Talk:Beersheba

message: See discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#New "twist and turn" as "Hebrew alphabet" is switched to "Hebrew languages" concerning appropriate uses of the word "Hebrew" here. IZAK 05:33, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes of Hebrew definitions

message: The most common English spelling by non-Israelis, gets over 800,000 hits on Google. It's also more neutral toward the Arab name. Not used by any official Israeli sources.
#Support (fairly known city worldwide, IMO it warrants using the world spelling as opposed to the Israeli one). -- Ynhockey (Talk) 11:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Beersheba

message: The most common English spelling by Israelis, gets nearly 900,000 hits on Google.
*Support Only this one makes sense. The apostroph in Be'er is unnecessary. The fact that it's Sheva and not sheba should be obvious to anyone with a minimal knowledge of Hebrew or Israel. --Daniel575 21:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * This article is also aimed toward readers without a minimal knowledge of Hebrew or Israel. El_C 17:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I agree with this. It meets between the official name and the 'b' name. Of course links should link to the correct spelling page, whatever the vote decides, because 50% of people will definetly spell it incorrectly. Flymeoutofhere 12:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Beer Sheva

message: Since i don't know  english well enugth i hope some one could add this in a good english :
in Sports :
  Be'er sheva hold the second biggest Free style Wretling center (around 2000 people ) it is led by Leonid Shulman.
    The wresling scene is popular since many russian imegrants brought that from USSR.
    Most of the Russian kids  hi-school and school age 
      wore tought there this place took people from the poor areas of the city
    (D'alet nagal beka (at the creation area) ) and tought them for free.
be'er sheva sports centers :
   Hapoel be'er sheva (soccer)
   Macabi be'er sheva (soccer)
   Beitar Be'er sheva (soccer)
   Vasermil Stadium 
   Hapoel Be'er shva (greek - Romi wrestling ) 
   Macabi Be'er sheva (free style wrestling ) 
   AMI wrestling school (Alie'at megini israel ) - עליית מגיני ישראל -(The isreal imegrated defenders )
Acdemic : 
  Goverment college (מגללה למנהל)
  The technical college.
  The Isreally  airforce college (aka Techni ) 
  The art and performence college .
In Moncipal or explenation  :
   Beersheva has 17 neighborhoods (?) (shcunot) that are:
     The Old city , schuna alef , schuna beit , schuna gimel , schuna dalet , schuna hei , schuna vav , schuna tet , schuna tet , shuna  yud alef , Neot lon , Neve zeav , Nahal beka , Nahal ashan , ramot ,darom , Minal azrahi .
Historical places : 
  Govrer house , Beit Eshel , Turkish bridge , Abrham weal , Turkish train station , british policy station british grave yard .  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.176.11.177 (talk) 15:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff should be added

message: A paragraph about palestinian terrorism contains the following sentence: "In 1972 Beersheba was proclaimed by Checkaredo Vistella as the place of pig praising but is no longer used for such purposes."
Can anyone make sense of that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Robost (talk • contribs) 11:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ...pig praising? 

message: I'm not sure I would categorize the recent "explanation" for not having a Shechunat Zayin or a Shechunat Het as vandalism. When you think about it, this might well be true, but probably falls into the category of folklore. If the English were fixed up a bit, I think it could stay. The question is whether  it is based on any source known to man--Gilabrand 14:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shechunot 

message: Adding this kind of sentence in the middle of a history section is not the proper link procedure. --Gilabrand 15:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to diary 

message: Isbuschenskij, none? Savoia Cavalleria against a Soviet infantry regiment, winning and taking prisoner, in August 1942? Ah, ok, they weren't Anglo-Saxons, so they do not count... And still later: Soviet cavalry massacring the surrounded Germans at Korsun (1944) doesn't count?
Basil II 15:09, 5 November 2007 (CEST)
Quite right in fact. There is a common misconception, particularly by Australians, that the charge of the lighthorse was the last great cavalry charge in history. I think the lighthorse article itself says it was the last great cavalry charge in british history. In fact, the lighthorse are described by its own article as "cavalry and mounted infantry". The LAST cavalry charge was by Ukrainians,yes? Paul Roberton (talk) 07:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Last successful cavalry charge"... pff

