Talk:Beit Shemesh

Materials

• http://www.calcalist.co.il/real_estate/articles/0,7340,L-3514659,00.html

Untitled

The article contains the following sentence:

"There are 567 immigrant settlers."

I have lived in Beit Shemesh for ten years, and I have no clue what this could be referring to.

I am removing this from Category:Wine regions. This is because it is not a region in the sense of the other ones (administrative areas with particular winemaking regulations). I thought about creating a category for villages which make wine, but these are almost infinite. Unless they have some legal significance (eg French appelations) I dont think they are important. I have put Cremisan into Category:Wineries however. Justinc 18:08, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I was wondering: Did anything happen to this place between Biblical times and 1948? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.239.202.173 (talk) 15:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Friction

Deleted the 'jpost' reference as it doesnt exist in webarchive nor in jpost.com nor do I, as an ever-resident of Bet Shemesh, ever heard of any friction between the sides. What are you people talking about, feeding on media lies?! Ridiculous. Bet Shemesh is very known for it's peacful nature and friendly population, at least to those actually who live in it. I should also state that using a non-existant link to a specific case of attack to dishonor the name of an entire, very unique, city, is shameful, as several 'stabbing/assult/whatever' by individuals does not make any city known for friction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.93.255 (talk) 01:29, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Would people out ot BS stop commenting about the "friction" in BS please? Thank you, Ynhockey. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.93.255 (talk) 17:11, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Anonymous! Please don't post misleading information about the link. It works just fine, I tried it again now. Maybe you should try to use a different browser. I am restoring the well-sourced information until you can provide a source stating otherwise. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 22:41, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

A well sourced information? Name a city's character by an archived (therefore deleted) article from a News website? Meaning, a website that lurks for controversy, admitted for being wrong, therefore deleted the article, and you're the one to claim otherwise? I will not tolerate such insults to my home-town, and will revert your ridicule. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.93.255 (talk) 07:05, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Ramat Beit Shemesh and Beit Shemesh

Is the city of Ramat Bet Shemesh included into the Bet Shemesh population? They are two different areas (although close in distance)

Ramat Beit Shemesh is part of Beit Shemesh, it's population is included.

Anyone know the source for the statement:

"2005 population around 80,000"

No, but I remember reading that it is one of the fastest growing cities in Israel. Spoil29

That's true, but unfortunately, there appear to many people who exaggerate this growth. I have heard local politicians and others claim that the population has passed 75,000, but based on the official figure for the end of 2004, it is highly unlikely that the population is greater than 65,000 at this time. Shlomo

The problem may be that some people think that Bet Shemesh and Ramat Bet Shemesh are the same. Spoil29

Bet Shemesh and Ramat Bet Shemesh are the same - Ramat Bet Shemesh is a large neighborhood in Beit Shemesh.

I removed the part about 80,000 people since according to official statistics, the population was 65,500 at the end of 2005 (see http://www.cbs.gov.il/population/new_2006/table3.pdf).

I agree. They should be merged with Ramat Bet Shemesh being a link to Bet Shemesh. Happy138 20:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I second that. The city is Bet Shemesh. It has one mayor, one city hall one everything. Ramat Bet Shemesh is only a general name for the two neighborhoods, just like "Giva't Sharet" is for the second (newer) of the three hill on which Bet Shemesh is on. --Gavers23 22:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

merged Happy138 16:03, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

And I oppose. The 'merge' has been reverted. This 'merge' was done in a highly unprofessional way. First of all, the 'merge' was totally inappropriate. The entire world knows RBS as a separate town. I have been there many times and until this discussion I have never known that it is technically merely a neighborhood of Beit Shemesh.

