Talk:Beirut: Difference between revisions

Cities Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Lebanon Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lebanon-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:Releaseversion Template:FAOL

I wasn't sure why it was necessary to specify that Brooklyn is in New York City which is in New York, so I removed the last one. I feel it reads better like that and there is still enough information under the link for anyone who does not know what Brooklyn or NYC is to find out easily enough. I'd be happ to discuss it, however. Nevilley 07:25, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Should the mention of the airstrikes link to the article on the conflict itself? -F.S.O--train--'09 19:20, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that you need to put scare quotes around "Hezbollah bunker" -- it's enough to say that the Israelis claimed it was one, which already indicates that it was the claim of one side and not necessarily established fact. But I haven't edited this yet. 24.47.190.74 03:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)motorneuron[reply]

Why does the article mention, under the "Israel airstrikes" section, all the bombardments of Lebanese territory, and not only the ones which hit targets within the area of Beirut itself, as it should be in an article that discusses the mere city?

________________________________________________________________________________________________

I feel that it is unencyclopedic to comment upon allegations made as to the conduct of a war (by both parties) when it is difficult in the extreme to verify these assertions. It is my opinion that the proper conduct for an encyclopedia is to provide a dossier of verified facts, the reporting of current events is best left to the mass media.

The first several paragraphs are clearly biased against Israel. Let's please keep politics out of Wikipedia. There are plenty of other sites where you can let your opinion be known.

Yes - we're all concerned about the conflict. Since it is an ongoing, fluid, current event, readers should be referred to the article about the conflict itself. Opinions and facts about the conflict do not belong in the article.

To this end, I have added a "conflict" section to the article and refer interested readers to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict article.

This is the text that I removed:

The city, along with the rest of the country, is currently experiencing a major humanitarian crisis as a result of the coordinated missile strikes and artillery fire from Israeli aircraft and artillery units. These strikes have so far mainly targeted the city's southern suburbs, widely considered to be Hezbollah's strategic headquarters.

The stated purpose of the strikes are to destroy the Lebanese Islamic militant organization Hezbollah. However, in reality a policy of collective punishment against the Lebanese population is being executed; a great part of the city's infrastructure, including its international airport as well as most of its major bridges and highways have also been partially or completely destroyed. Indeed, these events are inline with the statement of Israel's chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, who said "If the soldiers are not returned, we will turn Lebanon's clock back 20 years." (Source: CNN) Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions collective punishment is a war crime. Article 33 states: "No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed," and "collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited."

I need to tune up some formatting at the beginning of the Beirut article and will do so now. --AStanhope 21:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I propose removing the Israeli Airstrikes section of the article. This information belongs in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict article - not in the article about Beirut proper. Alternatively, an article called 2006 Israeli airstrikes on Beirut or something similar could be produced. Why not? Sounds good! --AStanhope 21:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the entire removed section regarding Israeli airstrikes for use elsewhere:

• On July 12, 2006, Israel attacked dozens of targets throughout the country as part of an operation Israel claimed was aimed at recovering soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah in a cross-border raid earlier in the day. Critics say this is retaliation for Lebanon's toleration of attacks on Israel, pointing to a prisoner trade offer by Hezbollah. [1]
• On July 13, 2006, the raid extended to the Lebanese capital, Beirut. Israeli jets fired missiles at the Rafic Hariri International Airport, which forced its closure and diversion of flights, as well as damage to Hezbollah's Al-Manar television station, and the destruction of the Rayak Air Base in the Bekaa Valley in east Lebanon.[2]
• On July 14, 2006, over 50 civilians have been killed, and Israeli jets dropped bombs on the southern Beirut suburb of Dahieh, a Hezbollah stronghold in Beirut. Also, the international airport came under attack once again. [3]
• On July 15, 2006, Israeli warships bombarded coastal targets in northern Beirut, such as the port, lighthouses, and navy radars at the Lebanese army's coastal base. One Lebanese soldier was killed while a few were wounded. But earlier, Hezbollah attacked an Israeli warship killing four Israeli soldiers. Israeli jets also dropped leaflets over the north-western tourism city of Manara Street and the rest of Lebanon. Children and adults ran into the streets to snatch up leaflets, which had a caricature of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah as a serpent and read: "Is the resistance ... helping Lebanon? The resistance ... is destroying Lebanon!" [4]
• On July 16, 2006, the assault on Dahieh at Beirut's southern suburb resumed as an attempt to destroy Hezbollah targets and kill Hassan Nasrallah of the Shi'ite Muslim radical group. Israeli jets also destroyed the bridge in that area that leads east to Hazmieh. [5]
• On July 20, 2006, seven Brazilians were killed by Israeli airstrikes. [6]. Israel claimed to have bombed a "Hezbollah bunker" in the Beirut suburb, however Al-Manar dismissed this claim and said that the jets hit a mosque in that area. [7]
• Currently, foreigners and Lebanese are trying to flee from Lebanon by sea, to Cyprus and then to their home countries, or by land to Damascus, Syria, either to flee through its airport or stay there as refugees. Warships from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Commonwealth of Nations are still evacuating their citizens to Cyprus, which is critically overcrowded with tourists and evacuees.[8]
• There are an estimated 90,000 Sri Lankan mostly female domestic workers in Lebanon. As Sri Lanka is itself undergoing a rebel attack by the militant LTTE ("Tamil Tiger" terrorist organization), the government is not organizing any exodus for its citizens.

I agree that this is extremely important information however I don't think it belongs in the Beirut article proper. Whoever is behind this, please consider integrating it into the 2006 Lebanon-Israel conflict article or starting a new article on the topic. Thanks! --AStanhope 21:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i don't see the point of comparing the two cities. you could compare beirut to many other mediterranean cities in turkey or greece or even north africa i say the comparison should be deleted, there's no need for it

'Beirut has both developed and less developed neighborhoods. Its most famous Sunni Muslim negihborhood is Saifi Village at Downtown.' This information is both inaccurate and misleading. Saifi is not even a neighborhood per se. It's barely ten buildings full of non-residential shops. Plus it's population is not remotely exclusive to Sunni Muslims. I know that many Christians and other Muslims have clinics/offices/apartments there. If that info is meant to heightened one group of Muslims over the other, and to make foreigners believe that there is actual segregation between the two Muslim groups, I think it should be removed at once. This is not 'The Truth'. And why allude that downtown is a Sunni neighborhood. We all know that there are many many many Christian properties there (both historical and personal). If you insist on a Sunni neighborhood, why not choose something like 'Malla/ Nazlit el Hoss', 'tallit el khayat' or even 'Verdun', which is a reasonably elegent. --LestatdeLioncourt 20:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)Bold text[reply]

I've just started looking at this article, and I'm curious if there's even any reason to list the neighborhoods? Are any of them notable? Should they all be listed? Should the entire paragraph just be removed, or moved to its own section instead of the introduction? George Saliba 13:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was just glossing over the Beirut article...it is in desperate need of sources. There are several POV statements that I'm about to fix...I thought I would mention it here. I'm going to go at it a little at a time...please feel free to provide thoughts/input/etc...--Xtcrider 15:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have, on several occasions, inserted lines in this article similar to "of course, this title was self-proclaimed by the Lebanese themselves, and is still stubbornly and pretentiously still being used by some of them" when referring to Beirut's nickname "Paris of the middle-east". Whether you are right or wrong (which isn't the point), your sentence is blantanly POV, unsourced and doesn't belong in an 'encyclopedic' article...if you can reference your sentence (much like I referenced the nickname), please do so...your approach isn't very constructive... --Xtcrider 02:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what are the major transportation iin beirut Lebanon?

what are the major transportation iin beirut Lebanon?

Should I add in information about the suburbs in Beirut (ie Mansourieh, Antelias Antelias, and Mkhallis)? If so, would this make a new section or go under one that already exists? TBL 23:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the pictures on Beirut aren't enough and are rather unappealing. I think we should place an aerial picture of the Beirut peninsula. God knows there's alot on Yahoo or Google. Im still new here so i have no idea how to add pictures. But i have many awesome ones. Someone show me how to do it..lol

Regarding the sobqriquet "The Paris of the Middle East," one author wrote: "although this was a title the Lebanese self-appointed to themselves, and many Lebanese still pretentiously use this title, despite Beirut being a shadow of it's former glory days."

Besides the redundancy and awkwardness of the phrasing "self-appointed to themselves," and the unnecessary inclusion of an apostrophe in the possesive "its," the entire sentence is highly derisive of both those Lebanese who chose to refer to their city by this title and the state of the city itself. The sentence is utterly inappropriate for a Wikipedia article, which has rigorous standards of formality, impartiality, and clarity. Before contributing to Wikipedia any further, the author must consult Wikipedia's style guidelines at length. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.232.207.175 (talk) 09:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

External link or links have recently been deleted by User:Calton as "horrible Tripod pages which add little information, are full of ads, and fail WP:EL standards." No better external links were substituted. Readers may like to judge these deleted links for themselves, by opening Page history. --Wetman 15:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beirut is more than 5000 years old and this should be mentioned at the begining of the history section. The current first paragraph implies that it dates back to 15th century B.C. which is wrong.

Excerpts from http://www.middleeast.com/beirut.htm

Historical Heritage

Beirut stands on the site of a very ancient settlement going back at least 5,000 years. Its name appeared in cuneiform inscriptions as early as the 14th century B.C. In the first century B.C., Berytus, as it was then called, became a Roman Colony and under Roman rule was the seat of a famous Law school which continued into the Byzantine era.

> >

I added it