Talk:Location of Aram

The Location of Aram does not support the article it is proposed to be merged with Rktect (talk) 19:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem, it doesn't have any third party sources either backing it up, so it can just be changed into a redirect. dougweller (talk) 10:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

There are no primary or even secondary sources for these passages. They come from Strongs Commentatry, thats at least the third source removed. According to the Documentary hypothesis, the edit prior to Strongs would be the selecition of books and prior to that compilations by J and P.Rktect (talk) 14:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I mean there are no sources stating or speculating on the location of Aram. dougweller (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

They are self referential; the comentators of the documentary hypotheis are telling you where the place names are by adding little glosses to the story in the begats like an aside to the audience. I have a map so you can see where the places are, and I referenced Strongs as the best source for more information. All the references to Aram collectively locate it. (ARAM-DAMMESEK, [3] translated 'Syrians of Damascus,' embracing the highlands of Damascus including the city. (Mount Hermon) AM-MAACHAH [4] translated 'Syria-maachah,' a district on the east of Argob and Bashan) between Hammath and the Golan. Rktect (talk) 17:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

And this would be a classical case of synthesis. It's original research, you must know that by now. dougweller (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The Bible is not considered OR so far as I know. My understanding is that is taken as correct in what it says so far as where it is talking about what it says. In other words if it talks about Aram we locate Aram where it says it goes. Its not a case of SYN because its a single source. Rktect (talk) 19:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Synthesis occurs when an editor puts together multiple sources to reach a novel conclusion that is not in any of the sources. Even if published by reliable sources, material must not be connected together in such a way that it constitutes original research. If the sources cited do not explicitly reach the same conclusion, or if the sources cited are not directly related to the article subject, then the editor is engaged in original research. Summarizing source material without changing its meaning is not synthesis; it is good editing.

Rktect (talk) 19:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

But that is not what you are doing. If you have a quote from the Bible that says 'Aram is here'. Fine. But WP:Primary is applicable here, and says All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors. dougweller (talk) 19:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

No Doug. The Bible is not a prinary source. Its not the observer speaking, its the commentator 5 times removed through, J, then E, then P, then R then Strongs and King James and all the rest. What we have here are secondary sources from a single source summarised. Rktect (talk) 02:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The Bible is a primary source. We even have a template for it:

So are the Amarna letters. dougweller (talk) 10:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Location unknown? this article a fork of Aram-Naharaim

Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible PADDAN-ARAM Web. paMan-'4rim) (also PADDAN) An area around Haran in upper Mesopotamia Usually translated "Field of Aram" (cf. Hos ]2:12[MT 13)), Paddan-.aram is generally regarded as an alternate designation for Aram-naharaim. the territory encompassed by the great bend of the Euphrates River. A few scholars have argued that the term was an Aramaic rendering of the city name Haran. The exact location of Paddan-aram is not known. but also:

Aram-naharaim: Western part of Paddan-aram (cf. Gen. 24:10) and areas along the great bend of the Euphrates (cf. DeuL 23:4[MT 5|; )udg. 3:8). In Num. 23:7; |udg. 3:10: Hos. 12:12(13) the general term Aram designates this area.

The Book of Judges By Yaira Amit, Jonathan Chipman published by Brill

"The location of Aram Naharaim is not clear either according to the Bible (Gen 24:6 and Deut 23:5), nor according to the early sources; cf. Loewensiamm [1950], 581-582. In this case too it would seem that the tendency to glorify Judith and David took priority over historical accuracy."[1] And more here: [2] - sources explicitly discussing the location.

In any case, this article appears to be a fork and perhaps a POV fork of Aram-Naharaim. dougweller (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

No. What we have in Aram Nahrain is an article which is about some sort or Armenian nationalism. This article is about the location of Aram. Rktect (talk) 02:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The lead of Aram-Naharaim says Aram-Naharaim or "Aram of Two Rivers," is a region that is mentioned five times in the Hebrew Bible. It is commonly identified with Nahrima mentioned in three tablets of the Amarna correspondence as a geographical description of the kingdom of Mitanni. It was the land in which the city of Haran lay. According to one rabbinical Jewish tradition, the birthplace of Abraham was also situated in Aram-Naharaim. . Are you saying this article is about some other place? dougweller (talk) 06:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Having a template for something doesn't mean its use is appropriate, Taking a list of bible passages that refer to Aram from Strongs introduces a secondary source. We could at least read what a policy says before applying it. The lead from Aram-Naharaim refers to a myth propagated by Josephus that all references to two rivers were to Mesopotamia. If you go to Strongs you will find that two rivers is an idiom used widely to define boundaries as for example with the boundaries of Lebanon and Syria. Rktect (talk) 11:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

If the Bible is a primary source, and we regard it as one on Wikipedia, then how is a list of biblical passages not still a primary source? As for the Aram-Naharaim article, the article is about the same place that this one is, right? Thus this is a fork from a short article. dougweller (talk) 12:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

No Doug, as I said previously. The Bible is not a prinary source. Its not the observer speaking, its the commentator 5 times removed through, J, then E, then P, then R then Strongs and King James and all the rest. What we have here are secondary sources from a single source summarised. Rktect (talk) 02:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The lead passage of that article says Aram-Naharaim or "Aram of Two Rivers," is a region that is mentioned five times in the Hebrew Bible. It is commonly identified with Nahrima mentioned in three tablets of the Amarna correspondence as a geographical description of the kingdom of Mitanni. It was the land in which the city of Haran lay. According to one rabbinical Jewish tradition, the birthplace of Abraham was also situated in Aram-Naharaim.

If that article is correct... well... Haran is up north and a bit east of where the Euphrates crosses the Turkish border, in Turkey, a long way from Aram.

Aram is located between the Golan and HammathRktect (talk) 22:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Google books search

Not many hits but they do agree that the location is unknown. Turning this into a redirect. dougweller (talk) 20:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)