Who's 'everybody'? ALL residents of Bet Shemesh know they're just 2 (3rd in construction) neighbothoods, under a 'borough-like' name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.93.255 (talk) 01:34, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

It is completely different from Beit Shemesh. Just like there are articles for different neighborhoods of Jerusalem, there is no problem in having an article for RBS, even if it is technically a neighborhood of BS. I will put that into the RBS article. --Bear and Dragon 22:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

After checking, I discovered that both the BS and the RBS articles already clearly mention that RBS is a neighborhood (well, 2 neighborhoods) of BS. Issue closed. Are we also going to move Har Nof, Givat Shaul, Ramot, Pisgat Ze'ev, Neveh Yaakov, etc, into Jerusalem? There is no reason why RBS should not have its own article. --Bear and Dragon 22:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

merge Ramat Beit Shemesh and Beit Shemesh

• merge RBS is a neighbourhood of BS. BS is not such a big city that might require seperate articles for each neighbourhood. As it is, the BS article, except for the stats, is mainly refering to the RBS Haredi section. --Shuki 21:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• oppose. If the BS article refers mainly to RBS, then improve the BS article by writing about BS. Everybody I know sees RBS as a separate town. Until this dispute erupted I (who lies 20 km away from there and has been in RBS many times) never knew that it was not a separate town. This 'neighborhood' has about 20,000 inhabitants, making it a huge neighborhood and most definitely worth its own article. If you merge this article, I suggest you stick the same tags on the above-mentioned articles on Jerusalem neighborhoods as well, as well as of all other neighborhoods of other Israeli cities. We are going to be consequent. Merge this, and we merge Gilo, Har Nof, Pisgat Ze'ev, Neveh Yaakov, Ramot etc into Jerusalem as well. You can't have it both ways. --Bear and Dragon 23:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

B&D, you do understand that your statements are admitted WP:OR, and that you expect us to fall in line from what 'you' know as opposed to what might be consensus/policy. As for Jerusalem, or other major cities with split neighbourhood articles, if you can expand the main Beit Shemesh article extensive to the size and scope of the Jerusalem article, then I would might with you. Look at the nearby and almost identical Modi'in article. Would it be valid to open a seperate article for Modi'in neighbourhoods? Scale up to larger Israeli cities and check Rishon LeZion at triple the size - no need for seperate neighbourhood articles. --Shuki 13:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Do these neighborhoods of Modi'in also have 20,000 inhabitants and are they also demographically totally different from the rest of Modi'in? --Bear and Dragon 14:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

See my reply below. There are also other separate and unique neighborhoods in BS, other than RBS. Happy138 18:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you please name some of these neighborhoods, each of which are of course so well-known as RBS? --Bear and Dragon 23:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

• merge. There are also other separate and unique neighborhoods in BS, other than RBS. They should all be in the same article. Happy138 07:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• merge. As now a majority for over a month - have merged.Flymeoutofhere 17:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Sun godess?

I propose the following discussion points:

1. Beit Shemesh is better translated as "temple of the sun", not "home of the sun". The same is true about Bet-El, Bet-Dagan (dagon)and Beit Horon. All these were canaanite temple sites.
2. Shemesh was not a sun-goddess, but a sun-god, as is correctly stated in the link provided. Hficher 16:16, 16 June 2007 (UTC) That is correct. Alilah, Shemosh, AKA in the bible as Chemosh, and Nergel were sun gods; and were positions of the sun. Alilah means "The god ascends," and is the morning sun. Chemosh means "highest authority." The noon sun. Nergel was the sun god of the night after sundown. Beit [Shemosh / Chemosh] means House of the Highest Authority. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.131.245 (talk) 20:45, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Inter-religious conflict

