1493:
Nebuchadnezzar II's siege of
Jerusalem, its construction date and the identity of its builder are debated....Since the 1980s, skeptical approaches to the Biblical text and the archaeological record led some scholars to doubt whether any temple at all was constructed in Jerusalem in the 10th century BCE. Others suggested that Solomon's original temple was modest, and was later rebuilt in a larger scale during the late-monarchical period. No direct evidence for the existence of Solomon's Temple has been found, nonetheless, no real archaeological excavations have ever been conducted on the Temple Mount due to the extreme political sensitivity of the site." The alleged date of construction is also in the infobox.
929:
921:
913:
1919:. I took the freedom to remove the tag. I find it irrelevant, once it's been made clear that it's all exclusively based on the Bible. They could understand biblical prose perfectly well 120 years ago, functional illiteracy among apparently educated people is rather our problem today than it was back then. What can be challenged is the Bible text, but that A. has nothing to do with the JE being pre-WWI, and B. for the period in question the biblical compilation was proven to be rather factual, the authors likely had royal and Temple archives to work from.
905:
574:
553:
243:
222:
1449:
motives from the Iron Age (for example, Proto Aeolic capitals, which are known for being common in
Israelite and Phoenician architecture), something that cannot be said on the 17th century depiction. Gråbergs Gråa Sång - Sorry, but I strongly disagree with you. Accuracy should be a consideration when describing an ancient, historic building. Moreover, this article states that Solomon's Temple was based on Phoenician design, and the leadimage should match that.
795:
453:
463:
432:
348:
1645:
327:
1891:(hence the modern map), not ancient ones.) As it stands, it appears to be simple providing unsubstantiated information than comes more from the realm of religious and political fantasy than it does the realm of evidence, and is largely serving simply to bloat the infobox. If readers want to know where the temple mount is, as the presumed location of Solomon's temple, they can click on its link.
679:
1637:
897:
658:
358:
253:
751:
584:
191:
1150:"Because of the religious and political sensitivities involved, no archaeological excavations and only limited surface surveys of the Temple Mount have been conducted since Charles Warren's expedition of 1867–70. There is no solid archaeological evidence for the existence of Solomon's Temple, and the building is not mentioned in surviving extra-biblical accounts."
1890:
Given that the location of the original temple is unknown, as even the likes of
Finkelstein admit, is there an particular reason why there should be a mildly POV-ish map and coordinates giving it a precise location? (Especially when this feature is clearly actually designed to locate modern buildings
1814:
please. The Temple's precise location on the Temple Mount and identification with the (platform of the) Dome of the Rock are less certain, but it is the prevalent view in literature. One recent debate, for example, was whether the Holy of Holies was located above what is today known as the
Foundation
1701:
are counter-factual. Solomon's temple remains a thing of myth whose precise location is fundamentally unknown. Setting aside the completely unevidenced claims that the Dome of the Rock is where it stood (this is not even known for the Second Temple), there is even debate over whether Mount Moriah was
1284:
It is worth noting that on p235, the authors state "Monumental building techniques—such as the use of ashlar masonary and Proto-Aeolic capitals that typified the elaborate Omride building sytle in the northern kingdom—did not appear in the sourth before the seventh century BCE," although they then go
1463:
This is not an article about a historical building, at least not according to the article. All depictions are artist musings more or less based on biblical text. Since the
September discussion (such as it was) found a consensus for the Vatable pic, and comments were made against File:Храм I (I asked
1448:
I'm not sure who created this photo, but as someone familiar with biblical archeology, and having seen ancient
Israelite motives with my own eyes (I live in Jerusalem, few kilometers from the City of David and the Israel Museum) - I can see that the suggested depiction is actually based on Israelite
1172:
The temple's existence and the existence of
Solomon are not mutually exclusive despite the strong connection between the two, regardless of when it was built and who truly built it, consensus agrees that the Temple did exist and was destroyed during the indicated siege of Jerusalem. But, I digress.
