the Arabs cease shooting and return to their regular workplace.

This is a gross misrepresentation that must be corrected. I suggest the following

 * On 21–22 April in Haifa, after the Haganah waged a day-and-a-half battle including elements of psychological warfare, the Haifa Arab National Committee was unable to accept the truce deal and decided to evacuate the town's Arab population.

As always, I'm looking forward to suggestions and corrections. Amayorov (talk) 13:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

 * The material at Battle of Haifa (1948) is correct? Selfstudier (talk) 14:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, Battle of Haifa (1948) makes no reference to the Jewish National Committee. However, it's ambiguous too. It refers to the "National Committee (Haifa)" that couldn't "guarantee that no incidents would occur." That should be amended to make it clear that it was the Arab NC, and that it couldn't guarantee that no incidents would occur from their side. Amayorov (talk) 08:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Walid Khalidi has repeatedly debunked the myth of Arab evacuation orders in Haifa. See, for example, "The Fall of Haifa Revisited" (2008). إيان (talk) 05:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Agree that it's inappropriate and WP:UNDUE to go down the pay of Nakba minimisation. TarnishedPathtalk 05:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It has not been debunked. Walid Khalidi only analysed radio broadcasts to come to his conclusions, while Morris bases his conclusions on American/British intelligence, conclusions from the High Commissioner for Palestine, and internal Haganah reports, and other evidence. You don't have to state this as fact, but as a possible perspective – from a historian, on whose research much of the rest of the article is based.
 * Again, what I strongly object to is misrepresentation and selective referencing of Morris' work. This example is particularly egregious – there were no Jewish National Committee that could not "offer the Palestinian council assurance that an unconditional surrender would proceed without incident." You cannot reference Morris on this, when he talks about the opposite! Amayorov (talk) 06:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @TarnishedPath Amayorov (talk) 06:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Morris is a biased writer who engages in Nakba denialism. The position is WP:UNDUE. I see no problem with some small inclusion of his views in the article but the expansion that you introduced, based on his POV alone was WP:UNDUE. TarnishedPathtalk 06:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * "Morris is a biased writer who engages in Nakba denialism." – I find this statement ridiculous, giving that he was the first who uncovered the extent of Nakba, and that his works are widely quoted by even such authors as Pappé and Finkelstein.
 * He's no more biased than any of the other authors, and must be referenced non-selectively. He's already the most sourced from author on this page. Amayorov (talk) 07:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Again you're making an argument for reducing the amount of sourcing to the opinions of one specific writer, not increasing it. TarnishedPathtalk 07:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It's not about his "opinions", but rather the primary evidence that he uncovered and deemed relevant. I'm making an argument for quoting him non-selectively, in order to make the article WP:NOV. If you wish to reduce the amount of referencing him, you'd have to rewrite over half the page. Amayorov (talk) 07:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * We always quote selectively both for brevity and because of copyright. The opposite of quoting selectively would be quoting the entire work. I do not see how expanding the quotation for him is useful, especially given Morris is already given plenty of airplay in this article. TarnishedPathtalk 07:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Because you quote evidence that he provides, supporting the fact that the Haganah engaged in psychological warfare at Haifa, while ignoring the many pages where he describes the "surfeit" of evidence that the Arab leadership (both local and the AHC) ordered and spurred on the evacuation. Such selective quoting seems like pushing a particular POV. Amayorov (talk) 07:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I entirely disagree and I find covering Morris's opinion on that to be Nakba minimisation at the very best. TarnishedPathtalk 07:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You cannot separate a historian's work into "Nakba maximising" and "Nakba minimising" and quote only the former, if you want to build a neutral encyclopaedia. Amayorov (talk) 07:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You cannot separate a historian's work into "Nakba maximising" and "Nakba minimising" and quote only the former. That's certainly not a synthetic distinction I proposed, nor a course of action I suggested. If it were a course of action I suggested I'd be engaged in the complete removal of Benny Morris, which is demonstrably not the case. What however is going against NPOV is seeking to disproportionately rely on the view points of exactly one author. It needs to be toned down a bit. He's not the only author out there. TarnishedPathtalk 11:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That's certainly not a synthetic distinction I proposed, nor a course of action I suggested. Certainly, but the article currently appears to be doing just that, at least to some extent. Amayorov (talk) 11:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Morris's name is mentioned 18 times in the body of article. 3 times in notes, 25 times in the references and 3 times in the source list. Just the 21 times (18 inline and 3 via notes) he's mentioned by name attributing his view point says that is almost certainly not the case and in fact that we have somewhat of a problem with an over-reliance on the POV of Benny Morris. TarnishedPathtalk 11:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, but he's quoted selectively. He's (rightly) quoted on the Haganah's use of psychological warfare, the well-poisoning program, the expulsions from Lydda and Ramle, etc. At the same time, he's ignored when it comes to the Arab evacuation orders, that the Haganah's mortars didn't target civilians at Haifa, and plenty of other important instances.
