Talk:Eilat Mazar

"Approach" section unnecessary

This is just a little hit-piece of people whining about Mazar's worldview. Nothing in it is particularly noteworthy. 72.95.92.54 (talk) 16:38, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

And whining (to use your language) about this article being written according to our WP:NPOV policy won't get you anywhere. Mazar has his critics and we recognise that in his article. Dougweller (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eilat Mazar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081007130847/http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-06.asp to http://www.bib-arch.org/debates/seal-controversy-06.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:33, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Unprecedented discovery?

To editor Doug Weller: Doug, you deleted "unprecedented", although the sources do in fact call the discovery of Hezekiah's personal bulla as "unprecedented". In Wikipedia, we're not supposed to enter our own opinions into the pages, we simply take a look at and enter in what the published sources say.Korvex (talk) 01:31, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you are quoting something I often tell editors accurately, but if you are then I need to be more careful, as it isn't actually simple. Obviously not all sources are equal or even appropriate. Spand there are some types of statement that we would never make in Wikipedia's voice but would always attribute. I don't know who said this and one source is unavailable. Doug Weller talk 06:09, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I've removed it again. It's basically hype. Please don't replace it without discussing it here with better justification. Doug Weller talk 14:42, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Eilat Mazar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.momentmag.com/olam/Apr06/MOM-2006-04_mazar.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071222022710/http://archaeology.huji.ac.il/news/visiting/eilatm/eilatm.html to http://archaeology.huji.ac.il/news/visiting/eilatm/eilatm.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Iron Age Jerusalem "larger than thought"

A research article entitled, "Radiocarbon chronology of Iron Age Jerusalem reveals calibration offsets and architectural developments," (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2321024121) by Yuval Gadot, Joe Uziah, Elisabetta Boaretto and Johanna Regev detail their nearly ten-year study of organic matter found in construction materials embedded in Iron Age (c. 1200-586 BCE) buildings on the slopes on either side of the City of David. The study provides additional data to suggest that Jerusalem was much larger during the Iron Age period (10th-9th centuries, BCE) "than previously thought." These data add support to Dr. Mazar's conclusions regarding her various discoveries on both the City of David and Ophel sites.

The researchers' testing, intended to provide greater accuracy in dating artifacts during the "Hallstatt plateau" period, compared tree ring data (dendochronoogy), particle acceleration of seed molecules and pottery samples with Carbon-14 to better calibrate C-14 offsets during this puzzling era. Their results, according to lead archaeologist Yuval Gadot may change his and others' thinking regarding Jerusalem's size and spread during this period, stating, "“If my pendulum has to move somewhere, it now goes more in the direction of the city than the village because of these results" (see Times of Israel article, May 21, 2024, titled, "Using burnt seeds from 1st Temple era, Israeli researchers tame a vexing dating enigma" (https://www.timesofisrael.com/using-burnt-seeds-from-1st-temple-era-israeli-researchers-tame-a-vexing-dating-enigma/). Ushebertswiki (talk) 17:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't have the full article, but the PubMed abstract says this: "It provides evidence for settlement in the 12th to 10th centuries BC and that westward expansion had already begun by the 9th century BC, with extensive architectural projects undertaken throughout the city in this period." So, okay, there was a settlement 12th to 10th centuries and it grew in the 9th century.

Also, at Video on YouTube they don't mention discovering any buildings built by David and Solomon. That would have been the big news that's missing from this story. Buildings by later kings are mentioned, but not by David and Solomon. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@Tgeorgescu: This source indicates that archaeologists have found buildings in Jerusalem dating to the times of David and Solomon (10th century BC). Potatín5 (talk) 18:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)