Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism/Archive 37

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37Archive 38Archive 39

Meir Kahana image

At Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2019_August_8#August_8 editors want to replace a good picture of Meir Kahana by one that is completely not representative of him. Yes, this post is not neutral, and that in view of the fact that editors at WP:FFD try to judge this by some (rather silly) rule, which is not applicable in this case. Debresser (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Talk:Activities prohibited on Shabbat#Merger discussion

Please note above discussion. Thank you. --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 13:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Requesting consensus to change era-style

I'm requesting a change in era-style from Anno Domini (BC/AD) to Common Era (BCE/CE). The following articles focus wholly on Hasmonean rulers. I didn't mention all the rulers because they initially started and still maintain BCE/CE.

  1. Aristobulus I
  2. Alexander Jannaeus
  3. Aristobulus II

— JudeccaXIII (talk) 03:47, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Agree All pages relating to Judea/Palestine up to 70 CE should be consistently styled as concerns date formatting. warshy (¥¥) 14:44, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Agree to these, and warshy's principle in general - but it is not for this project to set a general rule, as many articles will come under different projects. Per WP:ERA (under some discussion at the moment), I think at least a notice on the article talk page is needed first, referring here. Johnbod (talk) 15:02, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Johnbod I have left notifications on each of the articles talk page and at WP Royalty and Nobility as you suggested. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Abimelech (Judges)

I would like to move Abimelech (Judges) to Abimelech of Shechem. He was not a Biblical judge but a monarchy. Opinions please, thank you. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 01:39, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

The article is not called Abimelech the Judge, rather Abimelech from the Book of Judges. So I don't see that this proposal constitutes an improvement. Debresser (talk) 22:35, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
I wasn't referring to him as a judge. He was never a judge but a king, just not of Israel. I'm not seeking a move yet, only opinions for a possible move. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 01:38, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Template:Kings of Israel and Template:Kings of Judah

There is a discussion @WP:BIBLE#Templates:Kings_of_Israel_(Samaria)_and_Kings_of_Judah to possibly remove Template:Kings of Israel and Template:Kings of Judah completely from articles. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 18:20, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for giving notice here. By the way, the proposal isn't as radical as you make it sound here, rather the proposal is to replace those two templates with another template that includes both of them and is better than they are. Debresser (talk) 20:48, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Some more input is needed in the discussion, Thank you! — JudeccaXIII (talk) 20:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Requesting Consensus for changes in Template:Rulers of Ancient Israel

In August, I had changed with this edit from "Israel (northern kingdom)" to "Samaria (northern kingdom)" on Template:Rulers of Ancient Israel in hopes of completely distinguishing the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the United Kingdom of Israel, alas though, I was reverted. I know that having (northern kingdom) in brackets should help distinguish the two, but it's pointless when the name Israel is referred twice to represent two different monarchies. I would like consensus to change it to Samaria (northern kingdom).

Now Athaliah's name is in italics. I don't know why it is when she was the sole ruler of the Kingdom of Judah after Ahaziah of Judah, but I would like to remove the italics.

And finally Tibni. Even though he was a contender for the throne after Zimri (king), he was eventually defeated by his opponent Omri in a civil war, making Omri the true successor. That being said , Tibni's name in the template is after Zimri. That is an unnecessary confusion and I would like to remove his name. That's all. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 04:17, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

From top to bottom:
The article about Tibni makes it clear that he is mentioned among rules. So he has to stay.
Please remove all italics. They are completely illogical and random. There are 4 of them in the template.
The article about the Northern Kingdom is at Kingdom of Israel (Samaria), so it seems we should keep Israel. Moreover, at least the Jewish sources use almost exclusively the name "Israel" for the northern kingdom, not "Samaria". Debresser (talk) 22:18, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Debresser I removed italics on Tibni and Athaliah, but I could not do it with Simon Thassi and John Hyrcanus because they were not monarchies. I wouldn't be suprised if someone reverted me for removing italics on Tibni though. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 01:19, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
You mean to say that they weren't "monarchs"? The article about Simon Thassi says "He became the first prince of the Hebrew Hasmonean Dynasty. He reigned from 142 to 135 BCE." The article about John Hyrcanus says "reigned from 134 BCE until his death in 104 BCE". So why not? Debresser (talk) 21:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
And even if they weren't, is that reason to add italics? Debresser (talk) 21:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Yes, neither of them took the kingship title. I was learning more about the first king Aristobulus I while expanding and improving the article along with Alexander Jannaeus. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 21:53, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Well, I don't see anything wrong with removing the italics. I'll do it and link this discussion in the edit summary. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 22:23, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Short descriptions for Chabad Rebbes

Hi guys, long time Jew first time poster on WT:JUDAISM. User:debresser and I were having a disagreement and he suggested that this would be the most appropriate forum to bring the discussion to (thanks for the advice btw). The seven Chabad Rebbes currently have the short description “First Chabad Rebbe,” “Second Chabad Rebbe,” "Third Chabad Rebbe,” etc etc which seems to go against WP best practices as discussed at Wikipedia:Short description, specifically the idea that the short description be accessible to those without a previous knowledge of the subject. My proposal is to add a descriptor to the current “X Chabad Rebbe” to make them something along the lines of “Russian-American Jewish leader, Seventh Chabad Rebbe” so that they can be readily accessible to those without a knowledge of this very specific corner of Jewish history. Anyway thats what I was thinking, would love to hear some other opinions. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 23:22, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

This proposal sounds better than your previous edits, which had only the first half of your current proposal. I would stick with "Orthodox rabbi" rather than "leader" though. Debresser (talk) 23:32, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Time and the vehemence of your response caused me to question whether my first edits were complete enough. I mean no disrespect to them by using leader rather than Rabbi, I’m trying to avoid confusing people with the whole Rabbi vs Rebbe thing as well as make it as assessable as possible to the largest possible audience. The meaning of “leader" is clear to someone who doesn't specifically know what the religious leader of a Jewish community is called. Perhaps “Orthodox Jewish Leader” or “Hereditary Orthodox Jewish Leader"? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 23:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
I think the word "rabbi" is known to the wide public and more specific than "leader". It is also the word commonly used in such cases. Debresser (talk) 08:42, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Chardal

Please see Chardal where an editor moved the page back to Hardal and changed the lead to say that the primary term is Hardal and "also Chardal." I think this is incorrect and should be changed back. Sir Joseph (talk) 22:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Please open a discussion on the talkpage there. Debresser (talk) 22:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Judaism images

Hey! I do image restoration, particularly of images from about 1700 to 1924 (images later than that are rarely out of copyright). I'd like to help out with some Judaism-related images, but I could use a little direction. User:Adam Cuerden will give an idea of stuff I've done in the past. If you know of anything high-resolution (or feel like poking around, say, https://gallica.bnf.fr or https://loc.gov for ideas) I'd love to hear them. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7% of all FPs 02:44, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

RfC at Talk:Orthodox Judaism#Photographs

Please comment on the issue at hand. AddMore-III (talk) 06:47, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Rosh Hashanah on the front page

Just an FYI for the first time in more than a decade, Rosh Hashanah will not be on the front page. Sir Joseph (talk) 20:56, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

And why is that?
And, another question, why should it be? Especially when it has been there every year for a decade, as you said. Debresser (talk) 16:59, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Debresser, it was put back on real late, it was tagged for references but it was fixed up so it was put back on. But I think that certain dates that are special should have leeway and not be tagged so hard or it should be given dispensation so that it be included on the Main Page even if it has some issues. Sir Joseph (talk) 00:40, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
I see. Agree with you on that one. Debresser (talk) 14:17, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
You guys know I agree with you. But we've been through this before, and have been told in no uncertain terms that Easter and Xmas aren't immune, either. So I don't think we'd win this.
What I worry about more is that there's a risk that someone could come sweeping through and start tagging the page very close to the holiday (or on the holiday), and the three of us (and others) would not be in a position to fix, revert, or anything else. So I do wonder if we can set up a system for a short list of days where there would be a time point ahead of the holiday (for illustration, 00:00 UTC on erev yom tov, or erev Shabbat if yom tov is Sunday) where if there are no disqualifying tags on the page, the page gets fully-protected until its main page sojourn has passed.
My initial list would be RH, YK, and the three regalim (including their end days, if they get a separate listing). I'd probably also put Purim and Tisha B'Av on, since even though we could theoretically be on-line, often we're not. (I'm not as sure about Chanukah, Yom Ha'Atzma'ut or Yom Yerushalayim.) If you guys agree with this idea, I'd bounce it off of Howcheng, and if he is agreeable, he can implement, as he's a sysop. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:24, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Forgot to ping: @Debresser and Sir Joseph:. G'mar hatima tova! StevenJ81 (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
I think it's a good idea and I usually try to remember a few days before an event to post it here anyway, but I was busy this time being railroaded. Sir Joseph (talk) 22:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

"Not officially recognized as Israel"

User:Supreme Deliciousness has undertaken a series of edits removing the country "Israel" from places in West Jerusalem. This is entirely inaccurate; West Jerusalem is and always has been under Israeli sovereignty. It's East Jerusalem and places in northern Jerusalem, like Ramot, that are under debate. Could an administrator help with revising these edits? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 14:56, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

A. I dont see the relevance to WikiProject Judaism, B. it depends on the country on if West Jerusalem is recognized as Israeli territory or not. For the most part there is at least tacit acceptance that West Jerusalem is Israeli territory, but states such as the UK continue to consider all of Jerusalem outside of any states sovereignty. nableezy - 14:59, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah, I agree, and this has been the consensus for a while. It's also not Jerusalem,Israel in one link but separated to show that. There was a discussion about this on the Jerusalem page a while back.

