This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic
Palestine region, the
Palestinian people and the
State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting
the project page, where you can add your name to the
list of members where you can contribute to the
discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Greek history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our
project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our
talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
This article was
copy edited by
SMasters, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on March 8, 2010.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
I realize that this is on the list for ACR at Military history, and the
Good Article list. While you've clearly done a lot of work on the article, there are serious prose issues here, and these need
to be addressed before further action can be taken in either review.
I've made the necessary tweaks on the lead, but will look to you to do
the ones on the article itself. Please let me know when you've
finished this, and I will take further action regarding passing or
failing this article for GA status.
Auntieruth55 (
talk)
19:08, 28 January 2010 (UTC)reply
I have fixed some pronoun related problems where jerusalem was repeatedly used. I have also tried fixing some article related issues putting 'the' and 'a' in various places where they were missing. You can check it here
[1]
As i said before that english isnt my native language and the user who helped me out in past in copy editing is now on indefinite leave so kindly help me out where ever i stuck, if you can.
It is much improved by your work, and I went through it and did some copy edits. There are three things that still need to happen though. First, the last sentence of the first paragraph under Siege is very confusing to me. It starts with the weary Muslim troops.. This needs to be reworded. Second, the last sentence of that section, and the last sentence of the following section have no attribution (no citation). Third, please read it through once more to make sure I didn't change your meaning when I changed some words. Thanks.
Auntieruth55 (
talk)
01:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)reply
I still don't understand that last sentence that starts with the exhausted Muslim troops.. What is the difference between starting
Siege warfare and pressing the siege? Instead of starting a siege, they press the siege? what does this mean?
Auntieruth55 (
talk)
16:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)reply
i have reworded it as ..and instead of the relentless assaults on the city, they decided to press the siege until the Byzantines would run short of supplies and a bloodless surrender could be negotiated.
I think its clear this time.
I have also provided a reference in the last sentence of the following section. While the last sentence of this section already had a reference.
Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine, 634-1099, p.
51, Cambridge University Press (1997)
Meron Benvenisti, City of Stone: The Hidden History of Jerusalem, p.
5, University of California Press (1996)
J. F. Haldon, Byzantium in the Seventh Century: The Transformation of a Culture, p.
301, Cambridge University Press (1990)
Leslie J. Hoppe, The Holy City: Jerusalem in the Theology of the Old Testament, p.
15, Liturgical Press (2000)
Bernard Lewis, Arabs in History, p. [ ], Oxford University Press (2002)
Steven Runciman, A History of the Crusades, vol. 1 "The First Crusade and the Foundation of the Kingdom of Jerusalem", p.
3, Cambridge University Press (1987)
Other sources for 638:
Abd al-Fattah El-Awaisi (U. of Stirling), Umar's Assurance of Safety to the People of Aeia (Jerusalem): A Critical Analytical Study of the Historical Sources. Journal of Islamic Jerusalem Studies (Summer 2000), 3:2, 47-89. Page
1. Quote: "The first Muslim conquest of Jerusalem in Muhrram 17 AH/February 638 CE..."
Theophilus of Edessa, Theophilus of Edessa's Chronicle and the Circulation of Historical Knowledge in Late Antiquity and Early Islam, p.
114, Liverpool University Press (2011). "(638) The capture of Jerusalem and the visit of 'Umar". Footnote 254 discusses the different dates from old sources (638, 637, 636/37) and the different scholarly discussions.
Yes, there are some primary sources indicating the year 636/37 or 637, too, and some secondary sources are offering both dates - see for instance Britannica,
here for 638 and
here for 637. The article should mention and discuss both dates, the title should be adapted - "Siege of Jerusalem (630s)" or "First Muslim conquest of Jerusalem" -, but under no circumstances should one opinion be presented as the only valid one, let alone the theory that is not the dominant scholarly one.
@
Doug Weller: I must admit I'm still not up-to-date with the procedure, and I've sworn I'll do some work other than Wiki editing, so I'll leave it to whoever has the time & skill. Thanks a lot and have a good time - if possible.
Arminden (
talk)
14:56, 2 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Good catch Arminden- I'm a complete fuckwit with technicalities. I think First Muslim conquest of Jerusalem (637/638) as a title would cover the issue.
Nishidani (
talk)
09:04, 3 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Regarding passage - reference makes no mention of anything whatsoever which is written
This passage here:
"It has been recorded in the annals of Muslim chronicles, that at the time of the Zuhr prayers, Sophronius invited Umar to pray in the rebuilt Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Umar declined, fearing that accepting the invitation might endanger the church's status as a place of Christian worship, and that Muslims might break the treaty and turn the church into a mosque."
references the following book:
Gibbon, Edward (1862). The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume 6. J. D. Morris Publishers
The book which can be found
here makes no mention at all of the passage written above and can be found on page 337 corresponding to page 321, which is from the reference. Although the book is another edition, it makes no mention at all of either Umar nor Sophronius. I therefore propose the passage to be deleted.
Othmas biaggio (
talk)
17:16, 18 August 2023 (UTC)reply