| Revision as of 20:55, 11 January 2014 editMangoe (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users34,840 edits →The Ashkenazi Jews/Khazarian origins theory: d← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:23, 11 January 2014 edit undoNishidani (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users99,541 edits keepNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| *'''DELETE''' this fork. ] (]) 20:55, 11 January 2014 (UTC) | *'''DELETE''' this fork. ] (]) 20:55, 11 January 2014 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep'''. | |||
| The proposer’s argument has no merit because he is totally confused, WP:AGF. accusations that raise serious doubts about his editorial integrity, and has made deceptive assertions. | |||
| *(1) The ‘myth’ (actually it is a theory) is not ‘covered thoroughly in two extremely long sections in the article Khazars, in 1)Khazars#Judaism and 2)Khazar#Ashkenazi-Khazar. The article's content can be found there and therefore it's pointless.’ | |||
| *(2) The section of the Khazar page on https://en.wikipedia.org/Khazars#Judaism Khazar Judaism does not mention the myth/theory | |||
| *(3) The section of the Khazar page on the theory of a link between them and the Ashkenazi (https://en.wikipedia.org/Khazars#Ashkenazi-Khazar_theories) a minimalist account of the history of the controversy, and https://en.wikipedia.org/Khazars#Genetic_studies recent genetic research, which is overwhelmingly sceptical of such a link | |||
| *(4) This article was hived off from one singularly bad pastiche of newspaper comments made by Yambaram, who inserted it into the Khazar article, without justifying his edit on the talk page. Note that the Khazar page has a standard templat, which Yamabaram’s stuffing ignored. He took no trouble to justify his massive expansion, but, with a handful of others, edit-warred, one aim being to tip the article over the limits so that it would have to be split, destroying its formal, aesthetic and narrative integrity. | |||
| *(5)He had some backing, but after his disruptive edit (9kb of poor text into a 150kb text that is at the limit of article length) this was discussed and editors not given over to POV battles decided that it was inappropriate and destabilizing. This page was created in order to allow editors like Yambaram ample scope (and much can be written) to cover all aspects of the controversy and amass the extra critical detail. He has not deigned to improve this article. I had had to do the basic legwork. | |||
| *(6) Yambaram accuses me of spreading a ‘belief (that Ashkenazi Jews are "fake Jews")’ here and elsewhere on wikipedia. This is an extremely serious sign of bad faith, and malicious misrepresentation. He has no diff to prove his contention, which constitues a violent personal attack on me, insinuating my work is motivated by antisemitism. If this charge is repeated, I will report him for a ban on this and related topics. | |||
| *(7) https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Palestinian_people&diff=586810159&oldid=586798396 This diff is adduced to insinuate an extraordinary idea, that I am arguing ‘Ashkenazi Jews are "fake Jews". Where is that stated? Jews are Jews – I don’t even know what a ‘fake Jew’ is? That the origins of the Ashkenazi Jews are unknown does not mean they are ‘fake’. It means that historians are puzzled by the question: their numbers might suggest early large scale conversion. But a convert is not a fake, even if this is the only premise one is forced to assume from Yambaram’s extraordinary claim here. | |||
| In short Yambaram has made a proposal that completely confounds the issues, just as his edits completely mess up pages that strive to be neutral, comprehensive, and to hew to very strict standards of scholarly reportage and source quality. ] (]) 21:23, 11 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:23, 11 January 2014
The Ashkenazi Jews/Khazarian origins theory
- The Ashkenazi Jews/Khazarian origins theory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- This myth is already covered thoroughly in two extremely long sections in the article Khazars, in 1)Khazars#Judaism and 2)Khazar#Ashkenazi-Khazar. The article's content can be found there and therefore it's pointless.
- Important notes: The article was created recently and is solely is an attempt to promote a widely spreading theory often regarded as anti-Semitic and used for anti-Semitic purposes. The creator of the article, Nishidani, spreads this belief (that Ashkenazi Jews are "fake Jews") in other places, even in articles that have absolutely no connection to it, as he did in "Talk:Palestinian people" here for example. When I added some criticism about this theory in the Khazars article, Nishidani kept removing it as others reverted him, but he eventually succeeded and created this page instead so that the former one won't be touched. More details about it can be found on Talk:Khazars and Talk:Ashkenazi Jews / Talk:Ashkenazi Jews/Archive 8 if needed. Thanks, Yambaram (talk) 20:21, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions.
- DELETE this fork. Mangoe (talk) 20:55, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep.
The proposer’s argument has no merit because he is totally confused, WP:AGF. accusations that raise serious doubts about his editorial integrity, and has made deceptive assertions.
- (1) The ‘myth’ (actually it is a theory) is not ‘covered thoroughly in two extremely long sections in the article Khazars, in 1)Khazars#Judaism and 2)Khazar#Ashkenazi-Khazar. The article's content can be found there and therefore it's pointless.’
- (2) The section of the Khazar page on https://en.wikipedia.org/Khazars#Judaism Khazar Judaism does not mention the myth/theory
- (3) The section of the Khazar page on the theory of a link between them and the Ashkenazi (https://en.wikipedia.org/Khazars#Ashkenazi-Khazar_theories) a minimalist account of the history of the controversy, and https://en.wikipedia.org/Khazars#Genetic_studies recent genetic research, which is overwhelmingly sceptical of such a link
- (4) This article was hived off from one singularly bad pastiche of newspaper comments made by Yambaram, who inserted it into the Khazar article, without justifying his edit on the talk page. Note that the Khazar page has a standard templat, which Yamabaram’s stuffing ignored. He took no trouble to justify his massive expansion, but, with a handful of others, edit-warred, one aim being to tip the article over the limits so that it would have to be split, destroying its formal, aesthetic and narrative integrity.
- (5)He had some backing, but after his disruptive edit (9kb of poor text into a 150kb text that is at the limit of article length) this was discussed and editors not given over to POV battles decided that it was inappropriate and destabilizing. This page was created in order to allow editors like Yambaram ample scope (and much can be written) to cover all aspects of the controversy and amass the extra critical detail. He has not deigned to improve this article. I had had to do the basic legwork.
- (6) Yambaram accuses me of spreading a ‘belief (that Ashkenazi Jews are "fake Jews")’ here and elsewhere on wikipedia. This is an extremely serious sign of bad faith, and malicious misrepresentation. He has no diff to prove his contention, which constitues a violent personal attack on me, insinuating my work is motivated by antisemitism. If this charge is repeated, I will report him for a ban on this and related topics.
- (7) https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Palestinian_people&diff=586810159&oldid=586798396 This diff is adduced to insinuate an extraordinary idea, that I am arguing ‘Ashkenazi Jews are "fake Jews". Where is that stated? Jews are Jews – I don’t even know what a ‘fake Jew’ is? That the origins of the Ashkenazi Jews are unknown does not mean they are ‘fake’. It means that historians are puzzled by the question: their numbers might suggest early large scale conversion. But a convert is not a fake, even if this is the only premise one is forced to assume from Yambaram’s extraordinary claim here.
In short Yambaram has made a proposal that completely confounds the issues, just as his edits completely mess up pages that strive to be neutral, comprehensive, and to hew to very strict standards of scholarly reportage and source quality. Nishidani (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Categories: