Talk:Mount Judi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Could "Qardu" come from "Qar-iudu", translated "Mountain of Judi" ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.235.26.150 (talk) 01:17, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some edits

I tried to make the article both more informative (by eadding, e.g., information on the possible derivation of the name "Judi") and shorter. Making it shorter meant cutting back the long quote from Crouse, and, regretfully, deleting entierly the Berlitz material. Sorry about Berlitz, it was interesting, but I don't believe it really said anythin that wasn't already there. But I did the edits one by one, so anyone who wants to restore material just has to go back into archives. PiCo 10:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

There is another page (Mount Cudi) and I propose that it be merged into this page. Cush (talk) 08:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A merger is ridiculous since Massis Ararat (Mother Ararat 5137m) is not Mount Judi 200 miles to the south. And if anything, a split because Mount Judi (Cudi) at 2090m, is a single mountain not as high as the peak on Ararat know as Judi. Greater Ararat (Big Ararat) has three peaks, a lower one to the south and an even lower one of the plateau to the north (the one called Judi). Ask any Kurd in Turkey as I have. 75.86.172.174 (talk) 03:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

location of the modern peak

According to Reynolds (2004), there is a modern peak called jabal jud, judi dagh and qardu, located east of Cizre, at an elevation of 2089 m. But I so far fail to identify this peak on any map. Precise coordinates, together with a reference to a map that marks the peak, are needed. The article used to have 37°22′28″N 42°28′16″E / 37.374505°N 42.471119°E / 37.374505; 42.471119, without reference, which is probably about right, but I cannot verify it. --

dab (𒁳) 09:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

this would be the mountain north of

dab (𒁳) 09:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Would it be possible to have a map in our article? Even google-earth would be a help.PiCo (talk) 01:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you can click on the globe symbol next to the coordinates, this will bring up a map. We cannot upload google earth screenshots, they are copyrighted. --

dab (𒁳) 10:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Height

The 2089 m elevation is due to Reynolds (2004).

dab (𒁳) 10:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply
]


Undue weight; Reliable source etc

I have, amongst other things, removed a long quotation from the text. Since one editor appeared interested in it, I have now placed the quotation in the citation, but personally I am dubious of the appropriateness even of this. Its source "Archaeology and Biblical Research" sounds good, but actually it is a journal (now called "Bible and Spade") that "written from a scholarly and conservative viewpoint, supporting the inerrancy of the Biblical record. .... Archaeological evidence, properly interpreted, upholds the history of the Bible". There is no editorial board or review process listed. We can check it out at

WP:RSN if editors insist, but I am pretty clear that it will not be considered a reliable source for anything other than the opinion of its author; which is how it is now phrased. Quoting it as it was gave undue weight to material, including many so-called "facts", sourced to an unreliable source. So, yes, this edit summary with its unfortunate failure to assume good faith, is correct in a way; I am uncomfortable with WP citing "facts" from such a unreliable source. As I should be. --Slp1 (talk) 01:36, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

It has been noted that the "Bible and Spade" is not a peer-reviewed source so it should not be included here.Historylover4 (talk) 23:28, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And it isn't. There are circumstances when it could be used, eg to show the Creationist perspective.
talk) 06:09, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply
]

Yet more unreliable sources

Perished Nations is a self-published by Islamic creationist

talk) 09:01, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply
]

Photo

I put a photo of Mount Cudi on Wiki Commons -> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cudi-dagh-tr-1829.jpg

Regards, --Timo Roller (talk) 12:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish sources identifying the biblical mountain with Mt Judi or Qardu, really?

"
Arab historian Al-Masudi[1]
(d. 956), reported that... ."

I guess there must be a misunderstanding here. Either the reference to Babylonian Jewish sources is unsourced (the ref is set in the middle of the NEXT sentence), or it's highly dubious. The journal requires subscription, but the author has written a whole book on the topic, published by Brill, and the only reference there to Mount Judi is in a footnote, where it only speaks of "[t]he traditional view among the Moslems". Nothing Jewish. On Qardu the book has nothing at all.