message: Hi - I think this article is really getting close to GA status. If there are editors who are knowledgable on the city who are willing then I am happy to help, although really dont know much about the city.--Flymeoutofhere (talk) 20:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beersheba GA 

message: Refactored from page top, please put new threads at the bottom. Franamax (talk) 22:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look at this. If you managed to upload an image, there should be an Image:(name) that you can put in. Franamax (talk) 22:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like you've uploaded it onto the he:wiki. You would need to upload it to Commons in order to be able to use it here at English Wikipedia. However, the existing image in our article looks to me to be of better quality, and I'm not sure what your proposed image would add. Is there something notable in your image? Otherwise, I would recommend we keep the image that's already there. Franamax (talk) 22:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: If someone mind

message: In the back and forth between the ip and Chagai, a reference was screwed up. The last reference in the Biblical era section was messed up. The tag currently reads  where it should read  (look at the code and replace the quot; with the ampersand before it with ") Could somebody please fix this? nableezy - 22:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ref error 

message: This is what Morris writes:The conquest was accompanied by the execution of a handful of Egyptian POWs, and wholesale looting by individuals and military units.In Beersheba, the IDF had captured about 120 Egyptian soldiers. The remaining population, some 200 adult males and 150 women and children, were temporarily housed in the town's police fort. A few days later, apparently on 25 October, the women and children, 'together with several dozen old men and cripples', were trucked to the border with Gaza and shoved across. The Egyptian PoWs were sent to prisoner of war camps in the north and the remaining able-bodied adult males, about 120 in number, were put to work in cleaning and other menial chores. They were treated like POWs and housed in the mosque. Complaints reached IDF\GS that they were supplying the Egyptian Army with intelligence. Yadin ordered that they be removed from Beersheba. Some were apparently transferred to POW camps and others to Egyptian-held Majdal or Gaza. Ben Gurian and Shafrir, the Custodian of Absentees Property, were greatly annoyed by the looting.Gilabrand changed "wholesale looting" to "instances of looting" where the text clearly supports "wholesale looting". She also changed "the women, children, disabled, and elderly were expelled by truck and placed over the Gaza border" to "they were transported over the Gaza border by truck", where "they" also refers to the Palestinian adult males, when the text clearly supports the original wording and contradicts her favored phrasing. The one part of what she removed that is not supported by this source is "one woman was shot and killed". I will keep that out, but the rest of this is simply whitewashing what happened. The source clearly supports the original text and I have restored it. nableezy - 20:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently the source is not saying either of what your edits said. Please refrain from personal interpretations, especially on controversial topics (this goes to both editors). In addition, I am sure there are better sources dealing with the situation in Beersheba in 1948 than Morris's Revisited. In fact, Morris's own 1948 is probably a better source to use (since it discusses the war in general, not specifically the refugee aspect), but there are others. —Ynhockey (Talk) 04:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Besides the woman being shot, which I did not notice the first time I reverted, what in the last edit is not in the source? nableezy - 05:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  1948 

message: i want to know please. פארוק (talk) 05:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Per past consensus on this page. —Ynhockey (Talk) 08:01, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why '''Beersheba''' and not '''Beer Sheba'''  ?   

message: The article should be titled Be'er Sheva. All other spellings to redirect to Be'er Sheva, including the anglicized and incorrect Beersheba.
Reasons:
1) This may be Wikipedia English but all of Wikipedia revolves around the idea that one Must Not Be A Dick. In this case, the dick in question is anglicization.
2) If Wikipedia's purpose is education, calling the place Beersheba is just plain factually incorrect. If other spellings of the name redirect to Be'er Sheva, that IS education.
And yes, I know it's still called Beersheba in printed encyclopedias, atlases, etc. But this is not a printed book. That's the grandest and best thing about Wikipedia: it can be almost instantly edited to reflect any significant change, or event.
The locals have called the place Be'er Sheva since the 10th century BCE, and who are we as English speakers to call it by any other name? After all, it's not very hard to say.
Before anyone objects, ask yourself first if you're just being stubborn. Time for all of us English-first-language speakers to quit mangling place names just to suit ourselves.41.174.20.147 (talk) 00:12, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The above by me. Hi. (exits stage left)NM 75 (talk) 01:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I fully agree. I honestly can't understand why it hasn't been changed yet.--RM (Be my friend) 18:30, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that many people feel this way. Please open a move request. —Ynhockey (Talk) 21:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name, again. Please give due consideration 

message: I know that this may lie outside of our guidelines for evaluating place names, but this is my foremost concern nonetheless. I have reviewed a map of the Partition Plan for Palestine and surmised that the city appears to lie on the Palestinian side of the border. If the current status of the city is contested, I would support the current page name. If the current status of the city is not contested, I would support a shift towards the official name. I have just expanded a bio by someone who grew up there, and he refers to the city as "Beer Sheva" (no apostrophe, no dash). But is the territory contested or uncontested? ClaudeReigns (talk) 20:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The territory is not contested and the article title is the result of past consensus. Feel free to start a new discussion on the article title, preferably as a move request. —Ynhockey (Talk) 21:08, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  A question in general and vis-a-vis article name 

message: A user has been blanking a section about Beersheba in the Israelite period. He states that it's biblical/religious, even though it's actually not sourced to the Bible, and in any case any biblical references are qualified. I therefore completely don't understand the rationale for the blanking. If there's a specific problem with the information, it should be changed but not entirely removed. —Ynhockey (Talk) 07:28, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with Ynhockey.  The Bible says a lot about Beersheba, Beersheba has everything to do with the Bible, but this particular user has been known for years to have an issue with any such information being presented or made available to readers researching biblical topics like Beersheba.  So I suspect it isn't a "rationale" so much as a "bias". Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 11:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  While I agree that relevant material should be fixed rather than blanked, it is indeed very poor.  The JP article given as source for the first paragraph is entirely useless.  It is just an unscientific recount of biblical myths written by a tour guide with a conflict of interest. The paragraph sourced to it contradicts the properly sourced science in the previous section (which should be expanded).  As a start, I removed that paragraph and reversed the order of the other two. Zerotalk 12:36, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Your description of the Biblical accounts as "myths" will be offensive to many. A couple years ago, it was being argued that the definition of the word "myth" should be extended to any account of the creation of the world.  Now a couple years later suddenly we have editors who become so rabid when they see any mention of the Bible that the entire book is to be regarded only as a "myth". Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 12:44, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for your views.  Wikipedia has a strong bias in favor of academic sources for history.  That is how it should be.  If archaeology says Beersheba was founded 6000 years ago and the bible says it was founded 4000 years ago, archaeology wins. Zerotalk 13:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, that's not how it should be.  The overwhelming view of editors is that wikipedia should not have any bias, and should treat all views of history as neutral. Academics lie for bigoted reasons, and then the debate opens on "who is a "true" academic? OUR academics, or YOUR academics?".  TGeorgescu's opinion has been widely contested by numerous long term editors who hold NPOV as a cornerstone policy.. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 13:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you want to use the bible as a reliable source of history, present your case at WP:RSN.  You won't succeed; it's been tried before. A better use of your time would be to read WP:RS to see how lack of bias is not the same as treating all sources equally. Zerotalk 14:11, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  You should know that's not at all what I'm saying.  Rather, I'm saying the Bible is a reliable source for what the Bible says, on hundreds of Bible-related articles. We should not endorse anyone's view of history, but we should mention what the various competing views of history are. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 14:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

text: @Zero0000 The section has serious problems about historical reliability and therefore accuracy. The Bible is not a reliable source for obvious reasons (which means any Bible references have no place in a section about actual history), and the source references given in the section seemed rather religion-driven as well. Are there no seriously reliable archaeological sources? Excavation reports published by universities? The underlying problem is that historical Israelites have rather little to do with biblical Israelites, so naming the section "Israelite era" will lead many readers to assume the biblical stories had any merit. Anything the Bible assigns to before circa 850BCE (before the Divided Monarchy) is entirely mythical, and the rest is a religious interpretation of some historical events and some anekdotes taht may or may not have any historical basis at all. ♆ CUSH ♆ 12:56, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are indeed scientific sources and I just spent the past 30 minutes collecting some of them.  However, the fact that Beersheba is mentioned in the bible is noteworthy and should be mentioned.  Provided the biblical account is not presented as fact, this is not a problem. One way to make it clearer would be to have a "Beersheba in the Bible" section which is not in sequence with the history sections. Zerotalk 13:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing Israelite period 

