Talk:Eilat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Judaism Portal
Eilat is part of WikiProject Judaism, a project to improve all articles related to Judaism. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Judaism articles.
Project Judaism To-do:
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
Israel Portal
Eilat is part of WikiProject Israel, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Israel articles.
Project Israel To Do (Drop-Down Menu):
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.


Contents

[edit] E in "Eilat"

Excuse me, but why the silly accent on the E in "Eilat"? Hebrew does not use latin characters, so this accent does not come "from the original Hebrew". So the title of the article should the name of the city in English or as would be typically written by English speakers. And that is "Eilat", without any foreign-looking accent mark. Compare Tel-Aviv (not Tel-'abib or who knows what), Haifa (not Khefa, Cheifa, or whatever). I believe this article should be renamed Eilat, unaccented. Nyh 14:45, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It is simply a more accurate Latin script transliteration convention for Hebrew. You see, in Hebrew it is regular for the accent to be on the last syllable. But then this is not the case, an acute mark can be placed over the accented syllable to show that it — rather than the last syllable — is accented. It is not "exotic", it is linguistic. - Gilgamesh 22:18, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I beg you pardon?! Maybe in a subset of the supposed set of Hebrew languages Eilat is pronounced with the first syllable accented, but Hebrew is not a member of that subset. --i@k5 22:26, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
I recall that it is on the first syllable in Biblical Hebrew. But if it's not the case in Israeli Hebrew, then by all means move the article back. But don't change the Tiberian vocalized transliteration. Maybe someone could leave a note about the differences in stress for the name between the forms of Hebrew. - Gilgamesh 22:50, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I'm more studied in Tiberian Hebrew, to be truthful. Tiberian Hebrew and Standard Hebrew do have a lot of subtle irregular mutual differences that creep up on me all the time, so a confusion like this is an easy mistake to make. For the most prominent example I've seen of the differences, see the names for the vowels in niqqud, and how different they are between the vocalizations. (Why in the world did Standard Hebrew do this so much?) - Gilgamesh 22:56, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Um, it's most certainly on the last syllable in Israeli Hebrew, I'm not quite sure about Tiberian (is it relevant in a discussion of modern Israeli realitiy anyway?) I removed the accent in Eilat, but not in Negev. In the latter case the stress is marked correctly; the big question is whether we should mark it at all in normal English text flow.
If we do it for names from other languages in article texts (Arabic, French, Hawaiian, Japanese), why not here? :) It's always nice to have a bit more detail. When in doubt, I always add linguistic detail. - Gilgamesh 23:45, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Gilgamesh, just a reminder: YOU are not "in charge" of the Hebrew language. There are millions of Jewish Hebrew speakers with Hebrew as their first language, and familiar with English too, who have a better sense of the best way to present Hebrew words to the world at large... Find a different hobby won't you... IZAK 11:08, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Gilgamesh is at it again

Gilgamesh is determined to remove the Hebrew language from its normal rational historical moorings under cover of "scholarly" arguments, as he believes that the Jews do not have "exclusive" rights to their own language! That is perhaps why he persists in creating havoc with Hebrew names whenever he finds them, regardless of the naming conventions that are accepted and used by the whole world such as with "Eilat". See for example my debates with him at:

When he will stop his useless and confusing tamperings with Hebrew is anyone's guess. IZAK 08:55, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

See Talk:Negev for my response. - Gilgamesh 10:51, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
(Another response.) IZAK, I do not appreciate "Gilgamesh is at it again." It is quite pejorative, implying that I am somehow being vandalous. You are perfectly free to disagree with my approach to edits, but please stick to politely critiquing me and respect me as an editor in my fields, just as I respect your vast knowledge of the Torah. - Gilgamesh 11:00, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

But let's keep arguments about "Jews" and "their own language" away from the current discussion. I don't think this is the case here. When discussing a thriving modern city, you need to take into account the current accepted usage of its name in English texts, not just historical notions of what it might have been called 2,000 or whatever years ago. Eilat is a popular (to some degree) tourist attraction, frequented also by English-speaking tourists, and they tend to spell its name like that, "Eilat" (again, try Google), so this is how Wikipedia should also spell it. It is unrelated to how the Jews spell the name (they usually do so in Hebrew characters anyway), and this whole issue has no religious relevance at all anyway. But Gilgamesh, by denying that this city (and other names of Hebrew origin) have common (not "linguistic") transliterations into English and trying to "invent" new (you think more accurate, modern pronunciation disagrees) ones, you sound like you're implying that these names are not commonly used by modern English speakers, and I think that this implication is what bothers Izak here.

