Talk:History of Jerusalem during the Kingdom of Jerusalem

Expert Attention

The whole entry was tagged in need of copy editing, which I have tried to do. I have edited for grammar but not changed the content. However, there is a lot of detailed, unsourced information which I found confusing and at times contradictory. If someone who knows more about the content can have a look at it, as there is still a lot of work to be done. Thanks. Melcous (talk) 10:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Originally the article was machine translated from Hebrew wikipedia. There were 3 editors, including myself who tried to translate its English into English. Then the article was deleted under the notion that it is fork of Kingdom of Jerusalem (which is clearly not). I restored in my user space to slowly cleaning it. But I am not expert, so I tgried in vain to post request at various Jerusalem-related forums and major articles. Nobody cared. <shrug> May be your tag will help better. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:07, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Sources: useless w/o details!

Even if it's been translated from Hebrew Wik., why don't we get the quoted sources in full? Schein, Amitai: only the titles. Anderson, Armstrong: nothing but the surname & page! Completely useless, especially with such common English names (as opposed to, say, Pringle or Boaz). Arminden (talk) 17:08, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

This Article Contradicts the "Timeline of Jerusalem" Article

According to the "Timeline of Jerusalem" article Christians had control of Jerusalem prior to 649 AD. This means the introductory section detailing "Jerusalem was conquered by the Christian First Crusade in 1099, after it had been under Muslim rule for 450 years." is facetious OR incorrect at best.

Jerusalem video

Thanks for flagging that the church depicted is not from c 1050 as described in the subtitles. These videos are from a German broadcaster, ZDF, and have been released as part of a project against 'disinformation', so it is a bit annoying when these discrepancies crop up. I hope it is of general use and not too inaccurate, even if the date can't quite be pinned down. --Jim Killock (talk) 14:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

​Jim, hi. I know the ZDF and tend to trust them. I don't know how accurate the Latin text is, or how close it's followed by its English translation. The citadel to the south (right) of the western gate is also fantasy: the Herodian tower was and still is square, not round (and had no minaret on top), and Ronnie Ellenblum makes an excellent case for the rest of the fortifications around it only being built in the 12th c., not the 11th. So the clip is OK for a general impression of the topography and some other details, but otherwise it's as weird as the incongruous Hungarian accent of the off-voice speaking the Latin text. Btw, maybe you can check yourself: the subtitles don't show up on my mobile phone, only on the PC. Same there? Arminden (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'll take a look at the mobile performance; if subs don't work, that is very annoying but I'm not sure what can be done except wait for WP devs to sort it out. On the Latin accuracy, it has been run through some very proficient written and published Latinists to ensure it is correct; on the accent, I'm not sure why that seems odd to you; again I have approached people I would trust on these issues to choose good reciters (albeit, everyone's approach is a bit different). Raphael has a US with a background in Italian and Latin academic study currently in Scotland I believe. --Jim Killock (talk) 15:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikimedia videos on iOS 11 don't seem to work for me at all. I expect this is a known issue so I'll check and file a bug report. That said I would be surprised if these issues aren't already known. --Jim Killock (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

​I don't know who Raphael is, but if you see him, please tell him "servus!" from a Romanian with a penchant for all things Transylvanian. I'd be very surprised if his mother tongue weren't Hungarian, and there's a saying about their diaspora: A Hungarian may loose everything he has, but for his accent. Which doesn't take anything away from his knowledge of the noble Latin language. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 20:05, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

​I see you've put back in some of the stuff I had taken out. Please, let's stay grounded.

• The Church of the Holy Sepulchre we see there is post-1149.
• The Dome of the Rock tiles we see there are post-1550s.
• The humongous round tower at David's Gate has no business being there, and the minaret on top has been transplanted there from the SW tower of the Mamluk citadel and is from the 17th century.
• The gilded dome of the Dome of the Rock we see there is post-1993.

So we have a 11th-century claim and 12th, 16th, 17th, and 20th-century facts.

If the little men walking on the roof of the church did indeed try to do that in the 1050s, they'd fall to their death pretty pronto, as the Calvary was in the open, with no roof over it and the garden facing the tomb rotunda.

As to the Pannonia thing: If it quacks like it and walks like it, it sure must be out of "Asterix and Obelix Go Down the Istrus". It's hard to make a joke about a joke. Or not to make one.

Accent aside (the Hungarians did indeed lead the Fifth Crusade, but that was in the 13th century!), and the fact that I can't see any "cc" button anywhere, neither on my phone nor on the PC screen: The text is poorly written and has nothing to do with the topic. There is no reason for the "Latin". The visuals have some minimal value in helping one understand the topography in broad terms, but I'd fully cut out the sound and the voice-over to salvage what can be salvaged. Otherwise it might well be taken out as not appropriate for a history article that has been worked on a lot by serious editors. It's well intended, and a gamer might have a lot to gain from it, but not this article. Sorry. Arminden (talk) 00:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Sure, you are the expert on the content of the video. I'm happy to leave whether or how to use it here to you. On the technicals I have followed up on Phabricator but I think there are severe limitations to videos on iOS due to the use of WebM as a video format by Wikimedia. Subs should be available on PC or Android tho; the button is normally on the bottom right hand side. --Jim Killock (talk) 19:59, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

​Thank you Jim, I appreciate it. I'm a very clumsy basic user when it comes to technical matters, so I won't even start trying to re-edit or remove the audio. I will stick to what I can do and add a few written words. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Who is Anderson? What book did s/he write?

Empty reference. Arminden (talk) 11:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Please do not comment here because the discussion has developed and reached good results at Talk:History of Jerusalem during the Middle Ages#Who is Anderson? What book did s/he write? and Talk:History of Jerusalem during the Middle Ages#Baybars building shrines for Muslims AND JEWS - ?!. Thank you, Arminden (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Use of the word "crusade"

"Crusade" is a communicative framing word. Using it uncommented, automatically means you step in the perspective of the Roman Catholic Church - fighting for the cross as the right cause. Nothing wrong with that, when one is aware. Here the word crusade however has to be explained in neutral wordings and be used as less as possible.

Besides that, many did fight from other motives or for other reasons than religion. Count your Garden by the Flowers (talk) 17:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

We use the word because it is what the overwhelming majority of reliable sources use. It isn't a commentary on it. Zero^talk 03:30, 19 October 2022 (UTC)