See here: <ref>{{cite book |last= Lewis |first= Jack P. |author-link= Jack P. Lewis |title= A Study of the Interpretation of Noah and the Flood in Jewish and Christian Literature |page= 5, note 3 |year= 1978 |orig-year= 1968 |edition= reprint |publisher=[[BRILL]] |isbn= 9004054987 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=mO_H2lVTyhkC&pg=PA5 |access-date= 11 August 2022}}</ref>

References

  1. ^ Lewis, J. P. (December 1984), Noah and the Flood: In Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Tradition, The Biblical Archaeologist, p. 237(subscription required)

Arminden (talk) 09:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through the edit history, it becomes clear that it is UNSOURCED. The ref to Lewis only concerns the historian Al-Masudi (see here), which I cannot check (no subscription), but that's not the issue here.
"Jewish Babylonian" was introduced here by Kathovo (stopped editing in 2020) without a ref. Jewish w/o Babylonian is much older in the article. Never with a source.
I have now removed "Jewish" of any kind until a ref is offered. If a source is found, "Babylonian Jewish" was the last wording & wikilink used. @Doug Weller and Editor2020: hi, you have contributed to Noah and/or here: any opinion? Cheers, Arminden (talk) 10:06, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Arminden Just that the Chrome extension Who Wrote That? shows it was added here.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Judi&diff=prev&oldid=474300411\ Doug Weller talk 10:34, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
​Yes, that's what I wrote. But I don't know how to use the Chrome extension Who Wrote That?, so I'd appreciate some advice, maybe on my talk-page if you feel like it. No problem if you don't. Take care, Arminden (talk) 10:56, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps not so, but the view of this being
Abrahamic religion. Leo1pard (talk) 05:24, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm not all that interested in the topic, I needed clarification 1.5 yrs ago for a specific purpose and got stuck here in some obvious issues. That said, which other notable religions, Abrahamic or otherwise? If you have RS, add them, I have no problem with that. But it must be a complete logical chain: scripture X calls Noah's mount Y - Y has been identified with this specific Mount Judi - the RS for those steps are:... Thank you. Arminden (talk) 14:14, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First sentence is unacceptable

Mount Judi [..] is Noah's apobaterion or "Place of Descent", the location where the Ark came to rest after the Great Flood, according to very early Christian and Islamic tradition

It should be "Mount Judi is a mountain in Southeast Turkey [or whatever]. According to blah, it is Noah's blah." Wikipedia is supposed to follow

WP:NPOV. It should not give Biblical literalists and the correspondent Jewish and Muslim people the power to decide what a thing is. First the facts about the mountain, then whatever a group of people believe about it. --Hob Gadling (talk) 12:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Support. Arminden (talk) 14:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Easier said than done. Is it a real mountain? Where? Since when is it called Judi? Is the name Judi derived from the tradition, or is it independent from it and it took some interpretative effort to identify it with the biblical mountain at some point in history?
The lead really doesn't address this essential issue. Even the photo offered is NOT of Mt Judi, and there's no obvious connection to it. Nice pic, but why is it there?
Mess. I'm certainly not the only one who's not interesting in studying the article in depth, in order to figure out if it contains the simple answer to the question: what and where is Mt Judi in reality? Btw, that's half of the DEFINITION of the article at hand, and it's missing. It should be in the first sentence of the lead. Good catch Hob Gadling. Arminden (talk) 14:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, ok. The map has misled me into thinking it is a known existing mountain. The map should be deleted, and the first sentence should stress that it is mythological. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:56, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably those elements are based on this part: "Syriac, Islamic, and early Christian traditions identify Mount Judi or Qardu as a peak near or northeast of the town of Jazirat ibn 'Umar (modern Cizre in south-east Turkey)", which does give the mythological rock a rough real world associated location.
Iskandar323 (talk) 07:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Wait. It does appear to be a specific peak, with one photo showing a monastery visited on "Cudi Dagh" in 1909 by Gertrude Bell, and pilgrimage to the site in general being a documented phenomena. The page just does a bad job of laying down the specifics and separating fact from fiction.
Iskandar323 (talk) 07:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
It's on Google maps as "Mount Cudi" - combining "mount" with the Turkish rendition of a "J".
Iskandar323 (talk) 07:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Removed this pic:
[[File:Qudshanis,upperbarwar.jpg|thumb|[[Zagros Mountains]] near [[Qudshanis]], in the [[Hakkâri District|district]] and [[Hakkâri Province|province]] of Hakkâri, southeast [[Anatolia]], [[Iran–Turkey border|near the border]] with [[Iran]]]]
Judi is near Derebaşı and Boyunyaka in Şırnak Province. Qudshanis in Hakkâri Province looks to be c. 100 km west on Google Maps. Possibly being part of the approximatly same mountain range or region, if at all, is not good enough. Arminden (talk) 09:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Location, altitude

Online sources (the usual tools, blacklisted or not) vary very slightly re. both coordinates and elevation (either a little under, or a little over 2100 m: both 2,089 m and 2,114 m consistently pop up). Maybe the coordinates we have now are just what Google Maps is showing, and we know that Google Maps can be edited by anyone, almost like Wiki, right? Arminden (talk) 10:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mount_Judi&oldid=1213828149"