Talk:Yonassan Gershom

Objection to proposed deletion of this page

Yonassan Gershom here: There has been a proposed deletion claiming that I am "not notable" and that this page exists in order to promote my "wares" on eBay. This patently absurd. While it is true that I own an eBay store, and it is true that I use "rooster613" as both my Wikipedia and eBay IDs (as well as my ID on Amazon, Blogspot, Facebook, Google Friends and elsewhere) this is for consistency of my identity. There is no mention of eBay anywhere on this page, nor is there any link to the eBay store, which sells mostly feathers and other craft supplies and "wares" that aren't even relevant to the article nor are they mentioned here.

I have been "rooster613" since the mid-1980s when it was my old BBS ID, long before the eBay store even existed. Plus my books are sold in commercial bookstores all over the place, and many were published long before I opened the eBay store in 2005. Besides, if owning a business were a criteria for deleting a page, then every corporation on earth should not be on Wikipedia, since they also own stores. For that matter, show me a single author anywhere who does not want people to buy his books. But that was not the reason this page was originally created (and not by me, either, although lately I have become a watchdog of it.) It was created because of my work on reincarnation.

This page was previously under attack by contacteeperson who was later proven to be a sock puppet with multiple identities and an agenda againstJewish Renewal rabbis. (Read all the controversy stuff below, and go check the sock puppets page.) "Contacteeperson" wanted to delete and was using the excuse that it had no references. Well, it has references now, so I suspect the anti-Renewal sockpuppet is back again under another ID but can't find anything wrong with the page other than the ridiculous claim that it exists to promote an obscure store.

As for whether or not I am "notable," Google my name -- I just did and got 53,000 hits, and since "Yonassan Gershom" is not all that common a name, In think we can pretty much assume they are about me. Try also "Google book search" for how many academic and regression therapy books cite my work (374 hits is what I just got today.) I would say that makes me notable enough to have this page stay here. I am therefore removing the delete request. Rooster613 (talk) 22:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Plus I removed the link to my homepage which does promote my books (among other things) -- again, can you show me any author who does not have links to his own books on his website??? But the link really wasn't necessary, given that links to the Reincarnation FAQ and other relevant info pages on the website are there and more direct than navigating the homepage.Rooster613 (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Yep, apronming who requested the delete, is from the same sockfarm as "contacteeperson" and is now blocked as a sockpuppet. Give it up, sockfarm person, this page is being watched! And thank you, admin folks, for a very fast investigation :) Rooster613 (talk) 14:05, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Contacteeperson is a confirmed sock puppet

Well waddaya know, I was right after all, per all the discussions below -- user contacteeperson is not only confirmed (and blocked) as a sock puppet, but he/she had created a whole sockfarm of identities bent on, among other things, wreaking havoc with Jewish Renewal related pages. Just click on Contacteeperson's ID to find links to the investigation, etc. if further interested. Rooster613 (talk) 20:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Contacteeperson

(This section with contacteeperson was moved here from my talk page where s/he posted it, because this is where it belongs, so others can also give their input) Rooster613 (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I would like to say that my posts were to remove unsourced and not properly sourced info. Thats it. If you notice, I did not post criticisms of the subjects. Your article, for example has no 3rd party references. Contacteeperson (talk) 19:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)Contacteeperson

First of all, I did not originally write this article, so technically it is not "my article" although it is about me. And it has been up here for quite a while with no real objections until you came along. Now, if references were really the issue, then why did you revert the entire page back to your edit when I ADDED some 3rd party references yesterday? As noted below, they are not in footnote format because I do not understand the Wiki to do this, but they are there now, in parentheses, and so maybe you should use your energy to make them into proper footnotes instead of reverting? Or did you jusdt revert without READING IT first?????

