Misplaced Pages

Talk:Islamization of Jerusalem

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia 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 an old revision of this page, as edited by JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk | contribs) at 18:13, 12 May 2020 (→Merger Discussion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 18:13, 12 May 2020 by JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk | contribs) (→Merger Discussion)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
WikiProject iconPalestine Start‑class Mid‑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
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIsrael Start‑class Mid‑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
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:


Religions in Shaam

Rebuilding the walls, building a cemetery, closing a gate

Since when is rebuilding the city walls anything to do with Islamization? Here is how a Jewish resident described it: "God aroused the spirit of Suleiman, king of Rumelia and Persia, and he set out to build the walls of Jerusalem, the holy city in the land of Judah. ... And his fame spread across the land for he wrought a great dead." (F.E. Peters, Jerusalem, p480). The walls had been repeatedly destroyed and repaired over the centuries and most recently they had been demolished in 1219 by another Muslim (I wonder if that was Islamization too). Zero 02:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

I also can't see anything Islamization about building a Muslim cemetery, unless it displaced a Jewish or Christian cemetery. The book of Birnbaum doesn't read like a history book, more like some sort of personal essay on history that only has a few words on this subject. He doesn't have his facts right either. Pilgrim Arnold van Harff described the cemetery outside the Golden Gate at the end of the previous century, so Suleiman didn't build it (Peters, ibid, p.410–411). There are a large number of Islamic traditions about the gate (actually two adjacent gates in the eastern wall of the Haram, not in the city walls), not only Christian and Jewish traditions. Also Suleiman might have added stonework but he wasn't the one to seal it. Peters quotes a pilgrim from 1350 that the gate was permanently closed and that the Muslims had great reverence for it. Mujir ad-Din in 1496 wrote that the gate was impassible and probably that was for security reasons "in fear of an attack on the Haram and the city by the infidel enemy since the gates lead out into the countryside and there would be little use in leaving them open" (same source). All of these facts from a specialist historian with primary sources show that Birnbaum's narrative is below the bar. Zero 02:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

The sealing of the gate and placing a cemetery in front of the gate which is considered by Chrisitan and Jewish tradition the gate through which Messiah should enter Jerusalem certainly has to do something with Islamization. As you likely know according to theJewish tradition Eliyahu who is supposed to enter through that gate before Messiah, can not pass through cemetery. I did not wanted to enlarge this section by quoting this. However your removal (beside maybe the dating of cemetery was unjustified) There are planty of sources regarding this question, are you claiming that all of them are unreliable?--Tritomex (talk) 23:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
"No other gate has been the subject of so many legends (Schiller, pp. 98-108)". I'm aware of the legend, but the gate was closed long before Suleiman's time (maybe 8th century though the Crusaders opened it twice per year) and the cemetery existed before his time too. There was a Christian cemetery there in Crusader times (Boas, Jerusalem in the time of the Crusades, p.182), so it may not have been Muslims who first put graves in the path. I don't know why we should repeat legends from tertiary sources when there are many competing legends and a contemporary historian's word that the real reason for the closure was security related. Zero 07:59, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
As far as I see there are many reliable sources claiming that Suleiman closed the gate, however if different views exist on this subject it can be added in parallel to the article. I have nothing against this. Also, from reliable sources it is clear that the gate has special religious significance for Christians and Jews and that the sealing of the gate and the establishment of the Muslim cemetery happened during Islamic rule over Jerusalem. That is why it is connected to the subject.--Tritomex (talk) 08:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Personally I don't add stuff to Misplaced Pages that I know to be wrong, even if a "reliable source" claims it. That's just my vice. But anyway, your argument is WP:SYNTH. You can't yourself put together the closure and the traditions to make Islamization. You need a reliable source saying that the gate was closed because of the traditions. Zero 12:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
It is not WP:SYNTH, please read the sources which claim religious reasons behind the sealing of gate and placing of the cemetery. Also read read the article Judaization of Jerusalem in almost all of sources Judaization is not directly mentioned by any source for any of concrete actions, but "logically concluded" --Tritomex (talk) 14:47, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
What sources? You only brought the useless Birnbaum book. Zero 15:33, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

So now Tritomex ignores the strong contrary evidence by eminent scholars and reinserts not only the useless Birnbaum book but even adds such gems as a travel guide, a book in which a tourist recounts what the guide told him and a book by a philosopher. But my favorite is this book which features a skull and cross-bones and has such incredible insights as "Time is 2-dimensional. It always goes in 1 direction. It doesn't go backwards or sideways, only forward." It should be obvious that multiple violations of policy are involved here. This has gone on long enough, time to prepare the case for a topic ban. Zero 23:39, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

In the earlier section, we also see Tritomex adding the reference "Kister, Traditions in praise of Jerusalem P.186". I challenge Tritomex to prove that he ever consulted such a source. Zero 00:08, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the source Kister, Traditions in praise of Jerusalem P.186" I really made a mistake twisting footnote 61 instead of footnote 64 from Medieval Jerusalem and Islamic Worship: Holy Places, Ceremonies, Pilgrimage by Eldad page 162. The note 61 refers to "Kister, Traditions in praise of Jerusalem P.186". while the note 64 which I twisted by mistake refer to Ibn al Murajja for 25b. This was unintentional mistake as the names of the books cited from Google Books, can not be copy-pasted.--Tritomex (talk) 11:21, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Some notes

This is of course an attack article, taking an historical transformation of a city under new management in the distant past as somehow insidious. No one thinks of writing a The Christianization of Rome or Judaisation of Jebusite Rušalimum Since it is attacking Islam it should be documented from scholarly sources, and not from cheap polemical cant like the politically spun screed from Kedar, out of Ynet. Whatever Kedar had to say is already in the scholarly literature, as my edits show, without the hypocrisy of implying there is something anomalous or fake in Muslim attachment to a city they have lived in for 1,400 years, while taking as normal an identification process being engineered now by another people.Nishidani (talk) 15:51, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Let me look into this matter. Leo1pard (talk) 06:32, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Islamization of Jerusalem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—Talk to my owner:Online 23:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Islamization of Jerusalem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Islamization of Jerusalem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:29, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Page views

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

Leo1pard (talk) 06:32, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Merger Discussion

Request received to merge articles: Islamization of East Jerusalem under Jordanian occupation into Islamization of Jerusalem; dated: May 2020.

Proposer's Rationale: The article to be merged is already discussed here and there seems to be no reason for an independent existence. In addition, the title is misleading as it stipulates a Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967, which is not the case.

Discuss here. Selfstudier (talk) 14:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Oppose. This article is already very long, and covers several centuries worth of history. It has a section dealing with the Islamization of Jerusalem under the Jordanian occupation, but that section has a much more detailed treatment in the separate article. If we adda all that material here, it will create an undue weight issue, so per WP:SPINOFF, it is preferable and acceptable to treat this in its own article. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk)
  • Support This article is ~2,000 words long, the "under Jordan" article is ~600 words long with only ~200 of those not already being in this article, so a merger would mean this article becomes ~2,200 words. With so much duplication between the two articles, it would serve readers better to have this tidied up. Onceinawhile (talk) 16:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
800 out of 2200 words is more than a third, and would be clearly undue weight. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 17:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
You're missing the point, User:Debresser. The editor who proposed this merge has already suggested a rename, and it looks like there is no consensus for it, so he's trying this as a way around that failed rename suggestion. WP:FORUMSHOPPING and game playing, as always. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 18:13, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Categories: