Revision as of 15:43, 27 November 2011 editLisa (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,446 edits →User:In ictu oculi's edits: Don't do that.← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:50, 27 November 2011 edit undoLisa (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,446 edits →User:In ictu oculi's disruptive editsNext edit → | ||
Line 168: | Line 168: | ||
:* any other policy you wish to bring to my attention? | :* any other policy you wish to bring to my attention? | ||
:Best regards | :Best regards | ||
::] comes to mind. - ] (] - ]) 15:50, 27 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Hello Lisa | :Hello Lisa | ||
Line 179: | Line 181: | ||
# (Move log); 00:51 . . Lisa (talk | contribs) moved ] to Osek b'mitzvah patur min hamitzvah over redirect (move without consensus) | # (Move log); 00:51 . . Lisa (talk | contribs) moved ] to Osek b'mitzvah patur min hamitzvah over redirect (move without consensus) | ||
:However I'd welcome discussion on these names on the sections on relevant Talk pages, and if anyone can find then they're smarter than me, which is quite possible, but let's see WP:RS not chat. Anyway, now you've moved ] etc. Lisa, what '''do''' you want this article to be called? ] (]) 03:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC) | :However I'd welcome discussion on these names on the sections on relevant Talk pages, and if anyone can find then they're smarter than me, which is quite possible, but let's see WP:RS not chat. Anyway, now you've moved ] etc. Lisa, what '''do''' you want this article to be called? ] (]) 03:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC) | ||
::] or ] would probably be good. But it doesn't matter. I wouldn't change it to that without engaging in discussion on the subject in talk. You clearly don't play well with others. I wonder what you're doing here on Misplaced Pages at all. - ] (] - ]) 15:50, 27 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Hiya Debresser | :Hiya Debresser | ||
Line 209: | Line 213: | ||
::::::My ]: these moves should be performed in concordance with the moving policy, with an entry on ], so the community can offer their input on each discussion. While the ] recommends English names, one would need evidence that the concept is actually recognised in that form in English. Some of the articles discussed above have titles that simply do not occur in their English form in English writings. Translating them to force English titles throughout is wrong, puristic, and potentially disruptive - because nobody will be able to find the article except through redirects from their more common Hebrew titles. I am not against running Googlefights to determine whether the Hebrew/Aramaic or English name is in more common usage. ] | ] 08:12, 27 November 2011 (UTC) | ::::::My ]: these moves should be performed in concordance with the moving policy, with an entry on ], so the community can offer their input on each discussion. While the ] recommends English names, one would need evidence that the concept is actually recognised in that form in English. Some of the articles discussed above have titles that simply do not occur in their English form in English writings. Translating them to force English titles throughout is wrong, puristic, and potentially disruptive - because nobody will be able to find the article except through redirects from their more common Hebrew titles. I am not against running Googlefights to determine whether the Hebrew/Aramaic or English name is in more common usage. ] | ] 08:12, 27 November 2011 (UTC) | ||
:::::::I don't remember how to request an IP check. Can someone please point me in the right direction? I suspect ] may be the perm-banned editor ]. - ] (] - ]) 15:50, 27 November 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:50, 27 November 2011
Main | Discussion Board | Members | Article Assessment | Templates | Categories | Resources | Manual of Style | To do | New Articles | Articles for Deletion | Sister Projects | Watchlist |
Discussion BoardDiscussions relating to Jews and Judaism. (edit) (back to top) | ||||
Shortcut
Request for input in discussion forumGiven the closely linked subjects of the various religion, mythology, and philosophy groups, it seems to me that we might benefit from having some sort of regular topical discussion forum to discuss the relevant content. I have put together the beginnings of an outline for such discussion at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Religion/2011 meeting, and would very much appreciate the input of any interested editors. I am thinking that it might run over two months, the first of which would be to bring forward and discuss the current state of the content, and the second for perhaps some more focused discussion on what, if any, specific efforts might be taken in the near future. Any and all input is more than welcome. John Carter (talk)
Someone to rewrite the Judaism section of an articleMy original "Request for someone to rewrite the Judaism section of an article", dated 18Jun11, is now in Archive 27, and of course I hoped someone would place it where such a request should be placed. I was unable to find such a place, myself. This followup entry is simply to let someone know I'll feel free to rewrite the Judaism section of the Matrilineality article myself when I can find the time to do so, no earlier than a month from now, and without any further notification to anyone else. As I stated in my original request, I am totally and hopelessly unqualified for this rewriting job. At the same time, my judgment (hopefully good enough in most matters) is that my result will at least be an improvement upon the present Judaism section for most readers of Misplaced Pages. Again, I'm posting this identically in my own Talk page, adding it directly with my earlier 18Jun11 entry, and would like any reply entered on my own Talk page as well. On behalf of WP readers, For7thGen (talk) 23:39, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Advice neededTwo editors (Lisa, Jayjg) appear to have a problem with additions I have made to Ger toshav since Mzk1 pointed out that it was not correct to say that the term ger toshav did not occur in the Tanakh. Since then editor Lisa has deleted half the article (all content and sources related to the Tanakh) 3x. At the same time as this is going on I have had to restore the deletions in order to add sources requested by Jayjg to prove that there is a relation between the phrase in Leviticus and the commentary on the phrase in Leviticus in the Talmud.
What exactly is the problem with expanding article content outside of the Rambam to look at Leviticus itself? I cannot understand the reaction being made to transparent WP:RS supported edits? The content seems completely vanilla. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:31, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Need access to Commentary Volume 11 (1951)Does anyone have access to Commentary? I believe this is a publication of the American Jewish Committee. I am looking for Volume 51 (1951). I found the following snippet via Google Books and would like to know what the context of the snippet is. Specifically, I would like to know how the sentence ends.
This is the Google Books URL. http://books.google.com/books?id=lZISAAAAIAAJ&q=Harlan+%22Jud+S%C3%BC%C3%9F%22+%22Werner+Krauss%22&dq=Harlan+%22Jud+S%C3%BC%C3%9F%22+%22Werner+Krauss%22&hl=en&ei=5bSxTpfiEMOyiQKbzrDbDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBQ I am working on the article about Jud Süß (1940 film) and it seems that this snippet is commenting on the return of some of the participants in that project to the German entertaiment industry. Any help in this regard would be much appreciated. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 21:31, 2 November 2011 (UTC) Name of the Who is a Jew? articleA discussion has started regarding a proposal to rename the Who is a Jew? article. Interested parties can find it here: Talk:Who is a Jew?#Article should be renamed. Jayjg 16:53, 6 November 2011 (UTC) طهارة and טהרה and WP:naming conventions (use English)
Help with article on Ger toshavThe article on Ger toshav has been under a kind of attack in recent weeks, primarily by User:In ictu oculi. This user is engaging in two maneuvers simultaneously. On the one hand, he is attempting to modify the article so that it's about the general concept of gerim and toshavim in Tanakh, and on the other hand, he is then arguing that the title of the article should be changed into English. I've tried explaining to him that Ger toshav is a halakhic category, but he seems not to understand this. Or perhaps it's that he thinks any midrashic linkage between that category and the phrase גר ותושב in Tanakh means that all uses of that phrase or any similar phrase must be referring to the halakhic Ger toshav. I've pointed out the difference between the articles on Shabbat and Biblical Sabbath, the one being a Hebrew titled article discussing a halakhic concept and the other being an English titled article discussing a general Biblical concept that, while it is obviously related to the halakhic concept, has an entirely different focus. He simply rejected this point. I'd appreciate it if I could get some help over in Ger toshav to prevent User:In ictu oculi's continued inappropriate edits. Thanks. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 15:45, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
I've seen quite a few articles tampered with by User:In ictu oculi, (see Mnachem Rizikoff for one), i've found that my attempts to explain halachic terms and titles to him are not receptively met.--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 22:09, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Righteous gentileIt seems Righteous gentile redirects to Ger toshav. That is strange, since "ger toshav" is a biblical definition, while "righteous gentile" is a title bestowed also by the state of Israel upon non-Jews who helped Jews, like Oscar Schindler. Debresser (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC) I see we have Righteous among the Nations for that. I think we should turn Righteous gentile into a disambiguation page. Debresser (talk) 15:56, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Jud Süß (1940 film) nominated for Good Article statusI have nominated the article on Jud Süß (1940 film) for Good Article status. If you are interested in reviewing the article against the criteria for good articles, please follow the instructions at the top of the article's talk page. Only one reviewer is need for this process; however, comments and suggestions for improving the article are always welcome. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 23:28, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
New imageI just had to share this fabulous new image with everyone: --Chesdovi (talk) 17:20, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Tribe of DanThis and Denyen attract fringe editors. If you look at Talk:Tribe of Dan you'll see an editor attacking me as anti-Semitic for I'm not sure what, saying the tribe of Dan wasn't in America or dislinking Sunday school sources? "The Tribe of Dan was of ancient Egypt, Dan himself allied with Egyptian princes, their tribe was highly knowledgeable, especially of construction and architecture, and their tribe was the seafaring tribe, so it is not weird to believe all the pyramids in the Americas have some kind of link to Egypt via the ancient Middle Eastern diaspora ultimately of many groups, and possibly the Tribe of Dan themselves; and we're now finding through DNA those links in some of the Americas. The Druze have a high concentration of the X haplogroup and they're still in and around Israel and the region. You're an anti-Semite." (quote from an edit by Wheres Dan (talk · contribs)). Dougweller (talk) 13:11, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Article ratingHello everybody, I've been doing a considerable amount of work trying to improve Charles W. Engelhard, Jr. from its current C status. I think, at this moment, it's finally a B article. Can somebody please review the article, and if they agree, change its rating. I believe I can't do this because of some COI rule since I'm a major contributor. Thanks, Magister Scienta 05:09, 24 November 2011 (UTC) User:In ictu oculi's disruptive editsUser:In ictu oculi (henceforth: IIO) has been, for some weeks now, engaged in what I can only call a campaign to disrupt articles on Jewish legal topics. I first noticed IIO's behavior in the article on Ger toshav. This is a concept in Jewish law which applies to non-Jews living in the land of Israel. IIO decided that any reference to ger or toshav in the Bible was therefore to be included in this article, even in cases when they are completely unconnected. So he pulled in Abraham referring to himself in Genesis as a ger v'toshav, and then linked from that to material in the Christian scriptures, and then, because he had changed it from an article about a Jewish legal concept to a general article about a different topic, he wanted to change the article's title to be in English. As you can see from the talk page (which is currently more than half filled with debates on this issue), IIO refuses to stop adding irrelevant edits to this article. I tried at one point to use the articles on Shabbat and Biblical Sabbath as an example of an article about a Jewish legal concept on the one hand, and a general article about the word in the Bible on the other. So now he has expanded his disruptive edits into those articles as well. He has engaged in a number of unilateral moves without any discussion whatsoever in talk. Some may be justified, such as the move of Nahash to Serpent (Bible). Others, he has justified with comments such as "reverting move with no discussion", despite the move he refers to having happened in 2009 (!). He has gone into an article on Shituf, a Jewish legal concept which refers to whether or not certain forms of Christian worship as viewed as idolatrous in Jewish law, and added an utterly irrelevant section on "shituf meal", something which has absolutely nothing to do with the legal concept of shituf. He has gone into an article on Kareth (roughly: excision), which is also a concept in Jewish law. He did the same thing there that he has tried to do with Ger toshav, changing the article to one about the word in the Bible (with a demand to change the article title to English due any day now) and relegating the actual content of the article to a subsection of "In Judaism". He has moved the following articles unilaterally: The status quo Kohen => Recognition of priestly descent I've moved all of them back pending discussion. IIO has been absolutely impervious to argument and to requests that he stop. To give him the benefit of the doubt, he may simply not understand how Jewish law works. He has referred to the Talmud a number of times as "a commentary on the Bible". But even if this is the case, he is unwilling to be corrected about it. I'd appreciate it if we could get some admins to ask him to stop, since he won't listen to anyone else. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 01:01, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I am having the same problem with him at Hromim. And that is in spite of the discussion we had with him here on this WikiProject talkpage, and on the talkpage of that article specifically. Debresser (talk) 01:14, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
|