961:
Those three images of yours are anachronistic, based on some old painter's imagination without basis on reality, adopting styles that have no resemblence to ancient
Israelite or Phoenician architecture. The digital rendering that I added is loosely based on biblical description, including the molten
1809:
Virtually all scholars accept that a
Yawhist temple existed on the Temple Mount by the time of the Babylonian destruction; the debate is mostly surrounding its construction date and the identity of the builder. Moreover, the majority of scholars agree that the Second Temple was built at exactly the
1508:
I hope I'm not taking liberties, but it seems the entire slant of this post is about factual accuracy, which is a very specific concern. I've tweaked the title and maintenance tag accordingly. As with many biblically linked pages, there seems to have been a cumulative blurring of biblical story and
1838:
My main problem here is certain features of the religious building infobox template that are clearly aimed at contemporary structures: I'm not sure if the template is even meant to be used for historic structures, let alone a non-extant 3,000-year-old one that is indeed the stuff of hypothesis and
1276:
say that there is no archaeological evidence for a
Solomonic Temple and it is not mentioned in extra-biblical sources (and we correctly cite it in the following sentence in this respect). But it goes on to say "strong arguments have been marshaled to counter some of the minimalists' objections",
1268:
My difficultly is that the sentence as written does not accurately reflect what the source says. The sentence makes two claims. Firstly, that there is general agreement as to the existence of a ritual structure by the time of the Babylonian siege. The source says nothing about this. The pages
1115:
The historicity of Solomon and related stuff is quite weak and lost to history, "unknowable" as someone said in relation to Moses. "Accurate" here is a matter of Bible-text, faith. Interpretation by artist is unavoidable, like the snow-white walls and shining bronze in the red one. If there was a
1040:
are the most relatively 'accurate' (i.e. unanachronistic + resembling actual Israelite/Phoenician architecture) representations at our disposal... that said, I'd 100% go with the former in place of the latter, as aside from quality, it seems to take a modicum of artistic liberty when it comes to
1492:
The first para says "It was built during Solomon's reign over the United Kingdom of Israel and was fully constructed by c. 957 BCE." - but although citations can be found, the 4th paragraph clearly says "Although most scholars today agree that a temple existed on the Temple Mount by the time of
1285:
on to mention "royal structures" in Jerusalem as potentially having achieved "some measure of impressiveness, if not grandeur." One could reasonably deduce from this that any temple in Jerusalem before the 7th century must have been modest, but again the authors do not actually say this.
1277:
namely the possible eradication of earlier remains by Herodian construction and the weakness of Egypt and Mesopotamia during this period. The authors do not express a view as to whether there was or was not a Temple, but leave it for readers to judge. Therefore it seems to me to be
1193:"There is a general agreement that a ritual structure existed on the Temple Mount by the point of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, however serious doubts remain in attributing it or its construction to Solomon, or any king roughly contemporaneous to his lifetime. "
1241:
There is a general agreement that a ritual structure existed on the Temple Mount by the point of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, however serious doubts remain in attributing it or its construction to Solomon, or any king roughly contemporaneous to his
1169:
There is a general agreement that a ritual structure existed on the Temple Mount by the point of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, however serious doubts remain in attributing it or its construction to Solomon, or any king roughly contemporaneous to his
1177:
to have looked like, they are rendered either as Greek style temples, Baroque style churches, or they have fantastically unrealistic additions such as the huge brick spires both the former lead image and some of the above examples portray.
1033:
1120:, like Moses. "According to the Bible" is not a minus, but there are other factors. Like I said, I'm ok with Vatable, "accurate" or not. But I'm ok with others too, for example 3rdCentADGlassBowl which is really old.
153:
1759:"It is known to Jews as the Temple Mount, site of two Biblical temples" reads like "in Jewish faith", doesn't it? Also, while BBC and other news-orgs are often good sources, a WP-article like this should focus on
808:
1377:
Agreed. But even still, if the same sources also accept the (albeit significantly few) attestations of the temple as historical, where exactly does that leave us in terms of how to frame it?
1069:
Amending a previous copyright violation, I've uploaded the best (i.e. accurate) depiction of the Temple locally to Knowledge, in accordance with non-free image use policy. It can be found
1134:
I'm not trying to debate the historicity of Solomon. This is about the temple itself, the temple which actually existed irrespective of Solomon. We know, generally, what it looked like.
