Talk:Qatra

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

1596

Hütteroth p145, 46 families and 15 bachelors (all Muslim). Zero^talk 02:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Yepp, noted, Huldra (talk) 23:05, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Khalidi mistake?

Khalidi, p. 404 cites Robinson, 1856, p. 143, describing Qatra as being of a "considerable size".

Now, according to Khalidis Bibliography, he used a 1977 reprint of one of the many 1856 Robinson versions. Which one I don't know. But the present Robinson, 1856, p.143, does not refer to Qatra at all, instead it refers to a Kubab as "a considerable village". And that is Al-Qubab, on SWP map 17, with Robinson on his way from Lydda to Yalo.

However, Robinson and Smith, 1856, vol 2, p 227, mentions a Kutra, sighted from Aqir. Now to me, that sound like "our" Qatra.

Will anyone protest if I cut that 1856, p. 143, out from this article, and moves it to Al-Qubab? Huldra (talk) 23:04, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

• Robinson, Edward; Smith, Eli (1856). Biblical Researches in Palestine, Mount Sinai and Arabia Petraea: A Journal of Travels in the year 1838. Vol. 2. Boston: Crocker & Brewster.

Looks right to me. Zero^talk 20:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Eh, what look right, my opinion or Khalidi? Huldra (talk) 22:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Your opinion looks right (as usual). Zero^talk 07:28, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I like a check....actually, I quite often find that I make mistakes, and insert wrong info. In 95-99% of the cases I am the one who discovers it, though... Huldra (talk) 22:46, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Guérin misreading

there is two misreading of Guerin :

• the houses are not in adobe, but in rammed earth ;
• and there is not " acacias and mimosas, but acacias mimosas : it was not two different sorts of terres but one, in thé most easy lecture. So, with this species, I can't find the scientific name, too difficult for me. Plyntérêts (talk) 17:55, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

User:Plyntérêts So it is a type of mimosa tree? Huldra (talk) 23:33, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

This is a difficult question and one should not assume that Guérin was expert in distinguishing related species of trees. My LLM friend says "the Nile or Egyptian acacia, now Vachellia nilotica, formerly Mimosa nilotica" but we shouldn't trust LLMs without independent verification. It might be safer to use Guérin's name in quotes. But Plyntérêts is correct that only one type of tree is being referred to. Zero^talk 01:56, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for answer. Excuse me, I have forgotten one thing. On fr:Mimosa, we can read : "Par un étrange télescopage entre les noms vernaculaires et les noms scientifiques, il existe une confusion dans les appellations de trois genres : les genres Acacia, Robinia et Mimosa".

In a few words, in vernacular french (and Zero0000 is correct, Guérin is not naturalist) the genders Mimosa, Robina and Acacia are blended. We can name a Mimosa acacia, an Acacia Robinier, etc. So, Guérin's sentence maybe can be understand like "trees whom I don't know the name, but similar to acacia or mimosa". It's a possibility. The quotes seems to be the best thing to do. Unless if there is a specialist of french bourgeoisie in XIX who can say : "Easy, for Guérin, it's surely [type of mimosa], he use the common word used for it."

Well, I suspect it hadn't helped even if Guerin had been a botanist: back in his day identifications were only done based on external looks, it is only with present-day DNA sequencing that a 100% correct classification can be done, for many species. So the old translations could perhaps be changed from "acacias and mimosas" to "acacias or mimosas"? cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:48, 26 September 2026 (UTC) PS: thank you for the correction of my (non-existent) French: I just used translate.bing (I never took French) Please don't hesitate to note if you see any other dubious translation.

thanks. From one year I translate en: articles on 1948 villages, but it's just the 2nd or third time I could see some misreading. And thanks for en: wikipedians for doing this articles. Plyntérêts (talk) 06:02, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

ok, what were the first or second mistranslations? cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:13, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't think we can be sure that "acacias or mimosas" is correct. It relates modern usage to 19th century usage in a manner we have no source for. Zero^talk 09:47, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

+1. Plyntérêts (talk) 20:09, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

But we don't need to be sure of the species: we just re-iterate what Guerin wrote, Huldra (talk) 21:16, 28 September 2026 (UTC)