Talk:Adoraim

Blacklisted Links Found on Adurim

Cyberbot II has detected links on Adurim which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.bible-history.com/geography/ancient-israeladora.html

  Triggered by \bbible\-history\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:17, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Dubious sources

Are the following accepted sources?:

• M. Gabrieli; Isaac Sachs (1969). Tour Israel: a tour guide of the country. Evyatar Pub. House; distributed by Steimatzky. p. 99.

As for:

• William F. Albright
• LaMar C. Berrett
• Josephus

..the two first were professors, but recent scholarship has all but discarded many of Albright ideas (William G. Dever: "[Albright's] central theses have all been overturned, partly by further advances in Biblical criticism, but mostly by the continuing archaeological research of younger Americans and Israelis to whom he himself gave encouragement and momentum. ... The irony is that, in the long run, it will have been the newer 'secular' archaeology that contributed the most to Biblical studies, not 'Biblical archaeology.')

..and LaMar C. Berrett was a Mormon scholar. I suggest that in both cased we say "according to".

Same for Josephus, where modern archeology has shown that not all he wrote was historically correct.

Comments? Huldra (talk) 21:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Gabrieli & Sachs: Absolutely not. Tourist guides are typically replete with errors and traditions presented as facts. It is gone. Zero^talk 00:51, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

The things cited to Berrett should be cited to someone more mainstream to avoid the possibility that we are unintentionally presenting Mormon fringe views. It would be best to update the older sources to modern ones. Zero^talk 00:57, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Josephus, as always, should be cited via a modern specialist and not directly. Zero^talk 00:57, 17 July 2020 (UTC)