Talk:Caleb

message: IMO, this should be divided into at least two or maybe three articles: one for the name itself, a second for the biblical Calebs, with the Caleb of the Quran either appended to the latter or in a third article. Opinions?
: Agree. There's too much that can be added to the individuals to fit in a combined article as it currently stands. — al-Shimoni (talk) 21:41, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. This article, which should firstly be about the name, instead deals exhaustively with Judaic lore. Unacceptable.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niffe (talk • contribs) 05:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree.  The article is rather short as it is.  But it might be renamed:  Caleb in the Bible.  This is not "Judaic lore," as it is not about a Caleb in the Talmud nor in any distinctive Jewish work (in the moderjgdfsdufpisduhfpiusdhfpiughdfiuhpsiudfhpisudfhpiudhfpgihsdpifuhgdble character.  Since Judaism as we know it today is not the religion of the Tanach, but of the Talmud (so far as it is "orthodox") and of Jewish culture developed over thousands of years, IMHO this treatise on Caleb does not come under "judasim."   Now if Caleb does have some significant role in the Talmud and in Jewish culture, that should be elucidated -- or conversely, if Caleb has been neglected in Jewish culture, that also might be mentioned.  (EnochBethany (talk) 21:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split? 

message: Article says: "Perhaps the name Kenizzite in his case derives from some ancestral Judean family head named Kenaz, even as Caleb’s brother was so named (Joshua 15:17; Judges 1:13; 1 Chronicles 4:13)."  Could the writer clarify what he means?  Are you saying that Othniel was named for some ancestral Othniel?  Are you saying that if Caleb is a Kenizzite, the Kenaz from whom he came could be a different Kenaz for any other Kenaz in the Bible? (EnochBethany (talk) 18:29, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: The Kennizite Lowpothesis

message: <<According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, "since 'Caleb' signifies dog, it has been thought that the dog was the totem of [Caleb's] clan".[1] The New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance states that keleb is of "uncertain derivation".[2]>>
That's what the article says right now. It could be deceptive to anyone who doesn't read Hebrew. What it looks like those two sentences are saying is that the Jewish Encyclopedia identifies "Caleb" as meaning "dog," but that the NAS Concordance does not know the meaning of Caleb.
But here's what actually going on. Under it's entry for the Hebrew kaleb, the NAS Concordance says that kaleb (the name Caleb) is related to keleb, meaning dog. Then, under its entry for keleb it says the derivation is uncertain. So the NAS does have a position on the origin of the name Caleb, it just doesn't have a position on where the word keleb comes from in the first place.
Just like it's my position that Phife Dawg's stage name was from the word for "dog", but I have no information on where the word "dog" itself comes from. Me and the NAS Concordance are in the same boat here.Alephb (talk) 00:42, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Uncertain Derivation" 

message: Quranic reference: unsourced, no visible connection to Caleb in given quotes. Made up? The theory of some specific theologian or school? First & foremost: is there a Caleb figure in Islamic tradition? What is his name in Arabic?
Unacceptable as part of the article as it is now. Moved the material over here for possible reuse if a sourced comment can be found that convincingly supports a connection of the verses to Caleb in Islamic thought.
;Quranic reference to Joshua and his men
It is considered that Caleb is alluded to in the 5th Surah of the Quran (5:20-26). The two men alluded to here are Caleb and Joshua:
 And when Moses said to his people: O my people, remember the favour of Allah to you when He raised prophets among you and made you kings and gave you what He gave not to any other of the nations. 
 O my people, enter the Holy Land which Allah has ordained for you and turn not your backs, for then you will turn back losers. 
 They said: O Moses, therein are a powerful people, and we shall not enter it until they go out from it; if they go out from it, then surely we will enter. 
 Two men of those who feared, on whom Allah had bestowed a favour, said: Enter upon them by the gate, for when you enter it you will surely be victorious; and put your trust in Allah, if you are believers. 
 They said: O Moses, we will never enter it so long as they are in it; go therefore thou and thy Lord, and fight; surely here we sit. 
 He said: My Lord, I have control of none but my own self and my brother; so distinguish between us and the transgressing people. 
 He said: It will surely be forbidden to them for forty years -- they will wander about in the land. So grieve not for the transgressing people.Maulana Muhammad Ali, The Holy Qur'an (1917).
 Arminden (talk) 10:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Koran: unrelated & unsourced material 

message: I have started a discussion here. Arminden (talk) 19:14, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The three "tombs" in Kifl Haris: fishy 

message: قَالَ رَجُلَانِ مِنَ الَّذِينَ يَخَافُونَ أَنْعَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمَا ادْخُلُوا عَلَيْهِمُ الْبَابَ فَإِذَا دَخَلْتُمُوهُ فَإِنَّكُمْ غَالِبُونَ ۚ وَعَلَى اللَّهِ فَتَوَكَّلُوا إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ
5 : 23 (Thereupon) two men (- Joshua and Caleb) from among those who feared (their Lord) and on whom Allâh had bestowed His blessings said, ‘Enter the gate (of the city advancing) against them, for when once you have entered it you shall surely be victorious, and in Allâh you should put your trust when you are believers (in Him).’ 2601:642:4301:6AD0:9DD0:4B30:4A7B:9AA3 (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see above, at "Koran: unrelated & unsourced material": you have added the name between brackets, it's not in the Surah, and have offered no source. Arminden (talk) 04:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quran refers to Caleb as below: 

message: Can't anyone block this infantile idiot? If he were at least funny, but no such hope. No IQ patrol around? Arminden (talk) 19:26, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: StAnselm (talk) 20:11, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Hi . I see no reason to accept your massive interventions for which you didn't offer any explanation, not here and not even as an edit summary. Unsourced material might well be correct and valuable (useful to the reader), as seems to be the case here. I can easily imagine that it's for instance based on the Hebrew (heWiki) article, translated but without the sources, or in the case of the lead, re-edited many times, with some sources lost in the process, but in no way wrong or invalid. Please see this work here as an imperfect, but useful team effort, where eliminating large amounts of info with no explanation is not acceptable. Btw, if your problem is with unsourced material: your edit in the lead was totally unsourced as well. So you see...
Here is to a future good cooperation! Cheers, Arminden (talk) 03:12, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unexplained substantial removals of material