Loading AI tools
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Onceinawhile. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
On 29 April 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bab el-Gasus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the largest intact Ancient Egyptian tomb ever found, with 254 richly decorated sarcophagi, was forgotten for almost a century? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bab el-Gasus. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Bab el-Gasus), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
|
Hook update | |
| Your hook reached 17,533 views (730.5 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of April 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:29, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Hey Mr. Mischievous! I was wondering if we should nominate Eshmunazar II sarcophagus for FA. What do you think? el.ziade (talkallam) 15:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Elias Ziade, definitely. All the hard work has been done, it is one of the most important inscriptions ever found in Middle Eastern archaeology, and the article represents by far the best source of information on the topic anywhere. Happy to help with further drafting as you see fit. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:36, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Music to my ears! I have an ongoing FA, and a new article in the making. I will review this one and include you as nominator when I submit it for FA review. el.ziade (talkallam) 17:48, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- PS. I don't get to say this often, but you're doing an amazing job. el.ziade (talkallam) 17:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you Eli. As are you my friend. The throughness with which you address the topics is magnificent. I particularly enjoyed the quality of the content (both factual and visual) that you have brought at Royal necropolis of Byblos. I remember visiting Byblos a long time ago having been told of its great historical importance, and feeling quite confused afterwards. So little of its historical significance is visible to the visitor. But with articles like this one, it is now so much easier for the world to understand what that great place is really all about. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- PS. I don't get to say this often, but you're doing an amazing job. el.ziade (talkallam) 17:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Music to my ears! I have an ongoing FA, and a new article in the making. I will review this one and include you as nominator when I submit it for FA review. el.ziade (talkallam) 17:48, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi buddy, thanks for the above. I'm hoping you have a good image of the sarcophagus of Ahiram. The ones on common are a bit blurry or taken from a bad angle. el.ziade (talkallam) 11:14, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- I looked at the others I have but you wouldn’t like the angles. Best I can do is: File:National Museum of Beirut, Lebanon - 49573139338.jpg which improves alignment, sharpness and brightness. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Ahem, Golan Heights isn't "occupied Palestinian territories".... please see move-request on the talk-page, Huldra (talk) 20:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Got time to whip up a quick article? Shouldn't take you too long :) Selfstudier (talk) 13:29, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Selfstudier: yes life is definitely busy (too busy at the moment...), but always happy to help. What is the topic? Onceinawhile (talk) 13:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Include at Status Quo a new article Status quo (Al-Aqsa mosque) (2022 Al-Aqsa Mosque clashes refers). Make sense? Selfstudier (talk) 13:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Selfstudier: it may already be covered by: Hashemite custodianship of Jerusalem holy sites? Onceinawhile (talk) 14:12, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Uh huh, that is what I mean, interesting that "Status Quo" is not really mentioned much in that, only this sentence "Leaders of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre issued a statement of support to Abdullah on 1 March 2018 after Israel shelved a proposed bill that aimed to propose new tax measures to churches in the West Bank. "Your defence of religious freedom and Your leadership, in ensuring that the Status Quo is respected and maintained, has been crucial in our ongoing attempts to guard and protect the Christian presence especially in the Holy City of Jerusalem" but that's the "other SQ", right? Maybe it needs a name change? (and an update).Selfstudier (talk) 14:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've created a redirect pending a change to the status quo ;) Iskandar323 (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ta, before I travel further down this road, I am a little confused about something and the talk page doesn't help, I have the same query as Arminden, essentially. Afaics, Holy Sepulchre is a subject of SQ (J&B) so it can't be a subject of the new SQ, right? Assuming that is the case, are there in fact any Christian sites subject to SQ new? Or is it just Al-Aqsa? Selfstudier (talk) 17:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I know, status quo is an informal agreement only relating to the Dome of the Rock in its entirety, and not just Aqsa mosque. SQ does not deal with Christian churches or other Islamic shrines in Jerusalem, some have their own non-IP-related SQs. Hashemite custodianship is part of the informal unwritten SQ, which for example includes a prohibition on Jewish prayer (but not visits) at the Temple Mount-excluding western wall. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK, then Status quo (Al-Aqsa mosque) is not an incorrect title? Or is Status quo (Al-Aqsa) better? Just to be clear, I want to distinguish Status Quo (Jerusalem and Bethlehem) (which says Holy Selpuchre is covered). Selfstudier (talk) 09:09, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hmm. I need to do some reading. What I do know is that:
- Original Status quo: The "Status Quo (Jerusalem and Bethlehem)", as we name it, is a formal documented arrangement which evolved over two centuries to regulate the use of certain Christian sites, and later two Jewish-Islamic sites.
- 1967 Status quo: The "Status Quo" for the Al Aqsa Compound / Temple Mount is a much more recent thing, formulated in June 1967 (* Najem, T.; Molloy, M.J.; Bell, M.; Bell, J. (2017). Contested Sites in Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Old City Initiative. UCLA Center for Middle East Development (CMED). Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-317-21344-4.
According to the arrangement formulated in June 1967, the Muslim Waqf - a local, Muslim, Palestinian institution tied to Jordan and, unofficially, since 1994, to the Palestinian Authority - manages the site. The Waqf controls the gates leading into the area (except for the Mughrabi Gate); employs guards of its choosing on the Haram/TM itself and at the entrances to it; sets the rules of permissible and prohibited behavior and dress; is responsible for general upkeep; and collects entrance fees from tourists and non-Muslim visitors to the al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock. The Waqf is also able to close the site to non-Muslim visitors in tense periods, as was the case between October 2000 and August 2003 (at which point Israel applied pressure to have it reopened). Israel prohibits the Wagf from hoisting flags on the Mount. Any renovations require prior coordination with Israeli authorities. Since the opening of the northern access to the Western Wall tunnels in September 1996 this coordination has ceased, with virtually no supervision over what goes on (even previously, supervision was not full).
