Talk:Dallata
Add topic | You are an administrator, so you may disregard the message below You are seeing this because of the limitations of {{If extended confirmed}} and {{If admin}}
You can hide this message box by adding the following to a new line of your common.css page: .ECR-edit-request-warning {
display: none;
}
Stop: You may only use this page to create an edit request This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is subject to the extended-confirmed restriction. You are not an extended-confirmed user, so you must not edit or discuss this topic anywhere on Wikipedia except to make an edit request. (Additional details are in the message box just below this one.) |
| Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to the Arab–Israeli conflict.The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. |
 | A fact from Dallata appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 October 2009. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Sharon-mistake
[edit]- Sharon, M. (2004). Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum Palaestinae, D-F. Vol. 3. BRILL. ISBN 90-04-13197-3.
Sharon, 2004, pp. 5-6 makes the mistake of quoting "Isac Hilo", that is Isaac Chelo. Scholem found that his alleged work was a forgery by Eliakim Carmoly, published in 1847.
As for Sharon's statement "The inhabitants were originally from the Maghreb and were settled there by Ottoman authorities", Sharon mention no sources, and the sentence make no sence in view of the 1596 tax records, Huldra (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'll see if I can find any equivalents from other sources. By the way, why did we remove the Cairo Geniza findings, and the ancient graves of Jose the Galilean etc.? Tombah (talk) 07:19, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- As for the Cairo Geniza findings; I think the connections with this place is tenuous, at most. As for Sharon's statement about the graves of Jose the Galilean etc; Sharon seem to rely only on Guerin, and Guerin relies on Carmoly -> a forgery. However, the 1662 Cippi Hebraici mentiones the above, so I have added that, Huldra (talk) 21:33, 5 February 2023 (UTC)