 * Sometimes, he's even quoted perversely, such as regarding the alleged Jewish National Committee's failing to give assurances during the truce negotiations at Haifa, whereas in fact it was the Arab National Committee. Amayorov (talk) 12:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Worth noting that the article being republished here, "The Fall of Haifa", was written by Khalidi in 1959 when Morris was 11. It looks like Khalidi added an intro to this republication which briefly criticizes Morris, but of course the underlying 1959 article does not.
 * The 1959 article probably isn't too relevant today. E.g. it says that the Haifa National Committee did nothing to encourage evacuation, which I don't think anyone (today) denies. Even Karsh would agree, saying Although the Committee strove to curb the mass flight, urging Haifa's Arabs to stay put and castigating those who fled-occasionally, these warnings were backed by the torching of escapees' belongings-its remonstrations proved of no avail.
 * I think Morris' views on the topic are quite significant and should be mentioned. There are scholars who argue Morris overemphasizes evacuation orders, which can be mentioned as well. Criticism isn't generally a reason to remove content, particularly in this area where every prominent work attracts criticism.
 * "Overuse of Morris" doesn't seem like a convincing reason to remove content either, partly since his work in this area is quite prominent (surely Technological singularity shouldn't limit mentions of Kurzweil?), but more importantly because WP:WEIGHT pertains to viewpoints on a particular topic (like evacuation orders), not to particular sources. — xDanielx  T/C\R 22:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * °The only problem above is overuse of Morris, not his bias.
 * The article, like most of wiki I/P historical articles, is in a poor state. And one of the reasons is that considerable emphasis is given to citing positions by prominent scholars in the midst of the factual narrative. All opinions of this kind should always be relegated below a strict narrative focus on the chronological reconstruction that established the facts as they are known to unfold day by day/week by week.
 * The section on Haifa here is woefully inadequate. It should, by rights, synthesize Battle of Haifa (1948), but we cannot do that at present because that is one more example of an inadequate reconstruction of the factual record, and overreliance on just one historian: 16 of the 43 references go back to Morris, the next most used sources are primary documents of the period, and then we have passing references to bits and pieces from Pappé, Segev, Azoulay etc., as minor voices. Kimche gets more mention than any of those. There is no use of Walid Khalidi,   The Fall of Haifa Revisited   Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 37, No. 3 (Spring 2008), pp. 30-58, which though earlier than Morris 2004, was updated in a 2008 reprint which took in and criticized Morris' narrative, including an accusation that Morris ignored or suppressed core information available to him.
 * So rather than jam more Morris stuff in here, there are two tasks. The primary one would be to revise the Battle of Haifa article, with an approach that established a detailed factual record of the sequence of events, (with brief notes when secondary accounts differ) and once that is done, readjust the Haifa section here, which is pathetically scrappy.
 * Nishidani (talk) 08:35, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * +1, I too am not particularly happy at this excessive focus on Morris. Selfstudier (talk) 08:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * All opinions of this kind should always be relegated below a strict narrative focus on the chronological reconstruction that established the facts as they are known to unfold day by day/week by week. – how could this be done in light of No original research, and the often significant differences between secondary sources as to what those facts were?
 * The only problem above is overuse of Morris, not his bias. – in my view, the problem is that he's used selectively. As I wrote above, you cannot separate a historian's work into "Nakba maximising" and "Nakba minimising" and quote only the former, if you want to build a neutral encyclopaedia.
 * overreliance on just one historian – One must distinguish between backing up objective facts using a historian's research, and representing the conclusions that that historian draws from them as fact. The fact is that Morris brought light on a lot of primary evidence from Israeli and Western archives from the 1940s, which often cannot be complemented, because the Arab archives are all still closed Amayorov (talk) 09:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Morris brought light on a lot of primary evidence from Israeli and Western archives from the 1940s, which often cannot be complemented, because the Arab archives are all still closed—bruh. You gotta be kidding with this.
 * I'm with TarnishedPath, Nishidani, and Selfstudier. إيان (talk) 17:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * First, as I've said, I'm not arguing for Morris to be used exclusively — rather that he is referenced non-selectively, instead of cherry-picking the bits to promote a particular view. To some extent, that is presently the case. Even more worrying is that sometimes he is cited outright wrongly, such as the reference to a "Jewish National Council" at Haifa that couldn't guarantee a ceasefire without an incident, whereas in fact it was the Arab NC.
 * Secondly, my point is true — all Arab historical archives, including those of the military, the main political parties, and royal courts, are still closed. That's not to say that you can't try and compensate for them. Amayorov (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * We can certainly utilise more sources and note when they disagree but the weight given to various positions should be based on the scholarly sources (reviews, citation, critique) and not on editors' own opinions. Alaexis¿question? 21:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Loyalists

This definately needs to be a disambiguation -- there are so many uses of the term "Loyalist" -- I hadn't even thought of this one. Eg. Spanish Civil War; Northern Ireland; any civil war, in fact. -- Sam

title: Talk:Loyalists