1947:
1101:…why would we keep a lead image we know is inaccurate? Isn’t that like having a picture of Michelangelo on Einstein’s page under the rationale of “eh, they’re both people so it’s fine”
299:
1829:
Such debate has been going on for centuries. It is characterised by reliance on tradition and argumentation rather than actual evidence. Both scholars and crackpots engage in it.
1997:
1697:
The lines in the infobox implying that the location of Solomon's temple is A) known, B) where the Dome of the Rock stands, and C) that its "public access" is the same as the
719:
147:
1173:
If nothing else, its descriptions in the bible should be accurately matched by the lead image. All the renderings do not follow the basic description of what the Temple is
729:
2002:
1942:
1810:
same location as the first one, so Herod's walls do support the mainstream academic view that the First Temple was located on the Temple Mount. Let's steer away from
1292:, but for it to stay in the article, it needs a better source, IMHO. Actually, probably 2 sources: one for "general agreement" and one for "serious doubts remain".
309:
1856:
If the real Temple "of Solomon" ever gets excavated, I guess Orthodox Jews and Conservative Evangelicals would not be delighted and would have vehement reactions.
1523:
The lead was a bit of an abomination - too long objectively, five paragraphs and bouncing all over the place in terms of contents. I've attempted a bit of a trim.
1987:
1706:
space), and not something that should just be copied across to articles on things presumed to have existed there. The map and coordinates are likewise tenuous.
640:
630:
1952:
1839:
debate, hence why details such as access are inappropriate, along with, one might argue, a map pin maintaining the pretence that an exact location is known.
695:
1992:
771:. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them.
1972:
525:
79:
871:
44:
1962:
1702:
actually the same thing as the Temple Mount. The "public access" line is meanwhile obviously intended for extant religious buildings (like the actual
1199:
What we have is artists musings. We can use them, or not. If there is one that has been well noted in scholarly literature, that is a WP-good choice.
535:
489:
404:
275:
1580:
Seems like we also have a bit of the old 'in-the-lead-but-not-in-the-body-problem' there too - so the question of leadworthiness is a pertinent one.
1272:
The second claim is that serious doubts remain as to the Temple's construction either by Solomon or by any roughly contemporaneous king. The source
1795:
Herod was involved in building the wall, yes, that is a historical fact, but that bears absolutely no relation to the unevidenced assertions above.
414:
2007:
686:
663:
606:
1594:
Two birds with one stone - I just lobbed both rather granular statements on a single piece of archaeological evidence back to where they belong.
1982:
1977:
758:
85:
1768:
1672:
1613:
1571:
1473:
1435:
1312:
1204:
1156:
1125:
1092:
1060:
1021:
991:
950:
497:
266:
227:
1465:
928:
1967:
597:
558:
380:
1957:
920:
1269:
referred to discuss the situation during the presumed reigns of David and Solomon and make no reference to the time of the siege.
819:
815:
811:
1682:
The article has way too many imaginary images and this is far down the list of significance. So I don't think we should have it.
493:
168:
1764:
1668:
1609:
1567:
1469:
1431:
1308:
1200:
1152:
1121:
1088:
1056:
1017:
987:
946:
774:
762:
135:
99:
30:
1729:, in which you restored this seemingly counter-factual information, this thread is primarily for you. What am I missing here?
1016:
Also, "loosely based on biblical description" is your guess (it's a good guess), there's no info on Commons to base that on.
501:
477:
437:
104:
20:
1363:
of the temple based on a source that doubts the historicity. The lack of archaeological evidence is essential to mention.
371:
332:
74:
1815:
Stone, or the temple's altar, but both views concur that both Temples were situated in this precise region of the Mount.
1087:
Since there are plenty of free images, I don't see how non-free will work. IMO, "accurate" isn't really the issue here.
882:
202:
1657:
912:
65:
1853:
Yes, there was a temple. I don't think it was Solomon's. I don't think it was big. I don't think it was monotheistic.
867:
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
379:-related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
129:
694:
related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1307:
This makes sense, and I agree on "probably correct, but for it to stay in the article, it needs a better source".
967:
1070:
945:. Adding a few examples. Opinions, editors? I think the 1899 one is ok. Of course, no image is also a solution.