No part of Jerusalem is internationally recognized as part of Israel. This includes West Jerusalem. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 15:03, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

That's not true though, many countries recognize Jerusalem as part of Israel, whether it's all of Jerusalem or just West Jerusalem. Australia recognizes West Jerusalem as Israel's capital, Czech sort of does, the US does, Guatamala does, Brazil is going to, Taiwan does, etc. Regardless, you should know that making such mass changes without discussing it first in such an area is controversial and not encouraged. You should have gone to the Jerusalem talk page and sought consensus. What you did is disruptive. Changing years of consensus within minutes without talking about it. That is not collaborative. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:00, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Concerning Brazil, you can not guess whats gonna happen in the future. The other nations are only literally a handful of nations. So there are around 200 nations that do not recognize any israeli claim to Jerusalem, including West Jerusalem. So all of Jerusalem, including West Jerusalem is disputed, yet you want to violate npov and present a fringe minority pov as fact. There has never been any consensus to present West Jerusalem as "Israel". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 04:01, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
AFAICT most NEWSORGs report West Jersualem as Israel. Icewhiz (talk) 05:02, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
Show me a reliable source that West Jerusalem is internationally recognized as part of Israel.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 05:18, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

I also saw this extreme POV edit by Supreme Deliciousness, and reverted it in one instance. He is wrong about the facts, and could likely be banned or blocked for these edits. In any case, he is right, that in many cases there is no need to add the "Israel" part, e.g. in this edit, just like it doesn't say NY, US, we needn't say Jerusalem, Israel. Debresser (talk) 17:15, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Banned or blocked for what? All the articles I edited said "Jerusalem, Israel" Not "West Jerusalem, Israel" but only "Jerusalem, Israel" so they were claiming all of Jerusalem is Israel. No part of Jerusalem including West is internationally recognized as Israel. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 05:24, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
You are blowing tyhings out of proportion. Jerusalem, Israel means that the relevant issues of the articles are in Jerusalem and in Israel, if you want in the Israeli part of Jerusalem. Nobody means to say by that that all parts of Jerusalem are in Israel. I am sorry, but sometimes we simply can't stop with the city, and a country must be added for clarity, and you are being disruptive about this. That is why you should be sanctioned. If you saw an issue, you should have discussed it, not made unilateral POV edits. Debresser (talk) 13:02, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
They are not in Israel as no part of Jerusalem is Israel and no one has been able to show any evidence that West Jerusalem is internationally recognized as Israeli despite me asking several times.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:24, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
I don't think that is a far-fetched redirect, in view of the sources he provided. But see this edit, which is at best an honest logical fallacy. Debresser (talk) 01:43, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Please note the Mandate for Jerusalem was never implemented as the Arabs rejected it. The only legal status for Jerusalem that pertains is League of Nations 1922 under which Jerusalem is in the region which became Israel.  User: Celebrate Israel 18:26, 13 October 2019 (UTC)  

Synagogue attack

I believe this should have "synagogue attack" or "synagogue shooting" in its title. See discussion. I believe the WP:COMMONNAME for this incident is Halle synagogue attack or Halle synagogue shooting. See Requested move 19 October 2019. The suggestion is to move the article as follows: "2019 Halle synagogue shooting → Halle and Landsberg attacks". Bus stop (talk) 20:48, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Article is presently at 2019 Halle synagogue shooting. Debresser (talk) 01:56, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Holocaust survivor Chaim Sztajer

Hi all! I have just drafted up an article for a notable Treblinka survivor named Chaim Sztajer. It is very much a work in progress because I have a lot more information that I need add to the section on his post-war life; right now I just have a couple sentences there as a placeholder.

He doesn't seem to be mentioned a lot in the general scholarship on Treblinka, but he is well known in Melbourne, Australia because of his contributions to the Holocaust museum here. Right now, most of my information is pulled from a single biography, penned by his daughter after his death. There is a connection between his story and the John Demjanjuk aka Ivan the Terrible case, and I think he would definitely be better known if the prosecution had allowed him to testify. There was a whole thing in February 1987 with the defence making erroneous claims about Sztajer having actually killed Ivan the Terrible during the uprising. It is not mentioned in the Netflix documentary about the trial that was just released, but it may have been mentioned in Israeli newspapers at the time (I can't read Hebrew though).

Anyway, this is also my first article so I would love general help and feedback. If anyone here has a lot of knowledge about Treblinka, or the Demjanjuk case, or if by chance there are any Melbourne Jews here who actually know about this guy and his family — I would especially appreciate your input.

Thank you! --Apriljennifer (talk) 09:30, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Aristobulus I

Could someone type in the Hebrew inscriptions here or at Aristobulus I in his coinage section according to this source, p.314? Jerm (talk) 18:42, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

יהודה כהן גדול וחבר היהודים‎ - Jehudah high priest and the assembly of the Jews / יהודה הכהן הגדל וחבר היהדים‎ - Jehudah the high priest and the assembly of the Jews. Just copy-paste. Kalimi (talk) 21:29, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
@Kalimi: thank you Jerm (talk) 22:16, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Priestly blessing

Please see the discussion here, if it should be "priestly blessing" or "Priestly Blessing". Debresser (talk) 21:17, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

My copy of the Artscroll Stone Chumash writes it as "Priestly Blessings" (pg. 765) with both a capital B and P. Kalimi (talk) 01:17, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Which just comes to show you how inaccurate they are. :) No, but really, it should be "Priestly blessing" Americans add capitals to everything. But not on Wikipedia, see MOS:HEADCAPS. Debresser (talk) 17:50, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Article 116 exclusions group

I came across this BBC article and it seems to me that we should really have an article on the Article 116 exclusions group. Such a topic is way out of my area of expertise, so I'll leave the creation of the article to those better versed in the subject matter. Mjroots (talk) 14:37, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Interesting. Perhaps you (or someone) could start by adding a section to History of the Jews in Germany, and see if it grows from there. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:11, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Jewish cuisine template

There is a discussion at Template talk:Jewish cuisine regarding issues with the template. I'd appreciate any expert input you may have and welcome any edits to the template itself. Hoof Hearted (talk) 20:33, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

NPOVN thread could use input

Please see Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Categories_for_"Jews",_"people_of_Jewish_descent",_and_the_Middle_East_-_can_someone_please_summarize?. Thanks. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:17, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Trump executive order defining Judaism as a nationality

Probably will need renaming if there is an official name or number. Could be an “In the News” item. Hyperbolick (talk) 15:32, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Using the term Rabbi next to the name

In many biographies, if the person was a rabbi this is stated in their name right in the beginning of the article in the lead and possibly throughout the article i.e. Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Meir Baal HaNes. Could someone explain from the policies of Wikipedia why or how a title of the person in question should appear next to their name and it wouldn't just be Meir Baal HaNes etc...just wanting some clarification. Thanks In Citer (talk) 21:55, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

It is mostly a matter of common name. As in WP:COMMONNAME. Debresser (talk) 00:38, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
That's great. Thank you and keep up the good work In Citer (talk) 09:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Salman Schocken

I did some work at Salman Schocken, but have a couple questions at Talk:Salman Schocken#Shlomo? et seq, if someone would like to comment. Thanks. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 11:34, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello User:AlanM1,
Thanks for your work on this. I have replied to your question on the talk page, with some additional suggestions. Regards, warshy (¥¥) 17:32, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Main usage of 'Christ'

Participants in this WikiProject may be interested to discuss the main usage of Christ at Talk:Christ (disambiguation)#Main usage. Cnilep (talk) 02:39, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

FYI

There is a discussion of Lists of Jewish people on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Coffee removing Categories and Lists Inappropriately. I would imagine it will also encompass what sourcing is required to define someone as Jewish.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:05, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Splitting categories and lists by ethnicity and religion

There are large numbers of irreligious ethnic Jews (and ethnic Jews of other religions) and relatively fewer but still plenty of Gentile converts to Judaism. Currently there are dozens of categories and list articles enumerating Jews, without regard to whether their ambiguous descriptor is referring to ethnicity, religion, or both. This has been causing perennial problems resulting in severe disruption, regular OTRS complaints, and the like, since the very early years of Wikipedia. Both lists and categories are supposed to use an unambiguous controlled vocabulary.

The only way I can see that Wikipedia attempts to address these issues currently is with the very lengthy but obviously incomplete List of Jewish atheists and agnostics and List of converts to Judaism. I do not believe this is an adequate solution or even substantially helpful for addressing the underlying issues. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with those lists, just that they don't help irreligious ethnic Jews or Gentile converts who write to OTRS complaining about Wikipedia's classification of them.

I'm just testing the waters here, but how about splitting those lists and categories into those of "religious Jews" and "ethnic Jews"? I sincerely believe this would save a lot of time, trouble, and effort going forward. EllenCT (talk) 07:12, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

How would you propose separating the "religious" Jews from the "ethnic" Jews, EllenCT? How would you categorize Jewish atheists who are members of synagogues and donate to Jewish charities? How about Jews who proclaim fervent belief in God but never attend synagogue? How about those who go to synagogue only occasionally? Would it be a lox and bagels and Yiddishisms threshold? That would discriminate against the Sephardi skeptics, wouldn't it? Would having taken X number of trips to Israel makes the cut? Will you impose a theological test that Judaism itself does not impose? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 09:43, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
According to the long-established guidelines at WP:CAT/R (public self-identification with religions for living people, or verified reliable published sources for the dead) and WP:ETHNICRACECAT (verified reliable sources for ethnicity.) Meaning the self-identified atheist synagogue member is not a religious Jew, and the self-proclaimed fervent but unobservant believer is, without regard to the frequency of synagogue attendance. And while I believe the remainder of your questions are facetious, it is true that people can be part of Jewish culture without being part of either the religion or ethnicity; I regret I have no solutions addressing, for example, agnostic but observant adoptees of Orthodox parents. But there are far fewer such cases than those which cause the perennial disruption. EllenCT (talk) 10:01, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia cannot redefine the basic concepts of Jewish identity. The fact is that Jews do not have a rigid barrier between so-called "ethnic Jews" and so-called "religious Jews". For example, the fact that someone converts to Judaism doesn't necessarily mean that they are religious or that they will remain religious. But as far as Jewish tradition and religious authorities are concerned, once that person has converted to Judaism, he/she is Jewish for life. I'm sorry, but terms contrasting "ethnic" and "religious" simply make no sense in the context of Jewish identity. Wikipedia is here to describe facts and identities, not to redefine them. The lists showing atheist/agnostic Jews and converts to Judaism seem more than enough of a solution to me. Zofthej (talk) 11:01, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Our article on Jewish identity draws distinctions between religion, ethnic heritage, and culture, rather prominently at Jewish identity#Categories. I am not suggesting that they are not tightly interrelated, but it is clear that the different sects adhere to separate criteria for determining inclusion in both the ethnicity and the religion. I understand that those differences between the sects are contentious. I have no solution to this problem, but I suggest that it exists in the first place is reason to follow Wikipedia's policies to rely on how verified reliable sources describe the ethnicity and religion of individuals, rather than choosing a particular sect's criteria and asking editors to apply them to the exclusion of the other sects' criteria, or than conflating the categories of Jewish identity, as we do now, at the cost of our recurring issues with classification among BLP subjects and confusion among readers and editors and the concordant recurring disruption. EllenCT (talk) 12:52, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Our article on Jewish identity is very very incomplete (start class) and gives much undue focus to the so-called “categories” of Jewish identity (I changed that subheading to “components” to clarify). Ethnic and religious Jews are not two different “sects”. Wikipedia is not a reliable source; don’t base your understanding of Jewish identity on the Wikipedia article about it, it is leading you astray. You’ll notice that reliable sources do not call a person an “ethnic Jew” or a “religious Jew”, they just say that a person is “Jewish”. As with all things, we should follow the sources. – Levivich 13:46, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
By sects, I was referring to the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform movements, along with the minor denominations such as Reconstructionist, Humanistic, and Karaite. They have different criteria for who qualifies as a Jew by birth (matrilineal vs. patrilineal) and distinct critera defining who qualifies as observant, legitimately converted, and heretical. And therefore, the denominations themselves draw the contrast between ethnic and religious Jews that Zofthej says make no sense. EllenCT (talk) 14:25, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Those are movements or branches, and they have no organized leadership, nor any set criteria. They do not draw a contrast between religious or ethnic Jews. There is much disagreement, even within the movements, about who is a Jew and what is Judaism. These are very large and complicated questions to which there is no right answer, and they can’t be answered in a paragraph or a page. There are books written about this. And, again, Wikipedia’s coverage of this is generally poor. There are not two groups (religious and ethnic) with two criteria for membership. It’s much much more complicated than that. As far as I know, nobody ever tries to create distinct lists of religious v. ethnic Jews. It could be very offensive to put a Jewish person just in one list or the other. We don’t want to create a list of ethnic-but-no practicing-Jews. I think it’s a bad idea. – Levivich 15:41, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Understood. I wonder if there is some variation on this which would resolve the recurring issues without offense. Perhaps a coordinated effort to improve the Jewish identity article might lead to new possibilities? EllenCT (talk) 20:55, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
I think that's an excellent idea. Until our conversation here, I wasn't aware of some of these Jewish identity articles (thanks for bringing them up!). There's Jewish identity, Who is a Jew?, Jewish culture, Jewish ethnic divisions, Jewish religious movements, Relationships between Jewish religious movements, and more. I think you're right it would help to have a concerted effort to review and improve those. – Levivich 21:15, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
  • I am 100% behind such a proposal. It would seriously clear up the waters on this and make sure we are applying the right standard to each specific issue. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 10:10, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
  • This would be absurd over-scrupulousness in most cases, & in my opinion counter-productive. Jewish can mean many different things, and it is enough for our purposes if there is reliable evidence supporting any one of them. This will not avoid recurring issues--given someone those who are certainly ethnically Jews but doubtfully religious Jews, there will still be arguments about whether they belong on both lists. There is no way to avoid recurring issues on this topic in real life; the way to end them here is to quash them. (There may be a very few cases where separation would make sense--where there is something atypical or likely to be misunderstood, or where the two possibilities make a difference -- there is for example a significant difference between those members of some Orthodox Jewish sects that do not support Israel because of religious motivations, and those non-religious Jews who do not because of political motivations.)— Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)
  • This issue has been brought up recently at various venues, including WP:AN and my talkpage. It is true that the word "Jewish" can mean both a person of the Jewish faith as well as an ethnic Jew. Add to that those who are not ethnic Jews but are of Jewish descent. It will however be practically impossible to differentiate between the two in many cases, at least for people who lived over give and take two hundred years ago, although there can be an assumption that most were both (ethnically and religiously Jewish). As I stated in those discussions, I have been active on Judaism and Jewish-related articles for over a decade on Wikipedia, and as more or less an expert on this issue both in real life and on Wikipedia I agree with DGG's comment and oppose this proposal. We should address the issues raised in those discussions on a page to page basis, and I have promised my help with any specific case that would be brought to my attention, as I am sure my colleagues here at WP:JUDAISM will help with any specific case brought to our attention here. Debresser (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
  • What do you think about Abraham Haas (1847–1921) and Kalman Haas (1847–1920)? I added a source that they came from Jewish families. Do you think that is enough to add them back to the list of business-people? the removal was due to "jmaw source is not sufficient to make claim either and does not specify whether it is referring to ethnicity or religious affiliation thus also removing WP:CAT/R violations & WP:OR//WP:SYNTH categorizations" Patapsco913 (talk) 23:51, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Good job. Yes, you solved the only issue these articles had in this regard, which was lack of a source. The rest is part of the removing editor's problem. Debresser (talk) 22:29, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
I think my mistake was stating that the subject was from a "Jewish family" when my source only said that the subject was "Jewish" (Jewish Museum of the American West) so that was where my synthesis was (assuming his family is Jewish). From now on, I will just state x is "Jewish" if I have a legitimate source (unless the source specifically says the subject's family is Jewish). Patapsco913 (talk) 22:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Bagh Saba Synagogue for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bagh Saba Synagogue is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bagh Saba Synagogue until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Theprussian (talk) 14:26, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Jews & Judaism television categories