message: Metrop. rings table: any reason for the different font sizes? Looks messy. Tony (talk)  06:40, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird font sizes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Beersheba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121009234550/http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2002/7/Sounds%20from%20the%20South, to http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2002/7/Sounds%20from%20the%20South,
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081011075109/http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/758461.html to http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/758461.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:11, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Zero and Huldra enforce a change done by an IP that changed Hebrew to Arabic in Etymology section, which I believe to be wrong.
The city name predate Arabic and already shown in biblical references (book of Gensiss), and even during the times of St. Jerome the name Beersheba existed. Britanica mention the etymology to be Hebrew or Canaanite languages , several scholars also mention the Hebrew reasons for the name  . Firestone adds the Islmaic explantation (when also mentioning that the bible is attributed to Hebrew)  even The ottoman resarches mention Hebrew as the source of the name  
It is one thing to add Arabic or Canaanite explanations to the existing hebrew name , but removing Hebrew and replacing it with Arabic is pure push of POV 37.19.119.150 (talk) 07:26, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody removed the Hebrew etymology.  Now it is there twice, in adjacent paragraphs. You replaced the Arabic meaning by a second description of the Hebrew meaning. Zerotalk 08:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:   The only place that mention the Hebrew language (now) as the source for the name is the Etymology section.37.19.119.52 (talk) 11:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:   The paragraph before the one you inserted is about the Hebrew etymology.  It isn't written very well but you are welcome to rewrite it and provide sources.  You are not entitled to remove the Arabic meaning.  This place was primarily Arab for a thousand years and the name has meaning in Arabic even if it was derived from the Hebrew name. Zerotalk 12:39, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:   as I said the previous paragraph does not mention Hebrew at all but talk about voguly about the origin, the city held that name during the Roman eta (at least int the book I'm reading now with a different spelling as BeroSaba) 
  There are several etymologies for the origin of the name "Beersheba." The oath of Abraham and Abimelech (well of the oath) is the one stated in Gen. 21:31. Others include the seven wells dug by Isaac (seven wells) though only three or four have been identified; the oath of Isaac and Abimelech (well of the oath in Gen. 26:33); the seven lambs that sealed Abraham and Abimelech's oath (well of the seven). 
That does not mention the hebrew language at all , now compare that to what I compared in Britinca :
  Beersheba is first mentioned as the site where Abraham, founder of the Jewish people, made a covenant with the Philistine king Abimelech of Gerar (Genesis 21). Isaac and Jacob, the other patriarchs, also lived there (Genesis 26, 28, 46). The name seems to be a Hebrew play on words—beʾer “well”; shevaʿ “oath,” or “seven” (referring to the seven lambs of Genesis 21)—though a Canaanite origin has also been suggested.  
Britanica is clear about the languages, wikipedia on the other hand is not.
In addition, I believe that this article is in a very poor state, just compare it (as I did using Google translate) to the Hebrew and Russian versions, this article make it look as if for more then a thousand years the city didn't exist (under the Arab rule and before the Iron age and neither khirbat meter or Zfady and batter are not even mentioned) 
What I'm missing here are elements such as beersheba region and history, I belive at least some of that info should exist on this page37.19.119.52 (talk) 13:43, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

text: Everyone knows the Bible was written in Hebrew, but you are welcome to modify that paragraph to mention Hebrew explicitly. You haven't given a reason for deleting the mention of Arabic, please put it back. Zerotalk 22:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:   Perhaps instead of assuming what "Everyone" know wikipedia should provide related hard fact facts instead ?. At least some of the later parts of the hebrew Bible had been written in Aramaic, at least some of the Deuterocanonical books had been preserved based on the Greek translation only - so can you honestly say that the common reader will know in what language a specific book had been written ?. Your comment is striking given that under most of the Arab period the place was deserted and only the location had preserved it's name  under the same logic you should have asked to have the Ottoman-Turkish name Birüsseb ,why not demand Greek and Persian etymology. Why don't you demand the Aramaic "Bira" (בִּירָא) (well) and Sheva (Seven) in the etymology as well (I know it wrong because similarly to Arabic the language arrived few hounded years after the name already existed) ?
I really don't understand why the Bible is taken as the primary encyclopedic source for the Etymology of this place - surely the correct way is to show what the words mean (and note the history) and then discuss the Biblical tale, not treat the Bible as a definitive source. Religious literalists may want to do that, Wikipedia should not, surely?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.60.76.28 (talk) 18:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: Please separate the Israelite section to biblical and archaeological sections37.19.119.150 (talk) 07:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bible section instead of Israelite section 

message: The existing city logo is incorrect , the logo presented here is the old 1972 log.
the current logo is https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:Beer_Sheva_New_Logo_2012.svg 37.19.119.52 (talk) 12:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  city logo 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Beersheba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081011075109/http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/758461.html to http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/758461.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:40, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Beersheba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100914010915/http://www.ims.gov.il:80/IMS/CLIMATE/LongTermInfo to http://ims.gov.il/IMS/CLIMATE/LongTermInfo
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130618145923/http://www.ims.gov.il:80/IMS/CLIMATE/ClimaticAtlas/TempNormals.htm to http://www.ims.gov.il/IMS/CLIMATE/ClimaticAtlas/TempNormals.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110925080227/http://www.ims.gov.il:80/IMS/CLIMATE/ClimaticAtlas/RainNormals.htm to http://www.ims.gov.il/IMS/CLIMATE/ClimaticAtlas/RainNormals.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:37, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Beersheba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140720232249/http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/5FBCED3943293BBD0525656900654AA6 to http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/5FBCED3943293BBD0525656900654AA6
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://ims.gov.il/IMS/CLIMATE/LongTermInfo
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ims.gov.il/IMS/CLIMATE/ClimaticAtlas/TempNormals.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ims.gov.il/IMS/CLIMATE/ClimaticAtlas/RainNormals.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160130063638/http://www.ims.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/163FFF5E-ACA3-403F-91AF-5FFA16ED9297/0/TemperatureStation.pdf to http://www.ims.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/163FFF5E-ACA3-403F-91AF-5FFA16ED9297/0/TemperatureStation.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110813132548/http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304840270&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304840270&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0%2C7340%2CL-3520156%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120213132906/http://www.beer-sheva.muni.il/openning.asp?Lang=1 to http://www.beer-sheva.muni.il/openning.asp?Lang=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090719003816/http://www.lyon.fr/vdl/sections/en/villes_partenaires/villes_partenaires_2/?aIndex=1 to http://www.lyon.fr/vdl/sections/en/villes_partenaires/villes_partenaires_2/?aIndex=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080406233300/http://web.bgu.ac.il/Eng/home/ to http://web.bgu.ac.il/Eng/Home/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070824023021/http://www.aliciapatterson.org/APF001971/Downie/Downie04/Downie04.html to http://www.aliciapatterson.org/APF001971/Downie/Downie04/Downie04.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: If one goes to the Wikipedia homepage and types in "Beersheba", the link that appears with the photo is captioned "Beersheba city in the Negev desert of southern Palestine".  I am not familiar with where that entry is logged for purposes of correction, but would request that it be corrected.One-Off Contributor (talk) 05:29, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction of Search Link 

