Stale

is the emblem "doctored? (a dagger stabbing a "Shield of David")

Stale

– DyceBot (talk) 07:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An armored car, captured from the ALA (Arab Liberation Army- Kaukji's army) on 1948. The car still carries the ALA emblem, a dagger stabbing a Star of David. It was captured after the ALA defeat in the Galilee and his flight from Palestine campaign.

Request:

This question is a continuation of a previous discussion here. I have uploaded a good quality image as opposed to the low quality image of the previous discussion, which was scanned from a book.

Since previously it was suggested the the "a dagger stabbing a "Shield of David"" is "doctored", will you please have your opinion whether the emblem might be "doctored" this time too?

The same armored car, but without the camouflage painting, is seen here:

More about this type of armored car: Otter Light Reconnaissance Car.

Looking at the background, there are sources who describe verbally the emblem as is] (some of with a slight modification).

The source for this image is the Haganah / I.D.F archive, where they claim to have more photos with the same emblem Ykantor (talk) 09:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Graphist opinion(s):

In the last discussion, the further I got into it, the less I was convinced the photos had been doctored. While at first glance they certainly looked doctored (that is, the emblem appeared to be added to the photo after it was taken), my opinion now is that they probably were not. The high resolution photo you offer further suggests they were not doctored. All that said, I wouldn't support erasing all trace of this discussion from the image description pages. There should be a link pointing to these discussions we've had on the subject. – JBarta (talk) 21:17, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not officially a "graphicist" but I do have quite a lot of experience with photo manipulation so I'm posting here. As I said in an earlier discussion, I was not convinced by the arguments that the photo is doctored. Now I am even less convinced. A lot can be learned from this hires image of exactly the same model from a similar angle. On the vehicle with the emblem, especially the lo-res version, it appeared that a corner of the vehicle passed through the left edge of the emblem, giving difficulties of shade and shape as well as raising the question of why someone would paint the emblem around a corner. However, the image I am bringing shows that the panel is completely flat, and the "corner" is just an optical illusion created by the camouflage pattern. I think the photo is genuine. Zero^talk 14:10, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, I strongly disagree with the description of the emblem. You can say that the dagger is stabbing the Magen David all you like, but it simply isn't. Take a fresh look; that dagger is sitting flat on top of the Magen David with a small sheath to hold it there. That dagger is not stabbing or even menacing the star. It doesn't make any sense as an Arab emblem. I think it is a Jewish emblem. Zero^talk 14:10, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

to Zero: yours:""That dagger is not stabbing or even menacing the star'". Why will not you magnify the image and see for yourself? Ykantor (talk) 16:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did that before posting, gimme a break. I stand by my assessment. Stabbing looks nothing like that. Zero^talk 02:37, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full Definition of STAB, transitive verb, : to wound or pierce by the thrust of a pointed object or weapon . "Merriam-webster" does not agree with you. Ykantor (talk) 06:49, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's funny. Well, if I have to get stabbed by someone I'll choose you to maximise my chance of survival. Here is what it really looks like (warning: graphic and disturbing). Zero^talk 07:29, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But "Merriam-webster" does not agree with you yet. Ykantor (talk) 09:29, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merriam-webster doesn't agree nor disagree with what Zero0000 says. Anybody can see that the dagger doesn't stab the Magen David. But it is not the issue. Pluto2012 (talk) 13:50, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know better than Merriam-webster? Ykantor (talk) 14:45, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments:

Could you get an additional image from that archive, along with a brief description of its origin? Perhaps one which - like the written sources cited so far - is dripping blood? – SJ + 06:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

to SJ: The archive is not fully digitized, so the process is slow, and depends on their initiative and in me, reminding them frequently. We need lot of patience, and a bit of luck. Ykantor (talk) 21:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As Zero notes here, the caption is dubious, and must be rewritten. I have suggested attribution to Benny Morris for the claims that it is an official ALA emblem, and that the dagger stabs at the magen (which it does not appear to, but lies over it). I don't see any problem with the photo, but with its description and the file should clarify, unless a photo with blood-dripping comes up, that we are dealing with an interpretation.Nishidani (talk) 14:50, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nish, does Morris refer to this photo? If not, it is OR to present the photo to illustrate Morris' words, especially as it doesn't match Morris' words. It is plausible that there was an ALA emblem like Morris describes but it isn't what appears in the photo. Zero^talk 15:12, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There ya go, chief. Didn't have Morris at my elbow and took refs to him from Ykantor at his word. Without wishing to come over as a brownnoser, I agree with you throughout on this, except for the notion that it might be Jewish, which would be perplexing in context (if a Jewish symbol were on an Arab vehicle, the implication would be that it was placed there by (victorious) Jews). I find nothing problematical with the idea an emblem like this might have been used officially, but find the documentation poor, the caption odd, and its use instrumental. These issues must be clarified before rushing to use them on wiki pages.Nishidani (talk) 16:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't these supposed to be captured Arab vehicles? Of course they would have been immediately put to use (assuming they still worked) and could be painted with Jewish emblems then. Zero^talk 02:33, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is supposed to be an ALA vehicle that participated to the Yehiam convoy "battle". What is written in Arab below the drawing ?

Note that if the foolowing document is true, it cannot be a Jewish Symbol : [1] and if it is a Jewish symbol, than the document is a piece of forgery as barely found...

Pluto2012 (talk) 08:41, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You make good points. Of course I don't really know it is a Jewish symbol. All I really know is that something doesn't stack up here. If someone wanted to draw a dagger stabbing a magen david, it would have been so easy to draw it actually embedded in the star as when someone is fatally stabbed, with the dripping blood Morris writes of, instead of held harmlessly against it. As it stands, it is quite innocuous compared to how it could have been. I don't believe that Israel attempted to forge an Arab emblem either, for exactly the same reason (in that case Israel would have made it look gruesome, but it doesn't). Perhaps it is an Arab emblem whose symbolism we don't understand, for example a reference to some other symbol people knew at the time. I don't know. Zero^talk 12:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which means in sum that, if we set aside the secondary sources, all we have visually is a Magen David with a dagger. Sources interpret this as 'stabbing', for which we have, as yet, no visual evidence, since equally one could say the dagger lies atop the magen, as a sword often lies atop a funeral bier of an officer of rank. In the absence of visual evidence, one would have to write, therefore, 'a Magen David with a dagger' (until we, or historians, can sort this out, meaning asking Benny Morris, Henry Laurens, Gilbert Achcar or Philip Mattar).Nishidani (talk) 12:31, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pluto's link takes us to a photo appearing in the Egyptian newspaper al-Mussawar, Cairo. April 3, 1948. There is a connect therefore with the report Ykantor mentions that in Cairo at the time 'hotel fronts and billboards were plastered with posters of a dagger dripping blood, on its handle the Star of David emblematic of Zionism.'( Kenneth W. Bilby, New Star in the Near East, Doubleday, ‎1950 p.7) where the dagger is identified as Zionist.Nishidani (talk) 12:39, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The inital picture was published by Ynhockey from a 1951's book written Alexander Doran (Lutzki) [2].

Lutzki was not an historian. He worked for the Arab Department of the Jewish Agency, then for the Israeli Foreign Ministry. He became ambassador. In his book in 1951, he also published a document in French written by the Mufti that was only found back 40 years later in the UN Nations's archives by Wiesenthal Centre. In this document the Mufti stated that he was aware of the Holocaust and was suggesting this to be implemented in Palestine... [3].

Pluto2012 (talk) 13:50, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not related to our problem here directly, Pluto. But if there is a document saying the Mufti suggested the holocaust be implemented in Palestine, that should be immediately cited on the al-Husayni page. The book you cite p.110, does not say that. The Davidic symbol was widespread in medieval Arabic literature as the Jewish Virtual Library article on the Magen shows.Nishidani (talk) 11:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The word "stabbing"

The word "stabbing" is my personal translation of the image title, taken from this Dotan book. I have just tried Google translation, which results in: stuck, thrusted, inserted. Ykantor (talk)

Resolved

Samuel Nicholas

Resolved

– Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article(s): Samuel Nicholas

Request:

trim to oval... -- Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:48, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Graphist opinion(s):

Done. I also made a png with transparent background for the infobox, but can't upload it (using DerivativeFX) until the licensing is sorted. nagualdesign (talk) 06:01, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! What licensing thing needs sorted? Is the original wrong?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In all honesty I have no idea. I'm not very good at that sort of thing. I was just trying to upload using DerivativeFX and it spat the dummy out. Give me a few minutes and I'll retry... nagualdesign (talk) 09:20, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...Nope. Sorry, it's still throwing up an error. nagualdesign (talk) 09:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded using the basic upload form. nagualdesign (talk) 04:05, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rosalynn Carter

Resolved

– nagualdesign (talk) 05:54, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article(s): Rosalynn Carter

Request:

trim uneven white space... -- Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Graphist opinion(s):

Done I quite liked the left-right balance, actually. (Uneven ≠ unbalanced.) Although it was a tad more artistic than encyclopedic. nagualdesign (talk) 09:38, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Maybe it's a trait I don't have, it looked wrong to me. Something about aspect ratio or where the face is supposed to be?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 10:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Photographers often avoid placing their subject in the centre of the frame, so as to add interest to the composition. Encyclopedic images are normally dead centre. But even now I've left more lead room on the right than on the left. Hair doesn't carry the same 'weight' (in the compositional sense) as the profile of a face. nagualdesign (talk) 05:54, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]