Please see WP:Categories_for_discussion/Speedy#Current_requests re the following proposed renamings:

Another editor has suggested that content about Judaism as a religion be split from content about Jews as an ethnic group, perhaps also for the part of the category hierarchy within Category:Works about Jews and Judaism. That's beyond the scope of the current discussion on the Speedy page, but if there are convincing reasons to keep that hierarchy as it is, then the other editor might withdraw his opposition to speedy renaming. – Fayenatic London 21:48, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

History section of Jews article needs revamped / rewritten

The 'History' subsection of the Jews article only covers Jewish history up to Babylon and Rome. Obviously, this is incomplete. It is missing 1900 years of Jewish history - the Middle Ages, modern times, the Holocaust, the establishment of Israel, etc etc etc.

There's been some discussion of this on the talk page. I tried to revamp the section, but I don't have the necessary knowledge (or time) to do it right. But having the main Wiki article on Jews not mention anything after 96 AD is not an acceptable state. I figured you guys were the right place to bring this issue for discussion and correction. Hope it can be remedied. Ganesha811 (talk) 21:39, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Identifying who is Jewish

I was wondering how do you define who is Jewish on Wikipedia since being Jewish seems to cross between religious and ethnic/cultural categories. What would be sufficient sourcing? I have searched all the relevant help pages but cannot seem to find a definitive answer. Assigning religious identity to living people requires self-identification (Wikipedia:BLPCAT) while deceased people may be identified without self-identification (e.g. "services were held at Temple xxxx"). Being Jewish as an ethnicity does not seem to require such a high hurdle (Wikipedia:ETHNICRACECAT). I am told that in order to designate a person as Jewish I would need multiple irrevocable sources that specifically state that the reference is referring to ethnicity in order to include. As most citations do not specify whether the subject is Jewish by faith or descent, they would not be sufficient. For example, Edits to Maurice Kremer (1824–1907) have been removed since I do not have multiple sources and the one I do have does not specify whether it refers to religion or ethnicity.

  • "Maurice Kremer: Very Early Pioneer Jewish Merchant and Civil Servant of Los Angeles". Jewish Museum of the American West. Retrieved April 9, 2018.

and Evelyn Danzig Haas have been removed despite having an interview where she states she was confirmed and her parents attended temple during the high holy days

and despite her funeral being held at Congregation Emanu-El (San Francisco)

For living people, I am told that I need to demonstrate a verified consensus of reliable sources that indicate that their being Jewish is key to their notability in addition to self-identification. see Bruce Berkowitz with three sources deemed insufficient

If this is the standard, it seems that there will be very few Jewish biographies left. I was perusing "Jewish writers" and very few would stand up to this level of scrutiny. Patapsco913 (talk) 16:34, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Without going into the details of any of the cases you mentioned at this moment, Judaism is an ethnic religion, and the less strict rules of an ethnicity are being used, if relevant. Debresser (talk) 17:16, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
@Debresser: is there a guideline about this I can read? Has anyone ever proposed splitting Jewish categories and lists by religion and ethnicity? EllenCT (talk) 02:21, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
There is WP:CATEGRS. Nothing more specific. What I said is based on my experience in the field for over a decade. Debresser (talk) 18:52, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
That is what I thought but given the multiple edits being made, the focus seems to be on it being Jewish as religious (and contentious) and thus requiring a consensus of sources, self-identification, and the fact that the subject's "Jewishness" is part of their notability. Per their now edited profiles, Sergei Brin and Isaias W. Hellman, are no longer considered Jewish.Patapsco913 (talk) 14:49, 30 Dec ember 2019 (UTC)
Yes, Hellman was the fabulously successful Jew described as a Jew by every single reliable source that has given him significant coverage, and the Jew who founded the first synagogue in Los Angeles, and who died one hundred years ago but his strong Jewish identity has been erased from his Wikipedia biography for some bizarre and incomprehensible reason that I am sure that Coffee and his OTRS friends must understand. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 09:34, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
They are both ethnically Jewish, and that is what the categories are about. This is being discussed at length elsewhere, including WP:AN. See also my talkpage. Debresser (talk) 18:52, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Coffee has indicated that the standard for adding someone as Jewish requires a consensus of sourcing showing 1) self-identification, 2) that being Jewish is part of their notability, and 3) the sources used explicitly identify whether it is referring to religion or ethnicity or else it cannot be used. I do not think that this is the standard that has been applied or required and seems to be evidenced by those who are reviewing Coffee's edits. I cannot find any discussion of the matter on any notice boards. There has been some discussion on my User talk:Patapsco913#Discontinue violations of BLP. Does anyone know if this has been discussed somewhere. Patapsco913 (talk) 02:03, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

There is a difference between describing a Jew as "religious" and simply noting that the person is Jewish. The difference is that being Jewish does not necessarily imply that the person holds any particular beliefs or engages in any particular practices. But being religious implies that the person holds some beliefs or engages in some practices. In reality there is a spectrum on which people are found from the very religious to the not religious at all. Bus stop (talk) 03:28, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
I certainly don't see "that being Jewish is part of their notability" (whatever that might mean for non-rabbis) is a requirement, nor is it normally expected for including any ethnic or religious background in an article. Any category is supposed to record something that is "defining" for the subject, and "defining" is sometimes confused with notability, but the two concepts are totally distinct. Johnbod (talk) 03:55, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
So, then why do we use terms like black and African American? Is Billie Holiday an African American singer? Are you sure you aren't meaning to post in the section below called Splitting categories and lists by ethnicity and religion? This is about "Identifying who is Jewish", not Categorization. Bus stop (talk) 04:08, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Requesting consensus to remove 2008 map

Hello, I am requesting consensus to remove this 2008 map which is being displayed at Alexander Jannaeus. I am currently in a dispute at Talk:Alexander Jannaeus about removing the map. My opponent has refused to remove the map on the grounds simply because s/he likes it, it looks good, and just needs to be there for the sake of the article. Of course, that is not an argument but ones opinion. My argument is the obvious fact that the map has no labels for any of the regions or cities Alexander conquered. Most importantly, the map itself is not supported by an academic/educational original version of the map. If fact, many academic supported maps show a much bigger Hasmonean kingdom under Alexander Jannaeus. Therefore, the boundaries of the map are inaccurate, and we (Wikipedia) have let this misconception of a map to be displayed for 10+ plus years maybe. Viewers should not be guessing which region or city was conquered.