Your comment on the latest revert says "lacks valid references." Please tell me exactly what is "not valid" about a newspaper article, a magazine article, the airdates on TV shows, and specific page references in a book -- all of which I added and you then REVERTED again? All of these are 3rd party except the ref in my book Beyond the Ashes about Amalek, which is nevertheless appropriate because it documents the claim about Amalek cited in the article. There are LOTS more 3rd party refs to my work in various books by Brad Steiger, Carol Bowman, Brian Weiss and others in the past-life regression field, as well as tons of links all over the Net, but I thought citing the original book was a better source, rather than all those secondary academic refs.

So I am reverting it back to the point where I edited yesterday. If your concern was REALLY lack of third party refs, then how about putting the ones I added into footnotes? In any case, you should not be simply reverting back to your edit, which ELIMINATES all the refs I added. I have looked at your contribs and it is very clear that you have been systematically going around Wikipedia trying to delegitimize all the Jewish Renewal rabbis. So I DO think you have an agenda that goes way beyond mere 3rd party references.Rooster613 (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Revisionism vs. reality

Please read up on BLP, before posting to any biographies especially your own. As far a being a Breslov Rabbi, this means Breslov ordained. Yes, you are a Rabbi, and yes you consider yourself Breslov, but you were not ordained by Breslov, so you are not a Breslov Rabbi.Contacteeperson (talk) 19:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)Contacteeperson

By this definition, Rabbi Yisroel Ber Odesser was not a Breslov rabbi either, since he did not go to a Breslov yeshiva. His Breslov connection was through private study with Rabbi Karduner. Neither did Gedalia Fleer, who was born in New York in 1940 and studied at the Narvoroc yeshiva in Brooklyn. And BTW, I met a lot of people in Uman in 1997 around Rabbi Chaim Kramer's Breslov Research Institute table who started out somewhere else and ended up in Breslov. So since when must one graduate from a Breslover yeshiva to be a Breslover? Since the rise of Haredism after WWII?

But the reality is, very few European Breslovers survived the Holocaust, and forty years ago Breslov was not at all centralized nor was it so institutionalized as it is today (something Rebbe Nachman himself strongly opposed, which is why he never founded a dynasty). In America there were few, if any, people calling themselves Breslovers back in the 1950s and 60s. Except for a few people in Jerusalem, Breslov as a movement was dead. We knew of Rebbe Nachman only from his books and stories, and a few unsigned pamphlets originating in New York City. I first learned of Rebbe Nachman through a used book I found at a garage sale and through Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi, who at the time was translating a lot of Hasidic source texts, including stuff from Breslov. He use to xerox these and pass them out at classes -- I still have my copies. This was back in the 1960s, long before Artscroll, long before Areyeh Kaplan, long before Breslov Research Institute or anybody else did their translations. People like Reb Zalman helped keep the teachings alive here.

Now it appears that along with the recent revival, the Israeli Haredi Breslov community is setting itself up as the final arbiter for who is or is not a "true" Breslover -- with the agenda of delegitimizing the non-Haredi American groups, some of which have been around for decades. IMHO, this is flat-out revisionism and not NPOV at all. I do recognize that things change over time, but there is a reason we speak of "grandfathering in" older people and institutions when the changes happen. Even major universities do this with older scholars when the degree requirements change. They don't just revoke everyone's former degrees bbecause of new admission standards. But have patience, my friend; my generation will eventually die off and then you Haredi guys will be 100% in charge -- until the NEXT generation takes over, of course. Rooster613 (talk) 14:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

If you disagree, then find a reference from any Breslov Rabbi in the world who would agree with you. If you have any questions about a specific edit I made, feel free to ask me, I will explain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autobiography

Contacteeperson (talk) 19:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)Contacteeperson

As I said, I did not originally write this page. And I have read all the Wiki stuff you refer to -- a very long time ago. I agree I am not a "Breslov rabbi" in the 21st-century Haredi sense you seem to be referring to (things were very different back in my day) so that should be corrected, although I HAVE left "Jewish Renewal" since the mid-1980s and I DO now publicly identify as a Breslov Hasid, so that should be there, too. No Breslov rabbi has ever contested that I am a Breslover, and there is no membership list in Breslov anyway, so removing ALL refs to Breslov here (as you did) is not legitimate if your only concern is whether or not I'm a Breslov rabbi. But it seems to me you are trying to remove any connection between Breslov and me. My more recent writings do incorporate Breslov teachings and I am known as a devotee of Rebbe Nachman. And as you will note, I have contibuted a great deal to the various Breslov pages.

If you want to call me a Jewish Renewal rabbi (as somebody else had edited at one point and I restored yesterday), fine, although that is not really accurate either, since I was ordained by Rabbi Schachter-Shalomi back when he was still Orthodox, when he was still the B'nai Or Rebbe, when there was no movement called "Jewish Renewal," but I'm not going to quibble about this in my old age. I am retired now, those who call me rabbi do so out of respect, and will continue to do so no matter what the Haredi halachah police do or do not say about me. Since this article has been categorized under "Jewish Renewal rabbis" (and not by me!) then you should at least grant that.

(See neo-Hasidism which probably describes me better than Jewish Renewal. I have been called that in the media occasionally, and it was during the early 1970s that I was attracted to Reb Zalman, not the current post-1980s Renewal movement.) Rooster613 (talk) 19:05, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I have always been very open about my credentials, and have always clearly stated that I was ordained by Schachter-Shalomi. But a great deal changed in the mid-1980s (see http://www.pinenet.com/~rooster/bnai.html What B'nai Or was like in the Old Days] And I am aware of the controversy around his private ordinations at this point in history, now that he has left Orthodoxy. Which left a lot of his older students in a sort of limbo -- including me. So I have many years ago voluntarily recrused myself for officiating at weddings, conversions, divorces, serving on a bet din, poskening, or any other rabbinical activity of a halachic nature. I now restrict myself to academic writing, editing and consulting, and counseling -- so I am really more of a maggid than a rav at this point -- but this does not negate the fact that I have been publicly recognized as a rabbi for the past 24 years. In fact, you are the first person ever to question whether or not am a rabbi.

As for editing my own page, that is not forbidden as long as it is NPOV. As I said, I did not originally create the page. But there were some inaccuracies about my books that I corrected a few years ago. There was also a request sent by email to me for a photo (which I put into the public domain and posted) and another request a while back (around Pesach time 2010) for me to come and reference some things like the TV program air dates, etc. because I have the archives and scrapbooks from the 1970s-80s. I did not get around to doing that until this controversy with you.

A lot of the 3rd party ref material is out of print or it's not on the web now, since it mostly happened before the Net was so accessible. But I would think that something in a newspaper's archives is more permanent than some review on the Web. I am now retired and no longer speaking and traveling, so of course there is not going to be much new material about my work, although the TV shows do get rerun periodically -- the Unexplained Mysteries segments simply recycle material from the Sightings interviews (of which there were 3, I only refed the latest one here), since both programs are owned by Paramount Studies, which also owns the unaired footage.

Anyway, I did add those refs and you STILL reverted back to your own edit. Did you even READ the new version I edited??? I doubt it. So please do so and start from THERE if you want to do more edits. Rooster613 (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Reverted possible vandalism, plus some citations added

I had not been here in a while and was alerted by a reader to the fact that somebody did extensive deletions that appear to be attempts to remove all my credentials (including the fact that I am a rabbi, which is an absurd edit!) -- this might have been vandalism, given that I've had ongoing hot debates with soapboxing by certain people on the Breslov and Na Nach Nachma discussion pages. These soapboxers have not repeatedly tried to debunk my edits regarding Nachman of Breslov. So it might be they wanted to discredit me on the Yonassan Gershom page also.

Or, it might have been merely that there were no citations, so...

I have added some references in parentheses, but I am CLUELESS as how to make them into footnotes. Would somebody please do that? Thank you! Rooster613 (talk) 18:10, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Change of plans on book collaboration project

Removed ref to collaborative book with Richard H. Schwartz -- No longer true. Schwartz and I did a first draft together but decided, for various editorial reasons, that the project would not work as a co-edit. He has continued with the project alone, and I have moved on to other writing projects. Rooster613 (talk) 18:10, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE on this book collaboration project for Who Stole My Religion?: Although there was a break at one point, this was reconciled and the way it finally came down is that both names are on the cover: Richard H. Schwartz as the primary author, "with Yonassan Gershom." So the main text belongs to Schwartz but there is still quite a bit of directly-attributed Gershom material in the book as well as some appendices, including a co-authored article on kapparot, a bio chapter on Gershom, and two dialogues bewtween Gershom and Schwartz on animal, ecology, and vegetarian issues. See also a Schwartz-Gershom dialogue about the book on Schwartz's blog at: http://whostolemyreligion.blogspot.com/2012/01/why-this-book-dialogue-with-author-of.html Rooster613 (talk) 16:34, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Pubs on other topics beside reincarnation

I also edited this page slightly to clarify that it is the reincarnation books that discuss the Holocaust karma theory, since I have written on other topics besides reincarnation. (The Star Trek commentary is due to come out this year and the one Schwartz and I are working on is about vegetarianism and environmental issues. I realize that I'm best known for reincarnation projects but that is not the only thing I write on.) Rooster613 20:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Rooster613

The source for the antiwar activity info is his website and his ebook I added to the pub list. This includes articles from The American Jewish World, The Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs, plus various Minneapolis neighborhood newspapers published during the 1970s and 80s.

RE: "anti-Semitism" vs "anti-Zionism" edits to the description of the Bailey article link, "anti-Semitism" is correct. The article has nothing to do with Israel or Zionism, it is about Alice Bailey's theology relating to Jews & the Holocaust, and is more in the genre of Jewish-Christian-NewAge debate. Rooster613 15:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Why the law project?

I am rather mystified as to why this article should be included in the law project. Yonassan Gershom is neither a secular lawyer nor a recognized expert in Jewish law. The article does not discuss legal issues, either. Explain your reasoning, please??? Rooster613 15:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Removed the law project tag, since I just realized I can do so and, as stated above, it was irrelevant to this article. If somebody else wants it back, fine, but please explain why. 64.61.202.78 (talk) 11:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

photo added

Yonassan Gershom here. As I no longer travel or do public speaking, it is not likely that anybody else will take a suitable current photo, so I have added a photo my wife took today (December 9, 2008) which we have released into the public domain. Rooster613 (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)rooster613

sourcing this material

Rabbi Gershom here. It appears most of the sources for this stuff comes out of my books and some interviews. (I did not originally write this page but I am watching it and have done some edits on and off. I try to keep it NPOV.) The TV shows periodically show up on reruns and Paramount keeps recycling the old interview footage in new paranormal shows -- after Pesach I'll try to track down the original air dates and source them, I've got studio copies of all the tapes. The anti-war activity is in my book Eight Candles of Consciousness which has reprints of a lot of my material from the 1970s and 80s including letters to the editor of various Minneapolis newspapers that were published, etc., and I've got the original articles on file, so I can ref those. I also have a collection of books by other authors that reference my work, which would provide some better 3rd party sources. I've been reluctant to do a lot of editing here because this is a page about me, but I am currently reorganizing my own archives so I do have the material on hand. This will be a lot of work, so it will have to wait until after Pesach. Rooster613 (talk) 15:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Writing autobiographies is discouraged because it is difficult to write a neutral, verifiable autobiography, and there are many pitfalls.

Writing an autobiography on Wikipedia is strongly discouraged, unless your writing has been approved by other editors in the community. Editing a biography about yourself should only be done in clear-cut cases.

As I noted above in the "contacteeperson" section, I did not write this page!!! I did add publication info on the books, a photo, and some corrections BUT if you go back to the original hisotry, you will see i did not originate it! It has been around for quite a while, various other editors have read it (see the LONG histgory) and not objected to it. And I an FINE with other editors approving it -- in fact, contacteeperson, I intend to INVITE all my Wikipedia colleagues to come here and work on this page -- let's see if they approve YOUR edits.Rooster613 (talk) 20:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia has gone through many prolonged disputes about the significance, factual accuracy, and neutrality of such articles.[1] Avoiding such editing keeps Wikipedia neutral and helps avoid pushing a particular point of view.

And you think are NOT pushing a point of view??? I checked your contribs and you clearly have an agenda to delegitimize non-Orthodox rabbis, especially Jewish Renewal rabbis. You have tried this on Arthur Waskow,Michael Lerner, and probably a lot of others. Your non-NPOV about me is that you want to disconnect me from Breslov for some reason. And who the heck are you, anyway? What are YOUR credentials??? There is zilch on your ID page about you. Are you a sock puppet? And how about actually dialoging on specific sentences and phrases here, instead of posting canned stuff I already read years ago and then reverting everything? Rooster613 (talk) 20:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I am not, repeat not trying to delegitimize anyone. If I was, I would put things in the article critical of the subjects along with references. I could have added "controversy" or "criticism" sections. I have not done that. Most of the stuff on those articles was written like a promotion with no references. I am not looking to disconnect you from Breslov or anything else. As you agreed with me "I agree I am not a "Breslov rabbi" in the 21st-century Haredi sense", thats all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Contacteeperson (talk • contribs) 20:35, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Well it looks pretty suspicious to me that most of your deletes are on the Renewal rabbi pages and the contgrib comments certainly seem delegitimizing to me. I usually do assume the best of people here, but when somebody shows up out of nowhere (you have only been here since Sept 30 2010 according to your contribs list), has absolutely nothing on their ID page about who they are, and starts going through all the Renewal pages like some big expert on the subject, then I have to be suspicious of hidden agendas. And regarding your constant spamming of my talk page with links, I HAVE READ ALL THAT ALREADY! I have been here for several YEARS, my friend. But "assume the best" does not mean never question anybody's motives. And I still do not trust that you don't have an anti-Renewal agenda. Rooster613 (talk) 21:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedia is not about mine or anyone else's credentials.

True, but a bunch of sudden activity against a specific group by an unknow person makes me suspicious. Rooster613 (talk) 21:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

First, don't take everything personally, I have nothing against you. Why don't you carefully read the Wiki links, then re-write your article to make it more encyclopedic. Contacteeperson (talk) 20:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)Contacteeperson

But you do seem to have something against Renewal rabbis. And why don't you explain why you think this is NOT encyclopedic? Check the history, LOTS of people have read it before and nobody but you has ever said it is not encyclopedic. Google my name, find out that what is there is indeed what I'm known for -- and not just on my own website. If wording need polishing up, fine, do it -- but I see nothing here that is not "encyclopedic" in content. Rooster613 (talk) 21:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Writing autobiographies is discouraged because it is difficult to write a neutral, verifiable autobiography, and there are many pitfalls.

True, but as I said, I did not originally write this page!!!!!!! (How many times must I say that?) But I did LATER help improve it. And I consider it legitimate to add things such as my age, Alma Mater, college degree, list of pubs, etc -- which I did. When it first appeared, it had only one book listed and a web link. Again, see my comments above.Rooster613 (talk) 20:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

If you have published elsewhere on a topic, we welcome your expertise on the subject for Wikipedia articles. However, every Wikipedia article must cover its subject in a neutral, fair, and comprehensive way in order to advance knowledge of the subject as a whole. Please forget your biases while enriching the Wikipedia readers' knowledge. Articles that exist primarily to advance the interests of the contributor will likely be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Contacteeperson (talk • contribs) 22:54, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I am not advancing any agenda other than accurate info about me. I do not need Wikipedia to promote me, I already have plenty of publicity already. Most of what I added to this was factual stuff and some 3rd party refs in parentheses which need to be converted to footnotes because I can't make heads or tails of the wiki to do that. Rooster613 (talk) 20:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Suggested Reading

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autobiography
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_edit_wars
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WTA

Contacteeperson (talk) 21:01, 24 November 2010 (UTC)Contacteeperson

If you want, I can help you re-write your article

If you want, I can help you re-write your article. If you think we can work together, I would be up for it. I can write it up, email it to you and you can make comments. If you don't want my help, that's fine also.

Contacteeperson (talk) 20:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)Contacteeperson

Again, it is not "my" article but if you want to do a re-write, go ahead, so long as you are REALLY NPOV. And please first read ALL my comments on this page, and respond to them here, because you do not seem to be doing that, you just keep posting new topics at the end of the page instead of responding to what I am commenting about in previous discussions with you. And private email is not really the best place to work editorial issues out, because nobody else can see what we have discussed. If you want to do it, then do it here. Rooster613 (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Footnotes fixed, more 3rd party refs, etc.

OK, somebody finally explained to me how to get the footnotes to work -- I was lacking the reflist link. I went through my personal archives and found refs for most of this. If they are not formatted correctly, please fix. I wish to be very clear that I am not intending to peacock here. But since lack of sources was a controversy and since I have the books and clippings on hand, it made sense for me to do the reference work.

Upon researching the earlier versions of this page (which I did not write), it appears the creator had in mind to verify some discussions about antisemitism and Holocaust "karma" on the Alice Bailey page, where my reincarnation work was cited in the older discussions. Hence the section on Holocaust karma and the link to my essay on Alice Bailey (which the original writer put there). Since this was the original interest of 3rd parties here, I left it in. And it is true that Beyond the Ashes had a strong influence on re-defining the "karma" of the Holocaust in New Age and regression therapy circles -- but that certainly WOULD be peacocking for me to add that about myself! But a search of my name on Google Books will show how many times Beyond the Ashes is still being cited by scholars and therapists so, if you need more 3rd party refs, they're out there. Good hunting! Rooster613 (talk) 17:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Responding to recent vandalism on this site

Yonassan Gershom here: A friend alerted me to numerous libelous edits by user 97.73.64.142 on this page (see history) insinuating sexual things about me that are NOT TRUE and may be connected to other recent attacks on me on other sites on the Internet, including a cyber bully on YouTube who used similar language to the vandalism here ("self-hating rabbi" being one phrase he repeated) and the creation of a bogus website claiming that I run an escort service in London. (Not true, I've never even been to London.) The motivation for this vandalism seems to be an attempt to discredit me and smear my reputation for political purposes.

I am thankful to those alert Wikipedians who have been reverting the vandalism. For future reference:

1. While I do support gay rights as human rights, I do not, and never have, advocated on behalf of NAMBLA, I have not written for any Nambla "manuals" or other publications, nor have I ever mentioned NAMBLA in any of my writings. I also do not equate gay rights with legalizing pedephelia -- they are two very different issues. The article by me originally cited on this topic, "Jews, Queers, and Closets," compared Jews trying to pass for gentiles with gays trying to pass for straight, and the oppression this causes.

2. I do not advocate polygamy. In fact, I have been loyally married to my wife for 33 years.

3. I do not own, nor am I in any way connected with, the bogus website at "rabbigershom.com," sdvertising an escort service in London. That website is a libelous fraud hyjacking my name, apparently for purposes of defaming my reputation. As far as I have been able to determine, no such business actually exists. There once was a legitimate website about me under that URL but it no longer exists.

4. There is, of course, no such org as "Jewish Cannibals of North Africa" nor would I belong to it if there were, given that I am a vegetarian! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rooster613 (talk • contribs) 22:29, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Asperger's Syndrome

According to the book Stars Behind the Tortured Soul, Rabbi Gershom was diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. He also wrote this Amazon review where he explicitly confirms that he is autistic. I feel like this information needs to be added to this page. Amadeus1928 (talk) 04:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I have found more proof here. So while I do have an idea for editing the page to include the autism info, I don't know where or how it would fit in anywhere. Amadeus1928 (talk) 21:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

I just added information about Gershom's autism and ADHD diagnoses on the page. I'm struggling to find a source though, since personal blogs and Amazon reviews are not considered acceptable Wikipedia sources.

Amadeus1928 (talk) 23:42, 2 July 2023 (UTC)