Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:47, 5 March 2007

Hi, a question and a point. First, in regard to - the word "archaelogy" is a valid spelling and was internal to a quote. Therefore it should be left as is. Second, Are you User:Nogster? I ask since you edited that user's user page. If so, why did you construct another account?JoshuaZ 01:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, getting passwords back is generally very difficult if one doesn't have one's email enabled. It generally requires a developer and they almost always have higher priority things to do. I would suggest just moving your userpage from there over to the now empty user page here and then putting a note on top that you used to be Nogster before you lost the password. JoshuaZ 01:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the encouraging words. I really do need a break. I've about given up (not quite) on defending MJ on wiki because I feel so alone sometimes. Thanks for stepping up. inigmatus 01:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC) :)

User page looks good. Be sure to join Wikiproject Messianic Judaism and put the banner code to mark you as a Messianic Jewish editor. inigmatus 05:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Love it

Love how you're rocking HaMashiach's name on your page! Lookin good, Dude. HaShem's grace and peace upon you & yours Rivka 18:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Netzarim

The problem with listing modern movements on this page on Misplaced Pages is that we'd have to have some kind of third-party, verifiable information about them and their beliefs. This threshold would seem to be met by making reference to books published by other-than-vanity presses, or perhaps (at the least) newspaper articles. The reason this policy of verifiability (and concomitant notability) is necessary is to prevent Misplaced Pages from becoming a site for anyone with a website to self-promote. Misplaced Pages aspires, after all, to be an encyclopedia, albeit an open encyclopedia. While I am in agreement intellectually with the group in Ra'anana, I also respect Misplaced Pages's vision.Wlmh65 20:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

As you can see, it's not my policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Verifiability Wlmh65 20:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I also note that the Timecube article you referred to is backed with sources including newspaper and scholarly articles. It may only have a handful of followers but there is publically-available third-party information adduced to the article.Wlmh65 20:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I find it hard to believe

That a Torah Observant Jew could go so far off the derech as to say that he is a Yiddishe Notzri (Hebrew/Yiddish for messianics.) My machshovos on the issue are to say things that I cant and wont say on wikipedia. --Shaul avrom 12:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Re-creating deleted articles

Please don't re-created deleted articles, it is against policy, grounds for speedy deletion, and ultimately grounds for more serious action. Thanks. Jayjg 15:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Lists like this are a bad idea to begin with, and this one in particular has been deleted via an AfD. Why not try categories instead? Jayjg 21:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

To begin with, the notion that someone is an "Important Messianic Judaism figure" is almost inevitably POV and/or original research. That said, you could create a category Category:Messianic Judaism figure, or something similar, and add the category to the bottom of each article. Jayjg 22:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

See, for example, the bottom of Menachem Mendel Schneersohn, which includes a number of categories, including Category:Rebbes of Lubavitch, which would be a good example. As for the Bible translation you mention, Dovi has explained quite well why translations of the Bible by groups/individuals which consider Jesus to be the Messiah, and which include the New Testament, are Christian, not Jewish. Jayjg 22:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, I replied to you at Talk:Jewish English Bible translations. Your edit was clearly well-meant, and there was never any suggestion that it was vandalism. For more, see my reply.Dovi 22:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll do what I can

) inigmatus 02:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk page comments

If you have comments regarding the content of specific articles, it's best to put them on the Talk: pages of the articles in question, rather than on User talk: pages. Jayjg 03:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Again, please make your comments on the Talk: pages of the articles in question, not on my Talk: page. Thanks. Jayjg 15:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

"Messianic Judaism"

I disagree.

1) NT is a corrupt document and is filled with non-Torah concepts and emendations done by Hellenistic groups to support their positions. See the work of scholars Bart Ehrman, Geza Vermes, Hyam Maccoby.

2) The historical Yehoshua taught and argued elements of the oral Torah. The written Torah implicates the oral Torah in many places--this has been argued for centuries so I will not bother rehashing it. The oral Torah is part of the Messorah. I suppose you may be a Karaite, but the fact is the historical Yehoshua would not have been in agreement with them, but was one of the Perushim who supported the oral Torah: see e.g. Harvey Falk, Geza Vermes, Hyam Maccoby, E.P. Sanders etc.