Please place your thoughts/decision below, thank you. Jerm (talk) 00:46, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Next time you post to invite editors to comment on a discussion, please keep it short and neutral. But we'll have a look. Debresser (talk) 00:52, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
@Debresser: Srry, I'm fustrated with the editor, that's why. Jerm (talk) 00:56, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Removals from Category:Jewish seminaries

41.180.16.10 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has been removing numerous articles from Category:Jewish seminaries, apparently on the basis that the term should only refer to liberal institutions. I'm not sure what the correct course of action is here, but I thought I'd bring it to attention here, and in the meantime, I've reverted their changes to these articles. -- The Anome (talk) 09:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Their standard edit summary is "removed from Category:Jewish seminaries which refers (more) to liberal institutions". I doubt this is factually correct. At least in Israel "seminary" is strictly haredi. Debresser (talk) 22:03, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Debresser, it would be a matter of defining what a seminary is. In Israel, a seminary isn't really a seminary, it's more a post-secondary institution. People study for a year or two, some schools do offer degrees and are more rigorous, like Michlala I think, but I'm not sure the rest would be seminaries in the traditional sense. There is just no other word to call it other than "Spend $20K for a year in Israel." Sir Joseph (talk) 00:56, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Hm. I'm not sure this isn't some Loshon horo. In any case, my point stands. Debresser (talk) 23:48, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Debresser, to clarify, seminary isn't strictly charedi. Nevei or michlala or many of the others catering to Americans aren't charedi and they don't offer degrees either, so they aren't really seminaries. They use seminaries because there is no other term for it. Sir Joseph (talk) 03:11, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
In any case we all agree that seminary is often haredi as well. Debresser (talk) 12:44, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Yep. Sir Joseph (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

IPv6 user needs careful review

I noticed that recently an IPv6 user has made edits to many articles, which in many cases have been of inferior technical quality and in many others unnecessary rephrases at best. Other edits have been helpful rephrases. So please carefully review any edits from the following users or other users in the same IPv6 range:

The editor from the 2600:8805:9200:11C0 range seems to have a preference for Chabad-related articles, while the editor from the 2600:8805:9203:5100 range seems to have a preference for articles related to women or girls in Judaism. Debresser (talk) 13:04, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Why are Chabad related issued being posted on WikiProject Judaism? brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:48, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Kidding, relax. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:48, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Mostly, anyway. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:49, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Not appreciated. I would think the real question is why issues related to women and girls are being posted here. Debresser (talk) 22:59, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
That was me kidding. Debresser (talk) 23:00, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
The second part at least. Debresser (talk) 23:00, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Cave of the Patriarchs

I have looked high and low, but cannot find a single source from before 1967 making the claim that the Cave of the Patriarchs is the "second holiest site in Judaism". Perhaps I am searching incorrectly, or perhaps this is more a political than a religious statement. Any help on this would be appreciated. Onceinawhile (talk) 17:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Moreover, I am not sure it is true. We have four holy cities, of which the holiness of Jerusalem surpasses the other. We do not have any second or third holy sites. All synagogues and gravesides have holiness in Judaism, but without any order of precedence. Debresser (talk) 17:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Four Holy Cities has a 1906 source which does not rank them but the article anyway contains the "second holiest" statement (unsourced).Selfstudier (talk) 18:10, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Safed is depicted as much more significant in this image. Onceinawhile (talk) 18:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Howard Schwartz (23 September 2010). Leaves from the Garden of Eden. Oxford University Press, USA. pp. 16–. ISBN 978-0-19-975438-0. says Safed is "second holiest Jewish city" Selfstudier (talk) 18:36, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
I guess you also have to ask the question as to the difference between "city" (here Hebron) and "site" (a tomb).Selfstudier (talk) 18:51, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Letters in transliteration

Do we have a policy for how to transliterate Hebrew/Aramaic letters? For example, sources such as the Jewish Encyclopedia will transliterate ח,ט,צ,ש using the diacritical letters ḥ,ṭ,ṣ,š. But for various reasons this seems to be less popular in recent works, with ASCII equivalents such as ch,t,tz,sh very often used instead. Should we be using the diacritical forms or the ASCII forms? (Tagging Davidbena, who I debated on this subject on my talk page a few months ago) Ar2332 (talk) 20:47, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

We do: WP:HEBREW.
Davidbena likes to use uncommon spelling (e.g. ḥ), but that is really not common, and against the WP:HEBREW guideline. Debresser (talk) 00:51, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
OK, thank you. Ar2332 (talk) 09:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
In most cases. Articles about Sephardi or Yemenite subjects may be an exception according to WP:HEBREW, although even in those articles it is not the first option and not common. Debresser (talk) 02:34, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
What is the correct spelling of the name Honi ha-M'agel? It looks wrong as is, and WP:HEBREW does not provide a conclusive answer, as far as I can tell. Ar2332 (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Honi HaMe'agel. I think Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Hebrew)#Vowels_and_shva and Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Hebrew)#Formative_letters are very clear and conclusive about this, as a matter of fact. Debresser (talk) 18:28, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hm, seems you are right, I missed it. Ar2332 (talk) 18:49, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Where should we move Halizah to? Options listed by number of Google search hits: chalitza (11500), chalitzah (7860), halitza (6880), halitzah (7220). Ar2332 (talk) 21:07, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
My understanding of the above naming conventions (Consonant table) is that there is no pressing need to move Halitza (i.e. its title). The letters there are written in the lower case, in the event that the transliterated form appears in the middle of a word. As a capital letter, H is equivalent to h. Of course, in modern-day transcriptions, the word חליצה is often transliterated as Chalitza. Ar2332, I wish to call your attention to this exchange in communication between Debresser and I, which you can see here, and where we hashed-out some of the problems we find with translterated Hebrew words.Davidbena (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
I too see no need to move Halizah based on WP:HBREW. Another question is WP:COMMON. Based on the Jewish Encyclopedia, I think the article is on the right spot. Debresser (talk) 22:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
I am convinced that a move is needed because the Z should be a TZ (following WP:HEBREW). Z for צ is *not* common in recent texts, it is confusing and would probably be considered an error. Even in the Jewish Encyclopedia (over 100 years old), it was printed with a diacritic. However, regarding the beginning and of Halizah, I will leave those letters as is, in accordance with your comments. Ar2332 (talk) 06:49, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
He, Ar2332. You can't just ignore the fact that two other editors disagree with you and make your move (pun intended). Please remember you are on a community-based editing site, and there is a policy called WP:CONSENSUS here.
I did a quick Google search. Halizah - 643k results, Halitzah 12k results. Please notice that WP:HEBREW defers to WP:COMMON. Debresser (talk) 07:04, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
I read your comments as comments on the beginning/end of the word, not on the Z/TZ question, as I saw WP:HEBREW's advice as pretty clear and assumed you did too. And it's not 643k, it's 162k if you include double quotes (as I did for my numbers), and some of those are unrelated (e.g. non-Jewish people and a tourist site named Halizah), or not necessary relevant to our question (written with diacritics). The "tz" spellings have a total of about 34k hits so the discrepancy is not so big. Ar2332 (talk) 07:18, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
That is stil 1 to almost 5. Debresser (talk) 08:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Purim taken off the main page

Please see here: Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors#Today's_OTD. Yesterday, Purim was on the main page, today it wasn't because someone decided it had errors. Sir Joseph (talk) 16:39, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

What is the diff for the actual removal? El_C 16:51, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
El C, here, and it looks like my timing was off, the Shushan Purim wasn't on the main page, Purim itself was removed from the main page late in the day. [1] If you look at the page itself, it is not woefully lacking in references, I checked the page and there are one or two paragraphs that might need references, but they are linked to a main page. Also, I did ask on the Errors page what was wrong with the page, and Amakuru did not respond, and another admin, Killiondude asked as well. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:19, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
@Sir Joseph: the best course of action, I think, would be to appeal to the editor behind the removal for an explanation. I've gone a head and done it. El_C 17:29, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Several articles being speedily deleted

Maurice Kremer, Milton H. Biow, Joy Silverman, Floria Lasky by IP address 217.150.87.242. If someone could take a look and see if they agree. I think they are all notable.Patapsco913 (talk) 00:54, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Passover to be on front page on the 9th

Passover to be on the front page on the 9th, please take a look at the article to help improve it and see if there are any lose tags. Thanks. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:42, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Jewish Virtual Library

Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Jewish_Virtual_Library, regarding our community's view on the reliability of the Jewish Virtual Library (as had been documented at WP:RSPS). Onceinawhile (talk) 22:31, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion on jew-tagging

An article in Commentary is starting to lead to some discussion on this issue. Please see the media section of the latest Signpost and proceed from there. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:02, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

This is very interesting. This sheds light on what led to this discussion here as well as this WP:AN discussion. The present discussion is at Talk:Edward_Kosner, and again User:Coffee is in the forefront. Debresser (talk) 20:47, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Please comment on the Ester article

Please comment on the Ester article whether we should say "impossible", "unlikely" or yet something else. Debresser (talk) 17:26, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I think you are on the wrong side of this debate, however I think it should be possible to find an academic source which disagrees with the source being discussed. Ar2332 (talk) 06:44, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
I doubt it that such a source can be found. I think that the source was wrong in using the word "impossible" and that nobody saw it necessary to point out that out to him, as it the word "impossible" obviously not applicable in that field of science, and possibly it was not even the authors intention to be that categorical, but just used the word to stress his point. Debresser (talk) 11:03, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
I think it's extremely likely that such a source can be found. The surviving writings about Persia in this era are limited and not particularly reliable, so I expect there are academics who say that we can't be sure of the source of Persian queens. But I don't have time/energy to look for a specific source right now. Ar2332 (talk) 14:36, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Semitic neopaganism

I need help on the Semitic neopaganism page. It is being repeatedly vandalized, over a years long period, by someone who has a grudge against one of the listed groups. This page is about modern day groups that have neo-pagan beliefs, and are open about it (for instance, openly discussing their beliefs and the gods they pray to by printing prayerbooks, siddurs, discussing them on websites and in interviews.) But one Wikipedia editor is censoring this position, apparently trying to present one modern day neopagan group (Kohenet) as if perhaps they were Orthodox Jews. They aren't. Members of Kohenet offer prayers to Anat, Asherah, Lilith, and other deities. I do understand the the person opposing me wishes that Kohenet were Orthodox Jews, but they simply aren't. Wikipedia needs to be a place for groups are described accurately. We can't falsely write about Protestant Christians as if they are really Catholic; we can't write about neo-pagan Wiccans as if they are Muslims, etc. We merely need to be accurate. Thank you for your time. RK (talk) 12:11, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

TfD Notice

There are currently two open discussions on whether templates Template:Kings of Israel & Template:Kings of Judah should be deleted or not. Both discussions can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 April 27. Jerm (talk) 02:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Jezebel

Requesting consensus to add Jezebel to Template:Rulers of Ancient Israel. She's been identified as a "Queen of Isreal" by other encyclopedias and in academic sources. Here are just a few sources that support this:

— Jerm (talk) 16:52, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

She was a queen, meaning that she was the wife of the ruling king, Ahab. Not that she was a ruler herself.
I see no other women in that template (except one, many centuries later, in another era), and it does not seem likely to me that Jezebel was indeed a "ruler", even if she obviously was an influential lady. Debresser (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
It’s not very often a woman married to an Israelite king is given the title of “Queen of Israel” by academics and other sources. Many women married to an Israelite king are just a consort and have no authority over any domestic or foreign matters. Jezebel had a strong influence over the king. The introduction of Baal was done by her and the deterioration of Yahwism throughout Israel. She even had the Baal prophets funded. Jerm (talk) 21:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
As I said, she had influence. She was not the ruler. Ergo, she shouldn't be in the template. That is my opinion. Debresser (talk) 20:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
She was famous - most queens were not. That doesn't mean she was a ruler. Ar2332 (talk) 13:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Amshinov

Amshinov is rated B by this project. But I don't see how. It seems pretty much without support. --2604:2000:E010:1100:11A9:DC5E:CAB5:2E2C (talk) 12:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

I changed the rating to start-class. There are a lot of articles poorly assessed in this WikiProject. Kalimi (talk) 01:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Qinah, kinah and kinnot

About three weeks ago, I looked for 'qinah' meter with regard to the Book of Lamentations. There was no such 'qinah' article. But there was a short article called 'Kinah' and a longer one called 'Kinnot'. I put 'mergeto' and 'mergefrom' templates on them. There being no follow-up, I went ahead with the merger of 'kinah' into 'kinnot'. But I wonder; was this the right thing to do? Is there, in fact, some sort of distinction among these topics? Any thoughts would be useful. Thanks. Feline Hymnic (talk) 16:48, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for posting here. I respectfully reversed your redirect, since use "kinah" is a general term for a form of poetry, while "Kinot" is used almost exclusively to indicate the specific kinot (the Hebrew plural of "kinah") said of the fast day of the ninth of Av. Debresser (talk) 18:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi Debresser, can you join the discussion on Talk:Kinah and indicate your reasons there, so we can try to reach a consensus? Ar2332 (talk) 20:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
First of all it should be clear that a major edit like a merge, when reverted, falls under WP:BRD, and the correct course of action is to stay with the last stable version, which is the article and not the redirect. In any case, I am discussing here, since this is where we started. Frankly, this Judaism project should have been notified about the merge discussion in the first place. Debresser (talk) 23:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, both! Could you note that it was a merge (after a three-week request about it) of two articles, not merely a change to one. Any decision and action (including revert) should take into account both articles and their talk pages, according to WP:MERGE. It's quite possible I got it wrong. But the articles need to be considered together, not in isolation. Thanks. Feline Hymnic (talk) 20:59, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Since there was no discussion, and these are indeed pages that are not followed by many editors,, this means simply that there is no consensus for the merge. I am frankly speaking a bit unhappy with your revert. Debresser (talk) 23:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
The content merged from Kinah into Kinot was just one paragraph, and I see no reason to remove it even after the unmerge. I added a See also reference to it in the Kinot article, and that should be enough. Debresser (talk) 23:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Fusion of Ouza and Samyaza

I would like to propose to fuse together Ouza and Samyaza. I was editing the former when I realized it openly identifies the article's figure as the latter, and the article's text are traditions that I have similarly found associated to Samyaza in sources. I would have done it myself, but I figured it was something I needed to ask first in this wikiproject. Any opinion? Creador de Mundos (talk) 15:58, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

As I seem to find no opposition, I proceed. It is a small movement of text after all, and the article of Samyaza needs work anyway. Creador de Mundos (talk) 00:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Would any Hebrew speakers like to play a word game?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

No, this is not a silly forum game or something like that. This game will actually help improve an article, Hebrew punctuation.

I am looking for three Hebrew words, A, B, and C, such that:

  • A+B is a valid word C.
  • C has an unrelated meaning to A followed by B.
  • Niqqud do not need to change.
  • The example is clever. (optional)

So far, I only have a rather lame example, visible at Hebrew punctuation § Vertical bar and paseq №4:

So, you can use a paseq as Hebrew: אַ׀ בָּא to confirm that you mean an onomatopoeic expression, and not the word abba.

Can anyone please help me do better? I don't know enough Hebrew words to solve this puzzle myself I'm afraid. Thanks for reading, Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 22:09, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

אברך Debresser (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
@Debresser: Thanks—where would we put the space? You mean C = אַברֵך right? I think I just thought of another one—אָלֶף בֵּית and אָלֶףבֵּית. I don't know if it's any better than my original though, seems not. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 19:58, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
אב + רך, indeed. I think that is better than א + בא, since א is not really a word. אלףבית is basically still אלף + בית, not to mention the awkwardness of having an endletter in the middle of a word. Debresser (talk) 13:52, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
כַּפְתּוֹר (button) almost meets the criteria, if not for the shva on the second letter. Typically in Hebrew consonant clusters (is that the appropriate term?) the first consonant will be "vowelized" with a silent shva (it used to be that shvas had a pronunciation, now they're silent), so having two, pure, back-to-back consonants are rare. Kalimi (talk) 14:35, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
@Kalimi: Sorry for missing this! Where would the space go in כַּפְתּוֹר, and what would the two descendant words mean? I don't think shvas much matter. I know I said niqqud mustn't change, but silent niqqud, or niqqud that sound alike, can change. I don't think it butchers the text to allow it. After all, the text (which I wrote, to be fair, but based on reliable sources) only says liable to be wrongly connected. I think I was too strict with demanding no niqqud change, which isn't the plain meaning of the text. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 21:56, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
@Psiĥedelisto: The space goes between כַּפְ‎ (the פ‎ should turn into a ף‎), which means hand or foot, or spoon even, and תּוֹר‎, which means turn, as in a queue. If a silent shva is fine, then the word fits your criteria then, unless you have an issue with final letters changing. Kalimi (talk) 22:05, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
That's perfect! A=kaf, B=tor, C=kaftor! I'll implement that right now and let you know. Thanks! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 22:09, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 Implemented. I'd say what we have is leaps and bounds better than before, but perhaps Kalimi, if you want to play some more, at your option of course, perhaps try thinking of a solution that when split/joined will not cause any letter to become/leave its final form. So, no pe sofit, tsade sofit (except at the end of the entire word C) et cetera. I appreciate your help! Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 22:50, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Will try to come up with something better when I have nothing else to do. Anyhow, I'm glad that I could be of assistance. Kalimi (talk) 23:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Kalimi, כַּפְתּוֹר might be an imperfect example as it is a foreign loan word (though dating back to biblical times). It is the name of the Island of Kaftor (possibly Crete, possibly Cyprus, possibly something else) where the Philistines came from.--Geshem Bracha (talk) 10:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
I too dislike that exmaple, because of the fe at the end of the word, which should be a long fe (final form). Debresser (talk) 20:40, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

I can do it with three words. Bet/mem + tzaddi/resh+ yud/mem makes one, unrelated word. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:44, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

  • I have another possible one - הרחב (command to widen) split into הר (mountain) and חב (to owe a debt). It "works" because חב has a two letter form, הר is a two letter word, and הרחב is a normal contraction of רחב.--Geshem Bracha (talk) 10:50, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

I randomly thought of a word today that may be even better than kaftor, though it has its own disadvantages. The word I am thinking about is תְּהִילָּה, meaning praise or adoration. A and B would then be תְּהִי, meaning "you will be", and ּלָה‎, meaning "for her" or "to her". The reasons why this is better is that there are no niqqud changes, and it actually makes sense when put together (i.e., you will be to her...). The disadvantages of this on the other hand is that the dagesh/mappiq should move from the ל in תהילה to the ה in לה, and more importantly, this would only work when the word is in ktiv male (full spelling) form, which never occurs in the bible according to this online concordance. Any opinions? Kalimi (talk) 05:11, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Shavuot is coming

Let's get it ready for the main page. Sir Joseph (talk) 04:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Biblical and Quranic narratives - almost all original research

Pretty much needs rebuilding from scratch. Doug Weller talk 14:22, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion of merger of The Exodus to The Book of Exodus

There is a discussion of merging The Exodus to The Book of Exodus that may be interest to members of this project at Talk:Book of Exodus#Merger proposal.--Ermenrich (talk) 01:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion of whether the Bible can be used to summarize its own narrative

There is a discussion of interest to members of this project at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Scriptural texts (WP:RSPSCRIPTURE) concerning whether the Bible can be used as a source for its own content.--Ermenrich (talk) 23:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Anyone interested in writing a short bio of Jacob Frankel, the first Jewish military chaplain in the US?

Hello all, I'm the originator of Military history of Jewish Americans, and I was glancing back through the article and noticed we have no bio for Jacob Frankel, who in 1862 became the US military's first Jewish chaplain after public pressure pushed the government to undo rules requiring chaplains to be Christian. I know we just passed Memorial Day in the US, but if anyone is interested into digging into this aspect of Jewish history, it might be cool to cobble together at least a short bio of this gentleman and his contributions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

MatthewVanitas, I'll see what I can put together to at least start something. Sir Joseph (talk) 23:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
MatthewVanitas, just so you know there is a German version of the page, I dumped it in my sandbox and started to machine translate and will add stuff from the Civil War that is more appropriate. Feel free to add/edit as you see fit: User:Sir_Joseph/sandbox/Jacob_Frankel I will be offline the next couple of days. Sir Joseph (talk) 00:18, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
@Sir Joseph: thanks for taking the initiative, and great find on the de.wiki version! I've done just a little formatting to help out, and I think between the two of us chipping away we can get it launched pretty smoothly with a little time. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
And it's now up at Jacob Frankel. Go team! MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:53, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Controversial requested move of Jews

Hi, hope all goes well. Please take a look at Talk:History of the Jews in Abkhazia#Requested move 5 June 2020. Thank you. IZAK (talk) 19:19, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

CFD

Jewish slave traders

Recently there was a discussion at Cfd regarding Jewish merchants, and it was decided that these for a distinct subgroup of merchants, and that therefore the cross-section of Jewish and Merchants is worth keeping on Wikipedia. Now I saw that Torchist (talk · contribs) created Category:Jewish slave traders, and I wonder if that too should be a separate category, or if there is nothing defining about slave traders being Jewish? Debresser (talk) 12:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I don’t see the distinct grouping here, most would fit in one of the other sub-categories of Category:Slave traders. Lets take for example Aaron Lopez, his Jewishness is a notable part of his social, legal, and religious life but I don’t see anything that suggests his Jewishness is any more important than his Americanness or Portuguesness when it comes to trading in slaves. The only sub-category which is similar is Category:Arab slave traders which confusingly only contains Africans even though Category:African slave traders exists so I see neither precedent nor compelling argument here. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 16:40, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm currently working on Category:Scottish slave traders as a subset of British slave traders and noticed that, some of the individuals included in the category for British slave traders have rather ambigious statuses. Many of the Jewish individuals involved in the transatlantic slave trade (mostly Sephardim), especially those in the Carribean, such as Aaron Lopez are in an ambigious position since they overlapped at times with the Dutch, British, Portuguese and Spanish Empires (depending on who controlled a particular piece of territory at the time), but throughout this they form part of their own distinct ethno-religious Jewish community making such a category useful for navigation. Torchist (talk) 17:05, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Jewish merchants definitely had their own identity, but I don’t see Jewish slave traders having an independent identity from Jewish merchants (especially in the Atlantic context). I also see no indication that Jewish slave traders where organized in any way beyond their links as Jewish merchants. If we look at a small example in the Caribbean like Statia we find almost all Jewish merchants participating in the slave trade in one way or another, there simply is no meaningful distinction between slave traders and merchants in the Caribbean context. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 18:26, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Jewish Wikipedia Discord?

Would anyone be interested in setting up a Jewish Wikipedia Discord? Ibn Daud (talk) 02:37, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't know about anyone else, but it would help me if you explained what that means. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:01, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
@Dweller: It would be similar to the normal Wikipedia discord, but it would specifically relate to Jewish projects. A collaboration with Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history, Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel and Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish culture. Ibn Daud (talk) 21:17, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
I don't know what a "discord" is, whether normal or not. I did a search. Are you referring to this? Wikipedia:Discord --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Dweller: Yes, I was thinking we could organize something similar to that for Jewish topics on Wikipedia? Ibn Daud (talk) 20:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Can someone add more info and refs to this page?