message: This article says that the original rectangular grid was laid out in 1900, with citation to the Director of the Beersheba Municipal Museum. This article appears to say that the grid was laid out in 1915, which no citation given.  Both are referring to the same event since they both indicate the grid was the work of a Swiss and a German architect. The grid was certainly there by 1917, per WW1 aerial photos. Can anyone find further evidence? Zerotalk 11:33, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No matter; I found good sources and will edit. Zerotalk 03:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source discrepancy 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Beersheba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090221004609/http://duns100.dundb.co.il/2007/vp/600143622/index.asp to http://duns100.dundb.co.il/2007/vp/600143622/index.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090221005430/http://duns100.dundb.co.il/companies/600143622/index.asp to http://duns100.dundb.co.il/companies/600143622/index.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Beersheba. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121105032445/http://globaltravelerusa.com/mag/beer-sheva-desert-bloom to http://globaltravelerusa.com/mag/beer-sheva-desert-bloom
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130516073356/http://www.hageula.com/news/israel/6890.html to http://www.hageula.com/news/israel/6890.html
*Added  tag to http://highbeam.com/doc/1P1-103365216.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A user reinserted this sentence about the Bedouin population of Beersheba, apparently sourced to a book by Ian Lustick. Unfortunately I don't have access to this book, but I believe that the statement is a misinterpretation by the Wikipedian in question of the source. Either that or the source is incorrect. The statement contains two claims which are fundamentally impossible:
* That 11,000 Bedouins were removed from Beersheba: cannot be true because Beersheba did not have 11,000 residents before the war, not to mention after it when most residents were gone
* That they were concentrated on 10% of their ancestral lands: considering Beersheba's size was about 1 km2 at the time, that means they were concentrated post-war at an incredible density of 110,000 people per square kilometer.
Naturally both statements are nonsensical where Beersheba is concerned. However, they make a lot more sense when discussing the entire Negev, and the issues are covered in the Negev Bedouin article. While one could argue about whether the Negev Bedouin were forcibly removed or "concentrated" anywhere, it is at least a plausible claim. In addition, Beersheba was a town not exclusively populated by Bedouin.
If someone has access to the source, please post a full quote here. Additional input is welcome. —Ynhockey (Talk) 07:22, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: "In addition, the 11,000 Bedouin remaining in the Beersheba area were forcibly concentrated into reserves representing 10 percent of their ancestral lands." Lustick's statement is true and well documented in other sources, but "in the Beersheba area" should not be translated into "in Beersheba".  The extent to which this article should cover the surrounding region can be debated. Zerotalk 08:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, if you're talking about the entire Negev, at least the statement isn't complete nonsense (even just the northern Negev). However, it's not relevant to this article, just like you don't talk about the Little Triangle in the Haifa article for example. They are subjects related so indirectly that it would be doing a disservice to the readers to lump them together. Even more so the specific edit I pointed to, which specifically talks about the city of Beersheba. —Ynhockey (Talk) 09:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Lustick's work can be accessed here. Al-Andalusi (talk) 20:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the link. It's exactly as I said—when you talk about the "Beersheba area", meaning the entire Negev desert in Israel, the statement makes some sense; but it's not relevant to the article. It's covered more in-depth in other articles anyway, with sources that elaborate more on the distribution, who was settled where, etc. —Ynhockey (Talk) 08:33, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence about Bedouins 

message: The Wikipedia page "Biblical archeology" lists time periods studied as part of biblical archeology, which go back as far as 8500 BCE in the Levant. Thus, the excavated tell, which is linked by most archeologists to the town described in the Bible, can be accurately described as being from the biblical period. Note that describing the town as being from the biblical period is not the same as describing it is as an Israelite town for the entire period – in fact, in the first mentions of Beersheba in the biblical narrative, the Israelite people don't even exist yet. 
It is likely that a significant fraction of the page views are drawn here by Beersheba's biblical connections. For example, the number of views of Beersheba is greater than the number of views of Holon  even though they have similar populations, and I suspect the difference is mainly driven by the biblical connection. If you want a RfC on this, I am willing to put something together. OtterAM (talk) 22:51, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biblical archeology clarification 

message: I know we discussed this before, but there is no reason to keep the old name and one that is more academic or ancient. The most recent and one that is used by most sources is Be'er Sheva, even EB says that Be'er Sheva is an alternate spelling and if you look at the city's website, it uses Be'er Sheva, the external references section mostly has Be'er Sheva sites and when that is the COMMON spelling, it doesn't make sense to use an obsolete spelling and pronunciation that nobody uses. Just today CNN put out an article with Be'er Sheva as a spelling:  I don't think we need an RM but let's have a discussion and see if consensus changed because in my mind it really doesn't make sense that our title doesn't reflect reality and what is on the ground. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Beersheba continues to be commonly used in reliable sources. Eg, NYTimes, Jerusalem Post, Times of Israel. Think you need more evidence to substantiate that Be'er Sheva is the common name. nableezy - 18:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ,  the municipality itself calls it Be'er Sheva. When we have multiple RS's and many of them calling it Be'er Sheva, and the city itself calls it Be'er Sheva, we shouldn't continue to use such an old and archaic spelling. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: We go by common English name, not what it calls itself. I just posted several reliable sources that refer to it, in English, as Beersheba. Among them two English papers from Israel. That sorta disproves old and archaic. nableezy - 19:52, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , Note how the Jpost while using Beersheba, has Be'er Sheva in parentheses. . There is no reason to use a spelling that makes no sense. Sir Joseph (talk) 22:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, note that it primarily uses Beersheba and also shows another alternate name exists. We do the same here, showing Be'er Sheva as the Hebrew pronunciation and transliteration. But the English name is determined by usage in reliable sources, and to me so far it seems like they use Beersheba. I dont quite get what you mean by no reason to use a spelling that makes no sense, the sources that use that spelling is the reason to use that spelling. nableezy - 22:18, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  English Haaretz regularly uses both, and also "Beer Sheba", even in the same article. By the way, it makes so sense to say that a name makes no sense. Names are just names. The only issue here is what the common English name is. Zerotalk 03:42, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title should really be changed. 