828:
1656:. It's an "own work", uploaded to Commons in 2010. In short, it's fan art. It looks impressive, a bit like the
1297:
125:
878:
780:
109:
904:
175:
1781:
would cover that stonework as being built by Herod, rebuilding on the site of Solomon's original temple.
1468:), I don't think the leadimage should be changed without new discussion first agreeing it's a good idea.
1896:
1844:
1800:
1786:
1750:
1734:
1711:
1599:
1585:
1546:
1528:
1514:
1499:
1417:
208:
1861:
1117:
1037:
963:
1403:
but I see no information about it. Why is it more accurate? When was it created and who created it?
1265:, pp128-129. The new citation is for pp128-132. To be clear, I am sure this is a reliable source.
190:
1454:
1326:
1293:
1278:
1005:
589:
161:
55:
605:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
274:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1924:
1368:
834:
70:
141:
573:
552:
24:
1382:
1344:
1183:
1139:
1106:
1078:
1046:
768:
691:
51:
1426:
Like I said in the leadimage discussion above, I don't think "accurate" is much of an issue.
1892:
1840:
1820:
1796:
1782:
1746:
1730:
1722:
1707:
1595:
1581:
1541:
1538:
1524:
1510:
1494:
1412:
863:
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
849:
830:
794:
1857:
1336:
468:
242:
221:
1555:
1450:
1406:
1322:
1001:
978:"loosely based on biblical description" goes for all of them. The current image is non-
363:
271:
258:
1744:
1936:
1920:
1830:
1811:
1683:
1364:
1743:
The location of the temple is widely sourced: Here is one from a couple of days ago
1055:
The Russian one looks nice, but is sadly anonymous. Francois Vatable is fine by me.
1916:
1778:
1760:
1703:
1698:
1661:
1653:
1427:
1378:
1340:
1247:
1179:
1135:
1102:
1074:
1042:
983:
979:
942:
IMO we should use some older, pre CGI imagening. Commons has several possibilities
602:
1652:
I've removed it 3 times from the article since yesterday, so I'm getting close to
1644:
1911:{{Update inline|date=April 2024|reason=The source is from like a 100 years ago.}}
1509:
historical fact in the editing of this page. It will need careful teasing apart.
1816:
1636:
1360:
896:
877:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —
462:
1288:
I have mixed feelings about this, because I do think the sentence is probably
579:
458:
353:
248:
1928:
1900:
1865:
1848:
1833:
1824:
1804:
1790:
1772:
1754:
1738:
1715:
1686:
1676:
1617:
1603:
1589:
1575:
1549:
1532:
1518:
1502:
1477:
1458:
1439:
1420:
1386:
1372:
1348:
1330:
1316:
1301:
1254:
and subsequently moved by them to the start of the paragraph. I removed it
1208:
1187:
1160:
1143:
1129:
1110:
1096:
1082:
1064:
1050:
1025:
1009:
995:
971:
954:
943:
937:
886:
832:
678:
657:
452:
431:
1073:. Barring any further issues, I will be placing this image in the infobox.
783:
when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
347:
326:
1400:
1258:
and Zhomron immediately reinstated it, with a slightly expanded citation.
1034:
File:Francois Vatable, reconstructie van de tempel van Salomo (detail).jpg
488:-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
1664:
of the anonymous uploader. So my view is that it shouldn't be used here.
986:. "some old painter" is pretty much WP-standard in this kind of article.
484:
583:
962:
sea, the famous columns and other iconic symbols of the first temple.--
376:
1643:
1635:
1562:
of specific scholars (Fabio Porzia and Corinne Bonnet), but their
927:
919:
911:
903:
895:
1466:
Knowledge:Reference_desk/Humanities#Commons_image_File:Храм_I.jpg
1167:
Interesting that you conveniently skip the intermediate sentence
939:
it's a recent work by a netizen. It has nice colours, though.
835:
788:
745:
184:
15:
1148:
We know what the Bible says. The article disagrees with you:
1032:
As far as the existing images on Commons are concerned,
932:
C+B-Temple-Fig4-3rdCentADGlassBowlShowingJerusalemTemple
1726:
1255:
1251:
1261:
The original citation was Finkelstein & Silberman
160:
936:
I don't like the current image, according to Commons
1660:, and has colors, but it's only the artistic vision/
1430:
maybe? The source page states "© Studio Har Moria".
1000:
Agree that any of the older images would be better.
690:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
601:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
375:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
270:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1041:depicting the temple itself, what with the tiling.
1237:The fourth paragraph of the lede currently begins:
1246:By way of background, this sentence was added by
1693:Present-day location associations in the infobox
924:Heinrich Bünting's view of the Temple of Solomon
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1948:High-importance Jewish history-related articles
1116:Rembrandt, I'd take that, even if he'd made it
482:, a project to improve Knowledge's articles on
843:This page has archives. Sections older than
174:
8:
1886:Map and geographical coordinates in infobox
1777:Almost any of the 200 sources used for the
1998:High-importance Ancient Near East articles
1197:"We know, generally, what it looked like."
652:
547:
426:
321:
216:
2003:Ancient Near East articles by assessment
916:Salamoni templom Chipiez rekonstrukciója
1943:C-Class Jewish history-related articles
704:Knowledge:WikiProject Ancient Near East
654:
549:
428:
323:
218:
188:
1558:like this should almost never include
853:when more than 8 sections are present.
707:Template:WikiProject Ancient Near East
872:Solomons-temple-sam-lawlor-724551.jpg
7:
1988:Low-importance Architecture articles
684:This article is within the scope of
595:This article is within the scope of
474:This article is within the scope of
369:This article is within the scope of
284:Knowledge:WikiProject Jewish history
264:This article is within the scope of
1953:WikiProject Jewish history articles
908:MACCOUN(1899) p099 SOLOMON'S TEMPLE
287:Template:WikiProject Jewish history
207:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
1993:C-Class Ancient Near East articles
615:Knowledge:WikiProject Architecture
14:
1973:High-importance Religion articles
847:may be automatically archived by
618:Template:WikiProject Architecture
1963:High-importance Judaism articles
1281:to say "serious doubts remain".
793:
749:
677:
656:
582:
572:
551:
461:
451:
430:
356:
346:
325:
251:
241:
220:
189:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
773:Content must be written from a
757:The subject of this article is
724:This article has been rated as
635:This article has been rated as
530:This article has been rated as
409:This article has been rated as
304:This article has been rated as
290:Jewish history-related articles
2008:Knowledge controversial topics
1763:books and scholarly articles.
1209:17:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
1188:17:22, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
1161:17:18, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
1144:17:11, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
1130:16:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
1111:16:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
1097:09:50, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
1083:17:22, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
1065:18:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
1051:17:09, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
1026:14:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
1010:14:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
996:14:27, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
972:12:40, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
955:09:28, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
887:16:23, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
510:Knowledge:WikiProject Religion
1:
1983:C-Class Architecture articles
1978:WikiProject Religion articles
1687:10:16, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
1677:08:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
698:and see a list of open tasks.
687:WikiProject Ancient Near East
609:and see a list of open tasks.
513:Template:WikiProject Religion
389:Knowledge:WikiProject Judaism
383:and see a list of open tasks.
278:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1537:I very much agree, thanks.@
1488:Factual accuracy in the lead
1387:15:03, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1373:09:22, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1349:15:05, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
1331:21:19, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
1317:09:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
1302:15:17, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
392:Template:WikiProject Judaism
1805:15:45, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
1791:15:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
1773:13:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
1755:13:35, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
1739:12:45, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
1716:12:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
1658:Holyland Model of Jerusalem
1478:20:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
1459:20:23, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
1440:14:37, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
1421:13:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
767:When updating the article,
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
2024:
1929:09:13, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
1566:is fine if "lead-worthy".
730:project's importance scale
710:Ancient Near East articles
641:project's importance scale
536:project's importance scale
415:project's importance scale
310:project's importance scale
267:WikiProject Jewish history
1968:C-Class Religion articles
1901:05:18, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
1866:03:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
1849:17:39, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
1834:10:00, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
1825:07:41, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
1618:18:51, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
1604:16:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
1590:16:28, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
1576:16:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
1550:16:05, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
1533:15:19, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
1519:14:42, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
1503:14:14, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
769:be bold, but not reckless
723:
672:
634:
567:
529:
446:
408:
341:
303:
236:
215:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1958:C-Class Judaism articles
1554:Minor detail, but IMO a
1233:Fourth paragraph of lede
598:WikiProject Architecture
500:standards, or visit the
1649:
1641:
1640:Image under discussion
1244:
933:
925:
917:
909:
901:
761:and content may be in
197:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
1647:
1639:
1239:
931:
923:
915:
907:
899:
775:neutral point of view
621:Architecture articles
100:Neutral point of view
1632:The red image, again
478:WikiProject Religion
105:No original research
1812:conspiracy theories
1667:Opinions, editors?
1359:We can't claim the
1339:should be avoided.
1263:The Bible Unearthed
1195:is pretty far from
590:Architecture portal
372:WikiProject Judaism
1765:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1669:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1650:
1648:By the same artist
1642:
1610:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1568:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1470:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1432:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1309:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1201:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1153:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1122:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1089:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1057:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
1018:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
988:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
947:Gråbergs Gråa Sång
934:
926:
918:
910:
902:
879:Community Tech bot
490:assess and improve
203:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
857:
856:
787:
786:
744:
743:
740:
739:
736:
735:
701:Ancient Near East
692:Ancient Near East
664:Ancient Near East
651:
650:
647:
646:
546:
545:
542:
541:
516:Religion articles
504:for more details.
425:
424:
421:
420:
320:
319:
316:
315:
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
2015:
1544:
1497:
1415:
1410:
852:
836:
797:
789:
753:
752:
746:
712:
711:
708:
705:
702:
681:
674:
673:
668:
660:
653:
623:
622:
619:
616:
613:
592:
587:
586:
576:
569:
568:
563:
555:
548:
518:
517:
514:
511:
508:
502:wikiproject page
471:
466:
465:
455:
448:
447:
442:
434:
427:
397:
396:
395:Judaism articles
393:
390:
387:
366:
361:
360:
359:
350:
343:
342:
337:
329:
322:
292:
291:
288:
285:
282:
261:
256:
255:
254:
245:
238:
237:
232:
224:
217:
200:
194:
193:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
25:Solomon's Temple
16:
2023:
2022:
2018:
2017:
2016:
2014:
2013:
2012:
1933:
1932:
1908:
1906:Unnecessary tag
1888:
1695:
1634:
1542:
1495:
1490:
1413:
1404:
1397:
1252:3 February 2021
1235:
1038:File:Храм I.jpg
964:Michael ben Zvi
894:
865:
848:
837:
831:
802:
750:
726:High-importance
709:
706:
703:
700:
699:
667:High‑importance
666:
620:
617:
614:
611:
610:
588:
581:
561:
532:High-importance
515:
512:
509:
506:
505:
469:Religion portal
467:
460:
441:High‑importance
440:
411:High-importance
394:
391:
388:
385:
384:
362:
357:
355:
336:High‑importance
335:
306:High-importance
289:
286:
283:
280:
279:
257:
252:
250:
231:High‑importance
230:
201:on Knowledge's
198:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
2021:
2019:
2011:
2010:
2005:
2000:
1995:
1990:
1985:
1980:
1975:
1970:
1965:
1960:
1955:
1950:
1945:
1935:
1934:
1913:
1912:
1907:
1904:
1887:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1875:
1874:
1873:
1872:
1871:
1870:
1869:
1868:
1854:
1836:
1694:
1691:
1690:
1689:
1633:
1630:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1623:
1622:
1621:
1620:
1592:
1521:
1489:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1443:
1442:
1399:The source is
1396:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1389:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1321:I also agree.
1294:Havelock Jones
1234:
1231:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1067:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1014:
1013:
1012:
893:
890:
875:
874:
864:
861:
859:
855:
854:
842:
839:
838:
833:
829:
827:
824:
823:
804:
803:
798:
792:
785:
784:
754:
742:
741:
738:
737:
734:
733:
722:
716:
715:
713:
696:the discussion
682:
670:
669:
661:
649:
648:
645:
644:
637:Low-importance
633:
627:
626:
624:
607:the discussion
594:
593:
577:
565:
564:
562:Low‑importance
556:
544:
543:
540:
539:
528:
522:
521:
519:
473:
472:
456:
444:
443:
435:
423:
422:
419:
418:
407:
401:
400:
398:
381:the discussion
368:
367:
364:Judaism portal
351:
339:
338:
330:
318:
317:
314:
313:
302:
296:
295:
293:
281:Jewish history
276:the discussion
272:Jewish history
263:
262:
259:Judaism portal
246:
234:
233:
228:Jewish history
225:
213:
212:
206:
195:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2020:
2009:
2006:
2004:
2001:
1999:
1996:
1994:
1991:
1989:
1986:
1984:
1981:
1979:
1976:
1974:
1971:
1969:
1966:
1964:
1961:
1959:
1956:
1954:
1951:
1949:
1946:
1944:
1941:
1940:
1938:
1931:
1930:
1926:
1922:
1918:
1910:
1909:
1905:
1903:
1902:
1898:
1894:
1885:
1867:
1863:
1859:
1855:
1852:
1851:
1850:
1846:
1842:
1837:
1835:
1832:
1828:
1827:
1826:
1822:
1818:
1813:
1808:
1807:
1806:
1802:
1798:
1794:
1793:
1792:
1788:
1784:
1780:
1776:
1775:
1774:
1770:
1766:
1762:
1758:
1757:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1745:
1742:
1741:
1740:
1736:
1732:
1728:
1724:
1720:
1719:
1718:
1717:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1700:
1692:
1688:
1685:
1681:
1680:
1679:
1678:
1674:
1670:
1665:
1663:
1659:
1655:
1646:
1638:
1631:
1619:
1615:
1611:
1607:
1606:
1605:
1601:
1597:
1593:
1591:
1587:
1583:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1548:
1545:
1540:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1530:
1526:
1522:
1520:
1516:
1512:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1504:
1501:
1498:
1487:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1456:
1452:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1444:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1419:
1416:
1411:do you know?
1408:
1402:
1394:
1388:
1384:
1380:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1358:
1357:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1338:
1334:
1333:
1332:
1328:
1324:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1314:
1310:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1286:
1282:
1280:
1275:
1270:
1266:
1264:
1259:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1243:
1238:
1232:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1176:
1171:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1151:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1118:with horns on
1114:
1113:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1085:
1084:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1068:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1054:
1053:
1052:
1048:
1044:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1003:
999:
998:
997:
993:
989:
985:
981:
977:
976:
974:
973:
969:
965:
959:
958:
957:
956:
952:
948:
944:
940:
938:
930:
922:
914:
906:
898:
891:
889:
888:
884:
880:
873:
870:
869:
868:
862:
860:
851:
846:
841:
840:
826:
825:
822:
821:
817:
813:
810:
806:
805:
801:
796:
791:
790:
782:
778:
776:
770:
766:
764:
760:
759:controversial
755:
748:
747:
731:
727:
721:
718:
717:
714:
697:
693:
689:
688:
683:
680:
676:
675:
671:
665:
662:
659:
655:
642:
638:
632:
629:
628:
625:
608:
604:
600:
599:
591:
585:
580:
578:
575:
571:
570:
566:
560:
557:
554:
550:
537:
533:
527:
524:
523:
520:
503:
499:
495:
491:
487:
486:
481:
480:
479:
470:
464:
459:
457:
454:
450:
449:
445:
439:
436:
433:
429:
416:
412:
406:
403:
402:
399:
382:
378:
374:
373:
365:
354:
352:
349:
345:
344:
340:
334:
331:
328:
324:
311:
307:
301:
298:
297:
294:
277:
273:
269:
268:
260:
249:
247:
244:
240:
239:
235:
229:
226:
223:
219:
214:
210:
204:
196:
192:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1914:
1889:
1779:Western Wall
1704:Temple Mount
1699:Temple Mount
1696:
1666:
1651:
1563:
1559:
1491:
1464:about it at
1428:James Tissot
1398:
1289:
1287:
1283:
1279:WP:SYNTHESIS
1273:
1271:
1267:
1262:
1260:
1245:
1240:
1236:
1196:
1192:
1174:
1168:
1149:
975:strike sock
960:
941:
935:
876:
866:
858:
844:
807:
799:
772:
756:
725:
685:
636:
612:Architecture
603:Architecture
596:
559:Architecture
531:
492:articles to
483:
476:
475:
410:
370:
305:
265:
209:WikiProjects
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1893:Iskandar323
1841:Iskandar323
1797:Iskandar323
1783:Moons of Io
1747:Moons of Io
1731:Iskandar323
1723:Moons of Io
1708:Iskandar323
1608:Thank you!
1596:Iskandar323
1582:Iskandar323
1543:Doug Weller
1539:Iskandar323
1525:Iskandar323
1511:Iskandar323
1496:Doug Weller
1414:Doug Weller
1361:historicity
850:ClueBot III
148:free images
31:not a forum
1937:Categories
1858:tgeorgescu
982:published
1727:this edit
1451:Tom Bahar
1407:Tom Bahar
1395:New image
1323:Achar Sva
1242:lifetime.
1170:lifetime.
1002:Zoeperkoe
892:Leadimage
781:citations
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1921:Arminden
1725:: Given
1365:Dimadick
1337:WP:SYNTH
845:365 days
800:Archives
779:Include
507:Religion
485:Religion
438:Religion
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1917:CycoMa1
1556:WP:LEAD
1379:Zhomron
1341:Zhomron
1335:Ditto.
1290:correct
1248:Zhomron
1180:Zhomron
1136:Zhomron
1103:Zhomron
1075:Zhomron
1043:Zhomron
900:Current
763:dispute
728:on the
639:on the
534:on the
413:on the
386:Judaism
377:Judaism
333:Judaism
308:on the
199:C-class
154:WP refs
142:scholar
1817:Tombah
205:scale.
126:Google
1761:WP:RS
1662:WP:OR
1654:WP:EW
1564:ideas
1560:names
984:WP:OR
980:WP:RS
809:Index
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1925:talk
1897:talk
1862:talk
1845:talk
1831:Zero
1821:talk
1801:talk
1787:talk
1769:talk
1751:talk
1735:talk
1712:talk
1684:Zero
1673:talk
1614:talk
1600:talk
1586:talk
1572:talk
1547:talk
1529:talk
1515:talk
1500:talk
1474:talk
1455:talk
1436:talk
1418:talk
1401:this
1383:talk
1369:talk
1345:talk
1327:talk
1313:talk
1298:talk
1274:does
1256:here
1205:talk
1184:talk
1175:said
1157:talk
1140:talk
1126:talk
1107:talk
1093:talk
1079:talk
1071:here
1061:talk
1047:talk
1036:and
1022:talk
1006:talk
992:talk
968:talk
951:talk
883:talk
720:High
526:High
496:and
494:good
405:High
300:High
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1915:Hi
1864:)
1250:on
631:Low
498:1.0
176:TWL
1939::
1927:)
1899:)
1847:)
1823:)
1803:)
1789:)
1771:)
1753:)
1737:)
1714:)
1675:)
1616:)
1602:)
1588:)
1574:)
1531:)
1517:)
1476:)
1457:)
1438:)
1385:)
1371:)
1347:)
1329:)
1315:)
1300:)
1207:)
1186:)
1159:)
1142:)
1128:)
1109:)
1095:)
1081:)
1063:)
1049:)
1024:)
1008:)
994:)
970:)
953:)
885:)
818:,
814:,
156:)
54:;
1923:(
1895:(
1860:(
1843:(
1819:(
1799:(
1785:(
1767:(
1749:(
1733:(
1721:@
1710:(
1671:(
1612:(
1598:(
1584:(
1570:(
1527:(
1513:(
1472:(
1453:(
1434:(
1409::
1405:@
1381:(
1367:(
1343:(
1325:(
1311:(
1296:(
1203:(
1182:(
1155:(
1138:(
1124:(
1105:(
1091:(
1077:(
1059:(
1045:(
1020:(
1004:(
990:(
966:(
949:(
881:(
820:3
816:2
812:1
777:.
765:.
732:.
643:.
538:.
417:.
312:.
211::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
