Talk:Birket Israel/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Starting GAreview.Pyrotec (talk) 21:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review

An interesting well-referenced and compact article, but there are a number of unanswered questions and/or possible confusions that need to be resolved. So I'm putting the article On Hold.

Specifically:

Construction - No date(s) is given for the archaeological excavations.

Ref 6, which is not invoked at this point, seems to say that it was excavated by Charles Warren, if so let's mention it. (And) if so, the excavations reports are probably available, and will be out of copyright.
- I am not sure if he excavated it, but I have mentioned his findings. Chesdovi (talk) 01:59, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the cistern was in fact a "moat" for the Temple Mount, does that imply that it was built contemporarily (or possibly after) the Herodian Temple? (See ref 6)
- According to Warren in the article, some type of moat existed from ancient times at the site. I don't think it was built as a defensive structure, rather it doubled up to serve as a moat. Chesdovi (talk) 01:59, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably this is Roman era concrete and cement, not modern stuff?
- According to most estimates, the birket was constructed during Roman occupation. Luckily there is a page on Roman concrete, which I will link to the article Chesdovi (talk) 01:59, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Later uses - I believe that some expansion of why the cistern is (was) identified as the "Sheep Pool" of John 5:2 and later associated with the Pool of Bethesda" is needed.
- Added Chesdovi (talk) 01:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The perceived/actual health hazards need to be expanded. Cistern was filled in and in use as a vegetable garden does not appear to be hazardous, are we talking hazards from static water, refuse, etc, ?
- No sources can be found giving precise reason Chesdovi (talk) 01:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dates need to be given for when the East Jerusalem Development Company intended to excavate and build a car park.
- Added post-67 Chesdovi (talk) 01:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notes & References - Some dates given in Notes do not match the dates given in the References, by several generations, which implies re-prints / re-publication. This needs to be made clear in the actual References (usually done as e.g. "Smith [1866] (1999)") - there is a cite book template that can, optionally, be used.

Fixed. Chesdovi (talk) 01:59, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pyrotec (talk) 08:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looking at the article's Talkpage there was some detailed discussions about Birket Israel / Pool of Bethesda, I have therefore addressed this in the article by moving some text from "Later uses" into a new section and expanding it with some new citations.Pyrotec (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

An interesting, compact article.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Congratulations, I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 22:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]