In names that have modern importance, not just historical importance, English spelling is almost always a simplified transliteration and not a 100% accurate (and that is also a questionable notion) one. See for example Istanbul. This is the perfect place to keep the accurate spelling, with a dot over the I, and yet Wikipedia didn't. Because this is an English Wikipedia and not a Turkish one, and English writes don't know what this dot means and never write it. The article also gives the accurate Turkish spelling, but it admits that the modern, actually used, spelling is the simplified one without any diacritics, dots and accents. See also Munich, another example of a "non-accurate" name but in fact the one in use by English speakers.

But I'm starting to repeat myself :(

Nyh 09:32, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I really didn't realize Eilat was that famous. I suppose I can understand putting an article name under a common name, such as Beersheva or Moscow, which are not the native names. I had gotten the impression that Eilat was more obscure because I keep seeing "Eilat", "Elat" and "Elath" as variant spellings on search engines. I also was always taught that Eilat was obscure compared to its much more famous neighbor Aqaba. - Gilgamesh 11:00, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Not sure what any of this discussion is about, but in case someone else hasn't mentioned it Israelis pronounce "Eilat" with the stress on the second syllable. --Zero 11:58, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] `Elyôn

The article titled `Elyôn also needs to be changed as its `E is not in normal use and would only confuse most readers. IZAK 07:34, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  • Similar problem with `Anat. IZAK 07:40, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neither of these terms have a "usual" English transliteration, so the problem here is much less accute than it is in articles about modern cities or regions. I do agree though that these transliterations are strange in that there is no way that anyone is ever going to guess them and type "`Elyôn" into the "go" box. The backticks (`) are indeed accepted transliterations of ayin, though, so I don't know if to suggest to remove it or not. I don't understand the accent-circumflex on the o though. In French, the accent-circumflex suggests that a letter has been lost, and this is not the case here. Nyh 09:34, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  • Placing these comments (so far) on the `Elyôn and `Anat pages so that their author can take note... IZAK 09:57, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Oh please, not again, Gilgamesh. Can't you PLEASE leave well enough alone? Eilat. Givatayim. That's what they're called in the press, and in tourist guides, and in signs all over Israel. Why complicate life with obscure apostrophes and stresses? --Woggly 10:41, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Yikes, I can't believe it - Gilgamesh just renamed the Givatayim article, after this discussion of the Negev and Eilat was already ongoing :( Gilgamesh, why do you insist on modifying spellings of modern Israeli places, when all the Israelis disagree with the way you write them and believe that your changes are harming the usefulness of the articles? In particular, I still don't understand the stress thing, which has no place in an English language name of a place. Nyh 10:49, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I have reverted Givatayim back to its common usage. When will User:Gilgamesh stop his butchering of common and rational Hebrew usage on Wikipedia? IZAK 11:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Názerat Illit is Gilgameshe's latest "victim". And I believe not only is the stress mark not useful in the article name, worse - it is again in the wrong place. Israelis pronounce the first word as "Natsrat", with the stress on the second syllable. Nyh 11:43, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I didn't move the pages after all our discussion. Nyh made a good point, and I wouldn't contest such a revert now. And as this seems to be a more complex sign of difference between Ancient and Modern forms of the languages (before, people had always told me they were the same language with negligible grammatical differences), it would seem wise not to make such moves in the future unless I knew it wouldn't be widely rejected. Instead of burning me in effigy, simply quietly correct my mistakes and explain the error while you do it. These are easy mistakes to make, as these are irregular stress differences between Biblical and Israeli Hebrew. I will not tolerate allegations of "butchery" in this academic setting. - Gilgamesh 13:25, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Here's another tip, Gilgamesh: don't let yourself get antagonised by IZAK's comments. You should have read enough of them by now to realise that this is how he expresses himself in arguments, it doesn't look like he'll be changing his style soon. When I disagree with you, I tell you that I disagree with you. When IZAK disagrees with you, he tells you that you are an antisemite promoting your hateful agenda. Just try to ignore it. But please don't make assumptions about the pronounciation of modern Hebrew based on whatever you know about biblical Hebrew. These assumptions are evidently often wrong. The wikipedia notation for the name of a modern city should reflect the conventions used by people who live, work, visit and do business in that city, not the conventions of those who know the city only through ancient and historical texts. In all seriousness now: maybe you should try to learn some modern Hebrew? Take a class, listen to tapes, meet with some Israelis. It could only expand your linguistic abilities. --Woggly 09:10, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I have already agreed to readdress Modern Hebrew before I try to make more logic leaps. In honesty, I may decide to give up Modern Hebrew edits if I keep running into etymological irregularities like these. And as for IZAK...when IZAK accuses me of grandiose crimes and grievous sins, I know he's just blowing smoke, but it's also like he's contempting my right to exist in his universe. It may seem hard to understand, but... I can easily deal with mere immaturity and empty insults — I shrug them off and do what I can to embrace friendship and peace. But contempt — particularly when it exists where I must continually witness it again and again — is something that feels very sharp, very cold, very toxic. It pulls and erases every feeling around it like a black hole, from which nothing remains but complete bitterness, utter nihilism, and even more contempt than before, feeding the black hole's size and expanding its event horizon. I mean, have you ever had a massive near-gangrenous infection that made you feel cold even on a warm day, and was old healed by having the dead flesh amputated (e.g. severe toe infection)? It's rather like that. I'm allergic to contempt, because contempt is a lot more real and more serious than mere unkind words. I would really prefer IZAK not to be contemptuous of me at all, so that we could collaborate professionally without mudslinging, the way you and I and others collaborate. That would be absolutely fantastic, absolutely grand. - Gilgamesh 11:33, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Negev

Just letting you guys know that I changed Négev to Negev. It's the common Latin transliteration, and since the stress isn't marked in Hebrew, it doesn't need to be in English. Besides, the acute accent was unclear; the first pronunciation that it suggested to me was [ˈnegɛv], even though I know the real one.Benji man 29 June 2005 13:55 (UTC)

[edit] Eilat / Elat

The transliteration of the Hebrew spelling as used by the Survey of Israel (HaMerkaz leMippui Yisrael, formerly Agaf haMedidot) maps for many years has been Elat. The English conventional spelling is Eilat, as is found in numerous holiday brochures. This was also the earlier (1960s ?) Survey of Israel convention. Eylat or Eylath are marginally more "scientific" transliterations of the Hebrew but are really never used. The use of the acute accent does not necessarily indicate stress, which would be incorrect for this word - it could simply indicate vowel quality and would be an accurate rendering into, say, French, of the Hebrew pronunciation, where the i or y sound is barely audible. It is, however, not used by Survey of Israel. Some of the previous contributors need to calm down, and the discussion is going off topic. NGH.

Actually my father chose the spelling "Eylath" as the transliteration of our family name. Unfortunately it works only in non-Englosh Speaking Europe, where it is always pronocuced correctly. In English speaking countries, it is a disaster, usually pronocunced Eye-lath or Elie-ath, with man more butcheries. "Eilat" works best for English, from my experience. AAE

[edit] Battleship Eilat

Does anyone have any more information on that ship? Reply on my talk page --V. Joe 23:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The airport is no longer domestic

There are international fights there, for several years now, specially from western Europe, but also from the US and sometimes even from Far East.

My English is not good enough for the English Wikipedia, so I'd be greatfull for whoever updates the article. 89.138.102.146 18:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History

I wish there was more about the history of this city. Anybody who knows more, please share. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RFoglio (talk • contribs) [1]

right. there is almost nothing about the history between ancient times and 1947/48, as if the town hadn't existed in these centuries! --Severino (talk) 17:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article improvement

A few of us are going to be working on the article to improve it. I'll mainly be doing some cosmetic and behind the scenes work, formatting, manual of style fixes, etc., but there will be others working on content. What content work I'll be doing today is to remove the promotional-tone of the Tourism section, as each item is written as a mini-advertisement, and needs to be neutralized, keeping in mind the list of words to avoid, and the peacock terms that should be avoided in articles. I've also done some work with re-ordering the sections, moving the history up, moving the huge panoramic image down to the very bottom, and I removed the gallery and placed the images into the article. Now, I have a request: There is a news report that was in the external links, that I've added to the article, which talks about the history of Eilat with regards to Egypt's claim of it. The article is found here, and since I'm not familiar with the history/politics, I request someone who is familiar with it add this information (not copying from the news URL, of course) into the end of the history section, and at the end of the sentences to reference the information, immediately following the period, put <ref name="jpost" /> (exactly as seen here). This will add the citation to the passage, as the source is already inline. Ariel♥Gold 15:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