) It was not shared at all for almost a millennium so there didn't need to be a status quo.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 09:18, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, Dayan apparently imposed it after the war Everybody seems to just refer to it as the status quo, UN included.Selfstudier (talk) 09:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hmm. I need to do some reading. What I do know is that:
- OK, then Status quo (Al-Aqsa mosque) is not an incorrect title? Or is Status quo (Al-Aqsa) better? Just to be clear, I want to distinguish Status Quo (Jerusalem and Bethlehem) (which says Holy Selpuchre is covered). Selfstudier (talk) 09:09, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I know, status quo is an informal agreement only relating to the Dome of the Rock in its entirety, and not just Aqsa mosque. SQ does not deal with Christian churches or other Islamic shrines in Jerusalem, some have their own non-IP-related SQs. Hashemite custodianship is part of the informal unwritten SQ, which for example includes a prohibition on Jewish prayer (but not visits) at the Temple Mount-excluding western wall. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ta, before I travel further down this road, I am a little confused about something and the talk page doesn't help, I have the same query as Arminden, essentially. Afaics, Holy Sepulchre is a subject of SQ (J&B) so it can't be a subject of the new SQ, right? Assuming that is the case, are there in fact any Christian sites subject to SQ new? Or is it just Al-Aqsa? Selfstudier (talk) 17:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've created a redirect pending a change to the status quo ;) Iskandar323 (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Uh huh, that is what I mean, interesting that "Status Quo" is not really mentioned much in that, only this sentence "Leaders of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre issued a statement of support to Abdullah on 1 March 2018 after Israel shelved a proposed bill that aimed to propose new tax measures to churches in the West Bank. "Your defence of religious freedom and Your leadership, in ensuring that the Status Quo is respected and maintained, has been crucial in our ongoing attempts to guard and protect the Christian presence especially in the Holy City of Jerusalem" but that's the "other SQ", right? Maybe it needs a name change? (and an update).Selfstudier (talk) 14:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Selfstudier: it may already be covered by: Hashemite custodianship of Jerusalem holy sites? Onceinawhile (talk) 14:12, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Include at Status Quo a new article Status quo (Al-Aqsa mosque) (2022 Al-Aqsa Mosque clashes refers). Make sense? Selfstudier (talk) 13:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Some sources for an article focusing on exactly what happened in June 1967 on this topic, and what happened since:
- Friedrich Ebert Foundation, A National or Religious Conflict? The Dispute over the Temple Mount/ Al-Haram Al-Sharif in Jerusalem
- JUBEH, NAZMI. “Jerusalem’s Haram al-Sharif: Crucible of Conflict and Control.” Journal of Palestine Studies, vol. 45, no. 2 (178), 2016, pp. 23–37. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26378568.
- Inbari, Motti. “Religious Zionism and the Temple Mount Dilemma—Key Trends.” Israel Studies, vol. 12, no. 2, 2007, pp. 29–47. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/30245660.
- [TBD whether RS] Kharroub, Tamara (2022-05-04). "Israel Is Stepping Closer to Controlling al-Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem". Arab Center Washington DC.
- [TBD whether RS] "The Status Quo on Jerusalem's Temple Mount Has Greatly Changed since 1967". Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. 2022-05-02.
- [TBD whether RS] Loewenberg, Meir (2016-05-05). "WHAT HAPPENED WHEN ISRAEL RECAPTURED THE TEMPLE MOUNT IN 1967?".
- [Non-scholarly] Halevi, Yossi Klein (2017-06-07). "The Astonishing Israeli Concession of 1967". The Atlantic.
Onceinawhile (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will look at those (and some others). We do need an article on this, there is quite a lot gone and going on around the issue and people will most likely search "status quo" for it. Selfstudier (talk) 10:28, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- We need to find the text of the military orders promulgated by Dayan in June 1967 on the topic. They are referred to in the above sources but I haven't seen a clear citation to the original document yet. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:30, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- That book I linked up above says "Those questions wouldn’t really be settled by the Protection of Holy Places Law that Warhaftig presented to the Knesset, in a speech that still infuriates rightists because he spoke of the sanctity of the Western Wall instead of the Mount". So I looked that up and got http://www.bu.edu/mzank/Jerusalem/tx/lawofholyplaces1967.htm which doesn't help much.Selfstudier (talk) 11:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Kattan, Victor Matthew, The Special Role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in the Muslim Holy Shrines in Jerusalem (July 2020). The Arab Law Quarterly 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15730255-BJA10031, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3850797 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3850797
- "The Status of the Status Quo at Jerusalem's Holy Esplanade". Crisis Group. 2015-06-30.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 11:29, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Great! That Kattan one looks quite promising, I will dig into that one first.Selfstudier (talk) 11:37, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- The second one, a 27-page report by the International Crisis Group, is quite widely cited too. Onceinawhile (talk) 11:48, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Right, Kattan cites it too.Selfstudier (talk) 11:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- You have probably seen them by now, but these are the two main sources Kattan cites re what happened in 1967:
- Reiter, Y. (1997). Islamic Institutions in Jerusalem:Palestinian Muslim Organization under Jordanian and Israeli Rule. Springer Netherlands. ISBN 978-90-411-0382-6.
- "Dangerous Liaison - Dynamics of the Temple Movements". Ir Amim. 2013-03-01.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 12:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Shall we go with Status Quo (Holy Esplanade)? Selfstudier (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK. Onceinawhile (talk) 16:52, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Kattan says "...include Christian shrines as well.50" and the note says "This reflects the special role the King of Jordan has in issuing berats to confer authority on the religious patriarchs of the Armenian Orthodox and Greek Orthodox churches."
- This] says "Under the terms of an Ottoman era treaty, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority and Israel must give a "Berat," or official edict of approval to the patriarch's election."
- I usually stay clear of religious things so I am a bit in the dark about all this, on the off chance, do you know of something that explains it? If not, no worries, I will find it eventually.
- Selfstudier (talk) 12:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- This explains what a Berat is. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- P 87 Selfstudier (talk) 14:27, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Interesting. So this 1951 proclamation still has legal force under Israeli law? Or Israel has not annexed the Holy Esplanade and thus Israeli law is not relevant? Onceinawhile (talk) 15:13, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Clear as mud, right? I'll let you know :) Selfstudier (talk) 15:25, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Raghib al-Nashashibi only managed 6 months in his role as custodian and was succeeded by Hussein Khalidi. Selfstudier (talk) 15:51, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Clear as mud, right? I'll let you know :) Selfstudier (talk) 15:25, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Interesting. So this 1951 proclamation still has legal force under Israeli law? Or Israel has not annexed the Holy Esplanade and thus Israeli law is not relevant? Onceinawhile (talk) 15:13, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- P 87 Selfstudier (talk) 14:27, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- This explains what a Berat is. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK. Onceinawhile (talk) 16:52, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Shall we go with Status Quo (Holy Esplanade)? Selfstudier (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- You have probably seen them by now, but these are the two main sources Kattan cites re what happened in 1967:
- Right, Kattan cites it too.Selfstudier (talk) 11:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- The second one, a 27-page report by the International Crisis Group, is quite widely cited too. Onceinawhile (talk) 11:48, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Great! That Kattan one looks quite promising, I will dig into that one first.Selfstudier (talk) 11:37, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- That book I linked up above says "Those questions wouldn’t really be settled by the Protection of Holy Places Law that Warhaftig presented to the Knesset, in a speech that still infuriates rightists because he spoke of the sanctity of the Western Wall instead of the Mount". So I looked that up and got http://www.bu.edu/mzank/Jerusalem/tx/lawofholyplaces1967.htm which doesn't help much.Selfstudier (talk) 11:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- We need to find the text of the military orders promulgated by Dayan in June 1967 on the topic. They are referred to in the above sources but I haven't seen a clear citation to the original document yet. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:30, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
@Makeandtoss: has reverted the move to Status Quo (Holy Esplanade), so his silence here was apparently not agreement, idk if it bothers you sufficiently to discuss it with him but I am not going to take up his suggestion of a second (redundant) article myself. Selfstudier (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- It would not be a redundant article, but a completely different one. For example, such a SQ article would focus on everything related to the 1967 status quo:
- first and foremost a definition of it, only Jewish visits no prayer except western wall, how Jordanians and Palestinians view SQ in a broader sense while Israel views it in a narrower sense (no. of visitors/guards/etc.), you can find a recent ToI article about this
- Sharon's entry, the intifada, Israel's attempts to change status quo and the Palestinian opposition to it
- And much more relevant information to such an article would be available there, rather than in an article that focuses on Jordanian role in Jerusalem over the past century. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:04, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Apparently SQ refers to the policy that Moshe Dayan adopted when occupying the Old City in 1967. I believe the scope of that article can be 1967-present, with focus on that policy and its local and int ramifications. Makeandtoss (talk) 07:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- SQ = Status Quo (Jerusalem and Bethlehem) (Status Quo is a disambiguation) refers to those holy sites listed there that were disputed rather than those not so. At that time Aqsa was not in dispute.
- When the press and everyone is talking about "status quo" now, yes they are referring to the Dayan "adoption" (and I suppose Jordan's 1951 declaration) but that status quo dates back to well before then as per the history in Hashemite custodianship of Jerusalem holy sites. In fact, I think there has been a waqf administration for hundreds of years per Jerusalem Islamic Waqf. Selfstudier (talk) 09:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Forget about the Jerusalem and Bethlehem status quo, that SQ is exclusively Christian. Here we are talking about the other status quo term, relating to Temple Mount. Status quo concept didn’t really exist pre-1967, it was just a policy that was formulated by Israel as the occupying power; meaning it wanted to convince everyone of its occupation by claiming that it wouldn’t change anything on the ground. Articles obviously interlap, but I think separate article for the the Israeli policy and its background and ramifications is both interesting and necessary. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:39, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- As I already indicated, I will not be taking up that suggestion myself.Selfstudier (talk) 13:44, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Forget about the Jerusalem and Bethlehem status quo, that SQ is exclusively Christian. Here we are talking about the other status quo term, relating to Temple Mount. Status quo concept didn’t really exist pre-1967, it was just a policy that was formulated by Israel as the occupying power; meaning it wanted to convince everyone of its occupation by claiming that it wouldn’t change anything on the ground. Articles obviously interlap, but I think separate article for the the Israeli policy and its background and ramifications is both interesting and necessary. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:39, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Apparently SQ refers to the policy that Moshe Dayan adopted when occupying the Old City in 1967. I believe the scope of that article can be 1967-present, with focus on that policy and its local and int ramifications. Makeandtoss (talk) 07:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
This edit saw you adding that the Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa is in Jerusalem, State of Palestine. This is a violation of Wikipedia policy, according which East Jerusalem's status is disputed, as it is claimed by both Israel and Palestine. As you have been made aware before, I request that you refrain from further violations of WP:NPOV. Thanks. Tombah (talk) 13:04, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- I don’t feel strongly, but it is more complicated than this comment suggests. Legally it is in the occupied Palestinian territory, declared as the state of Palestine, unilaterally (i.e. illegally) annexed by Israel, but operating under a joint Palestinian-Jordan administration agreement under the status quo. That doesn’t fit into the tiny box in the table. The terminology “disputed” added in your edit is an Israeli government term, and is equally wrong. I don’t think it matters though as our readers would know what we mean, whether we say Palestine, Israel, occupied, disputed, or any other term. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- EJ is not in any more dispute as being in the occupied Palestinian territories than West Jerusalem is in dispute as being in Israel. We routinely say things in WJ are in Israel. See for example the country listed in Katamon. nableezy - 13:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- For choice, I prefer "claimed by" SoP rather than "in". Notice that Israel has no such claim as the territory is considered occupied and any "dispute" about East Jerusalem arises only by virtue of an illegal annex, in other words, (sovereignty) is disputed only by Israel. Selfstudier (talk) 11:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello Onceinawhile! I would to ask if by any chance you know which coordinate system was used by the PEF in the making of their maps? I am in the process of georeferencing some maps made by the Government of Palestine and I want to also add maps from the PEF, but I couldn't figure out which coordinate system is used or what is their datum. I suppose it is some WGS but I don't know which.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 11:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bolter21: "based on a single Cassini-Soldner projection with a Central Meridian (λ0) = 34° 56' East of Greenwich. The ellipsoid of reference was the Clarke 1866." Somewhere I can't find just now says that the longitude is systematically out by a certain amount (half a minute?). Zerotalk 12:12, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you Zero for saving me, because I did not know the answer. Onceinawhile (talk) 12:16, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bolter21: Also, "A cartotest on the P.E.F. map revealed a block shift of 19 seconds to the west and an average discrepancy of 1.1 secs. to the north in latitude, when compared with the 1 : 100,000 maps of the Survey of Palestine." Zerotalk 12:39, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- The registration between PEF and SofP is good at Palestine Open Maps. At Amud Anan it is good for most of the country but Sheet 4 (eg. Safed) is out by about 4 km. I wrote to them about it years ago but nothing happened. Bolter21, perhaps you can try to get their attention? Zerotalk 13:04, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks Zero0000! I was actually about to ask you but then I remembered it was Onceinawhile who created the article on the SWP. Anyway I have tried to georeference a PEF sheet with several versions of Clarke 1866 but with no success. I gave up and decided to simply download someone else's work from ArcGis online. As for AmudAnan, I may try to contact them in the future about this, but I don't have much spare time for it. Thanks again!--Bolter21 (talk to me) 13:57, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you Zero for saving me, because I did not know the answer. Onceinawhile (talk) 12:16, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Mixed cities at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! -- RoySmith (talk) 17:09, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi there buddy, I lost access to the below work. Can you help with this? I need to verify a few things.
: Reinhard G. Lehmann: Die Inschrift(en) des Ahirom-Sarkophags und die Schachtinschrift des Grabes V in Jbeil (Byblos), 2005, el.ziade (talkallam) 23:43, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Eli, I just looked and unfortunately I don’t have access at the moment either. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:06, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
On 5 July 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article West Bank Wall graffiti art, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that one Palestinian man criticized the beauty of West Bank Wall graffiti art (example pictured), telling Banksy: "We don't want this wall to be beautiful. We hate it. Go home"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/West Bank Wall graffiti art. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, West Bank Wall graffiti art), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
|
Hook update | |
| Your hook reached 18,583 views (774.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of July 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 06:20, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
On 11 July 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mixed cities, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Israel's mixed cities aren't really? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mixed cities. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mixed cities), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
|
Hook update | |
| Your hook reached 18,644 views (776.8 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of July 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 08:53, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
The hatnote says "for the mosque" implying there is only one, there are a few, no? Mosque of the Dome of the Rock and so... Selfstudier (talk) 21:47, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
- Yes good point, thanks. Maybe it should say: "For the mosque within the compound also named Al Aqsa Mosque, see …"? Onceinawhile (talk) 22:08, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
- Until the dust settles, perhaps it might be best to leave it out since it is more or less immediately explained in the lead. You are waiting on Al-Aqsa Mosque (disambiguation) doing away with the (disambiguation) part, right? Selfstudier (talk) 22:14, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I am always too impatient I suspect, mostly because if I don’t tidy things up while it’s still at the top of my mind, I will likely forget later. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:34, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
- In the second para it has 'the main praying hall of al-Aqsa Mosque' blue linked to Al-Aqsa Mosque, that goes to the disambiguation atm.Selfstudier (talk) 22:36, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
- It's all very complicated, there is even one called Ancient (or Lower) al-Aqsa under the main. Despite the name I think it's recent.Selfstudier (talk) 22:42, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
- See the Arabic article at ar:مصلى الأقصى القديم (Musalla al-aqsa al-qadim). Onceinawhile (talk) 10:06, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- The language varies a lot: I have seen some sources state explicitly that the dome of the rock is not a mosque, while yet other sources refer to a host of "mosques" on the site, which I think may include other prayer halls like the above or the Solomon's Stables, or smaller musalla, which might also be termed 'mosque' in English. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:01, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
- See the Arabic article at ar:مصلى الأقصى القديم (Musalla al-aqsa al-qadim). Onceinawhile (talk) 10:06, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I am always too impatient I suspect, mostly because if I don’t tidy things up while it’s still at the top of my mind, I will likely forget later. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:34, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
- Until the dust settles, perhaps it might be best to leave it out since it is more or less immediately explained in the lead. You are waiting on Al-Aqsa Mosque (disambiguation) doing away with the (disambiguation) part, right? Selfstudier (talk) 22:14, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Since several people claimed that Qibli was too obscure of a name for the mosque building, I managed to dig up some news sources using Qibli: BBC, Al-Arabiya, the Jordan Times, the Jordanian government, Al-Jazeera, Middle East Eye, Middle East Monitor. I was going to ask you if there was decent amount of scholarly sources with Qibli as well. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Mellohi!: thanks for this. I have had a go at finding some scholarly (and governmental) publications and have added them to the article. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:11, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
- I would appreciate it if you could share any reliable scholarly publications that are using the term. Sharing is caring. I am curious to know when, and by whom, this term was first used. Tombah (talk) 19:33, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
- I put them here. I will have a look to see what is the earliest I can find. In English and Arabic. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:15, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
- Here is one talking about the nearby stairs being described in Arabic as “al-Maqam al-Qibli” as early as 952: Elad, A. (1995). Medieval Jerusalem and Islamic Worship: Holy Places, Ceremonies, Pilgrimage. Islamic History and Civilization : Studies and Texts, Vol 8. E.J. Brill. p. 117. ISBN 978-90-04-10010-7.
The southern set of stairs is called "al-Maqam al-Qibli" as early as 952.
- In the Levant Qibli can be translated as Southern. It strikes me as quite likely that the al-Qibli terminology was used for the Jami'a in early Arabic sources as a descriptive term. Like medieval writings in most languages, there may well not have been an "official name", but rather it was likely described creatively in many ways in many sources. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:02, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
- Here is one talking about the nearby stairs being described in Arabic as “al-Maqam al-Qibli” as early as 952: Elad, A. (1995). Medieval Jerusalem and Islamic Worship: Holy Places, Ceremonies, Pilgrimage. Islamic History and Civilization : Studies and Texts, Vol 8. E.J. Brill. p. 117. ISBN 978-90-04-10010-7.
- I put them here. I will have a look to see what is the earliest I can find. In English and Arabic. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:15, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
- I would appreciate it if you could share any reliable scholarly publications that are using the term. Sharing is caring. I am curious to know when, and by whom, this term was first used. Tombah (talk) 19:33, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
Can you locate "Addendum to Definition of a 'Refugee' under paragraph 11 of the General Assembly Resolution of 11 December 1948" (advice from UN Legal Advisor on 29 May 1951)? It is cited as document A/AC.25/W/61/Add.1 or sometimes just as W/61/Add.1. Incidentally, another cited document is here. Zerotalk 02:12, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
No matter, I found it here. Zerotalk 03:04, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed in a discussion here Talk:Israel and the apartheid analogy/Archive 42#Requested move 4 December 2021 that you gave example of United States and state terrorism as article title for contested issue. If I may ask, can you think of some more examples? I’m dealing with what may be, or perceived to be, a similar situation. Thanks! ProfGray (talk) 05:58, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @ProfGray: in my opinion there are two options:
- Articles such as those on Template:Disinformation, where Wikipedia rightly takes a clear POV - supported by mainstream sources - that the allegations are 100% false or else have zero evidence supporting them. Titles may be structured as "X myth", "Disinformation regarding X", or "Allegations of X".
- Articles where Wikipedia does not take a view and attempts to discuss the topic entirely neutrally, for which an "X and Y" type title structure is usual. United States and State Terrorism is an example of this, as is Environment and sexual orientation.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 09:42, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
That image you dug up is more than a little interesting: it seems to show the Jamy al-Aqsa with three separately named wings, corresponding to the 'Mosk of Omar', 'Mosk of Abu Bakr' and 'Mosk of Moghrabins' - it really shows how there is no end to the things that can be translated into 'mosque' by Europeans - even the wing of a prayer hall within a mosque complex can be called a mosque. We really face whole layers of vaguery upon vaguery in the sourcing. Curious to know what the Arabic terminology for these divisions (if they ever existed) might have been, though not sure the building would have been conceptualised like this. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:48, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Iskandar323: I agree. Would be very interesting. I think we can find out from here - this is Mujir al-Din's description, by far the most detailed ever published. How good is your Arabic?!
- محمد،, عليمي، عبد الرحمن بن (1866). كتاب الأنس الجليل بتاريخ القدس والخليل (in Arabic). المطبعة الوهبية.
- محمد،, العليمي، عبد الرحمن بن (1866). كتاب الانس الجليل بتاريخ القدس والخليل (in Arabic). المطبعة الوهبية.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 07:31, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- An English version is here: Williams, G.; Willis, R. (1849). "EXTRACTS FROM MEJIR-ED-DIN: DESCRIPTION OF THE MESJID EL-AKSA". The Holy City: Historical, Topographical, and Antiquarian Notices of Jerusalem. J.W. Parker.
- It would be valuable to be able to pinpoint these English extracts within the Arabic text, so we can identify the exact Arabic translations.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 08:16, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- And here is the even earlier Muhammad al-Idrisi, translated into French:
Sous la domination musulmane il fut agrandi, et c'est (aujourd'hui) la grande mosquée connue par les Musulmans sous le nom de Mesdjid el-Acsa. Il n'en existe pas au monde qui l'égale en grandeur, si l'on en excepte toutefois la grande mosquée de Cordoue en Andalousie ; car, d'après ce qu'on rapporte, le toit de cette mosquée est plus grand que celui de la Mesdjid el-Acsa. Au surplus, l'aire de cette dernière forme un parallelogramme dont la hauteur est de deux cents brasses (ba'a), et le base de cents quatre-vingts. La moitié de cet espace, celle qui est voisin du Mihrab, est couverte d'un toit (ou plutôt d'un dôme) en pierres soutenu par plusieurs rangs de colonnes ; l'autre est à ciel ouvert. Au centre de l'édifice est un grand dôme connu sous le nom de Dôme de la roche; il fut orné d'arabesques en or et d'autres beaux ouvrages, par les soins de divers califes musulmans. Le dôme est percé de quatre portes; en face de celle qui est à l'occident, on voit l'autel sur lequel les enfants d'Israël offraient leurs sacrifices; auprès de la porte orientale est l'église nommée le saint des saints, d'une construction élégante ; au midi est une chapelle qui était à l'usage des Musulmans; mais les chrétiens s'en sont emparés de vive force et elle est restée en leur pouvoir jusqu'à l'époque de la composition du présent ouvrage. Ils ont converti cette chapelle en un couvent où résident des religieux de l'ordre des templiers, c'est-à-dire des serviteurs de la maison de Dieu.
