Talk:Yibna

message: Just to clarify my edit: the village was not taken during Operation Barak, but rather in June 1948, well after Operation Barak ended. An earlier attempt to take the village was done in preparation for Operation Pleshet, which is also well after Operation Barak. —Ynhockey (Talk) 10:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look at the Operation Barak page, you will see otherwise.--Sreifa (talk) 05:52, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The source for the information in that article is unclear, and also there are numerous sources that clearly state that Yibna was still in Arab hands when the Egyptians invaded. Yibna was captured after a short fight on June 4, 1948, just after Operation Pleshet (as, ironically, the Operation Barak article states). If you are interested, I can send you some relevant materials. I believe the confusion stems from the vague guidelines of Operation Barak's objectives—therefore, some sources seem to consider Operation Barak to be an umbrella term for all Givati military action from May to June 11, 1948. This is incorrect, and there are a number of sources that define Operation Barak lasting between May 4 and May 15, 1948. —Ynhockey (Talk) 19:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

text:  Morris (p259) says June 5.  Zerotalk 13:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that is probably more accurate. The operation started in the evening of June 4 and ended at daytime on June 5. The only shots that were fired between Israelis and Arabs were during the night of June 4–5, although there was a friendly fire incident when the Irgun battalion (57th) believed the other battalion to be Arabs (but no one was hurt). Source: Ayalon, Givati Against the Egyptian Invader, pp. 146–147. —Ynhockey (Talk) 20:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operation Barak 

message: * After the debate above regarding "Operation Barak", the end-result is that there is NOTHING in this entry about the time-period between 1946 and "after" 1948. Can anyone knowledgeable fill in this period??
* Also why is there NO mention of the Crusader period, which obviously happened between the 9th century and the next date mentioned 1596...
Shmuel A. Kam (talk) 09:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Old Yavne.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: A railway line runs adjacent to the village on the south and east.  I think is a part of the Lyyda-Rafa track built by the British in 1918, but I don't have a good source.  If you have a good source, please add it and delete the current mention of railways. Zerotalk 16:26, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  railway 

message: This article needs to be expanded, since it does not mention the city's pre-Arab history. There is much that can be added in this area. Davidbena (talk) 17:12, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The City's pre-Arab History is Missing 

message: On 27 January 2021, unilateral action was taken to remove from this article two sections which briefly covered the town's Roman, Grecian and Jewish history, as shown here in this edit. While there can be no doubt that the main emphasis is on the town's more recent Arab history, is there no place to add in this article a brief account of the site's more ancient history? Comments are welcome here, so as to reach a consensus.Davidbena (talk) 23:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. This site is also known as Tel Yavne and the history should cover all periods of the site. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:35, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the Greco-Roman history should be here ... ridiculously obviously. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:52, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brief mention of Roman, Grecian and Jewish history 

message: I have a naming query or something of an RM prelim if you like in that I can't help wonder if this page might not be better hosted at one of the sites more famous historical names. Polling the names that I have so far gathered are most prevalent in history on Ngrams, it appears that the Roman-era Jamnia appears to set itself apart as the long-term historical favourite, much as with Ascalon being commonly known as Ascalon. The only caveat to this is that Jamnia is the namesake of the Council of Jamnia, which appears to be a much discussed event, so the Ngrams trends here might be being led astray by this. Still, it remains a very strong historical name. "Yibna/Yubna" is of course simply a phonetic drift away from Jamnia. The other names that stand out are Jabneh (the Biblical transliteration) and Ibelin, the crusader name, which appears to be derived from the name of an old hill name Abella, but connects to little else. The results for Yibna/Yubna are somewhat disappointing, but I note from the Ottoman section of the page that the pronunciation, spelling or simply transliteration of this was somewhat fluid, with different accounts also producing Ebneh, Yebna and Jebna ... so it is possible that the phonetic drift at the time was less than the 20th-century spelling of Yibna/Yubna make out. Jebna in particular would appear little changed from Jabneh, but it is possible that whoever translated the Ottoman lists simply transliterated the 'y' in Arabic as a 'j', ironically mimicking how 'Iamnia' came to be understood as 'Jamnia' by way of the phenomenon of the Latin consonant of 'y' to modern 'j' shift in the middle ages. In this case, the Arabic has simply never drifted far from the original Talmudic 'Yabne', which again, Jabneh is not very far removed from ... all of which begins to make me lean towards Jabneh as the possible best combination in terms of both literary prevalence and the best overarching link between the different names past and present. Jabneh is incidentally the name that Britannica comes to rest at. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I am supportive of any of those suggestions. Doesn’t need to be the current archaeological site name, or the name of its last inhabitants – the name with the most long-term significance is probably best. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

text: Makes sense. Alaexis¿question? 13:03, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name query