Talk:Umm Safa

	Palestine portal 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 has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Guerin problem[edit]

Ok, so Socin p. 156 gives Guerin, 1869, p. 39, Kefr Achoua for this place. (visiting 1863)

However, both Dauphin and Finkelstein gives Guerin, 1875, p. 109, Oumm Saffa! (visiting 1870)

Actually, I suspect they are all correct.....and that Guerin wrote about the same place twice...under two different names... (who said this was going to be easy...) Huldra (talk) 21:55, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking this up. At a rush this morning, the two texts more or less run thus:-

Guérin 1869 p.39

(1)From the summit of this same plateau, my guide pointed out another small village to me, located about 3 kilometres to the north and called Kfar Achoua’. de Saucey mentioned this site under the name of Kafr Aissoua(? Small print, hard to read), drawing attention to the book of Nehemiah’s mention of a village, called Iechoua (?) that had been converted into a Rechabite one by the children of Judea after the captivity. The name Iechoua is identical to thart of Achoua. But this village, as that learned man correctly observed, could not have occupied the site of the village we are dealing with here. That is to say, that It must be located within the tribe of Judah, and probably to the south of this tribe, to gather from the names of other villages in the midst of which this one is included. In any case, the name Achoua is certainly of ancient provenance. The village which bears this name took the place, undoubtedly , of a village or small town with this same name.

(2) Guerin, 1875, p. 109

At 12:16 we climbed the hill on the top of which the village of Umm Safa lies (occupied by the village . . , literally) It contains 300 inhabitants. It must go back to an ancient site as is shown by the materials used in the building of some houses and several columnar sections scattered about the ground. A copious spring, called Ain Umm Safa, provides the villagers with water. They venerate, under a koubbeh, the remains of Nabi Haman.

Notes

I'm not sure I read Haman correctly. I can't seem to get my computer to zoom into the text. The name suggests of course a 'prophet' i.e. sheikh, of this name. Cf. On a Nabī Ḥānūn or local sheikh turned into a saint, in the village of Beit Ḥānūn, north of Gaza see Moshe Sharon, Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum Palaestinae (CIAP) Volume Two: B-C BRILL, 1997 p.98

On koubbeh:-

The name of the northernmost of this southern group is Koubbeh, probably from having a saint’s tomb with a dome on it, for that the name in Arabic implies.James Silk Buckingham Travels in Assyria, Media, and Persia, H. Colburn, 1830 p.316

I've bookmarked this, and look forward to being a tad more helpful than this pittance suggests. Cheers.Nishidani (talk) 08:47, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nishidani, thanks a lot! Also, at least on my Safari, there is are small - and + signs on the top right side of the page, which you can use to decrease/increase the font size. (The original size is always too small for me to read..) And I believe koubbeh is supposed to be covered under Qubba (though that article could do with some expansion.) And I am really not sure when it is called a Qubba, and when it is called a Maqam, Huldra (talk) 21:39, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's easily got round. Link Koubbeh to Qubba and add, 'what Guerin (1875) described as a.. I.e. 'They venerate the remains of Nabi Haman under what Guérin described as a Koubbeh.'Nishidani (talk) 10:58, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Desert Mounted Corps[edit]

Checking "what links here", brought me to Desert Mounted Corps, and the source there is Preston, 1921, p. 110, in

Preston, Richard Martin (1921). The Desert Mounted Corps: An Account of the Cavalry Operations in Palestine and Syria, 1917–1918. London: Constable. ISBN 9781146758833.

However, I cannot find anything about Umm Safa on that page ...or anywhere else in the book for that matter. What am I missing? Huldra (talk) 21:44, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I downloaded Preston's book and have read two chapters dealing with the south of that area so far. I note that he mentions a village called Suffa in the context of troop formations driving north from Beit Ur al-Tahta (p.114).

The brigade then attacked the village of Suffa, which was full of enemy troops, in order to try and relieve the pressure on the left of the Yeomanry Division, but the Turks were found in too great strength to be dislodged. Fortunately, however, they made no further attempt to penetrate through the gap, probably because they were really unaware of its existence. Positions on both sides were exceedingly ill-defined, owing to the impossibility of digging trenches in the solid rock, of which most of the hill and ridge tops were composed. Very heavy fighting continued throughout the day, but the enemy, though continually reinforced, was unable to break our line.

It seems close because the military account talks of the difficulty of hill terrain in that area. Nishidani (talk) 12:21, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, User:Nishidani, That is clearly Saffa, Ramallah; close by Beit Ur al-Tahta and Beit Ur al-Fauqa (which are all mentioned). One day I will sit down with maps...and go through all of those WWI articles and get the locations right.... I have done some (typically: lots of the linked names started out just as a redir to "Gaza" or "Judea")..but there are still tons of mistakes there ...even in articles which have GA status....oh, well, Huldra (talk) 22:00, 27 June 2018 (UTC) (PS, actually, it is normally not that difficult to decipher the name...almost all of the English literature of the time closely follow the names used on the SWP maps! Seriously...)[reply]

Yeah I twigged that would be the case, but being a dumbo here in the presence of a topological maestro (maestro) I trusted you'd figure it out. That's why, despite everything, I like Wikipedia. There are a lot of people who actually know the topics more than those who provide us with sources! Nishidani (talk) 07:31, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]