This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Editors are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction when reverting logged-in users on all pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, broadly construed. When in doubt, assume it is related, and don't revert.
Please see here for more information. Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked or otherwise sanctioned without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
Can people please keep an eye on this entry? It seems to be a target for all kind of passions that lead to the insertion of partisan and unsourced words & texts.Super48paul (talk) 08:37, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I have removed text that suggested the government was deliberately massacring the Damascan population. I will remain vigilant on this page and make sure there is no vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 18:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I've removed a section that claims that Caligula gave Damascus to the Nabataeans. There is no evidence of such a transfer, though it has been conjectured to explain how Aretas IV could want to kill the apostle Paul in Damascus. -- spin|control 08:38, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Ross Burns in this 2007 edition of Damascus: A History Routledge pg 52 writes:
"The Augustan peace gave new impetus to Syria's economic development after centuries of disruption and fragmentation. Damascus, returned to Roman control, recovered quickly after the successive wars of the past ten years. It still enjoyed the theoretical status of a Hellenised self governing city within the Roman province of Syria and now embarked on an unparalleled era of prosperity."
This current scholarly source clearly states that Damascus was "within the Roman province of Syria" in the time of Augustus. I don't know where this Decapolis claim is coming from but since it is unreferenced it is useless.--188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:47, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
If burns didn't mention that damascus was part of the decapolis then it is his fault, I have provided the sources. its also by routledge and written by Warwick Ball, now you need a source for herod controlling the city, find it and add the sentence about herod without deleting the decapolis part.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 19:30, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Herod controlling the city is also in Ross also on page 52. Furthermore, "Pompey incorporated the cities of the Decapolis into the province of Syria and granted them autonomy" [...] "The other cities of the Decapolis were considered part of Syrian territory until 105-106 CE"- Fred Skolnik, Michael Berenbaum ( 2007) Encyclopaedia Judaica Volume 5 Granite Hill Publishers pg 527 Per Wikipedia:Conflicting sources and Wikipedia:These are not original research you can NOT choose one reliable source over other if they conflict but rather explain the conflict in a NPOV manner. Skolnik explains that the whole of the Decapolis was incorporated into the province of Syria explaining the apparent conflict between Ball and Burns.--184.108.40.206 (talk) 03:16, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I didnt choose anything, and I dont care if Herod controlled anything, you were just too quick to delete the Decapolis part and I just wanted to show you not to be hasty ;)
by the way, I dont think there is a conflict between the decapolis and the province, after all the decapolis were just an organization of cities and they had to follow a province :)--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 03:55, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
By deleting Burns in your edit you DID choose one source over the other. Also per Wikipedia:Verifiability "Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed." The Decapolis material did not have a source and I found one that appeared to say otherwise and so the Decapolis material was removed. You found a source that backed up the Decapolis claim BUT you messed in deleting Burns. You should have found a way to reconcile Burns and Ball rather then choosing Ball over Burns as you did.
As for the cities Decapolis having to follow a province not all works out there are clear on this and some maps show them as a separate entity from any province.--220.127.116.11 (talk) 04:10, 18 January 2015 (UTC)