I am more than familiar with the conflicts being raised. However, the edits that have been added to the article to describe the issue are in clear violation of Wikipedia policy requiring a neutral point of view. These edits need to be drastically reworded and properly sourced before they can be reinserted. Even ignoring the typo, describing someone as being "attacked by a group of hooligan Chardim" is blatant POV and is unacceptable in any Wikipedia article. Alansohn (talk) 13:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The word hooligan has been removed. Everything else is a statement of clear and unquestionable fact and not a POV in any way. If you insist on censoring the posting of facts that is a clear violation of Wikipedia policy and will be reported as such. jimr If you question any fact..state which one and you will be directed to the clear source of those facts. You have not made statement about anything else to show where POV was used. Be specific and I will answer specifically. Aside from that I will view you as a censor of facts until you clearly note exactly which statements you call POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.245.245.202 (talk) 00:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The content you are adding is plainly not NPOV. None of it is. I would fix the wording myself but I don't have access to the news articles you cite. I would suggest that you just leave it be, or request help at WikiProject Israel, where presumably an experienced editor will have access to the articles and be able to determine their encyclopedic value and/or modify the text to be in accord with policy. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that the issue is much less POV, and more WP:OR, and misunderstanding of WP as seen with the poor editing by the anon with a suspected WP:POINT. Anon, please don't simply reinsert your edit. Instead, hone up on the WP guidelines and perhaps suggest an alternative wording here on the discussion page. --Shuki (talk) 21:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

GA

Hi. I think this article is getting very close to GA status. In terms of content, I think we are almost there, but the referencing is what definetely would hold this back in a nomination. If anyone is willing to help work on this, it'd be great. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 11:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Almost all of the statistical information can be attributed to this source (or if not, it should be updated to this source's data, which is so far the latest). -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 19:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

This article is not anywhere near GA status.--Gilabrand (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree, there's a lot of information missing, too few citations, and the formatting is bad. But it's better than most of the articles about Israeli cities, so there's already something to work with. I can provide the Ariel Encyclopedia (1976) article on Beit Shemesh to anyone who is interested. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 23:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Merger of the article Tamuz

I have recently come across the article Tamuz (kibbutz), which appears to be a single building, or a complex at the most, with no notability whatsoever. The article can be merged into this one by copy/pasting just one line, so I will do it if there is no opposition. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 14:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Beit or Bet

If it's officially Bet, the article name should be Bet. Happy138 (talk) 19:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

No. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 12:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Why? in today's Hebrew the i is not heard. Happy138 (talk) 13:10, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

That's a complete different argument. However, I disagree with this one too; I believe that most modern Hebrew speakers do pronounce the letter. Moreover, even if some do not, omitting the letter is extremely uncommon in English renderings of Hebrew words (not just place names). For instance, English-language media in Israel (The Jerusalem Post, Ynetnews and Haarez English) use "Beit" exclusively, including in the case of Beit Shemesh. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 15:17, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Orot Banot School

Please provide explanation for deletion. Includes references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.192.130 (talk) 18:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

There should really be some more info here about what is happening now in Ramat Beit Shemesh. I'll start compiling and editing, and would appreciate all the help I could get. --FeldBum (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I agree, the section needs expaning. I started to clean up the article a bit, and prepared it for the expansion. I removed the allegation, that the Haredim in question are Sikrikim, as there is no mention of them in any sources, which all speak of either (extremist) ultra-Orthodox or Haredi Jews. I also removed the "notable rabbis", as they are not notable and the "sources" are just ads for rabbis and institutions, some not even in Beit Shemesh, Ajnem (talk) 15:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The reason that the Sikrikim weren't specifically indicted is partially because they are so small they escape the attention of the larger public and partially because the Israeli media is very anti-Haredi and saw to blaming the ambiguous "Haredi public" as the main instigators. By blaming "Haredi protestors" with the implication that a good number of the Haredi residents in RBS-B are complicit in the violence, instead of a small sub-sub-sub-fringe group, in the article, you lose all semblance of NPOV. Here are some citations on Sikri violence: [1], [2], [3]. Yserbius (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC).

Pardon, can you explain why you included an article fro mthe guardian (which appears to be news analysis, not news) and left out the part about moderate Chareidim protesting. You appear to be tryign to give a particular picture.Mzk1 (talk) 23:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The problem here is that the neighborhood itself (RBS-A) is moderate chareidi, or largely so, and the trouble comes from an element in RBS-B, which is very extreme chareidi, perhaps the most extreme in the country. The article implies quite otherwise. Also, if you read carefully through the articles, you find that the issue is as much about housing as anythign else. Also, although I do not yet have the chronology straight, this very real issue appears to be used in the middle of an anti-chareidi campaign on various womens' issues by the Israeli press. Ironically, this issue appears to have started - I've seen some evidence in Ha'aaretz to back this up - when some soldiers, who were (probably) mostly religious Zionist, were punished because they would not promise to stay when a woman sang. There is a clip from before this issue from Sivan Rahav of Channel 2 about the issue (the general issue; I don't think the school was in the news yet) being blown out of proportion.

I've done some minor clean-up, but did not add Chareidi sources. If anyone out there can try to be NPOV, maybe we can get something close to accuracy, given that there ARE no sources that are not heavily biased one way or another. It would be nice in Wikipedia could light the way for a press that seems to have forgotten what journalism is, at least before our stuff is copied verbatum into "reliable sources".Mzk1 (talk) 23:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

There is another issue, which I have tracked for quite some time. That is, that while even anti-religious parpers such as Ha'aretz (actually, there aren't any non-anti-Chareidi regular papers) are RS t osome extent, it is difficult to say the same of English internet sources. I've noticed things like columns not being labeled as such, contradictory statements, etc. See if you can get the Hebrew.

Perhaps we can balance with Chareid sources? I hate to, because it won't be NPOV either ,but I don't see much alternative.Mzk1 (talk) 22:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Mzk1, I admit that I don't quite understand what your stance is. If your only objection is, that there are no “Chareidi sources”, well, NPOV is achieved by presenting different points of view, so just add the haredi point of view with sources which you consider “Chareidi sources”, provided they are reliable (by Wikipedia standards) and in English. But there is a limit to what is acceptable. If Haaretz reports 10,000 protesters [4] at the rally in Beit Shemes, and The Yeshiva World reports a few hundred [5], Haaretz, which is a reliable source by Wikipedia standards, is more credible – which doesn't mean that the figures cannot be wrong – but adding the infinitly lower figures to “balance” is not possible. If one doubts the Haaretz figures, one has to find a reliable source which has lower figures. And by the way, I'm not “tryign to give a particular picture” or “left out the part about moderate Chareidim protesting.” I removed the part about the egg-throwing of a non-haredi because I didn't find any source for it in English, but that has nothing to do with “moderate Chareidim protesting”. But may be we first have to agree on semantics. “Haredi/Charedi” is synonymous with ultra-Orthodox Jew in English, not with Orthodox Jews, who also include modern Orthodox Jews, who are definitly not called Haredim in English. The families of the girls at Orot Banot are Orthodox, if I'm not mistaken, not just religious Jews (many American Conservative Jews consider themselves religious, even though they drive to Temple on Schabbath). I don't understand your distinction between “moderate chareidim”, “chareidim” and “extreme chareidi”, and above all, I don't understand what you mean by “anti-chareidi campaign on various womens' issues by the Israeli press”. Am I to understand that you want the English Wikipedia to aprove of the various violations of the principle of equality between men and woman, which is also the law in Israel, practised by (some?/many?/most?/all?) Haredim in Israel (and elsewhere) not only in the privat but also in the public sphere? If that is why you put the POV-tag there, well, you might as well remove it yourself, because it wont stay there for long. Cheers, Ajnem (talk) 10:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC) Oh, I forgot, you obviously don't know what “hate violence” is [6]. Google could have helped you, e.g. with this article [7].

