Talk:Qumran Caves

Merge with Qumran article??

ok. i'll be he first to ask: why did you create this article? why separate this article from qumran? i'll wait for a response before i tag it with a proposal to merge with qumran. --XKV8R (talk) 15:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand the urge. Qumran is about the settlement, its archaeology and its interpretation. It seems logical to have a separate article which is dedicated to the caves, in which cave issues can be dealt with. I don't understand the desire to merge this with Qumran. It will only make the latter 7kb longer with material not directly relevant to the settlement. There is much that needs to be dealt with there already that hasn't been covered. I think there could easily be a separate article on the Qumran cemetery as well and how it reflects grave practice of the period. Stick to settlement stuff in the Qumran article.--Ihutchesson (talk) 16:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

agreed. i'd like to see as much information about everything. however, this is wikipedia, and it is supposed to be a dictionary/encyclopedia article. methinks this may be a bit too much detail, especially when much of the detail is overlapping the qumran article. lemme think about it. i might support it, but for now it looks like the department of double redundancy department.--XKV8R (talk) 16:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Wryly smiling, this comes from the guy who gave us the litany in the Qumran article. You're just telling me to stop working on what I'm doing. Do you want to merge or remove the Ein Feshkha stub or the Orion Center page or any of the other short articles I've put up recently for the DSS navigation template? Why don't you get into it and find me a geological description of the cave zone or find me Schiffman's clanger about the settlement's library being in the caves? Oh and what about a map for the Qumran page?--Ihutchesson (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

lol. if you only knew what i was working on... ;-) were it up to me, there would be an entire archaeology version of wikipedia where every little thing would be written and discussed. scribes, caves, soil samples - all of it. i'd love maps and charts and much much more. but on wiki, we are required to take into account brevity and undue weight. you'll notice that i do not undo certain changes on these several articles. if i disagree with anything, i'll let you know. as for an article on the qumran caves, i'm still on the fence whether or not it should be a separate article. as for fleshing out a robust qumran article and then nominating it for site of the day, i'd rather go that route. qumran caves might make a better strong section within the qumran article. you din't delete any info from qumran and place it here, did you? it's just redundant here, right?? spin on!--XKV8R (talk) 18:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Beside one short paragraph and most of another sentence what else has been copied from elsewhere?? What information would you like me to delete from what I'd put in the Qumran article? Where exactly is the redundancy here? Do you want no mention of Patrich and Broshi and Eshel in the Qumran section about population?--Ihutchesson (talk) 19:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

nice save.--XKV8R (talk) 00:32, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You got me while I was tangoing with Stephen Goranson again.--Ihutchesson (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

relax. i'm just raising a question. we scientists do that. i'm not the one your edit war fighting with... besides, you're kinda starting to win me over on this. no need to get testy. as you know, i'm not a fan of testy. i like nice.;-) --XKV8R (talk) 00:32, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

You wouldn't like "nice" if you knew its history.

And I'm glad I've started to win you over: I've expended enough energy trying to get the data together.--Ihutchesson (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Do excuse my chiming in here. If, for example, biochemistry articles can get away with the level of detail seen in articles such as (the randomly chosen) Alpha_1-antichymotrypsin and all its links via the templates, we can surely spare the space here for separate articles for cave and settlement (the merging of which is, arguably, inherently not NPOV). So add some of your maps, soil samples and pottery! Wiki isn't supposed to hold every factoid and finding, but the Qumran pages as they are barely cover the basics imo Tobermory (talk) 18:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

" i'll question importance. unique is accurate." -- XKV8R

This is in response to a statement that 3Q15, the Copper Scroll, was the most important textual find in 3Q.

OK, I'll bite. Although the choice doesn't matter much in the context, working from the repertoire in 3Q, which other items might be considered as important as 3Q15?--Ihutchesson (talk) 04:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Merge Muhammed edh-Dhib

I propose to merge Muhammed edh-Dhib to this page. Since 2004 Muhammed edh-Dhib has not evolved into a biography warranting its own article. All he is notable for is discovering the caves, which can be easily added to this article. Chesdovi (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Inaccurate category

Currently there is the Cat: "Archaeological sites in Israel" in this article, but this article is about the Qumran caves, which are not located in Israel. So there is no reason to have this inaccurate category here. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 01:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. While the site is administered by the IAA, the site is in the West Bank. --XKV8R (talk) 04:56, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

It is not inaccurate at all. The site is "in" Israel enough to be categories as such. Compare: Salamis is in "Northern Cyprus". Chesdovi (talk) 12:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Qumran and the caves in its vicinity are frequently used as a political football. The area is currently under the administration of Israel, with a kibbutz next door and Israeli public buses plying the road hourly, so it is unavoidable that it is an archaeological site in Israel. At the same time it is certainly in the West Bank. Not to include both facts will only lead to greater contention in this article. Please leave both references intact, unless you can provide a compromise that will satisfy all parties more. -- I.Hutchesson ► 08:19, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Ihutchesson, the caves are not in Israel, that is a fact, it doesn't matter if Israel occupies them or that they are close to Israel, or that there is an Israeli settlement nearby or that an Israeli bus goes there sometimes, the fact is still that they aren't in Israel. Your edit is a clear non neutral edit that violates Wikipedia policy npov, please revert yourself. You also said "Unpoliticizing" in the edit summary while re-inserting the cat, your edit has nothing to do with unpoliticizing, only to expand incorrectness. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 04:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

So why this issue hasn't been solved yet? The caves are clearly NOT in Israel. This is not a disputed fact. UN and the international community does not recognize Israel's sovereignty over these areas. So why we still have this article and related ones categorized as in Israel? I maybe not an advanced user enough to solve this issue, so some other editors should intervene to resolve it. --Crazyketchupguy (talk) 18:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2015

"These caves were dug by Dan Avidan" ItsMeMunk (talk) 11:10, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 13:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Better yet, stop wasting our time, attempting to perpetuate a pretty lame joke. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Heck off liberal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.52.77 (talk) 21:26, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 June 2016

The Qumran caves were dug by Dan Avidan. 86.180.65.64 (talk) 16:56, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 17:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

New cave discovered

See this cnn report dated Feb. 9, 2017 regarding the recent discovery of cave #12. Vsmith (talk) 13:52, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2018

these caves where digged out by danny from game grumps 96.33.222.23 (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DBigXrayᗙ 14:35, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2019

Add a "in popular culture" section, with Daniel Avidans infamous claim to his father that he dug the caves, that led to people vandalizing the wikipage. Noffe2k (talk) 15:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not clear that this event is widely known or has had any cultural influence. I can't find discussion of this in reliable sources, and it is not mentioned on his own Wiki page. See also Wikipedia:"In popular culture" content. – Þjarkur (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2019

dug by Dan Avidan 68.134.159.220 (talk) 00:04, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Þjarkur (talk) 00:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2019

New bibliography reference : Jean-Baptiste Humbert, Alain Chambon, Jolanta Mlynarczyk, Khirbet Qumrân et Aïn Feshkha, Fouilles du P. Roland de Vaux, vol. IIIa, L'archéologie de Qumrân, Reconsidération de l'interprétation; Corpus of the Lamps, Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus, Series Archaeologica 5a, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 2016, 536 p. (ISBN 978-3-525-54054-1) Archéologie Ecole biblique et archéologique française (talk) 14:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done Izno (talk) 00:00, 28 May 2019 (UTC)