![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
The last tfd, the closing admin must have been on crack when he said lean towards keep. So I'm going to nominate it again. -- Ķĩřβȳ ♥ Ťįɱé Ø 09:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Support -- יהושועEric 18:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Nice to see I wasn't notified of this deletion review on my talk page, even though I was mentioned by name on it, AND I was the person to recreated the TFD. -_- Oh well. Lol, someone accused "accused" me of being Jewish. That is SO going on my userpage.--
Ķĩřβȳ
♥
Ťįɱé
Ø
03:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
There is currently a dispute over whether the word "Adonai" is singular or plural for the purposes of the Tetragrammaton article. Any and all commentary is welcome. Kari Hazzard ( T | C) 22:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I just posted a rather lengthy post on that talk page explaining my understanding of the issue. The gist is that A––nai is literally plural, but when used by the Bible is nearly always acribed with singular nouns and adjectives. In my opinion the translation "my Lord" is most appropriate when used in context; "my Lord(s)" may be appropriate for a literal translation, but should be used with an explanation because of its heretical and obviously inaccurate implication of polytheism. — Rafi Neal 17:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Inigmatus has opened an AMA request for advocacy against "Jewish editors" who he believes have "have bandwagoned many good, properly sourced Messianic Judaism articles to VfD death", also stating that "Jewish admins enforce the deletions." Normally this wouldn't concern me - if advocacy is what he feels is needed, I believe we all would be quite happy to work with an advocate. What's distressing is that he states in the request that "death threats have been issued to MJ editors." If this is true and it's come from Judaism project members it's a major problem that we need to examine here. I haven't personally seen these threats, but I don't get around as much as many here do. Can anyone help verify this? I've asked inigmatus to comment here regarding these threats. Daniel C/ T + 10:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
It was this edit by (now banned) User:Daniel575, I think. — coelacan talk — 12:57, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
That is indeed a horrible thing to say. This kind of ghastly verbal terrorism feeds online antisemitism. I agree that this editor should be seen as unwelcome on this project. I will also make it abundantly clear that this was one individual editor, and that these were not specific death threats but simply deeply disgusting generalisations.
It always bears quoting Rabbi Meir: "May sins disappear from the land (Psalm 104) - G'd doesn't want sinners removed, he simply wants them to stop sinning." It is with this in mind one should go about dealing with MJ/JFJ people. It is obvious that Jewish editors on Wikipedia will not tolerate MJ staking claims of legitimacy within historical Judaism. How about WP:NPOV? JFW | T@lk 21:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at Talk:Jewish feminism#Does Jewish feminism really exist?. Thanks, IZAK 12:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Could someone take a look? I think ancient Egyptians can be safely moved out of Judaism section, but I've never heard of Jews who "painted their... heads, and other parts of their bodies with blue dyes". The same text is repeated in Blue#Religion:Blue in Judaism. ← Humus sapiens ну ? 12:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
This is something we should take some interest in, because the whole issue has been causing a lot of trouble. From their POV, what they are asking for on this page sounds quite reasonable. Rather than ignore it, because guidelines will eventually be established for this dispute, I think an alternative policy that respects WP values should be formulated.
Here is an alternative suggestion:
I urge people to refer to this statement of principles when the issue comes up, which it often does. Also to give feedback and improve them, of course.
Lastly, these people seem to have a kind of persecution complex, as if "the Jews on Wikipedia are out to get them." Let's not feed that complex. Keep the argument principled, don't attack or malign, and also enlist the help of educated, mainstream Christian Wikipedians who can help keep these things in a reasonable perspective. Dovi 20:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Given that everyone acknowledges that when referring to Judaism the term "Orthodox" has a specialized meaning (See Orthodox Judaism), I would recommend not using the term "orthodox" with a small "o" to mean mainstream for the same reasons I would suggest not using "catholic" to mean general or "protestant" to mean someone who disagrees. There's too much risk of confusion with the specialized meaning of these terms, which is what people belonging to these faiths usually mean by them. Best, -- Shirahadasha 20:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Centralized discussion at Talk:Partnership minyan#No halakhic support for egalitarian innovations in Orthodoxy. Thank you, IZAK 10:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Someone ought to fix Alms#Judaism, which presently contains only the sentence: In the Jewish tradition, charity is secondary to tzedakah, or redistributive justice. -- Smack ( talk) 05:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm being accused of bigotry over suppression an external link to a non-notable article on Talk:Ten Commandments. Could others please comment whether this is a reasonable accusation? JFW | T@lk 22:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I have a question about the following story:
"The shochet must be a learned and pious man. A story I once read about a shochet goes something like this: The old shochet had retured and the rabbi had to help choose a new one. When one of the people in the town, a friend of the rabbi's asked about the candidate the rabbi had seen today, asked about the new potential shochet. The rabbi shook his head. "Did he check the knife for sharpness and nicks?" The rabbi nodded. "Did he slaugter with one smooth, clean stroke?" The rabbi nodded again. "Did he say the proper blessing?" The rabbi nodded. "Did he drain the blood and check the lungs?" The rabbi again nodded. "So, what is the problem?" asked his friend. "The old shochet used to cry afterwards" replied the rabbi. That is the ideal shochet, one who not only follows the proper proceedures in slaugtering the animal, but whom is sensitive and not blood thirsty, who knows that the eating of flesh is a consession. (source of the story is unknown, if you know, please e-mail me so I can properly credit the source)." [1]
I didn't write this, I found it on a random Jewish website. Has anyone else on here ever heard this and know the touching story's source? I would really like to know. Thanks. ( Ghostexorcist 01:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC))
Does anyone know of an English language book that focuses on the history, training (i.e. sharpening of his knife, recognition of disease, recital of prayers, etc.) and day-to-day job of the Shochet for all forms of Judaism? I can only look so much stuff up on the internet. ( Ghostexorcist 07:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC))
I submitted V'Imru for proposed deletion on the grounds that the article was basically just a dictionary definition and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The article creator removed the proposed deletion tag on the grounds that the religious significance of the word "v'imru" is that when one hears it, that is the signal to say "amen". My question is whether that is enough to constitute religious significance. After all, standing up is part of a religious service as well, but we don't have an article titled Please rise. -- Metropolitan90 07:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
How can I be a part of the WikiProject Judaism? Jonathan Haack ... Oemb1905 19:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Category:Antisemitic canards has been proposed for deletion here. Some input from people familiar with the topic would be appreciated. I personally would like to know if "Antisemitic canards" is the term used in reference works to describe this topic, or if there is another, more common, term. - Jwillbur 01:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Someone looking for something to do, that doesn't involve much in the way of controversy, might consider tackling some of the redlinks in the article on Jewish music (the article itself could use some help as well)... It's a pretty sad day when we've got an article on V'Imru but not on, e.g., Abie Rotenberg and the Miami Boys Choir... Tom e r talk 03:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Why is it so commonly accepted for articles to be edited according to Orthodox Judaism's stance on what determines Jewish status? Even a few long-time Wikipedians seem to experience a bit of difficulty differentiating between what is a religious belief (i.e., applicable only to those who actually hold it as true), and material suitable for an encyclopedic website. An overwhelmingly significant number of Jews (not only in the Reform movement, but also in the Conservative movement citation needed) make no distinction between gender in the case of interfaith parentage. I think there are quite a few articles in need of a revert when it comes to this particular subject, so long as Wikipedia hold its neutrality policy in place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.215.6.89 ( talk • contribs)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
The last tfd, the closing admin must have been on crack when he said lean towards keep. So I'm going to nominate it again. -- Ķĩřβȳ ♥ Ťįɱé Ø 09:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Support -- יהושועEric 18:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Nice to see I wasn't notified of this deletion review on my talk page, even though I was mentioned by name on it, AND I was the person to recreated the TFD. -_- Oh well. Lol, someone accused "accused" me of being Jewish. That is SO going on my userpage.--
Ķĩřβȳ
♥
Ťįɱé
Ø
03:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
There is currently a dispute over whether the word "Adonai" is singular or plural for the purposes of the Tetragrammaton article. Any and all commentary is welcome. Kari Hazzard ( T | C) 22:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I just posted a rather lengthy post on that talk page explaining my understanding of the issue. The gist is that A––nai is literally plural, but when used by the Bible is nearly always acribed with singular nouns and adjectives. In my opinion the translation "my Lord" is most appropriate when used in context; "my Lord(s)" may be appropriate for a literal translation, but should be used with an explanation because of its heretical and obviously inaccurate implication of polytheism. — Rafi Neal 17:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Inigmatus has opened an AMA request for advocacy against "Jewish editors" who he believes have "have bandwagoned many good, properly sourced Messianic Judaism articles to VfD death", also stating that "Jewish admins enforce the deletions." Normally this wouldn't concern me - if advocacy is what he feels is needed, I believe we all would be quite happy to work with an advocate. What's distressing is that he states in the request that "death threats have been issued to MJ editors." If this is true and it's come from Judaism project members it's a major problem that we need to examine here. I haven't personally seen these threats, but I don't get around as much as many here do. Can anyone help verify this? I've asked inigmatus to comment here regarding these threats. Daniel C/ T + 10:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
It was this edit by (now banned) User:Daniel575, I think. — coelacan talk — 12:57, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
That is indeed a horrible thing to say. This kind of ghastly verbal terrorism feeds online antisemitism. I agree that this editor should be seen as unwelcome on this project. I will also make it abundantly clear that this was one individual editor, and that these were not specific death threats but simply deeply disgusting generalisations.
It always bears quoting Rabbi Meir: "May sins disappear from the land (Psalm 104) - G'd doesn't want sinners removed, he simply wants them to stop sinning." It is with this in mind one should go about dealing with MJ/JFJ people. It is obvious that Jewish editors on Wikipedia will not tolerate MJ staking claims of legitimacy within historical Judaism. How about WP:NPOV? JFW | T@lk 21:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see the discussion at Talk:Jewish feminism#Does Jewish feminism really exist?. Thanks, IZAK 12:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Could someone take a look? I think ancient Egyptians can be safely moved out of Judaism section, but I've never heard of Jews who "painted their... heads, and other parts of their bodies with blue dyes". The same text is repeated in Blue#Religion:Blue in Judaism. ← Humus sapiens ну ? 12:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
This is something we should take some interest in, because the whole issue has been causing a lot of trouble. From their POV, what they are asking for on this page sounds quite reasonable. Rather than ignore it, because guidelines will eventually be established for this dispute, I think an alternative policy that respects WP values should be formulated.
Here is an alternative suggestion:
I urge people to refer to this statement of principles when the issue comes up, which it often does. Also to give feedback and improve them, of course.
Lastly, these people seem to have a kind of persecution complex, as if "the Jews on Wikipedia are out to get them." Let's not feed that complex. Keep the argument principled, don't attack or malign, and also enlist the help of educated, mainstream Christian Wikipedians who can help keep these things in a reasonable perspective. Dovi 20:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Given that everyone acknowledges that when referring to Judaism the term "Orthodox" has a specialized meaning (See Orthodox Judaism), I would recommend not using the term "orthodox" with a small "o" to mean mainstream for the same reasons I would suggest not using "catholic" to mean general or "protestant" to mean someone who disagrees. There's too much risk of confusion with the specialized meaning of these terms, which is what people belonging to these faiths usually mean by them. Best, -- Shirahadasha 20:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Centralized discussion at Talk:Partnership minyan#No halakhic support for egalitarian innovations in Orthodoxy. Thank you, IZAK 10:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Someone ought to fix Alms#Judaism, which presently contains only the sentence: In the Jewish tradition, charity is secondary to tzedakah, or redistributive justice. -- Smack ( talk) 05:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm being accused of bigotry over suppression an external link to a non-notable article on Talk:Ten Commandments. Could others please comment whether this is a reasonable accusation? JFW | T@lk 22:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I have a question about the following story:
"The shochet must be a learned and pious man. A story I once read about a shochet goes something like this: The old shochet had retured and the rabbi had to help choose a new one. When one of the people in the town, a friend of the rabbi's asked about the candidate the rabbi had seen today, asked about the new potential shochet. The rabbi shook his head. "Did he check the knife for sharpness and nicks?" The rabbi nodded. "Did he slaugter with one smooth, clean stroke?" The rabbi nodded again. "Did he say the proper blessing?" The rabbi nodded. "Did he drain the blood and check the lungs?" The rabbi again nodded. "So, what is the problem?" asked his friend. "The old shochet used to cry afterwards" replied the rabbi. That is the ideal shochet, one who not only follows the proper proceedures in slaugtering the animal, but whom is sensitive and not blood thirsty, who knows that the eating of flesh is a consession. (source of the story is unknown, if you know, please e-mail me so I can properly credit the source)." [1]
I didn't write this, I found it on a random Jewish website. Has anyone else on here ever heard this and know the touching story's source? I would really like to know. Thanks. ( Ghostexorcist 01:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC))
Does anyone know of an English language book that focuses on the history, training (i.e. sharpening of his knife, recognition of disease, recital of prayers, etc.) and day-to-day job of the Shochet for all forms of Judaism? I can only look so much stuff up on the internet. ( Ghostexorcist 07:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC))
I submitted V'Imru for proposed deletion on the grounds that the article was basically just a dictionary definition and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The article creator removed the proposed deletion tag on the grounds that the religious significance of the word "v'imru" is that when one hears it, that is the signal to say "amen". My question is whether that is enough to constitute religious significance. After all, standing up is part of a religious service as well, but we don't have an article titled Please rise. -- Metropolitan90 07:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
How can I be a part of the WikiProject Judaism? Jonathan Haack ... Oemb1905 19:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Category:Antisemitic canards has been proposed for deletion here. Some input from people familiar with the topic would be appreciated. I personally would like to know if "Antisemitic canards" is the term used in reference works to describe this topic, or if there is another, more common, term. - Jwillbur 01:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Someone looking for something to do, that doesn't involve much in the way of controversy, might consider tackling some of the redlinks in the article on Jewish music (the article itself could use some help as well)... It's a pretty sad day when we've got an article on V'Imru but not on, e.g., Abie Rotenberg and the Miami Boys Choir... Tom e r talk 03:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Why is it so commonly accepted for articles to be edited according to Orthodox Judaism's stance on what determines Jewish status? Even a few long-time Wikipedians seem to experience a bit of difficulty differentiating between what is a religious belief (i.e., applicable only to those who actually hold it as true), and material suitable for an encyclopedic website. An overwhelmingly significant number of Jews (not only in the Reform movement, but also in the Conservative movement citation needed) make no distinction between gender in the case of interfaith parentage. I think there are quite a few articles in need of a revert when it comes to this particular subject, so long as Wikipedia hold its neutrality policy in place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.215.6.89 ( talk • contribs)