message: See the discussion started at Talk:Tel Be'er Sheva#Which periods are documented?, but maybe it should be moved here. This town is an Ottoman creation from 1900. Biblical Bersheba was kilometres east of the modern Turkish town. Where was Beersheba after the Iron Age, in the Persian to Byzantine periods? (Was there one during the Early Muslim period?) We already have two different locations using basically the same name. Were there more? Human settlements do tend to migrate, taking along their name.
Rather than squabbling about the Anglicisation of the name, deal with the DEFINITION and corresponding LOCATION(S) first. English Beersheba refers primarily to the biblical site and WWI events.
Beware: biblical Hebrew apparently pronounced vav as B, Modern Hebrew uses V, see Abib-Aviv. This would mean that Beersheba might be more authentic than Be'er Sheva re. the  biblical site. This says nothing yet about the Israeli city. Drop ideology and "common sense" (= how we were conditioned to see things) and look for a scientific, nuanced approach. Arminden (talk) 16:34, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Get a DEFINITION first; then the LOCATIONS 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:54, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I know we discussed this before, but there is no reason to keep the old name and one that is more academic or ancient. The most recent and one that is used by most sources is Be'er Sheva, even EB says that Be'er Sheva is an alternate spelling and if you look at the city's website, it uses Be'er Sheva, the external references section mostly has Be'er Sheva sites and when that is the COMMON spelling, it doesn't make sense to use an obsolete spelling and pronunciation that nobody uses. Just today CNN put out an article with Be'er Sheva as a spelling:  I don't think we need an RM but let's have a discussion and see if consensus changed because in my mind it really doesn't make sense that our title doesn't reflect reality and what is on the ground. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Beersheba continues to be commonly used in reliable sources. Eg, NYTimes, Jerusalem Post, Times of Israel. Think you need more evidence to substantiate that Be'er Sheva is the common name. nableezy - 18:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ,  the municipality itself calls it Be'er Sheva. When we have multiple RS's and many of them calling it Be'er Sheva, and the city itself calls it Be'er Sheva, we shouldn't continue to use such an old and archaic spelling. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: We go by common English name, not what it calls itself. I just posted several reliable sources that refer to it, in English, as Beersheba. Among them two English papers from Israel. That sorta disproves old and archaic. nableezy - 19:52, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , Note how the Jpost while using Beersheba, has Be'er Sheva in parentheses. . There is no reason to use a spelling that makes no sense. Sir Joseph (talk) 22:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, note that it primarily uses Beersheba and also shows another alternate name exists. We do the same here, showing Be'er Sheva as the Hebrew pronunciation and transliteration. But the English name is determined by usage in reliable sources, and to me so far it seems like they use Beersheba. I dont quite get what you mean by no reason to use a spelling that makes no sense, the sources that use that spelling is the reason to use that spelling. nableezy - 22:18, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  English Haaretz regularly uses both, and also "Beer Sheba", even in the same article. By the way, it makes so sense to say that a name makes no sense. Names are just names. The only issue here is what the common English name is. Zerotalk 03:42, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

text:  I am 100% with changing the title to Beer Sheva. The situation seems to have evolved since the previous discussions - Google lists 3.43 million results in English for Beer Sheva (the spelling used officially by the city itself, by the way: https://www.beer-sheva.muni.il/ ) against 2.7 million for Beersheba. At the very least both should be in black in the lead. Dan Palraz (talk) 19:14, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title should really be changed. 

message: Could someone please manually undo the changes made to the table by Quackslikeaduck on March 11, 2017? Until then the table showed the breakdown of the metro population correctly, but now includes what is termed the "outer ring" twice, adding in the figures for its 3 subcomponents along with their subtotal to create total metro population figures way beyond the actual sourced figures. 176.228.195.157 (talk) 13:53, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographics