Talk:Herod the Great

message: WP:RS/AC does apply, claim stays at it was in the stable version. tgeorgescu (talk)  12:16, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war 

message: I searched the book on Google, it does not seem to exist. No luck either for the names of the author + the word Bible. tgeorgescu (talk)  06:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: "the book"? 2603:6080:21F0:6140:D0F0:571B:2B23:BC18 (talk) 21:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: See . Coming back to what I said, I can now find that book at , but there still absolutely no indication that it would be WP:RS. tgeorgescu (talk)  21:50, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not RS 

message: Does it really make sense to call him "Herod I" when only one king named just "Herod" ruled the kingdom? I am aware that he had a son who we have indexed as Herod II, but seeing as Herod II never held any political power or office, it seems a bit redundant to qualify Herod as 'the first'. "Herod the Great" would hypothetically disambiguate which Herod is being referred to just as much as "Herod I" does. Emolu (talk) 15:21, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the Herod series is a bit muddled and confusing, but both the Jewish Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Judaica have Herod entered as Herod I, so it is hard to right off as an established name. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Herod I, the Great" 

message: I've started untangling and organizing the citations and references of this article, it needs some TLC. Should the 'works cited' section be divided into primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, as is already partially done? Remsense聊 20:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense to me.--Ermenrich (talk) 21:50, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: The Talmud (Bava Batra 3b -4a) talks at length about Herod's origins as a slave, his rise to power, discussion with the sage Baba ben Buta and  subsequent construction of the Second Temple. Perhaps that should be included here? Aaron Shalom Jonas (talk) 00:44, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Herod in the talmud 

message: Relying on Strabo (I have not seen any other reasoning in the sources) is problematic because his writings about what happened in Judea include errors. He calls Hyrcanus II by the name "Herodes" and thinks that King Herod was his descendant and was also a high priest (Geographica, book 16, chapter 2, section 46). He thinks that Jews (Geography, same chapter) avoid eating meat and calls Shabbat (and not Yom Kippur) the "fasting day" (Geography, same chapter). I can add more. Contrary to his words, the Adomites were a Semitic people who lived before the arrival of the Nebatim. They maintained relations with the Nabateans and the Jews with whom they lived in the neighborhood and in Idumea they converted in the days of Yochanan Hyrcanus I. By the way, Herod's biographer of Damascus spread another story about Herod's ancestors that Josephus rejected. It is better to stay with the reference to the nearest dynasty. Therefore, I performed a removal. --שמי (2023) (talk) 13:27, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Strabo

message: Mainstream historians do have a secular viewpoint, unless expressly indicated otherwise. This includes mainstream Bible professors. Since mainstream history, including history of the Bible and Christianity, is not a sectarian discipline. Mainstream Bible scholars do not cater to true believers. tgeorgescu (talk)  04:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a question of catering to anyone's particular beliefs. The only issue is academic/journalistic honesty. Making a statement that includes the claim "most ____" should be baked up by authority that supports the claim. The cite included here does not support that claim.  At best, to be in agreement with the cited authority, the article should say, "some" -- but it's clear that this page is being controlled by true believers of a different sort. Btsom (talk) 19:28, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Btsom, while I agree that "most experts" requires a specific citation, you needn't cast aspersions of bad faith. — Remsense诉 19:32, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It is cited to a specific citation. It also doesn't say "most experts", it says "most Herod biographers." The text cited also says "and probably most Biblical scholars", but that keeps getting removed by people who dislike the word "probably."--Ermenrich (talk) 21:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Ermenrich, I just meant "most experts" statements in general, per WP:RS/AC. Apologies for not being adequately clear. — Remsense诉 22:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for the confusion .—Ermenrich (talk) 22:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secular viewpoint 

message: The IP is right,  is highly spurious information. tgeorgescu (talk)  01:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: The sarcophagus pictured appears to be tan, and not shattered.  Herod's sarcophagus is purplish red and fragmented.  Is this the true sarcophagus pictured? Tnyttym (talk) 04:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  sarcophagus