Hello, I recently found this article which has no references; moreover, I cannot find any information about its subject. Could anyone try to find some references and add more information? Veverve (talk) 10:48, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Veverve: I added references. Ibn Daud (talk) 16:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Vashti again

Please tell me if I am wrong at Vashti. User:GPinkerton is for sure wrong claiming that aetiology is "incorrect spelling" since according to out "etiology" article this is a valid alternative spelling. He is also wrong when he claims that the statement that the Book of Esther provides an etiology for Purim is a falsehood, since this is completely true and he himself admits this implicitly in his revert which only adds the word "invented". But maybe I am wrong about removing the word "invented"? Debresser (talk) 18:35, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

@Debresser: You are wrong about the the word "invented" having different meaning to the word "provides".
The reliable sources say "invented".
You are obviously afraid of this word, and would rather a woolly meaninglessness pervade the article, at variance with the sources cited.
The myth of Esther was invented to provide an aetiology for Purim, a pre-existing festival of non-Jewish origin. It does not merely "provide an aetiology". It was written so that there would be a non-non-Jewish aetiology for Purim.
This interpolation of yours gives a wholly different meaning, which is why I have reverted it and described, correctly, as false.
As for your vague (and wrong) assertions about the word "aetiology", I suggest you consult the dictionary in whose spelling the article is written, where "etiology" is listed as 16th century variant spelling. The correct form "ae-" is attested from the 15th century. Please do not revert to incorrect spelling and misleading POV wording again. GPinkerton (talk) 19:06, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Two sources are given for this sentence in the article - Browning and Tucker. GPinkerton is correct in understanding the assertion of Browning; however Tucker implies that "invented as an etiology" cannot be stated as a consensus position, which means that GPinkerton's edit is incorrect. I imagine the most accurate approach would be to mention "invented as an etiology" as a possibility supported by some scholars and not others. Ar2332 (talk) 19:17, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
@Ar2332: Please read Tucker again. Nowhere does it justify this claim that the story is why Purim exists, as Debresser's wording would have it. It says: the Book "purports to explain the origin of the festival". There is absolutely nothing there that supports Debresser's unsourced and ahistorical claims that is actually does "provide an aetiology for Purim". Quite the opposite. GPinkerton (talk) 19:40, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
@GPinkerton:: @Ar2332: is right, the best wording would be "invented as an etiology as a possibility supported by some scholars while being opposed by others" Ibn Daud (talk) 22:45, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
That's weasel wording. Who are these scholars that dispute this? Why haven't they published anything in reliable sources? GPinkerton (talk) 14:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
As for my supposedly "wrong" assertions regarding the word aetiology, please see etiology, and stop being an ass.
Claiming that a whole story was invented to provide a justification for changing a holiday from non-Jewish to Jewish sounds far-fetched, and as all big claims would need impeccable sources. On the other hand, we see that even in the 21st century people make up things... Debresser (talk) 20:07, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
@Debresser: No, claiming that there is the least possibility of Vashti being anything other than a fictional character in a mythical plot "sounds far-fetched". Nothing more. Your Whataboutery is as useless as is your attempts to justify your interpolations. GPinkerton (talk) 20:41, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
That is not the question. The question is whether the story was made up for the specific purpose of explaining Purim, and that is not something you can claim as having general academic consensus. Debresser (talk) 20:51, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Yes it is, and yes, I can, and the articles' citations prove it. GPinkerton (talk) 20:57, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
"Today there is general agreement that it is essentially a work of fiction, the purpose of which was to justify the Jewish appropriation of an originally non-Jewish holiday. What is not generally agreed upon is the identity or nature of that non-Jewish festival which came to be appropriated by the Jews as Purim, and whose motifs are recapitulated in disguised form in Esther." (Polish, 1999) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GPinkerton (talk • contribs)

Off the derech

Please see the talk page of Off the derech for a discussion about external links. Thanks. Sir Joseph (talk) 23:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

ʽAm haʼaretz

Somebody recently moved Am ha'aretz to ʽAm haʼaretz. Is this correct? If not, what should the correct spelling be? Ar2332 (talk) 06:41, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

It should stay where it was. See WP:HEBREW. Debresser (talk) 17:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
And we should use straight apostrophes. By the way. Debresser (talk) 17:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I have collected a batch of articles with ambiguous links to Judaism-related topics where expert assistance would be welcome. (I did have 40 or 50, but when I reviewed my bookmarks, many had been fixed.) Search for "disam" in read mode and for "{{d" in edit mode. If you solve any of these puzzles, remove the {{dn}} tag, and post  Done here.

Thanks in advance, Narky Blert (talk) 17:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

The Job one is difficult - look at the comment I added there (in source mode). The other remaining ones just involve tedious looking up sources on responsa.co.il to figure out which Pesikta is intended. Ar2332 (talk) 08:26, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Anti-semitism vs antisemitism

I noticed that the overall usage of the two terms on Wikipedia is nearly 50/50, and I looked for a while to see if one or the other is clearly preferred. The closest I found to such a discussion is here, which came to the conclusion that antisemitism is preferred (though not overwhelmingly). Has there been any movement on this? Does this seem like local consensus, or is this generally preferred? I am not so interested in litigating this issue here myself, but if there are examples where consensus one way or the other is demonstrated, I'd love to see that. Thanks~ Jlevi (talk) 15:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

It seems that there is a relative consensus that Antisemitic and Antisemitism are the preferred terms. And most articles use Antisemitism not Anti-semitism. See Antisemitic canard, Geography of antisemitism, Antisemitism in Islam, Universities and antisemitism ect. Ibn Daud (talk) 17:39, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
​Thank you. That is my impression. What is the suggestion when quoting from sources? Do we use the original term, or convert to the non-hyphenated version inside the quote? I don't expect that this falls under MOS:CONFORM, but I figured I'd ask for clarity. For titles and proper names, it seems clear that one should keep the original. Jlevi (talk) 18:24, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I would say that whenever quoting sources you keep the wording of the quote the same. Ibn Daud (talk) 19:28, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I figured. Means there's some inconsistency in text formatting, but that's a reasonable sacrifice for source accuracy. Thanks! Jlevi (talk) 19:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't think either is more significant than the other. Some sources use antisemitic. Some sources use anti-Semitic. There are arguments for both.--Geshem Bracha (talk) 13:50, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hebrew calendar

Hebrew calendar is a long and complicated article. I am thinking of moving its History section to a new article entitled "History of the Hebrew calendar". I hope this would make both articles more manageable for readers (especially as I think the History section/article could use a good deal of elaboration). Thoughts? Good or bad idea? Ar2332 (talk) 07:53, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

The article is quite convoluted, however I personally see no need in creating a new article soley about the history of the Hebrew calendar, I sure with the right structuring all the information could be contained within one article. Ibn Daud (talk) 23:21, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

‎Improving the improvements to The Exodus article:

Hi, I would be most grateful to WP:EXPERT editors if you could proof-read and further Wikify the new section that I have written at The Exodus#In Orthodox Judaism incorporating the ongoing suggestions being made at Talk:The Exodus#Adding a new section about the Orthodox position. Thank you so much, IZAK (talk) 13:27, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

RfC on ecclesiastical titles

There is a proposal for a new subsection on ecclesiastical titles being conducted at MOS:BIO. Interested editors are encouraged to participate. It is a bit Christian-centric as currently written, so the opinions of those with knowledge of other religions is especially welcome. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 02:17, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Historicity of Ishmael versus Moses (and Abraham, Isaac, Jacob) discussion

Hi, please see Talk:Ishmael#Historicity of Ishmael versus Moses and Abraham. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 18:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Category talk:Orthodox rabbis from New York City

Please see Category talk:Orthodox rabbis from New York City for a discussion about how to properly categorize rabbis from YU/YTV for example. Shimon Shkop right now is under a subcat of YU, which now is under NYC/US rabbis, which doesn't make sense. We should have a geographic cat, and then a cat for YU/YTV, etc. Sir Joseph (talk) 04:57, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Sin of Israel

Hello all, a wikipedia search of the above shows the term is dispersed throughout. Is there a suitable redirect target? Thanking you in anticipation.JorgeLaArdilla (talk) 18:01, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

A slightly odd request: Special:WhatLinksHere/Sin of Israel shows only this page. What is your point? JFW | T@lk 22:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
@JorgeLaArdilla: I am also unable to find that term used anywhere on wikipedia nor have I ever heard of it. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 22:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
My interest stems from Daniel 9 (Book of Daniel#Vision of the Seventy Weeks (chapter 9)), You will see the term in the first sentence. What does it mean? JorgeLaArdilla (talk) 22:53, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Where else is it used? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 23:01, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Not sure, will check again. [[Jewish views on sin|sin of Israel ]]? JorgeLaArdilla (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
sins of Israel in Ezra 7–10 in Ezra–Nehemiah#Summary and structure. JorgeLaArdilla (talk) 23:11, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Nathan of Gaza - a prophet in Judaism?

At Talk:Table of prophets of Abrahamic religions#Nathan of Gaza relation to Judaism there is a discussion of whether or not Nathan of Gaza is one of the prophets of Judaism. Please feel free to comment. Jayjg (talk) 21:03, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Highly offensive barnstar award with Nazi imagery

Hello, I wish to make editors aware of a discussion that is occurring on Wikimedia commons. Here is the link [2]. A creator has uploaded a barnstar with Nazi imagery that is intended to be awarded to editors who work on articles related to Nazism. It's not for articles - it is specifically intended for use on a userpage which the author makes clear here [3]. I feel this "award" is offensive in the extreme and its potential to be used as a personal attack or harassment is obvious regardless of the creator's intentions. Please contribute to the discussion. Thank you.   // Timothy :: talk  02:35, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Rabbi

The article Rabbi is tagged as being "within the scope" of this project as a C-class, "Top-importance" article. There are several issues listed on the talk page that someone with more knowledge would be better equipped to handle. -- Otr500 (talk) 04:46, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Article needs new title

The article Charlie Smith FDTB/More W.I.P. needs a new title, but I don't know much about titles, maybe someone here can come up with a better one, thnx 74.73.230.173 (talk) 19:21, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

BostonMensa and Charlie Smith FDTB mBostonMensa (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2020 (UTC)ay be interested. 74.73.230.173 (talk) 19:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I know how to do it. I just don’t know enough about the subject to come up with a better title. BostonMensa (talk) 19:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

BostonMensa, it's a duplicate of an existing article, should be deleted. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Dhimmitude

The following edit was made [4] I ask editor input on talk page about this edit. --Shrike (talk) 18:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

The idea that conquered people must pay taxes is written in the Torah, and is by no means an invention of Maimonides. Debresser (talk) 00:58, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

A discussion which may be of interest to the members of this group can be found here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Genesis Rabbah

A user has moved Genesis Rabbah to Genesis Rabba. I assume this is considered wrong? Ar2332 (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

It should definitely be "Genesis Rabbah". That's how Sefaria [5], Britannica [6], Encyclopedia.com [7] and The Jewish Encyclopedia [8] spell it. Ibn Daud (talk) 19:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Ibn Daud, in the future, to reverse it, you can't just copy/paste the page contents, that removes the entire page history. You need to do a page move, and if not possible, post a request to do it for an admin or pagemover. Sir Joseph (talk) 05:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure if that is what was done, since I can't find any history but just letting you know. Sir Joseph (talk) 05:18, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
My bad, I had no idea. Next time I'll make sure to do it properly. Ibn Daud (talk) 15:55, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Ibn Daud, if the page already had a redirect, such as in this case, you wouldn't be able to move it back. You'd have to post here for someone who is a pagemove/admin or post at WP:RM/TR for someone to move it. I posted at WP:AN and had an admin fix the history so it's all good now. Sir Joseph (talk) 23:51, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Harkavy

Hello. Please can anyone fix the remaining links to surname Harkavy? Those I was able to resolve were all for Abraham Harkavy but those I skipped may refer to Alexander Harkavy or another person. They're mainly in citations of works that I can't find in either biography or from a basic search. Thanks, Certes (talk) 23:41, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Fixed everything (except for the link from Navahrudak, which should either remain as it is or be removed). Pretty much all but one of them were referring to Abraham Harkavy, the historian. Kalimi (talk) 04:08, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Kalimi. I suspected Abraham but wasn't confident enough to change them myself. I've retained links like the one from Navahrudak, even where the target has little information about the name or family. I wouldn't add them, but they seem harmless and someone felt them necessary. Certes (talk) 10:09, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Jewish American Politicians

If someone notes that they have a Jewish father is that enough for them to be listed as Jewish on the page List of Jewish American politicians. Given that 35% or 5,250,000 American Jews are Reform Jews that is the plurality of Jewish Americans. Add the 900,000 Reconstructionist Jews and its greater than 40%. That means the plurality of Jews are in a movement that follows patrilineair descent compared to 28% of American Jews who do. Therefore, if a politician identifies as having a Jewish father can they be placed down as Jewish? Pennsylvania2 (talk) 04:27, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Somewhere higher up the category tree we differentiate between Category:American Jews and Category:American people of Jewish descent. However, in practice, this distinction is not kept in the lower echelons of the category tree.
Your comment made me smile. On first glance it looked as though you were saying that all Reform Jews have only got Jewish fathers. :) Anyway, I don't think we need to go that way to reach a conclusion for your question, and it is probably best to avoid that particular hornets' nest. Debresser (talk) 11:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
So do you think that someone with a Jewish father would meet the requirements to be listed? Pennsylvania2 (talk) 18:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
It depends how they define themselves. If they go to church every Sunday and sources call them some sort of Christian, probably not. If sources call them "Jewish-American" then probably yes. There is no formula here, sources matter.--Geshem Bracha (talk) 11:31, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: Chabad.org

Please be aware of the following discussion: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: Chabad.org. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 21:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Rosh Hashanah

Rosh Hashanah is in danger of being omitted from the Main Page this year due to a maintenance tag in the Religious significance section. Courtesy pings: Stephen, Valley2city. —howcheng {chat} 06:59, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Did what I could, thanks for noting this. Kaisershatner (talk) 19:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Yom Kippur on Main Page, please help with references and clean up

Hi, please go to Yom_Kippur and help clean it up so that there are no issues to be raised and it can be put on the main page without any issues. Thanks. Sir Joseph (talk) 04:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

For Purim, what MediaWiki code or Template calculated the dates displayed?

I am just getting interested in Hebrew calendar math, and the page Purim has the dates from 2019 to 2022, inclusive, but when I did "view source" or "edit", it looked like a generic "Holiday infobox", not a special "Jewish holiday" template, and it didn't say the dates. They are displayed in the rendered page, but the Wiki markup doesn't even say "14 Adar" (if I recall the date), it has seemingly no information or variables, and yet it has rendered to dates in the final displayed version.

How is this calendar math being done on Wikipedia? I would like to look at the code that does the math, or if you can recommend a Python library that does this, that might be interesting in other ways. I can search for Python libraries myself (but I love being helped, I'm lazy), but I am especially curious how the wiki syntax I see on the Purim page is turning into the full rendered and displayed dates. Because I don't even see things that look like a variable being set and then referenced. It is - magic, maybe. Or maybe there is a bot that did it, sometimes bots don't leave many "fingerprints" aside from the article edit history. The whole process of rendering a Wikipedia page is incredibly complex and multi-step compared to a Django or Jinja2 template.

Thank you. Sorry for not being more concise, I need practice.Fluoborate (talk) 17:07, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Fluoborate: The templates and modules in Template:Moveable date are nested several deep. The Module:Calendar_date/events holds much of the relevant code, I think. --Yair rand (talk) 23:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Chavurah, see Chavurah#Proposed deletion

NOTICE: User:Mèþru has proposed deleting Chavurah, please see Chavurah#Proposed deletion. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 02:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Kingdom of Israel (Samaria)

I just wanted some opinions on this, but what does everyone think of having Kingdom of Israel (Samaria) moved to Kingdom of Northern Israel? And no, I'm not going to propose a move. Jerm (talk) 23:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/All_current_discussions#Category:Jewish_slave_owners

I have nominated Category:Jewish slave owners and Category:Jewish slave traders for deletion at WP:CFD. Any comments for or against would be appreciated. I'm posting here because CFD is not a particularly well-visited page and these categories would benefit from fulsome discussion from those with expertise. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:57, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence_(2nd_nomination)

I thought this should be posted here: The author claims that this article is Anti-Semitic, while I see it as quite the opposite. If their article has issues of WP:POV there should be a concerted effort to fix the article rather than delete it. Ibn Daud (talk) 02:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)  

Article Superstition in Judaism has been nominated for deletion

Hello,

Since some editors are contesting existence of articles associating religions and religious communities to superstitions, One of the article which concerns this project/topic has been nominated for deletion. You can support or contest the deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superstition in Judaism by putting forward your opinion.

Thanks and regards Bookku (talk) 04:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

The discussion was closed, the consensus was to keep the article. Entara Lyon (talk) 22:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Ashkenazi intelligence

After the the Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence article was nominated for deletion, see section above, another discussion was opened at Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence, whether certain sources can be used as reliable sources in that article. Please see Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence. Debresser (talk) 22:35, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Kingdom of Israel (united monarchy)

There is currently a requested move at Talk:Kingdom_of_Israel_(united_monarchy)#Requested_move_15_October_2020. Jerm (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Jews (Jews are a nation)

That fact that the Jewish people both are and view themselves as a nation is being wrongfully contested here as “racial nationalist propaganda” attempting to “push a Zionist agenda”. Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jews#%22Jews_are.....a_nation%22. Ibn Daud (talk) 19:03, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

should Category:Klezmer musicians be taken out of Category:Jewish musicians by genre ?

Something that came up when someone was altering categories on an article I wrote (he removed the category stating the artist was Jewish since Klezmer musicians is by definition a Jewish category). Is this the way it should actually be set up? Category:Blues musicians is not set up as a subsidiary category of Category:African-American musicians by genre, for example. I can see at the moment that the majority of musicians in the Category:Klezmer musicians ARE Jewish, but not all. Thoughts? --Dan Carkner (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Sayanim

Would members like to review Draft:Sayanim ? Thank You. BlueD954 (talk) 15:30, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit-warring on Template:Jews and Judaism

Debresser again trying to WP:OWN a page. I think few people are watching there, so – Template talk:Jews and Judaism#Debresser. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 14:03, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I am trying to own the template... says the editor who wrote in his edit summary "The last time this template was discussed, it was me who made it what it is today without objection or participation.". :):):) Debresser (talk) 16:05, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Boaz and Jachin

If someone who knows Hebrew can check if this [9] was a good edit, it couldn't hurt. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:25, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I have reverted the edit by the IP and I hope the explanation I gave in the edit summary is enough. Thank you, warshy (¥¥) 18:18, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:39, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Congregation Beth Am

This article needs more work. Bearian (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Survey of Yiddish-music articles I have been working on

Hi everyone, this has been a pet project of mine lately and I do not expect it to be of great interest to most people, but in my Yiddish music communities off wikipedia lately there have been some big discussions about how poor the quality of writing is about Yiddish song and Klezmer music on wikipedia. I came up with this Yiddish Music Articles Improvement list on my sub-page so far. Definitely not every redlink or stub is particularly notable but it's more of an effort for me to figure out for myself what needs attention and to use as a discussion point off wikipedia. Feedback welcome.Dan Carkner (talk) 17:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Anonymous editor with some opinions on Jewish Atheists

I'm not an expert on issues relating to the intersection between Judaism and atheism, but I suspect that the changes of User:74.64.195.172 should be looked at by someone who knows more than me. They seem to be removing Jewish people from categories like Category:Atheist philosophers and Category:Jewish skeptics without good reasoning, in addition to making changes to Jewish atheism and List of Jewish atheists and agnostics. Again, I'm no expert here, so this may all be reasonable, but what I do know makes me suspect that these changes are biased. Gbear605 (talk) 04:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not an expert either, but an anonymous account only existing to make such specific edits on one topic unilaterally doesn't sit well with me either. Especially since it's a matter of strictly and literally interpreting a religious topic.--Dan Carkner (talk) 05:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Rabbi Yaakov Horowitz

Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Yaakov_Horowitz. Ibn Daud (talk) 21:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Deletion discussion for Category:German Jewish military personnel of World War I

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_February_2#Category:German_Jewish_military_personnel_of_World_War_I has been nominated for deletion.--User:Namiba 12:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Tel Dor

Would it be a good ideal to merge Dor, Israel and Tel Dor together seeing that both articles discuss the same ancient Tel Dor and the fact that Dor, Israel is a short article? Jerm (talk) 06:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Sub-categorization of American Jews

At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories#American Jews, I've questioned the presence of articles currently directly in the "container category" Category:American Jews (against its mandate in the note at the top), as opposed to sub-categories of Category:American Jews by occupation and proposed what I believe are missing sub-categories there, like Category:Jewish American judges. Input requested there. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:08, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Review of Draft:Hanan_bar_Rava

Hey, looking for feedback/review of my draft Draft:Hanan_bar_Rava. Thanks Gershonmk (talk) 17:46, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Improving Kosher Wiki Cookbook

The b:CookbookKosher wikibook has no recipes, and I'd really love to see some there. Would anyone be able to throw a kosher or israeli recipe up? TimeEngineer (talk) 05:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Notification

Hi - members of this project may be familiar with the sourcing restriction in the topic area of Polish history in the Second World War, described at WP:APLRS. I have raised a request for clarification on the wording of the restriction, interested parties are welcome to comment here. GirthSummit (blether) 19:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Bris Milah POV

Dear all Editors,

Recently glanced at article Brit milah. It appears to be suffering from anti-Jewish and christian POV. I am involved in other projects right now, but this is Judaisms most important ritual and I hope some editors can make this article NPOV.

