Talk:Church of Our Lady Mary of Zion

Non-Kohanim..
There are more than enough Cohens in the world, which according to this article can access the Ark. So, why haven't they let in a Cohen? -- nlitement [talk]  18:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Possibly they don't recognise the descent of the assorted worldwide Kohanim? Or perhaps they would also need to be an annointed Priest of the Temple?  No idea - just speculating.  The "holy of holies" of the OT temple was only entered by the High Priest once a year. 62.196.17.197 (talk) 15:21, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

New class grade
Regretfully, I have downgraded the class of this article from "B" to "Start". It needs a more comprehensive discussion of the history of the church (e.g., Francisco Álvares's description of the 16th century church), & definitely more sources -- inlined, if possible. I'd do it, but I have so many other things on my plate to take care of. -- llywrch (talk) 16:11, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Not Neutral Point Of View
This:

"Agreeing with ancient sources about a magnificent light emitted from the Ark, the History Channel in a 2008 special claimed that many of the guardian monks have died in short time, mostly with cataracts having formed in their eyes.[2]"

seems to be advocating a point. It could be reworded to be more neutral, something like:

"Ancient sources state that the Ark emits a magnificent light.[citation needed]. In a 2008 special, the History Channel claimed that many of the guardian monks have died in a short time, mostly with cataracts having formed in their eyes.[2]." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.14.154.3 (talk) 03:57, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Ark of the Covenant claim
The "Ark of the Covenant" section makes this statement: "This lack of accessibility, and questions about the account as a whole, has led foreign scholars to express doubt about the veracity of the claim." This does not accurately express the utter lack of acceptance of the claims amongst scholars (and really, everyone except those associated with this church). I suggest it be rephrased to something like "This lack of accessibility, and questions about the account as a whole, has done little to change the widespread skepticism of the veracity of the claim". Occam&#39;s Shaver (talk) 08:18, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Tigray War contradiction
This page, which was last edited yesterday on January 19th, contains a section whose content reads, in part, "750 people who were hiding in the church were brought out and killed by TPLF itself not Ethiopian National Defense Force (ENDF) soldiers or Amhara militia." This claim goes against both of the articles cited at the end of the sentence, particularly this one, which states that "Ethiopian federal troops and Amhara militia" carried out the massacre. The information on this page also goes against the information presented in the Wikipedia page for the event in question (titled "Maryam Ts'iyon massacre"), which also claims that the ENDF and Amhara miltiia were responsible for the attack, with no mention of the TPLF whatsoever. These contradictions are likely attributed to the severe lack of international reporting on the incident. For example, many sources haven't even settled on the date that it took place. 73.163.166.247 (talk) 16:15, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia as a platform for disinformation, please correct the section about the so-called culprits. Sources in doubt, contradictions.
The Church Mary of Zion is built by Amhara kings Fasilides, it's part of our culture & identity. The claim about Amhara militia's killing 750 people taking shelter in a church is ludicrious!

It doesn't hold water, other more recent sources say it's Eritrean, no investigation has taken place to verify!2A02:A466:1107:1:79BC:10FB:33C5:EDC1 (talk) 18:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC)