Talk:Ophel

WP:FRINGE
The fringe theories of Ernest L. Martin do not belong here. Zerotalk 05:10, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

He IS NOT the only one who claims the Temple Mount is not the 2nd Temple.--Degen Earthfast (talk) 13:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Source
This article (which I don't have all of) should be cited. Zerotalk 05:11, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

This is based on Encyclopedia Judaica and a good ref, too. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:31, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Catastrophic, REWRITE it completely
Certainly the worst article on any Jerusalem-related topic I ever came across on WP. Hardly a single complete sentence, let alone paragraph, that belongs here, makes sense, and doesn't contradict the previous/next paragraph.

- The majority view is not even mentioned: Ophel = segment between Mt Moriah/Temple Mt and Jebus/City of David. Agree or not, but mention it.

- The Nea Church takes 80% (??!!??!!!!) of the article, and has nothing to do with the Ophel. At all.

- Not even Martin's minority view/theory fits with the present mess.Arminden (talk) 17:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)Arminden
 * @Arminden Many biblical articles are currently in a need for an entire make-over. There isn't much editors in the biblical section of Wikipedia, so if you're making a request to have someone else improve the article...It will take some time. If you want someone else to try and improve this article right now. I can recommend some editors you could contact...if you want. Cheers! — JudeccaXIII (talk) 23:33, 29 June 2015 (UTC)


 * @Arminden the piece you deleted is from a contribution of an IP. I deleted the rest of this contribution: if you read carefully, neither this part speaks about Ophel; it speaks exclusively about the City of David. The article is to be started from scratch, unfortunately. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:21, 30 June 2015 (UTC)


 * @Staszek Lem :@JudeccaXIII Thanks. I'm very busy, sorry. I'll try to add the common interpretation if I come around, but undoing the current nonsense will need to be done by someone else. And yes, sure I know the endless Procopius quotation I removed was about the Nea, which has been identified with a high degree of certainty in an area between the current Dung and Zion gates. Saying that Al-Aqsa and Nea share location is very weird indeed. Whatever construction there has been on the Temple Mount/Haram ash-Sharif during the Byzantine period, it is impossible to prove w/o digging, and that's prohibited by the Waqf (unless done by the Waqf itself using bulldozers). The Temple Mount Sifting Project found some white tesserae from a simple Byzantine mosaic etc., Hamilton's rediscovered photos show the same, so there was SOMETHING Christian up there, but quite certainly not the humongous Nea, even if the church remains found in the Jewish Quarter were, contrary to all accepted theories, not the Nea but some twin church. Anyhow, we're in the realm of fantasy, not knowledge, and that's not WP but Indiana Jones.Arminden (talk) 07:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)Arminden

"Ophel" according to the Mazars
I finally introduced that definition, too. The problem is, I have used disparate bits of info, not a clearly written text of either Benjamin or Eilat Mazar. For at least a decade, the area between the Temple Mount's southern wall and the upper end of the City of David were marketed as "the Ophel". This was based on the work of the Mazars, but not necessarily academic. Now that area became popularly known as the "Davidson Center", which has nothing to do with archaeology anymore. The topic still needs clarification. It could well be that the Mazars mainly meant the eastern part of the area, and then the difference to Josephus' Ophlas becomes questionable. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 06:59, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Separate Jerusalem page
I would suggest a spin-off article. The Jlm section here is already cluttered, and it doesn't even properly deal with all the periods represented at B. Mazar's Ophel. It overlaps in part with Southern Wall: Outside of the Wall. The topic is "ophel" as an Iron Age Semitic term, I know, but we have Josephus & the Mazars in the art. already. Arminden (talk) 04:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)