The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

• You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
• You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are: Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required. With respect to the WP:1RR restriction: Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring. Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence. After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions. Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

I have added a map from Van der Velde, which shows the situation more clearly than the PEF map which did not survey the area. The location of Al-Dalhamiyya seems to have moved east after the founding of Ashdot Ya'akov. Currently the article says "Ashdot Ya'aqov, southwest to the village site, and Ashdot Ya'aqov Me'uchad, west of the village site, were settled by Zionist in 1933, but none on village land"; I don't understand the "but none on village land", which from the maps seems to be incorrect. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:32, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The reference to Menachemya is odd as well, as it is located west of the Jordan. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:56, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The move is proven by the location of the photo I just added to the article of the Dalhamiyya railway sign. As is shown on this Survey of Palestine map, the railway ran west of Ashdot Ya'akov. And this diagram shows Dalhamiyya as a synonym of Ashdot Ya'akov. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:25, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Onceinawhile: Lynch's map from the late 1840s is a close match to Van der Velde's map. It seems to me that the PEF map agrees too. Please explain why you think it moved. You can't take the location of a train station as the location of a village of that name; there was often a significant distance between them. I think it is more likely that either Ashdot Ya'aqov moved or the direction from there is given incorrectly. Note that "Kh. Dalhamiye" is at 2036/2288 on File:20-22-JisrElMajami-1942.jpg which is a very good match to PEF. It is also on File:20-22-Gesher-1954.jpg at the same place. Zero 04:10, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zero0000, I hadn’t noticed “Kh. Dalhamiye” – fully agree that that did not move from the 19th century location. It is also consistent with the location of the railway and the cemetery. I was focused on the location of the coordinates 2km east of there, which I guess are wrong?

I still think we are missing an important element of the history here — the canal built into the reservoir goes between the Khirbet and the cemetery – it seems reasonably likely to be that part of the area was cleared in the 1920s for the building of the canal? Onceinawhile (talk) 06:25, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the coordinates for Khirbet Dalhamiyya are 32°39′10″N 35°35′12″E / 32.65278°N 35.58667°E / 32.65278; 35.58667. The "cemetery" is visible as a mound. I wonder if that is the same as "Tel Delhamia" where an Ancient Egyptian artefact was found (Orientalia: Vol. 51. Gregorian Biblical BookShop. pp. 485–. GGKEY:QDL7YH4X4L1.). Onceinawhile (talk) 09:09, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What still needs fixing is the article statement which says "Ashdot Ya'aqov, southwest to the village site, and Ashdot Ya'aqov Me'uchad, west of the village site, were settled by Zionist in 1933, but none on village land". This all seems to be incorrect. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I get 32°39′12″N 35°34′8″E / 32.65333°N 35.56889°E / 32.65333; 35.56889 Zero 09:30, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

??? That is west of the Jordan river? Huldra (talk) 20:38, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the original course dried up; the river labelled on modern maps in that location as “the River Jordan” is actually the canal. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are right, I forgot to fix the 35' as 34'. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:55, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This one puts Tel Dalhamia in the Jordan Valley, so probably the same. It calls the artifact questionable though. Zero 11:36, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot under the spelling Dalhamiya. Also, I found in Carta's Official Guide to Israel that Ashdot Ya'aqov was founded in 1924 "where kibbutz Gesher now stands. In 1935 moved to the present site on lands purchased from Dalhamiyya village." Zero 11:36, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In ths paper, Gil-Har writes: "The boundary delimitation provided an unexpected extra source of revenue for the Trans-Jordan government, by the transference of the state domains of the former Ottoman government in the Jordan Valley to Trans-Jordan. Soon after, the government asked for the land registry books of Tiberias and Beisan in respect of these lands. Later on, the Trans-Jordan government sold a tract of the above land for the use of the Palestine Electric Corporation, and it legislated a special law that authorized this sale, since there had been an Ottoman law prevailing in Trans-Jordan banning the sale to foreigners of immovable property. The villagers of Dalhamiyeh claimed this land from the Palestine Electric Corporation first in 1927 in the Magistrate's Court of Ajlun, and later in 1941, in the District Court of Irbid. In both cases, the government of Trans-Jordan joined in as a third party versus the claimants. In the proceedings of the law-suits, the claimants presented official copies of the land registries of Tiberias that confirmed their rights to the land since the nineteenth century." Zero 11:46, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. It may conflict with the unsourced assertion at Ashdot Ya'akov that the land was purchased by the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, although it is not clear what part of the land is being referred to. I have added a map to the right; maybe you have a better eye than me, but I am struggling to differentiate between the two types of shading. Onceinawhile (talk) 12:48, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another map of the area from 1935. The old Khirbet Al-Dalhamiyya seems to be where the "Flood Water Outlet" is marked, but there is no sign of it. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:00, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All this does not contradict the position of ed Delhemiyeh on SWP 9 map, does it? Huldra (talk) 20:40, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]