This source http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2011/12/30/they-will-come-for-you-too/ does not look reliable to me, as it appears to be a self published blog. I think that it should be removed. Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 16:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you (Anjem) call a reliable source. Is Yeshiva World News a reliable source? Is it a "major newspaper"? I see it here, a Chareidi source used for only anti-Chareidi purposes. I questioned your quoting the anti-chareidi parts of the Guardian and not the pro-Chareidi parts. Is this proper Wikipedia editing? I agree Ha'aretz is a major newspaper, in Hebrew in newsprint; I question that the internet versions - especially the English ones. I'm sorry you can't find Hebrew sources, but this is not my problem. I am glad you assume that Wikipedia has principles, and I know anti-semitism is not one of them, even if "reliable sources" happen to hold such principles. I will go oe later, but note that the Wikipedia page is called Haredi Judaism.Mzk1 (talk) 22:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Please note that for all of the comments, I had basically left the article alone, however other made some changes. I did modify it now. I just want to mention that if you think the issue of "gender separation" is so "black and white", then the school must be illegal, because it is gender-separated. One problem with using "ultra-orthodox" is that from comments I have seen, people mistake it a self-descriptive, when it clearly is not, in fact often it is considered prejorative.Mzk1 (talk) 01:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, a note on the number, which I did not touch. I notice one source (Ynet? Ha'aretz?) was so anxious to confirm the expected 10,000 that they changed the tense in the first paragraph to confirm the number while the second was still in future! Highly suspicious, and demonstration numbers are perhaps the most susceptable to media bias; I recall this from the Soviet Jewry and pro-Israel demonstrations of my youth. At any rate, I have no problem with qualifying Chareidi sources by saying that they are such, although I do not see very much sticking to "major newspapers" here anyway. (Arguably, the 100-year-old Hamodia IS a "major newspaper", if we are not to judge our sources anyway.)Mzk1 (talk) 01:20, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Beit_Shemesh#Gender segregation and violence against Orot Banot girls’ school

Please stop undoing my edits. It is clear from reference 21 [8] that the violence was perpetrated by the Sikrikim, not a group of unknown Ultra Orthodox men. This is a huge POV issue, as your edit makes it sound like it's the fault of the entire Ultra Orthodox community while my edit puts the blame on a small group of troublemakers. There is clear and abundant evidence from several sources that the Sikrikim were the ones involved in the violence at the Orot Banot School. Specifically here are a few quotes from the aforementioned [[Jewish Press article], [this Forward article] and [this Jerusalem Post article]. Specifically these:

attacks on local women and children by a group of radical haredim affiliated with the Sikrikim

8-year-old Na’ama Margolis, the daughter of Orthodox American immigrants, was spat on by a member
of the Sikrikim

Upon their arrival, the radicals attempted to intimidate both religious and non-religious residents
by attempting to impose a strict “dress code” in and around their enclave. In recent months, members 
of the radical faction have become increasingly violent, hurling rocks at young girls who attend Orot 
Banot, calling them “sluts” and “shiksas.”

The new Orot Banot girls’ school is situated on a major road that is the seam between the city’s 
Modern Orthodox neighborhood and one that is home to members of violent ultra-Orthodox faction 
known as the “Sikrikim.”

Earlier this year, the Post reported that “the same group of Sikrikim has also targeted an ice 
cream store in the Geula neighborhood because they thought licking ice cream cones in public was 
immodest. Haredi media reported last year that Sikrikim in Beit Shemesh have targeted shoe stores 
in ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods that refuse to remove high-heeled shoes from their selection.”
...
These radicals are also said to be related to the extremist group causing trouble at the Orot Banot 
nationalreligious school in Beit Shemesh.

Now, can you please explain to me why this isn't enough to warrant a specific "blame" in the article as opposed to the vague "some Ultra-Orthodox Jews" language that sounds very NPOV? Yserbius (talk) 04:13, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Claims for evidence of 'advanced kingdom'

This section is problematic. 'In all layers from this period, the bones of animals were all of kosher animals, in contrast to nearby ancient fortresses and settlements of that period such as Maresha, Azekah or Lachish, suggesting an early Jewish settlement and advanced kingdom in the early biblical "kings" period.' There is no reference or supporting evidence. Even if there were it is hard to see how the absence of non kosher animal bones says anything about an 'advanced kingdom in the early biblical kings period'. This is pure POV, and likely to be OR. I intend to reword this section as follows. In all layers from this period, the bones of animals were all of kosher animals, in contrast to nearby ancient fortresses and settlements of that period such as Maresha, Azekah or Lachish, suggesting an early Israelite settlement.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 12:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

the source says that the dietary findings could indicate Israelite Cannanite or Philistine inhabitants, so I will update the proposed change above to include this.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 21:11, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Some things missing from some changes I made

• I tried to put the more serious stuff on top (the throwing things) and I added the kid who was injured; however, if there are more specfics about what was thrown, please add it. Also, I think the school was vandalized; if you have sources?
• There needs to be added information about attacks on Chareidi kids and adults in Beit Shemesh and elsewhere as the result of the media coverage, including spitting by a press photographer, beatings by attendees of the demonstration, fear of Charedi kids to walk the streets, and the rather serious indicent of the 10-year-old girl in Jerusalem. Perhaps also the Yeshiva lecturer who was put in the hospital in Ashdod; but since the attackers were Ethiopean I am not sure if one can assume a connnection.
• I did not write very well; if someone can improve the writing without messing up the content...
• I'm afraid I may have quoted too much from the Guardian article; possible copyright issue.

P.S. The Chareidi part of the building competition needs more; including use of Hamodia to justify the plural.

US State Department Travel Advisory

The article specifically lists the violence in Beit Shemesh as a precipitating factor for the advisory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.165.122.186 (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

That might be true, but the advisory was not to Bet Shemesh. Happy138 (talk) 20:30, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

POV-tag

Hello. I tried to clean up a bit and moved the controversies to the end, which I think is more logical. If I have removed something important, it was unintentional, but I have removed what was either unsourced or not pertinent to the issue, with the exeption of the above mentioned US travel advisory, which concerns Jerusalem, not Bet Shemesh. Would those who think that the controversies-section is unbalanced please state what they think is unbalanced, maybe we can get it so that the tag can be removed. Ajnem (talk) 15:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The history of Beit Shemesh goes back to "pre-biblical times"? Before Adam & Eve? WS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.10.183.178 (talk) 06:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Good question. Ajnem (talk) 15:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Heading wanted

Please make suggestions for the heading of the section that is now called Gender issues and inter-communal tensions. Thanks, Ajnem (talk) 15:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

"gender issues" is too narrowly defined a title. Yes, women and girls are the ones being harassed, but the issue is really around religious freedom. Extremists want to impose their version of their religion on others. It should be called something like "Tensions re: Religious Freedom and Religious extremism" Vaneman

"Prehistoric stone circle": no support, removed

On 20 April 2007 editor Pashute has added that "Also found nearby is a prehistoric Megalith circle, probably the source of the name Bet-Shemesh", but didn't offer any source for that. It's unlikely that the name has anything to do with prehistoric standing stones (with Bronze Age massebot in a sun god sanctuary, yes), and there is no online reference on any megaliths near Tel Bet Shemesh. There is nothing on anything pre-BA in Negev & Gibson's Arch. Encycl. of the Holy Land, either. This casual, unsourced line had become a paragraph standing by itself in the article, and after setting in a "dubious" notice in January, nobody offered any clarification. Considering this, I have now removed it, while leaving a message on Pashute's talk page. Should anyone have a source or any other type of related info, please step up. Thanks.

PS: I could only find one "reference" to a massebah at Bet Shemesh, 1 Samuel 6:14 - "a great stone" standing in a field; so Hebrew Bible, not archaeology. (I got the info from here, Lewis B. Paton, Survivals of Primitive Religion in Modern Palestine, p. 54). ArmindenArminden (talk) 08:27, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for removing it, until I find the sources for this knowledge. I did see it with my eyes and do remember reading about it, probably in the Eretz Israel survey of the 1970's which unfortunately I do not hold in my home. I will ask several of my friends, experts on the archaeology of the area, but in the meanwhile the whole site and its surroundings have been demolished without leaving a trace, due to clashes between an ultra orthodox company (Yesodot Tzur) and extreme ultra orthodox people from Atra Kaddisha. (See here about that in Hebrew in one of the many pictures. I have found this by Tel-Aviv University about a circular building discovered in Tel Bet Shemesh for worship which was first destroyed and then reused many years later for a different type of worship. It is a circular Matzeiva or Maseicha - an altar for pouring wine or blood on. But that is not what I was describing. When writing it, I had the source in front of me and intended to add it. I think this is it on Google maps, but cannot be sure. A book found online discusses the megalithic residents of Tel Bet Shemesh but that of course is entirely different...פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 20:26, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

No the google earth link is not it. That's a much more recent site on the way up to Tel Yarmuth... I'm still sure I can find people who remember and can point me to info about it.פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 20:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm glad you're still at it. Troubled neighbourhood, where the distinction is between "extreme" and "ultra"... ;-) I would be happy to see the prehistoric era coming back in, any site would do if it's well sourced. Anyhow, regarding the specific megalithic site you mentioned: the common explanation for all Bronze-Age cities called Bet-something is that they were named after the main deity worshipped there, so if that applies here too, the stone circle must be a) within the city area, and b) from the BA, not the Neolithic (prehistory). Similar to the ten standing stones at Tel Gezer, who fulfill both conditions. If the site is older, you get at most the situation where the BA people found them in place and often attributed them to some "giants" who lived there before them, not having a good explanation for it, but that doesn't lead to Bet-XY names in Canaanite cities, later preserved by the Israelites. If somebody in the 1970s made such a claim, we'll have to be very careful about using it. For now, the internet is full with sites who copied this statement from Wikipedia down to the dot & comma, so there's some responsibility in putting it out there, but that's in no way your fault. Enjoy the Shemesh in the Bet! ArmindenArminden (talk) 07:24, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

You are probably correct about the dating of that stone circle, but I cannot find it at all, and both experts I spoke to, who were with me on the hike around our town in 2003 (Gil Karsenty and Yair Zoran), don't remember seeing it or reading about it.

The Golovenchich brothers are now deep into construction, and have removed any trace of anything that could have been of archeologic value there, as documented in the pictures and videos by the ultra orthodox community who oppose the building there.

Anyway there is now road construction being done on the Tel hill, around it, and along the road from Bet Guvrin to the old stop at Shaar Hagai, I will upload to googearth some pictures I have on my camera of an interesting structure in the area (NOT the stone circle) and post a link here.פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 11:22, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Amarna letters - not related to the topic?

"In the Amarna letters Shamash is mentioned several times, along with Addu, as one of the greatest gods: the Pharaoh is "like Addu and Shamash"."

1. Is Shamash related to Shapash and/or Shemesh? If not, this doesn't belong here.

2. This clearly relates to a deity, NOT the city. Does it belong here? Arminden (talk) 12:25, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Historical tower on 1948 photograph

"File:Beit Shemesh.jpg|Position at Beit Shemesh fortified by Harel Brigade during Operation Ha-Har"

This is an old tower - Crusader? Mamluk? Ottoman? - and none is mentioned in the History paragraph. Is it really at Beit Shemesh? Arminden (talk) 12:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Writing style

The section about RBS Alef especially needs to be revised, it reads more like a guidebook than an encyclopedic article. Also, “beautiful cacophony” – does that make any sense? Elendil 03 (talk) 06:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

הרנוי (talk) 16:01, 6 May 2021 (UTC) אתה צודק זה נשמע באמת פרסומת למשאת מרדכי לפחות בגוגל טרנסלייט? חחח

"Beit Shemesh Engines Ltd." listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Beit Shemesh Engines Ltd. and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 6#Beit Shemesh Engines Ltd. until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. BilCat (talk) 04:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ramat Beit Shemsh.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Adding Eli Stefansky to the Notable Persons section.

I was told that you can only add people to the Notable page section if they have an article already about that. I believe that article is up and coming as his live is quite notable. But in the meantime I believe he should be on that list. He is more known throught the word than a bunch of the previous entries into that list. Please feel free to comment if you agree and if you state where you are from that might help make our point as to the extent of his reach. Avigdorfuld (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

definitely!! 130.43.174.225 (talk) 17:17, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

💯 2A10:8012:17:B14C:5D4F:536A:6BBD:C7DB (talk) 17:40, 15 March 2023 (UTC)