(Williams, G.; Willis, R. (1849). "Account of Jerusalem during the Frank Occupation, extracted from the Universal Geography of Edrisi. Climate III. sect. 5. Translated by P. Amédée Jaubert. Tome 1. pp. 341—345.". The Holy City: Historical, Topographical, and Antiquarian Notices of Jerusalem. J.W. Parker.) - I will see if I can find it in Arabic.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 08:22, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- Here it is in Arabic: Onceinawhile (talk) 08:25, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- The French is worth noting, treating the mesdjid unambiguously as a single structure:
At the center of the building is a large dome known as the Dome of the Rock.
Iskandar323 (talk) 08:31, 25 July 2022 (UTC)- And it has unmentioned detail on the Qibli chapel - noting specifically that it was converted into a 'convent' by the templars during the period of their occupation. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:33, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- And here is the even earlier Muhammad al-Idrisi, translated into French:
- I'm note sure how much detail Mujir al-Din goes into on actual architecture - it's more a historical narrative. But page 406 of volume 2 is about the current site's construction. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:26, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- The English version of Mujir al-Din has a key paragraph:
xxi. Observation. I have at the commencement called attention to the fact that the place now called by the name Aksa (i. e. the most distant), is the Mosk [Jamia] properly so called, at the southern extremity of the area, where is the Minbar and the great Mihrab. But in fact Aksa is the name of the whole area enclosed within the walls, the dimensions of which I have just given, for the Mosk proper [Jamia], the Dome of the Rock, the Cloisters, and other buildings, are all of late construction, and Mesjid el-Aksa is the correct name of the whole area.
It would be great to find this in Arabic. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:35, 25 July 2022 (UTC)- I have found the following from page 360 onwards:
- وعرضه شرقا بغرب من السور الشرقي المطل على مقارباب الرحمة الى صدر الرواق الغربي الذي هوسفل مجمع المدرسة التنكرية أربعمائة ذراع وسمة أذرع بذراع العمل غيرعرض السورين و تنبیه وقد تقدم عند ابتداء ذكر صفة المسجد الاقصى ان المتعارف عند الناس ان الأقصى من جهة القبلة الجامع المبني في صدر المسجد الذي به المنبروالمحراب الكمروحة مقة الحال أن الأقصى اسم لجميع المسجد مادارعليه السور وذكرنباسه. ناطولا وعرضا فان هذا البناء الموجود في صدرالسعد وغيره من فية الحرة والأروقة وغيرها محدثة والمراد بالمسجد الاقصی هوجمع مادار عليه السورما تقدم ، وأماصحين الحرة الشريفة فطوله قبلة بشام میں السور القبلى الذي هو بين الدرجتين القوانين مر بالقياس فيما بين باب الحرة الشرقي وفية السلسلة الى السور الشمالي المشرف على جهة باب حطة مائتان وخمسة وثلاثون ذراعارعرضه شرفا بغرب من السور الشرقي المشرف على الزيتون عند قبة الطومارالی السورالغربي المقابل للمدرسة الشريفة السلطانة مائة وتسعة وثمانون ذراعا كل ذلك بذراع العمل وتقدم ذکرذرع الجامع الأقصى وارتفاع قية العمرة ودائرها قبل
- Onceinawhile (talk) 08:46, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- Lord knows where the British survey got their information from in labelling the different parts of the building - quite possibly it might have been the local guides. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:57, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
- The English version of Mujir al-Din has a key paragraph:
Idk whether you will see this before you yourself see the close/notification at Qibli, RM review closer is going back to status quo ante but asks how long you still need for traffic analysis. Selfstudier (talk) 09:42, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
On 13 August 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Phoenician arrowheads, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the earliest-known Phoenician inscriptions (examples pictured) were found near Bethlehem? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Phoenician arrowheads. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Phoenician arrowheads), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
|
Hook update | |
| Your hook reached 12,621 views (525.9 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of August 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 16:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi! I see you just created the article for the infamous Johnson vs. Jeffries fight, which, believe it or not, I was about to create in a few days! I want to thank you for that! Takes a load off me. Now I can concentrate on various other articles I have in mind. Here is a fight article I created, I hope you enjoy it: Ray Mancini vs. Bobby Chacon. Thank you and God bless you! sincerely yours, Antonio Rocky Marcianooooo!! I am not! Martin (tell me, was I knocked out?) 12:38, 15 August, 2022 (UTC)
- Hi AntonioMartin, thank you. I am so pleased that you like it. I couldn’t believe there was no article on it when I first tried to read about it. Such a huge milestone in global sport, in African American history and in the history of minorities more broadly.
- And thanks for the Mancini Chacon article. The story of both fighters after that fight is very sad. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
https://academic.oup.com/book/36964 is worth a look (Ch 3). Selfstudier (talk) 13:35, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, that looks to be an excellent article. The abstract is spot on. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:15, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Polis, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tetrapolis and Hexapolis.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
hi how are you @Onceinawhile , can you take a look here and review this article and if it is ok can you move it to main space thanks a lot we have an Arabic article here عمر بن عبدالعزيز الزهراني (talk) 07:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- I am not against the article's creation, as I think it passes the WP:GNG criteria, with various articles focused on him in English, Arabic and Turkish. See for example https://www.dailysabah.com/arts/ali-al-suleiman-the-syrian-translator-behind-turkish-soap-operas-conquering-the-arab-world/news
- However, it will need consensus, because of these previous discussions:
- Onceinawhile (talk) 07:57, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you @Onceinawhile for your kind response and your seemingly neutral words. عمر بن عبدالعزيز الزهراني (talk) 08:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, @Onceinawhile as you said, there are different articles about the person, and perhaps the article should be re-created article from scratch as you said.
- Can you start it in your draft please عمر بن عبدالعزيز الزهراني (talk) 08:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- No, I do not have time. Sorry.
- Please read WP:UNDELETE carefully, and open a request there. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:52, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you @Onceinawhile for your kind response and your seemingly neutral words. عمر بن عبدالعزيز الزهراني (talk) 08:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- This account has been blocked as a sock of a very prolific self-promoter. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:05, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Why did you change a bunch of redirects to point to a dab page when we have a main article? I think that's wrong. Srnec (talk) 15:46, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Srnec: it was tidying up the specific redirects that clearly relate to Arab–Israeli War (disambiguation). Note: this is not Arab–Israeli conflict (disambiguation).
- If you don’t think that disamb page should exist, it can be put up for AfD. But while it does exist, redirects like Arab-Israeli War and Arab–Israeli War should obviously point there. The dab page has a number of important functions, for example to direct readers who were looking for articles on the individual 1948, 1967 or 1973 wars to the correct place. Onceinawhile (talk) 16:46, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- You made Arab–Israeli War point to the dab page, but that's wrong. The dab page should be moved to the base name. In any case, that change was reverted by MB. You also neglected to change the hatnote at Arab–Israeli conflict after making that change. So now Arab-Israeli War is treated differently from Arab–Israeli War. I think what you really want to do is propose a move of the dab page. Srnec (talk) 19:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, any change like this should be discussed. It is not clear to me that Arab-Israeli War should point to the dab because there may be a WP:Primary Topic for this term. MB 19:33, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I have figured out how to use Twinkle and have opened a few discussions at WP:RFD. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:56, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, any change like this should be discussed. It is not clear to me that Arab-Israeli War should point to the dab because there may be a WP:Primary Topic for this term. MB 19:33, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- You made Arab–Israeli War point to the dab page, but that's wrong. The dab page should be moved to the base name. In any case, that change was reverted by MB. You also neglected to change the hatnote at Arab–Israeli conflict after making that change. So now Arab-Israeli War is treated differently from Arab–Israeli War. I think what you really want to do is propose a move of the dab page. Srnec (talk) 19:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
On 17 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jack Johnson vs. James J. Jeffries, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The New York Times claimed that if Johnson beat Jeffries (fight pictured), black people would "misinterpret his victory as justifying claims to much more than mere physical equality with their white neighbors"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Johnson vs. James J. Jeffries. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jack Johnson vs. James J. Jeffries), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Vanamonde 12:02, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
On 29 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Geographia Sacra seu Phaleg et Canaan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bochart's 1646 Geographia Sacra seu Phaleg et Canaan was the first full-length book devoted to the Phoenicians? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Geographia Sacra seu Phaleg et Canaan. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Geographia Sacra seu Phaleg et Canaan), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Five years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:21, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arab Christians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Church of Jerusalem.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Onceinawhile,
This is to let you know that File:Survey of Palestine 1942-1958 1-100,000 sheet index georef.png, a featured picture you nominated, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for December 31, 2022. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2022-12-31. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.2% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600th FP! 04:12, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 |
The Survey of Palestine was the government department responsible for the survey and mapping of Palestine during the period of British Mandatory Palestine. The survey department was established in 1920 in Jaffa, and moved to the outskirts of Tel Aviv in 1931. It established the Palestine grid. In early 1948, the British mandate appointed a temporary director general of the Survey Department for the impending Jewish state; this became the Survey of Israel. The maps produced by the survey have been widely used in "Palestinian refugee cartography" by scholars documenting the 1948 Palestinian exodus, notably in Salman Abu Sitta's Atlas of Palestine and Walid Khalidi's All That Remains. This composite map of the region of Palestine was assembled from twenty-four separate 1:100,000 sheets published by the Survey for Palestine and its successor, the Survey of Israel, between 1942 and 1958. Map credit: Survey of Palestine and the Survey of Israel; assembled by DutchTreat
Recently featured:
|
- Onceinawhile Thank you for the original nomination of my work on this map. This is my first one of my pictures that has received the Feature Picture designation. I'm looking forward to seeing it as POTD. Happy editing! - DutchTreat (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @DutchTreat: I am really pleased that your work is getting the recognition it deserves. Thanks again for the great work. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:02, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
On 24 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the global coalition to save Abu Simbel, Philae and many other temples led to the creation of the modern list of World Heritage Sites? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 24 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article World Heritage Convention, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the global coalition to save Abu Simbel, Philae and many other temples led to the creation of the modern list of World Heritage Sites? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, World Heritage Convention), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
 |
The African Union Barnstar of National Merit | |
| Hereby I award you this African Union Barnstar for International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia. Nice work! BorgQueen (talk) 01:50, 24 November 2022 (UTC) |
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Thanks again for your amazing work on Geographica Sacra and other articles. I started a draft on Phoenician Studies, which is sitting in a drawer for years now. I would like you to help me develop it if you have the time. I will invite other users on the WikiPeojecrt, maybe it will help make it more active. el.ziade (talkallam) 11:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Elias Ziade: thank you. I am glad you like it - I found it fascinating to learn the foundational importance of the work; I had seen many passing mentions of the work, but had previously not fully understood.
- I would be delighted to help with a Phoenician Studies article. The lede of History of Phoenicia has a couple of good paragraphs which should be useful.
