Talk:Cave of Horrors

Was the 6000-year-old mummified corpse found in the Cave of Horror?Arminden (talk) 00:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Jerusalem Post says yes ("The cave offered several other unique findings, including the skeleton of a child dating back some 6,000 years."), but they're often confused. They do state that the basket was found elsewhere. The Bar Kokhba "Year 1" coins are from the Cave of Horror. Article. The Smithsonian Magazine article also says that, but it's not clear if they didn't just repeat what was written in the Israeli English-language press. A scientific source would be better, as always. Arminden (talk) 00:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

This has several seach results that might be helpful.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q="cave+of+horror"&btnG= Dgndenver (talk) 12:40, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Unclear to me

"In investigations following the first one by Yadin" -- first what? Scroll? ostraka? parchment scrap? Who is Yadin? Kdammers (talk) 19:03, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

That bit is confusingly written, but I think it means the first investigations were by Yadin. The easy bit to fix is the name: in full it is Yigael Yadin, and I've added that to the article. 🏰 Richard Nevell (talk) 20:01, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Mariamnei has written a lot of high-quality content at Bar Kokhba Revolt and might have insight into how the article could be reworked. 🏰 Richard Nevell (talk) 20:05, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, but "In investigations following the first one by Yadin" can only mean: after "the first investigation by Yadin", nothing else. Thank you Richard for adding a link. If one goes to "Search" and looks for Yadin, it's not hard to figure him out, but the link is of course far better. Arminden (talk) 11:21, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but it is written as if Yadin has previously been discussed on the page. It would be clearer to specify which investigations are being discussed without the relative chronological position. 🏰 Richard Nevell (talk) 11:25, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

It worked originally, but the 2021 removal of text mentioned that Yadin and the 1960s excavations compromised the remaining text. 🏰 Richard Nevell (talk) 12:21, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Yep, exactly. That's what I noticed too. It was made "politically correct" by removing the Bedouin "intervention", and Yadin dsappeared along with that episode. Archaeological looting is as consacrated a term as it takes to get an enWiki article. (Now I'm afraid they'll rename it.) Having a good justification doesn't change the resulting loss. But stuff like this got me topic banned, so - zip. Arminden (talk) 18:26, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

AI analysis

Youtube program Optic Expedition says AI analysis combined with other technology, including UV lights, indicated that these and other DS scrolls are from many different Jewish groups: "the emergneny salvage of an entire civilization." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YsDMVXgKrY I don't if this is verifiable, but if it is, it should be added. Kdammers (talk) 19:21, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Looking at some other videos from that channel, I'm seeing a lot of slop. AI (presumably a Large Language Model) has been used on the scrolls previously: 🏰 Richard Nevell (talk) 19:58, 20 June 2026 (UTC)