Misplaced Pages

Talk:Temple Mount

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 12:29, 21 October 2024 (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Temple Mount/Archive 5) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

Revision as of 12:29, 21 October 2024 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) (Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Temple Mount/Archive 5) (bot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Temple Mount article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
WikiProject iconReligion: Interfaith Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.
WikiProject iconIslam High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIsrael Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconJudaism Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPalestine High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Misplaced Pages. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMiddle Ages: Crusades Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Crusades task force.
WikiProject iconMountains Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconGeography Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconIsrael Palestine Collaboration
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, a collaborative, bipartisan effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. For guidelines and a participants list see the project page. See also {{Palestine-Israel enforcement}}, the ArbCom-authorized discretionary sanctions, the log of blocks and bans, and Working group on ethnic and cultural edit wars. You can discuss the project at its talk page.Israel Palestine CollaborationWikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine CollaborationTemplate:WikiProject Israel Palestine CollaborationIsrael Palestine Collaboration
WikiProject iconAnthropology: Oral tradition
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
???This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.
Warning: active arbitration remedies

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 Misplaced Pages, 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:
  1. 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.
  2. 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 Misplaced Pages, 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!

Better sourcing for introduction

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

For this section "The Israeli government enforces a ban on prayer by non-Muslims as part of an arrangement usually referred to as the "status quo" " two of the sources linked are very heavily opinionated and biased articles. One of an account of prominent reactionary and the second is an opinion piece, both provide little insight into the policies and have little to do with the text written. (sources for reference)

I'd suggest removing them, they would be more relevent in a chapter discussing issues of entry rather than referenced in the opening section. Galdrack (talk) 09:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: The sources are not being cited for their opinions, but for the fact that the "status quo" is a thing that in fact exists. If you have other sources you think would be better, please suggest those. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:47, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
@Voorts I think the links from this wiki page make more sense Status Quo (Jerusalem and Bethlehem) or Temple Mount entry restrictions, indeed to just link to one of those pages would probably make more sense here. Galdrack (talk) 16:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
@Galdrack Misplaced Pages is not itself a reliable source, so we still need to cite to something other than another Misplaced Pages article or the two sources that were cited back in January when I declined this request. voorts (talk/contributions) 16:11, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
@Voorts that's fair, I got this source from one of those pages which seems a lot better than the previous ones
https://ecf.org.il/media_items/1486 Galdrack (talk) 16:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
With an alt link to the Archive.org site for the original https://archive.org/details/cust-status-quo-holy-places/page/n5/mode/2up Galdrack (talk) 16:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
In regard to citations, there is a sentence that surprised me. It’s says “ For Sunni and Shia Muslims alike, it ranks as the third holiest site in Islam.”
The reference offered is a link to a Misplaced Pages page about Sunni Islam. I would think this sentence should, for a high standard, follow the format you’re requiring here, and would offer a non-wikipedia reference for both Sunni and Shia beliefs. Do you agree? 49.185.168.147 (talk) 03:51, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 April 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the first paragraph where it reads "that has been venerated as a holy site in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam for thousands of years."

It is odd since Islam doesn't have thousands of years. I understand the wish to treat all religions the same way, but that is no reason to try to change facts.

The easiest way to edit would be to remove "for thousands of years", but if we want to keep the message that it has been venerated for a long time we should make if factually correct, something like: "that has been venerated as a holy site in Judaism and Christianity for thousands of years, and by Islam for hundreds of years."

Since Christianity is just two thousand years old I think saying it more like this: "that has been venerated as a holy site in Judaism for thousands of years, and by Christianity and Islam for hundreds of years."

There are a lot of ways... but keeping Misplaced Pages factually incorrect shouldn't be one of them. Joaquim Calainho (talk) 12:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done ZionniThePeruser (talk) 20:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
How this paragraph currently stands still implies something fallacious. Probably best to remove the phrase “thousands of years” altogether if you’re not going to spell out the time periods.
In my view, to avoid misunderstandings and misrepresentations this page should at least give reference to the time lines and the claims for significance. It would ideally say something like “This site holds profound religious significance for the three Abrahamic religions. Originally a Jewish holy site dating back to at least 957 BCE; it has been an Islamic holy site since the 7th century, and a Christian holy site since the 12th century.”
To bring the page up to a high standard this paragraph would be expanded with a single sentence on each of the conflicts which resulted in a change of authority, and hyperlinks out to existing Misplaced Pages pages which describe those conflicts in detail.
A disproportionate number of the sources are narrative driven. Narrative driven sources can be important where appropriate but they can imply bias. If you’re unable to access historiography with a focus on evidence then be careful to be aware of your own bias. Aim for specificity over vagueness. 49.199.93.77 (talk) 03:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Apologies. I meant to xx out the dates and places. I’m not sure they are accurate, I meant to just suggest a format. I do think that Misplaced Pages users expect hyperlinks to more detailed pages about the conflicts and dates with such a hugely significant topic, so I believe it’s worth putting the effort in here if your aim is to improve Misplaced Pages. I do trust that Misplaced Pages’s process will iron out any duplicitous edits, although it may take some time to identify patterns of behaviour. 49.185.168.147 (talk) 03:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
My understanding of Misplaced Pages policy may not be adequate. I now read that Misplaced Pages links are not sufficient. I had expected that they were based on my usage of Misplaced Pages. Perhaps I misunderstand when they are acceptable. My concern is just with wanting the page to reach a high standard because I’m finding that the pages on this topic all have notifications of disputes and editing restrictions, and that they are often lack the clarity needed to use those pages as an encyclopaedic summary. I am not involved or invested in this conflict but have been trying to understand it because of the vast difference in news reports depending in who is reporting. I have noticed that some official pages lack balance ie some of the pages of museums and other repositories that I’d expect to be comprehensive are very one-sided. It makes studying this topic very difficult; but I think it’s worth mentioning so that editors are aware. I won’t disclose where I found the bias as that would be annecdote anyway. I mention this to suggest that anyone editing pages refrain from labelling anything as ‘propaganda’ (one person’s propaganda is another person’s primary or official source); and instead take care to look at multiple sources from both sides of the conflict. This will help ensure that there aren’t omission which are misleading; this is preferable to striving for some kind of ‘fairness’ that ends up producing false balance. 49.185.168.147 (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 April 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The first paragraph under the section "Temple Mount" is very poorly punctuated and, in a few cases, phrased. Here is my suggestion for cleaning it up:

ORIGINAL The term Har haBayīt – commonly translated as "Temple Mount" in English – was first used in the books of Micah (4:1) and Jeremiah (26:18) – literally as "Mount of the House", a literary variation of the longer phrase "Mountain of the House of the Lord" – the abbreviation was not used again in the later books of the Hebrew Bible or in the New Testament. The term was used throughout the Second Temple period, however, the term Mount Zion – which today refers to the eastern hill of ancient Jerusalem – was more frequently used. Both terms are in use in the Book of Maccabees. The term Har haBayīt is used throughout the Mishnah and later Talmudic texts.

SHOWING MARKUP The term Har haBayīt —– commonly translated as "Temple Mount" in English —– was first used in the books of Micah (4:1) and Jeremiah (26:18), – literally as "Mount of the House", a literary variation of the longer phrase "Mountain of the House of the Lord". – Tthe abbreviation was not used again in the later books of the Hebrew Bible or in the New Testament. The term was usedremained in use throughout the Second Temple period, however,although the term Mount Zion, – which today refers to the eastern hill of ancient Jerusalem, – was used more frequently used.

CLEAN REVISED VERSION The term Har haBayīt — commonly translated as "Temple Mount" in English — was first used in the books of Micah (4:1) and Jeremiah (26:18), literally as "Mount of the House", a literary variation of the longer phrase "Mountain of the House of the Lord". The abbreviation was not used again in the later books of the Hebrew Bible or in the New Testament. The term remained in use throughout the Second Temple period, although the term Mount Zion, which today refers to the eastern hill of ancient Jerusalem, was used more frequently. Modularscholar (talk) 09:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * it has begun... 22:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
You seem better versed in both topic and procedure. Would you care to take a look at the lede? It currently reads with a an over extended sentence that ends “…is a hill in the Old City of Jerusalem that has been venerated as a holy site for thousands of years, including in Judaism, Christianity and Islam.”
For expediency I suggest:
”The Temple Mount (Hebrew: הַר הַבַּיִת, romanized: Har haBayīt, lit. 'Mount of the House '), also known as Haram al-Sharif (Arabic: الحرم الشريف, lit. 'The Noble Sanctuary'), al-Aqsa Mosque compound, or simply al-Aqsa (/æl ˈæksə/; المسجد الأقصى, al-Masjid al-Aqṣā, lit. 'The Furthest Mosque'). It is sometimes referred to in popular media as “Jerusalem's Holy Esplanade”, and is a hill in the Old City of Jerusalem that has been venerated as a holy site by all three Abrahamic religions; Judaism, Christianity and Islam.”
Thoughts? 49.185.168.147 (talk) 03:43, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 September 2024

Rename it to Al-Aqsa mosque

2607:FA49:4203:4000:EDB0:B1D1:B3AB:AAD0 (talk) 14:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Wrong language links mess

Why is "Temple Mount" article linked to the "المسجد الأقصى" (Al-Aqsa Mosque) article in Arabic?

"Temple Mount" is a hill/location in Jerusalem, and not a mosque. Currently the Al-Aqsa which is a compount, is located on it, which in its turn contains the "Al-Aqsa Mosque" which is linked to "Temple Mount" in Arabic. Why?

"Temple Mount" article should be linked to "جبل المعبد" , which is currently redirected to "Al-Aqsa Mosque" instead. Why?

It's the "Al-Aqsa Mosque" article that should be actually linked to "المسجد الأقصى".

I am facing a lot of issues with Arabic articles which seem biased towards Islam, but it should remain neurtal. I tried to fix the links in the past, and create the relevant articles in Arabic, but they were all reverted.

Jimmyp84 (talk) 04:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

On the English wiki we have no control or responsibility for the content of the Arabic wiki. If there is a better choice for the interwiki link, tell us, but it has to be an article which exists. Zero 06:54, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
Categories:
Talk:Temple Mount Add topic