The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
... that the 1923 World Congress of Jewish Women in Vienna unanimously resolved to support the settlement of Jews in Palestine? Source: "In the final resolutions adopted by the Congress, a Palestine proposal was adopted unanimously with great acclamation: 'It appears, therefore, to be the duty of all Jews to co-operate in the social-economic reconstruction of Palestine and to assist in the settlement of Jews in that country.'" (Jewish Women's Archive)
Overall: valereee (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Re: lead. "A presentation in the Hebrew language was widely appreciated"just seems like a very nonspecific language. Does this even belong in lead?
Valereee: Thanks for taking an interest in this. Several sources mentioned the appreciation of Mazal Ovadia's presentation in Hebrew. The reason it struck a chord was that it is the language of the Jews in Israel, then Palestine, which was a key topic at the congress. Once the DYK has been posted, I hope to expand the article, explaining that several delegates had visited Palestine and saw it as an ideal destination for Jewish refugees. With due respect, I would not classify Hebrew as a non-specific language. I'm surprised at the plagiarism assessment. Most of the article is based on sources in German. I can only guess that any similarities are based on the title of the congress, the place, and the dates. I once had an entire article deleted on the basis of such details! If you can find something more specific, I would be pleased to look into it. I'm not sure whether you are giving this the go-ahead or not.--Ipigott (talk) 15:52, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@Valereee: you cannot just look at the percentage at Earwig's and say there's close paraphrasing; you must read the comparison text for each ref. In this case, two large quotes taken from one ref have been put in quotes, as is proper, and the other comparisons are proper names of organizations. There is no close paraphrasing here. Yoninah (talk) 16:29, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, Ipigott by 'nonspecific language' I meant 'what does "widely appreciated" even mean in this sentence?' -- the language being used to communicate the meaning feels vague to the point I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Not 'Hebrew is not a specific language,' lol. valereee (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@Valereee:: I'm glad you came back on this. It was probably my mistaken appreciation of general knowledge about Jewish history which is behind the problem here. I am in my mid-70s and have vivid recollections of the fate of the Jews in Europe. Both before and after the war (i.e. World War II), many of them found refuge in Palestine where the Hebrew language was a strong attraction to their ethnicity and religious heritage. I assumed that many people reading the article would appreciate this connection. While I don't really think the wording of the lead should be a reason for questioning a DYK, now that you know what I have been trying to communicate, perhaps you would like to suggest a more explicit wording - based of course on the sources used in the article. I very much appreciate your reactions as I often feel I am no longer in touch with the younger generations. It's important to try to communicate properly for all readers of Wikipedia.--Ipigott (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
I agree, the part about the Hebrew-language speech is out of context in the lead. I removed it. The name of the speaker and the fact that she spoke in Hebrew is sourced in the body text. Yoninah (talk) 19:21, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Ipigott I'm closer to your generation than to anything that could be called 'younger' lol. I had seen that the point was made more clearly in the body. I agree, DYK doesn't have to be anywhere close to perfect, just more pointing out that this sentence in the first three just made me go, "Huh? And then once I understood what you were getting at, just the fact it stopped me made me question whether it even belonged in the lead, I think Yoninah is right to leave it in the body as not crucial to a quick understanding of the subject. valereee (talk) 19:57, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Well, that's what collaboration is all about. Glad to see everyone is now happy.--Ipigott (talk) 13:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
valereee (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Ipigott I'm closer to your generation than to anything that could be called 'younger' lol. I had seen that the point was made more clearly in the body. I agree, DYK doesn't have to be anywhere close to perfect, just more pointing out that this sentence in the first three just made me go, "Huh? And then once I understood what you were getting at, just the fact it stopped me made me question whether it even belonged in the lead, I think Yoninah is right to leave it in the body as not crucial to a quick understanding of the subject. valereee (talk) 19:57, 24 November 2018 (UTC)