Talk:Al-Khader

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Al-Khader. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080106114303/http://www.imemc.org:80/article/52186 to http://www.imemc.org/article/52186

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:00, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Al-Khader. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120111192435/http://www.pcbs.gov.ps/Portals/_pcbs/phc_97/bet_t1.aspx to http://www.pcbs.gov.ps/Portals/_pcbs/phc_97/bet_t1.aspx

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Title: Al-Khader, not al-Khader
The way I understand the rule is that the article al- is lower case within a sentence, but upper case at the beginning of a sentence - and as a title as well, or not? The "move" function doesn't work, the title is already marked as Al- with capital A, but seemingly there's an overriding programming issue, with al- showing up in lower case, as if it were a common noun. Arminden (talk) 17:02, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Very mysterious. I tried a few things unsuccessfully. This talk page shows as "Al-Khader". Zerotalk 02:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The article Al-Khader contains a lowercase template. If you remove that, the article title will show up with upper case 'Al-' rather than 'al-'. EdJohnston (talk) 22:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

POV
This edit re-intoduce stuff from Solomon's Pools into this article.

IMO: stuff that belongs to the Solomon's Pools article, should go into the Solomon's Pools-article, not here. I suggest a RfC if anyone thinks that Solomon's Pools-history also should go into this article, Comments? Huldra (talk) 21:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Huldra, I see what you did here, and if it what I think it is - it's very unprofessional. It almost looks like that as long as this article incorrectly connected Solomon's Pools with the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Suleiman the Magnificent, you were fine with keeping it. But now, that the description of the pools is based on historical facts using academic sources, which mention the Second Jewish Temple and several Jewish leaders - you're asking to remove it. To me, it just sounds as another POV-motivated move. As this article mentions Solomon's Pools as one of al-Khader's main landmarks, the short description of Solomon's Pools should stay. Any reader who wishes to delve deeper into the history of the subject, can do so using the "Full Article" template. That's exactly the reason it was created for. To sum up, the short description of Solomon's Pools should stay. Tombah (talk) 23:09, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If you like, rm the sentence "Solomon's Pools, named after Suleiman the Magnificent the tenth Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, were built by the Romans under Herod the Great to provide water for the aqueduct built to supply water to Bethlehem and Jerusalem where it terminated under the Al-Aqsa Mosque" from "my" version.
 * Alas, now it is not better; it implies that pools were built in order to supply the Second Temple; when modern archeology has showed that they were built by Roman soldiers (who had little interest in the Second Temple, but needed water to Jerusalem as a whole),
 * And, to repeat: IMO: stuff that belongs to the Solomon's Pools article, should go into the Solomon's Pools-article, not here, Huldra (talk) 23:30, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Well this theory is great... as fan fiction. Roman soldiers took over Jerusalem only after it was destroyed during the Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE), when the city was emptied of its inhabitants, except for the conquering legion, so there was surely no need to build that massive water system then. Sources mention they only repaired parts of it. Modern archeology shows that the pools were built way before that, by the Judean rulers of the 2nd and 1st century BCE, including various Hasmonean leaders, and by Herod, a client king of Judea. And yes, the purpose was to supply water specifically to the Second Temple. Your claims border alternative history, as you are ignoring the sources, which agree on that point. In any case, you were okay with keeping the description for Solomon's Pools as part of this article as long as it mentioned alternative facts, such as Suleiman the Magnificent and the Al-Aqsa Mosque. What made you change your mind on this? It seems like every single time when a Palestinian place has an ancient Israelite or Jewish history, you are going out of your way to find ways to exclude it. What do you have against ancient Jewish history? Tombah (talk) 07:24, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If this is true and it was empty of its inhabitants, I'd better change its date at List of oldest continuously inhabited cities which at the moment says 18th c.BCE to 1st century CE, right? Doug Weller  talk 12:18, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That info (sourced to geocities(!)) is now removed (I actually hadn't noticed it was there). And I am against spreading any kind of info outside whatever article which is about the subject; eg I am against  (like at Huwara) describing Finkelstein as a "Archeologist Israel Finkelstein"; if readers want to know  that he is an archeologist, they can go to his article. Huldra (talk) 20:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Solomon's Pool can be introduced here as an attraction, but the in depth material on its history belongs in Solomon's Pools.  nableezy  - 15:09, 11 March 2022 (UTC)