I see little point in arguing with you, but you may find those authors worthwhile to study to learn more.Wlmh65 05:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Like I said, I'm not interested in an argument. I have my opinions about the NT, well-informed through academic research in works published through peer-reviewed presses, not blog postings. Wlmh65 09:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Some other points: 1) In traditional Judaism, the Judaism of the historical Yehoshua, the key to salvation is non-selective assent to the right of God to guide us--non-selective Torah observance 2) whether someone in particular is or is not the Mashiach is secondary 3) I would, and believe the historical Yehoshua would have, sought to have Jews and non-Jews follow Torah non-selectively even if that meant not recognizing him as Mashiach 4) because a careful reading of the various accounts of his life shows that the historical Yehoshua was concerned with orthopraxis vis-a-vis the community and God, over orthodoxy. I have no need to "reconcile" myself to "Orthodox" Jewish thought because my thought is in essence "Orthodox" Jewish. I don't seek to have people believe that the historical Yehoshua was Mashiach because I believe it is irrelevant. What I do seek is to do justice to the memory of an observant Jew who has become maligned and impugned in the Jewish community because of his misappropriation and corruption by Hellenist Jews and non-Jews. Wlmh65 10:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Another thing I would like to point out to you is that it's forbidden to speak of a Jew-by-conversion as a "goy" because once converted, the "goy" is a Jew. Yirmeyahu Ben-David was converted and he is now a Jew, not a "goy". Wlmh65 10:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep on trekkin'

Welcome to the Messianic Judaism editing community on Misplaced Pages. The MJ experience on Wiki is about as tough as it can get in the online world. Anti MJ Jewish editors abound on Wiki, to find out how many, just create a new MJ article. Feel free to restore the template, but realize there is an admin review process going on right now in the Wiki Deletions review page. The AntiMJ crowd may have deleted the template out of process, but we should attempt to restore it through process. We needn't lower ourselves and follow their example. If you have any Messianic friends that know a thing or two how to type and use the internet, bring 'em here. These Wiki MJ pages are the frontline for information on Messianic Judaism (just do a Google search); so our task is all the more important, and we should remain diligent. Thanks for stepping up. inigmatus 01:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 02:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk page comments

Again, please make comments on the relevant Talk: page. I will not respond further to comments about article content which are placed on my User: page. We are not having a personal conversation, but a discussion about article content, which should be open and easily found by all editors interested in that page. Jayjg 16:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Template

Please accept consensus and do not re-create this template. The arguments for deletion were solid and not demonstrably based on religious bias. The fact that only messianic Jews !voted keep is not, I'm afraid, evidence of bias in anyone other than the messianics. Hard to accept when you have strong feelings, but them's the breaks. Guy (Help!) 20:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry so late

Noogster, I replied to your comment on my talk page. I am not sure how to PM. Jamie Guinn 02:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism

I spent something like six to eight hours over 2/13-2/15 cleaning this article, and you wiped that out in a few seconds flat, and you ask me about rude? At least I used the talk page, you did not. I have reverted, and am now adding in your additions, so that the tens of updated, verified, and checked citations do not disappear. -- Avi 16:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Please stop reverting the citations. I am adding back your additions, but you keep on removing the work and effort of others. If this continues, this will be a serious content dispute, and I the page will have to be locked until we work this out. Is that what you wish? Remember, you do not own the page any more than Inigmatus, Kendrick, JoshZ, or I do. -- Avi 16:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Noogster, MANY people, not just myself, have added work, and no one person "owns" the page. It is actually poor wiki-form to make such sweeping changes without a discussion. I am lookiing at your edits, and you have done a LOT of good work. Let us MERGE the two, instead of reverting back and forth. -- Avi 17:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I was able to graft in the vast bulk of your edits. Please look it over and add in what I left out, but I'd request you add, as opposed to revert. Thanks. -- Avi 18:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I missed the pictures. By all means, add them back in. And Kendrick has called for sources for that section. He has agreed to wait a few more days, but unsourced material needs to be removed, so if you would like to keep that, I'd suggest you find sources. If I find any, I'll add them too. -- Avi 23:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Noogster, unfortunately, making such radical changes to an article usually cannot be done unilaterally. Your changes wiped out so much of what was there until now, practically re-writing the article. That usually requires a point-by-point discussion on the talk page; especially when it wipes out other authors' work. Wiki works on bettering existing articles; rarely is one given a total rewrite of that magnitude. -- Avi 06:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Yedioth Ahronoth

I noticed the comment you left on Avi's talk page. There is an article for Yedioth Ahronoth. The spelling of "Ahronoth" is a little unusual, although that's the they spell it at Ynetnews. According to Google, there are roughly the same number of hits (245,000) for Yedioth Ahronoth as there are for Yedioth Ahronot (266,000) and Yediot Achronot (214,000). There's a redirect page for Yediot Achronot, but you might want to set one up for Yedioth Ahronot or some other alternate spellings. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 23:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem; I'm happy to help. As Avi can tell you, I'm a pretty good "Google monkey." :-) — Malik Shabazz | Talk 23:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Template

Regarding the template, check the talk. While no one says it is complete, inigmatus agreed as well that it is a good start, and isn't he the one who moved it back into template space? -- Avi 01:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

YbD

I am not going to opine on his notability; I will say I don't think this person would be a speedy, there are points that may be considered notable, so I would say go for it. Just make sure that everything has a source. For example, I would like to see the letter from the Ch.Rabbi that you refer to. Also, there is a spectrum in Orthodoxy. From a personal perspective, I'd like to know which Rabbi converted him, as it may well likely not be accepted. Conversion is a very tricky issue, especially as Orthodx Jews are NOT big into prosylatization, and the rules are complicated, so any, evem slight, deviation may invalidate the ceremony. As for teh website claiming Lashon Hara, of you read the Halachos, especially as brought in Chofetz Chaim, certain issues MUST be spoken and are not L"H. For example, if there IS a chashash on the Geirus, this must be exposed to inform possible suitors that the children of these people may not be Jewish, which, of course, affects yichus, and things like that. When there is no toeles, of course it is Lashon Hara, and even when there IS a toeles, it has to be handled in a dignified manner, but. like all Halachos of Yidishkeit, there usually is not a cut-and-dried Halacha. Except for the Gimel Y'harayg V'lo Yaavor, there are exceptions to every rule (almost always ONLY in cases of life-or-death, but you get the idea). -- Avi 14:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Avruhom Yehida Balser

A tag has been placed on Avruhom Yehida Balser, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mhking

Independent, verifiable sources that provide empirical information about the site in something other than a sales-oriented context would be necessary. Please read Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources to find out more information about what is needed in an article of this sort. --Mhking 01:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Unless you've got it stashed someplace, most likely, yes. Make sure the article does not sound like a sales piece, and by all means, ask for help if you run into a roadblock. Good luck... --Mhking 01:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

3RR

Just so you're aware, WP:3RR is a strict policy on Misplaced Pages. You can be blocked if you revert an article more than 3 times in 24 hours. Please don't let that happen. Jayjg 22:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

MJ intro

Hi. Noogster, you may not think Messianics worship Jesus, but there is a reliable source that says that they do. Perhaps even some do and some don't. Regardless, we all have to be careful not to let our own personal understandings and beliefs get in the way of wikipedia policies and guidelines. Steiner is as a reliable source as any in that article, probably more reliable than the internet sites, since it is a scholarly book and not someone's website. There is no reason, nor excuse, for removing it, I am afraid; and removing it because it makes you uncomfortable would be like IZAK removing that Messianics believe that they are Jewish because it makes HIM uncomfortable. -- Avi 00:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

If I find a second, I'll add one, but all you need is one, which we have, to support the statement. -- Avi 03:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I've responded on the Talk: page. Jayjg 02:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

User talk:David Spart/Chabad Messianism

Following a recent wheel-war over Controversies of Chabad-Lubavitch in which PinchasC did not let me write an article on Chabad Messianism even after an AfD implied consensus for such an article I was advised to write such an article in my user space. I have now done so and would be grateful for any feedback from you before I put it up. Happy Purim. David Spart 00:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Well yes he does. The reason is because he is a chabbad messianist himself, and like many other messianists he believes in keeping these views as private as possible and as far away from wikipedia as possible. He watches all Chabad articles like a hawk and edit wars with anyone who makes even the smallest change. Yechi only got through because it was nominated for deletion before he found it, and of course it was found to be notable. So he has kept various merge boxes at the top ever since. If you notice the Controversies of Chabad-Lubavitch article only has one paragraph on messianism which is then followed by an endless an off topic attack on David Berger. All the other "controversies" listed are so carefully distilled by official chabad POV that you cant even make out what the controversy was. And thanks for the praise, it is much appreciated. David Spart 01:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

MJ Template

Not tonight I won't revert, no. It's far too late here to get into this, and I have an early class in the morning. No doubt it'll make for some interesting and heated discussion tomorrow though. Have a good night. :) Daniel/_T+ 01:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You have violated WP:3RR

On the Template:Messianic Judaism. Please revert yourself before you are blocked. Thanks. Jayjg 04:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)