- On a related note, I have a language theory I would be interested in your view on. From all the work I have done on Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions It seems illogical to think that these widely distributed Phoenician/Punic languages "disappeared". The formal written script was clearly quickly replaced by standardized Arabic script, just as the Greek-inspired Old Coptic script quickly replaced Egyptian script, or the invented Korean Hangul replaced Chinese script. But just like elsewhere, surely the spoken language continued, and evolved, which seems evident from the modern diglossia. From this it follows that modern Tunisian Arabic or Lebanese Arabic, and all other Mediterranean Arabic dialects, are not just "regional descendants of Classic Arabic", but are also "descendants of local Punic / Phoenician dialects, which over time took in heavy influence from Classic Arabic". This would also explain how "Arabic" took hold so quickly across such a huge region. I think all this is self-evident, but most sources which touch on this are stuck in the false dilemma nationalistic argument of Phoenicianism-verus-Arabism, when the truth is a 2,000 year unification of the two. I have yet to find a source explaining it clearly and in a balanced way.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 11:48, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- This is a thorny trail habibi. You said it yourself, any attempt to include material that does not adhere to the mainstream narrative will be dealt with accusations of ultranationalism. Early Phoenicianist rhetoric was very aggressive, haughty, and confrontational. The proponents were so high on their flimsy theories and relied heavily on the very scant archeological and historical evidence that was available at the time. Tales of a grandiose past transpired in the nascent republic’s politics and the immature ideology clashed with the pan-Arabist camp sooo tactlessly and made irreparable damage that we still suffer from today. We are still living, 100 years after that misstep, in the shadow of the winning camp, thanks to Edde and Corm and their haughtiness and idiocy. Their velvety disdain for everything common, born in the salons of the Beiruti “elite”, made the winning camp itself disdain any notion of Phoenician origins and influence, and mock its proponents. Did you know that after the completion of the restoration of the National Museum of Beirut in the 90s, the statue of “Mother Phoenicia” holding the alphabet, was covered up? It wasn’t until recently that the tarp-like cover was removed, probably because it was collecting dust. A museum worker actually told me it was there so not to anger Arab (oil-rich) visitors (at the time tourism was still a prospect lol). I don’t know where you come from, but “fini2é” is used scornfully in Lebanon, this is how bad it is. I know that some of my friends who are aware of my work here, and who have the curiosity to look up my contributions, will be so disappointed when they see my effort on the topic.
Back to our topic, I am not aware of any works pushing in that direction. And if there are, presenting the theory should be tackled from a wide standpoint, and not have the starting point as Lebanon and Phoenicianism. I had little interest in following up on any research in this regard for the reasons stated above. I am sure many have addressed the grammatical disparities in Levantine, Egyptian, and other dialects.
I will be however at your disposal, and I will try to find the time to read up. Push some material may way when you find interesting stuff. XO el.ziade (talkallam) 10:14, 2 December 2022 (UTC)- PS: I read a while back an article about how Arabic is in fact at least four distinct languages (like Dutch and German or Romanesque languages) and the MSA is the thread that holds them together. Will see if I can find it. el.ziade (talkallam) 10:19, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- PPS: Some users here completely ignore my invitation to the WikiProject. This is how bad it is... (ie:Hans van Deukeren). Also please use an archive bot for your talk page
el.ziade (talkallam) 10:21, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Elias Ziade: thank you for the above. I enjoyed reading it; it is a refreshing and clear take on it all, and has helped me further conceptualize the sentiment that exists around this topic. I like the perspective that the early 20th century Phoenician nationalism has been a significant setback for a balanced approach to the country's heritage. It must be right.
- I have always felt that the biggest of the many mistakes was the attempt to position the region's Phoenician heritage as exclusive to the Maronite community. That dragged the topic into the realm of modern ethnic politics, and because of the early Maronite political dominance, it was significantly more charged than for example the Coptic nationalists' attempts to co-opt Pharaonic history.
- Hopefully the ongoing work of the global academic community will continue to neutralize the topic, but there are problems there too given the deeply-held preconceptions based exclusively on early modern interpretations of classical and biblical sources.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 13:55, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- PPS: Some users here completely ignore my invitation to the WikiProject. This is how bad it is... (ie:Hans van Deukeren). Also please use an archive bot for your talk page
- PS: I read a while back an article about how Arabic is in fact at least four distinct languages (like Dutch and German or Romanesque languages) and the MSA is the thread that holds them together. Will see if I can find it. el.ziade (talkallam) 10:19, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- This is a thorny trail habibi. You said it yourself, any attempt to include material that does not adhere to the mainstream narrative will be dealt with accusations of ultranationalism. Early Phoenicianist rhetoric was very aggressive, haughty, and confrontational. The proponents were so high on their flimsy theories and relied heavily on the very scant archeological and historical evidence that was available at the time. Tales of a grandiose past transpired in the nascent republic’s politics and the immature ideology clashed with the pan-Arabist camp sooo tactlessly and made irreparable damage that we still suffer from today. We are still living, 100 years after that misstep, in the shadow of the winning camp, thanks to Edde and Corm and their haughtiness and idiocy. Their velvety disdain for everything common, born in the salons of the Beiruti “elite”, made the winning camp itself disdain any notion of Phoenician origins and influence, and mock its proponents. Did you know that after the completion of the restoration of the National Museum of Beirut in the 90s, the statue of “Mother Phoenicia” holding the alphabet, was covered up? It wasn’t until recently that the tarp-like cover was removed, probably because it was collecting dust. A museum worker actually told me it was there so not to anger Arab (oil-rich) visitors (at the time tourism was still a prospect lol). I don’t know where you come from, but “fini2é” is used scornfully in Lebanon, this is how bad it is. I know that some of my friends who are aware of my work here, and who have the curiosity to look up my contributions, will be so disappointed when they see my effort on the topic.
Hey buddy. I just noticed @Zlogicalape: who might have a say about this. He is also a skilled argumentator. Zlodicalape, what do you think about Onceinawhile’s input on MSA and regional dialects? el.ziade (talkallam) 23:36, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
— Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 17:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)On 21 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Axial parallelism, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the axial parallelism (diagram pictured) of the Earth's tilted axis is the reason we have winter, spring, summer and fall? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Axial parallelism. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Axial parallelism), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello Oncenawhile. I’m looking for CO 733/190/3, any idea where I can find a free and online accessible version? Page 8 specifically. Thanks! Makeandtoss (talk) 11:58, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Makeandtoss: in my experience the Colonial Office papers have rarely been digitized, unlike the Cabinet Office papers which are often already available. I looked around in a few different ways and I don't think this specific paper is available anywhere.
- If you are willing to pay for it, you can go here https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C822116 and click on "request a copy".
- Onceinawhile (talk) 12:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 |
Happy Holidays | |
| Hello, I wish you the very best during the holidays. And I hope you have a very happy 2023! Bruxton (talk) 19:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC) |
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