Blessings,

Yaakov W. Yaakov Wa. (talk) 04:14, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory has an RFC

Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Uncle Sam and Laughing Quaker != Judaism

Can we remove these images and replace them with something that represents this Wikiproject? Or at least, with something neutral that DOES NOT associate this project with the American military industrial complex, or with an alternate religion, or with the scoffing at the readership for no particular reason? Thank you for the consideration.Jaredscribe (talk) 04:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Passover 81/21

  • The lede has no mention of the Haggadah, Unleavened bread, or the Chag haMatzot, the "feast of unleavened bread" (which actually redirects here), nor the month of Aviv, nor the counting of the sheaves. Each one of these is a major omission. I added them all just before the holiday began, while moving the pesach seder link to the top, but my edit was reverted. Frustrating that it is so difficult to contribute here. I will have "prove" the basic facts that every 7 year old Jewish child takes for granted, and probably have to defend the articles against the biblical minimalism and general ignorance that is held as "mainstream" opinion here in wikipedialand on all articles in the content area of Judaism that aren't written "Yinglish". Can I get a witness?Jaredscribe (talk) 07:28, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
    A few days afterward, I was able to restore all the wikilinks to these articles, and they have been there since and are accepted. Also, the editor who reverted me did so in good-faith because I was new at the time and had made lots of edits on erev shabbat; i don't hold it against him. The excess of biblical minimalism stated in wikivoice as irrefutable academic consensus, is occasionally a problem on theology and hebrew bible articles, and is a somewhat separate issue; I found articles on Exodus and the Book of Exodus somewhat unbalanced in that regard, and haven't returned to them much since. Jaredscribe (talk) 23:16, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

The Eternal One

YHWH The editors here, quoting supposedly "reliable" sources, claim that the Jewish God "absorbed the all positive qualities of baal and ashteroth". The falsehood of this claim is easily ascertained by referencing Moses and the prophets, but they are systematically ignored in the article. This appalling claim is counterfactual, and if the "smith" who who is cited for this does actually claim that, the source is unreliable. The Jewish God specifically DOES NOT have the supposedly positive quality of corporal existence: he does not have a body, cannot be represented in images, is not a man OR a woman, does not have a consort, does not mate with human females, and does not desire the ritual prostitution of the baal and asthoreth cults, or the child sacrifice of molech. The prophets denounce and renounce all these things, as do the Jewish sages from the second temple period to the present day, unanimously. The Jewish God did not "absorb" these so-called "positive qualities", he repudiated them. How can this be seriously denied by anyone? This process is borne out in the name Elijah, which literally means El (deity) is Jah. His challenge to Baal at Mount Carmel is an example of this rejection. When I added these wikilinks, they were reverted. Whether or not it actually occurred is irrelevant to the point that it represents a repudiation of paganism, not an "absorption" of it. I thought this would be something on which Jews, pagans, and christians could all agree on. The article ignores the primary sources - the prophets entirely. Other than Moses/the pentateuch, there is not a single hebrew prophet quoted inline. Of the 102 footnotes, not a single one cites any of the hebrew prophets or Jewish sages. There's nothing wrong with an article on the pagan pantheon, or on Wellhausen's discredited documentary hypothesis, but they shouldn't masquerade as an article on the Jewish God. This article should be deprecated and merged with the articles on baal, ashtoreth, biblical minimalism, the documentary hypothesis, and anti-jewish propaganda. It doesn't even bother to quote a Jewish source post Moses as a minority opinion on the Jewish God. It is not encyclopedic - it is IGNORANCE. Jews will recognize this immediately and avoid the article, but the typical gentile reader will be confused, and our readers deserve better.Jaredscribe (talk) 07:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, so I just discovered that, of course, Jewish editors have made a separate parallel article God in Judaism, which covers the post-exilic tradition more or less fairly, though heavy on Maimonides. I added this: Furthermore, that this "God of Israel" is the omnipresent God originally worshipped by the universal human ancestors: Noah, Adam, and Eve. A "national God", yes, but much more than that. Articles written from a Jewish perspective tend to neglect mention of this, usually done for practical reasons of avoiding the anti-semitic backlash represented on the other article. There is really no dispute about it on the basis of the sources. Even Christians will agree with this.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asuppim

Asuppim is currently at AfD. Someone with better knowledge of the Old Testament than me might want to comment, as I'm unsure what a good target for a merge might be or if there are sources to warrant keeping the article. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 16:34, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

The Holocaust in Austria

The above is a new article. It came to my attention as a result of a move query at the Teahouse. I have done some very surface-level edits mostly for MOS issues, but it needs much deeper work I think, by those more steeped in the area. I have tagged the talk page with a project banner and added a class and importance rating, but I think a project member should check that. Thanks.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:13, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Olam katan

Notice

The article Olam katan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

"Olam katan" is basically just Hebrew for "microcosm", which we already have an article on, rendering this article a duplicate per WP:COMMONNAME. The information on this concept in Jewish philosophy (one among many philosophies to adopt it) would belong in the main article, though what is contained on this page is not usable as it is not properly sourced.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Apaugasma (talk|contribs) 03:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Discussion going on if I.B. Singer should be called a "Polish-born Jewish-American writer

If you would like to join the discussion go to I.B. Singer's Talk Page and express your opinion on whether the lead section should say that Singer was a Polish-America writer, (what's there now), or a "Polish-born, Jewish-American writer," or something similar. I started the conversation because I believe strongly that calling Singer a Polish-American writer completely misses the point of what makes Singer notable. I also think he would absolutely disagree with that characterization of him and his art. Please come and join the conversation, because we need consensus to change the lead. Thanks so much. DaringDonna (talk) 19:13, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

New template

Hi, I wrote a template (Template:Alhatorah) which I suggest we use to provide standardized references to Hebrew Bible commentaries. (I chose Alhatorah over Sefaria as a source because Alhatorah more reliably shows both English and Hebrew at the same time.) Comments are welcome. Ar2332 (talk) 20:16, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Wherever I see the need to show both the Hebrew and the English text side by side I use the "bibleverse|HE" template, as I call it:
  • Exodus 29:7 [just for example - bibleverse||Exodus|29:7|HE]
This template uses the Machon Mamre Hebrew/English translation, which to my view has been quite neutral and useful. Thank you, warshy (¥¥)
Yes, Mechon Mamre is my standard for Biblical verses, but the point of this is to create a version for *commentators*. Ar2332 (talk) 04:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Discussion of interest

This discussion may be of interest to members of this Project. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:59, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Shem HaMephorash

There is a discussion at Talk:Shem_HaMephorash#Discussion_about_whether_to_include_the_table_listing_the_"angels_of_the_Shem_Hamephorash" that members of this group might be interested in. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 07:48, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Khumra, Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Labin of Ziditshov, anf Kedushah

Hello. I wanted to make a few suggestions/points:

Thank you, Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 23:41, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Charlie, in general I agree with the spirit and most of the details of what you're saying, but I'll mention that in topics relating to the Yiddish language, the YIVO transliteration which uses Kh would be the norm (in academia, not in Wikipedia). However, the example you gave is of a religious topic so I think you may be right there. But in personal names or the names of historical European organizations/things in my opinion it's a more ambiguous situation and better to leave it as the article creator made it, as is the case with British/American spellings in English. For example I was editing Badchen and left it how it's written despite it probably being transliterated badkhn in most academic literature about Yiddish culture. Just putting in my 2 cents in case anyone reads this and thinks it's time for renaming a bunch of articles.--Dan Carkner (talk) 00:20, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
I agree that Khumra should be moved to Chumra. Nobody transliterates a Heth/ח as Kh. I also agree about Naftali Tzvi Labin of Ziditshov. Your other point about kedusha is well stated too. Nerguy (talk) 17:28, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
How can we go about making these changes? Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 19:03, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Statute of Kalisz

What is the current consensus among scholars (if any) about the Statute of Kalisz? Was it really an emancipation of Jews 500 years before the French Revolution? A forgery? The article itself is unclear, but it's having an effect on other articles, such as Jewish emancipation which extensively quotes from it (in section #Background) in Wikipedia's voice as if it were universally accepted. There are many other articles which link to it. Otoh, Disabilities (Jewish) lists France as the first to emancipate the Jews.

Statute of Kalisz needs attention to establish what we can really say about it, and if it's of questionable veracity, then a significant clean-up operation may be needed at other articles. (There is no mention in the Archives of this statute.) Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 19:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

This Reddit thread (not a source in itself, of course, but possibly useful] says that there's no real reason to believe it's a fabrication, but more to the point (imo) says that there are other documents which would also precede France's emancipation. I think the question is less "is any individual document a fabrication" and more "how are we defining emancipation"? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:19, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Artem Dolgopyat's ethnicity

There's a peculiar edit war over the Israeli athlete's ethnic background (which has lately been quite prominent in the news). I opened a discussion on talk page, but since my previous attempts to discuss this with the vis-à-vis (on two of their accounts) went nowhere, I thought others would also take some interest in the matter. --Simulacrum (talk) 02:51, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Book of Ruth

Additional eyes would be helpful on Book of Ruth. An editor who has been around a while and has made some good edits removed a well-sourced paragraph on an interpretation of the significance of uncovering Boaz's feet as "Intellectual graffiti from a perverted mind steeped in the weak morality of our current society", which came across to me (like this edit to Twelve Tribes of Israel and this to Jamu, which someone else reverted) as an odd turn towards non-policy-based editing / vandalism. When I undid the removal, the editor removed the section again as "Modernist crap and an attack on Christians."; another opinion would be helpful. -sche (talk) 23:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Bobby Fischer

Hello, I'm not Jewish but I'm concerned (actually effing shocked) with whitewashing occurring on at least one biography page. The fact that Bobby Fischer is known for being antisemitic is apparently not important to the lede and is only mentioned in section 14(!) way past after all the wonderful chessy things he accomplished. I do know that the lede had mentioned this fact at one time (not sure when or even if it was a stable addition) but it's not there anymore. Even BLP's ledes won't avoid negativity in ledes and this man has been dead for some time.

I'm a baby wikipedian and don't have the huevos to start an edit war by trying to fix this. I was hoping someone here could look at it and tell me I'm not crazy for thinking this is absolutely unacceptable. Thank you. Yo bailaba (talk) 19:08, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Yo bailaba: The lead of the article should summarize the body, and as such I agree at least a small mention should be there, as it doesn't really summarize any of the personal life section beyond "erratic". Edit warring isn't a good way to go, whether new or experienced, but you can definitely WP:BEBOLD to improve it. Just be sure what you add doesn't introduce anything that isn't already in the body of the article and isn't disproportionate to the size of those sections in the article. If someone undoes your change, the next stop would be Talk:Bobby Fischer to make a case for inclusion. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
I've added a sentence. -sche (talk) 00:10, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
As a rule the lead paragraphs are supposed to be a summary of what makes the person notable. What made Fischer notable was his achievements in chess; if not for them, no one would care about his antisemitism. No "whitewashing" was involved (also see WP:GOODFAITH). However, I don't object to the sentence that was just added. Bruce leverett (talk) 03:26, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Anti semitism on Wikipedia

When it was asked on RSN "Would you be perfectly fine with an article saying "According to Haaretz Haredi Judaism is a radical and dangerous new cult"?!?!"

Several users responded that they would be fine with it?! This is dangerous and this must be stopped! Please offer your voice at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Another_unreliable_Haaretz_article.155.246.151.38 (talk) 18:55, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Are you implying that Haaretz is antisemitic propaganda? tgeorgescu (talk) 18:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism/Archive_37&oldid=1255187466"