Talk:Rockefeller Archeological Museum: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
m Template |
|||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
I'm not convinced that the scrolls controversy should be reported here (there are articles about the scrolls themselves where it would no doubt be appropriate). However if we do report it, using the term "was criticised by some arab scholars" isn't accurate reporting. ''One'' head of antiquities described the acquisition as a theft, in a controversy that was more about politics than scholarship. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 14:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC) |
I'm not convinced that the scrolls controversy should be reported here (there are articles about the scrolls themselves where it would no doubt be appropriate). However if we do report it, using the term "was criticised by some arab scholars" isn't accurate reporting. ''One'' head of antiquities described the acquisition as a theft, in a controversy that was more about politics than scholarship. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 14:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC) |
||
::I believe the reason the material was brought here altogether was to insert a political agenda, if not through the front door, than through the back. Adding more quotes and material on this issue which was phrased in a very "in your face" and aggressive way from the start, is to give undue weight to a conflict that is only indirectly related to the Rockefeller Museum - a very interesting museum with many fascinating artifacts, but almost unknown and unvisited. I will not allow this article, to which I have been a long-time contributor, to be turned into yet another forum for people who have a history of going from one article to the next to push their political views and stir up hatred.--[[User:Gilabrand|Gilabrand]] ([[User talk:Gilabrand|talk]]) 14:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC) |
::I believe the reason the material was brought here altogether was to insert a political agenda, if not through the front door, than through the back. Adding more quotes and material on this issue which was phrased in a very "in your face" and aggressive way from the start, is to give undue weight to a conflict that is only indirectly related to the Rockefeller Museum - a very interesting museum with many fascinating artifacts, but almost unknown and unvisited. I will not allow this article, to which I have been a long-time contributor, to be turned into yet another forum for people who have a history of going from one article to the next to push their political views and stir up hatred.--[[User:Gilabrand|Gilabrand]] ([[User talk:Gilabrand|talk]]) 14:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC) |
||
If The Rockefeller Museum is located in East Jerusalem it is not technically located in Israel. The text clearly says [...]museum located in Jerusalem, Israel [...] that is outside Israel. |
Revision as of 00:52, 3 June 2011
Museums Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Palestine Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Scrolls controversy
I'm not convinced that the scrolls controversy should be reported here (there are articles about the scrolls themselves where it would no doubt be appropriate). However if we do report it, using the term "was criticised by some arab scholars" isn't accurate reporting. One head of antiquities described the acquisition as a theft, in a controversy that was more about politics than scholarship. --Tony Sidaway 14:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I believe the reason the material was brought here altogether was to insert a political agenda, if not through the front door, than through the back. Adding more quotes and material on this issue which was phrased in a very "in your face" and aggressive way from the start, is to give undue weight to a conflict that is only indirectly related to the Rockefeller Museum - a very interesting museum with many fascinating artifacts, but almost unknown and unvisited. I will not allow this article, to which I have been a long-time contributor, to be turned into yet another forum for people who have a history of going from one article to the next to push their political views and stir up hatred.--Gilabrand (talk) 14:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
If The Rockefeller Museum is located in East Jerusalem it is not technically located in Israel. The text clearly says [...]museum located in Jerusalem, Israel [...] that is outside Israel.