In most Israeli city articles, the emblem of the city appears under the photo in the infobox. Does anyone know how to put it there?--Gilabrand 06:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I looked into this, and in most of the cities, a high quality landscape photo is shown, to illustrate the city. The crest doesn't sufficiently illustrate the city, so that's why I moved it. See Ashdod, Ashkelon, Beersheba, Dimona, etc. Images are used to illustrate the topic, and I don't think that the city's crest does that for someone coming to the page who is unfamiliar with the city. In the vast majority of all city articles, worldwide, an image of the city's landscape is shown for this reason. For the guideline on layout of sections, refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities/Guideline. Ariel♥Gold 06:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I didn't say INSTEAD of the photo, but under it. Personally, I don't think it adds much either, but I see that it is done on many Israel city pages.--Gilabrand 06:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, alright, you mean inside the infobox? Apologies that I did not understand that's what you meant. This particular infobox only has parameters for one image, I have yet to see two images used in this particular infobox. The option would be to change to a more generic infobox, if you think that would be better? Ariel♥Gold 07:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

It's up to you. I don't know much about the infoboxes. On another subject, someone just added a long list of "also sees" - but most of them are already linked in the article and are not needed.--Gilabrand 07:17, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that. Generally the "See also" section is for related articles that provide relevant information not included in the article, and not previously wiki-linked. So those that are redundant could be removed from the section. As for infoboxes, it appears that this infobox is used in all but two of the cities in the template box at the bottom, so it would appear to be the current standard for Israel's South District. I kind of like the clean look of it, but the other infobox would be the one found in the Arad, Israel article. I'm not sure this article has enough information to really fill that infobox out (demographics, mostly). As mentioned, mostly I'm just involved in the cosmetic aspects, and not so much the content, and I'll be going through the article to put all the references into standardized templates at some point soon, but I don't have any preference for one thing or the other, except for just trying to bring the article's format up to the guidelines for cities, and to neutralize the tone (which you've done with the tourism section, well done on that Gil!) So feel free to make any changes you like, and if you need formatting help let me know :) Ariel♥Gold 07:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi: About the function of "See also" it's not a hard and fast rule, as sometimes it can be a way of summarizing the connecting articles too, and quite often articles in the "See also" section were not openly evident having been covered up by other wording, see Wikipedia:Piped link. At any rate, it's not a life and death issue. IZAK 08:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Quite true. It isn't as though the list is so long it is distracting. Perhaps some of the items could be removed, like the airports, but I don't consider it to be a big issue, personally. Glad to see so many folks coming in to help with the article! I think we were all united by dear Shir-El Too, so thanks to her for putting the focus on this interesting place, and for her dedication to improving the article! Ariel♥Gold 09:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Ariel: Thanks for the kind words. Why remove the links to the airports of all things?, they are the crucial keys to the over one million tourists who come to Eilat each year, and growing! IZAK 09:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Ahh, well as mentioned, I'm unfamiliar with the city, so at first glance, the airports were covered in the article, and linked, so they just seemed superfluous to link in the "See also" section. As I said, I don't think it is a huge deal, so I've no real opinion on it ;) Ariel♥Gold 09:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WOW!

It does not look like the same article! I'm trying to find a sufficiently novel way to say Thank You all, because I have been and will continue to be writing Thank You a lot! I'm working on Timna (which I've always written as "Timmna" btw) [facts, just the facts], and more weather info, because unfortunately Eilat's "dry" climate is in the past; for the last 20+ years humidity has been steadily rising and it has been +/-50% relative and more for over 2 years. Rav Todot - Many Thanks, Shir-El too 11:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Could someone please move the coordinates back into the infobox? They are unreadable under the donation drive blurb, and I've seen it done this way elsewhere. Thank you, Shir-El too 11:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, the donation box will be gone soon, it is a temporary thing. The function of the coordinate system has them at the upper right corner, and users can hide the donation box, so it shouldn't interfere. (If it does interfere, that's an issue with the donation box coding itself, and not with the article or the coordinates template). Additionally, putting them into the infobox would still make them show up at the top, since that's the function of the system. See Template:Infobox Israel muni and look at the top, that's the way the infobox (and all of the city/location infoboxes) have them formatted. If it is a big deal, it could be taken out completely until the donation box is gone, but that removes the ability to click on the coords and locate them with the various tools. See New York, Paris, Cairo, London, Tokyo, etc., they all use this format, as it is the standard geo-location template. I know the donation box is a pain right now, but it's a short term thing :o) Ariel♥Gold 11:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great work

This article now looks great! I think it is very close in terms of content to GA standard. What I think is holding it back is the citations and references of the article. I really think that once these are added the article should be submitted as a GA candidate. Just to let you know, the Ashdod article was in a very similar state and within a matter of days was a GA article! --Flymeoutofhere (talk) 18:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)