Talk:Letter of the Karaite elders of Ascalon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Planned expansion[edit]

I will be expanding this article to include a detailed summary of the letter in future. I just do not have the time to do it today. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 00:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Ascalon to Ashkelon[edit]

I have changed the spelling of "Ascalon" to "Ashkelon" since the later is more correct. I have also moved the article to reflect the change. I don't see this change as particular controversial so I did not discuss it first. Objections and criticisms are, of course, still welcome. Jon513 (talk) 12:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I have changed it back because all of the sources use this spelling and, most importantly, internet searches pull up more info with said spelling. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 13:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Ascalon links to a disambig page; at the very least that has to be fixed. Frankly when I saw the word "Ascalon" I was very confused and had no idea what it meant. Only when I clicked on the disambig link I realized that it meant Ashkelon. "Ascalon" is not a word "Ashkelon" is. Irregardless of how it is more commonly spelled in this instance the city is almost always spelled Ashkelon, and spelling it an unusual way in one article leads to confusion. But I don't really care enough to belabor the point. Jon513 (talk) 14:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
(out of sequence comment) Irregardless is not a word. Irrespective and regardless are. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I have fixed the disambig problem, but I fail to see how Ascalon is not a word. Wikipedia has an article named the Battle of Ascalon. On top of that, a google search pulls up the following results:

"Ascalon" = 1,220,000
"Ashkelon" = 743,000. 

Here is a more refined search:

"First Crusade Ascalon" = 18,600 
"First Crusade Ashkelon" = 885. 

Need I say more? --Ghostexorcist (talk) 14:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

In this context of the crusades it is practically always Ascalon (for example we also have Siege of Ascalon). Adam Bishop (talk) 18:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia specifically excludes Google search result numbers as a basis of spelling choice. For spelling, Wikipedia urges the currently most accepted form in the language of the Wiki site (in this case, English) except in cases where a direct quote is involved (which does not apply here). "Ascalon" is actually the Latin spelling, not the English spelling. The use of the Latin form in English writings was prominent over a hundred years ago, as were many other Latin spellings which are no longer used (in fact, many scholarly books by English authors were written entirely in Latin because it was considered a lingua franca of sorts). But that was then. The current preferred spelling for Ashkelon is "Ashkelon" and not "Ascalon" (last I checked, most English language scientific journals will either correct such a spelling, or reject the article for publication, so the spelling convention is strong enough that "Ascalon" is considered incorrect by modern journal standards).
I support the (re)move. The arguments against made above don't seem to be backed by Wiki policy, nor by modern English spelling conventions.
al-Shimoni (talk) 02:11, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


The article says that the Karaites of Ascalon sent the lettter to their "coreligionists". Were the recipients also Karaites or Rabinnic Jews? There is a considerable point of controversy about whether Karaites and Rabinnic Jews are coreligionists. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Karaites. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 09:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Should there be a brief summary of this article in the Ashkelon article? Hera52 (talk) 18:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)