Revision as of 14:06, 20 December 2024 editإيان (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,692 edits →Gallery of suggested images (feel free to suggest others if you think this article should have a lead image)Tag: 2017 wikitext editor← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 08:01, 26 December 2024 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,669,710 edits Removing expired RFC template. | ||
(4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
<!-- ] 08:01, 31 December 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1735632070}} | <!-- ] 08:01, 31 December 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1735632070}} | ||
{{rfc|soc|hist|reli|rfcid=A1F5144}} | |||
Should this article have a lead image? If so, which image should be used? ] (]) 07:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC) | Should this article have a lead image? If so, which image should be used? ] (]) 07:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC) | ||
=== Gallery of suggested images (feel free to suggest others if you think this article should have a lead image) === | === Gallery of suggested images (feel free to suggest others if you think this article should have a lead image) === | ||
Line 72: | Line 71: | ||
*'''Bad RFC''', no ]. I see no problem with the lead image though. A better one could be proposed, but it hasn't. Filer the image citing the nonexistent WP:ethnicgallery, and the real policy under ] doesn't actually say not to illustrate an ethnic group with an image, it says not to use a ''gallery'', which is very different. Unless someone has an argument why the image is bad based on an actual policy or guideline, it seems fine and certainly better than ''no image''. I'm open to proposals for a higher quality image on the basis that it's a black and white, kinda shadowy photo. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC) | *'''Bad RFC''', no ]. I see no problem with the lead image though. A better one could be proposed, but it hasn't. Filer the image citing the nonexistent WP:ethnicgallery, and the real policy under ] doesn't actually say not to illustrate an ethnic group with an image, it says not to use a ''gallery'', which is very different. Unless someone has an argument why the image is bad based on an actual policy or guideline, it seems fine and certainly better than ''no image''. I'm open to proposals for a higher quality image on the basis that it's a black and white, kinda shadowy photo. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
*:Pincrete pointed out the issue with the current image above. It's not representative. There's also no such image of ]. ] (]) 17:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | *:Pincrete pointed out the issue with the current image above. It's not representative. There's also no such image of ]. ] (]) 17:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
*::I'm not sure I understand the argument. It's a photo of Ashkenazi Jews. It's not the best picture ever and like I said, a better one could be found, but it is a representation of Ashkenazi Jews, so yes it is representative. I think we could find a better photo like one in color and with better focus and contrast, or other aspects of the photo, but as far as I can tell, unless we have some other reason to suspect the people in the photo aren't Ashkenazi Jews, that would be definitionally, representative of Ashkenazi Jews. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
*'''Bad RFC''' per the arguments by Andre, but I agree that this image is fine and that an image is desirable, not hard preference regarding a specific outcome. ] (]) 23:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | *'''Bad RFC''' per the arguments by Andre, but I agree that this image is fine and that an image is desirable, not hard preference regarding a specific outcome. ] (]) 23:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
=== Discussion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself === | === Discussion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself === | ||
Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
For the sake of organization, I've started this new section for anyone else who would like to give their opinion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself so as not to clog the discussion of the actual RfC question pertaining to the lead image. ] (]) 17:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | For the sake of organization, I've started this new section for anyone else who would like to give their opinion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself so as not to clog the discussion of the actual RfC question pertaining to the lead image. ] (]) 17:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
:An appropriate response to the members of the community all chiming in that this is a bad RFC could be to withdraw the RFC so we can have a proper discussion. You "skipped the phase" that is actually the important part. People are open to compromise, but you jumped right to creating a new RFC, which the guidelines advise against. It's also not typical to create a section to segregate out different types of responses "for the sake of organization" on the appropriateness of the RFC, which don't clog the discussion but in this case ''are'' the discussion, or to claim that a discussion on African Americans could serve as the RFCBEFORE on an article about Ashkenazi Jews. Consistency is not a mandate on Misplaced Pages for good reasons, as different things are importantly different. I note that you also modified the RFC prompt after it was already underway. These are all, relatively soft, violations of the guideline. We don't stand on ceremony in general, but you also have exhibited a pattern of starting RFCs without much discussion, in at least one other instance that I can recall. Not every revert needs to start an RFC, there are other ways around this. I'm open to changing the image. However, that doesn't make the RFC or the rationales above valid. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 08:01, 26 December 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ashkenazi Jews article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 14 days |
This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In section "Notable Ashkenazim", add an "and" in the last sentence, making it "Though Ashkenazi Jews have never exceeded 3% of the American population, Jews account for 37% of the winners of the U.S. National Medal of Science, 25% of the American Nobel Prize winners in literature, and 40% of the American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics." Maxyyywaxyyy (talk) 04:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Khazar theory
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
RFC 26 November 2024
Should this article have a lead image? If so, which image should be used? إيان (talk) 07:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Gallery of suggested images (feel free to suggest others if you think this article should have a lead image)
- current image: American Colony image circa 1900-1920 in what appears to be Palestine
- image used in the Hebrew and Yiddish versions of the article: Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur
- another image used in many versions of this article: map of the distribution of the Jews in Central Europe from Richard Andree, Ethnography of the Jews (1881)
Discussion
Where is the deadlocked discussion that has made a full-blown thirty-day RfC necessary? See WP:RFCBEFORE. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes - please read the info in the link Redrose64 has provided.
- Thanks. Lukewarmbeer (talk) 11:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Comment (Summoned by bot), despite the label, it does seem odd to have this picture (presumably taken in Mandatory Palestine), when the article is about a (mainly European?) diaspora group Pincrete (talk) 17:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed. إيان (talk) 21:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Comment General considerations—In 1920 when this was taken there were some 10,000s of recognizably ethnic Ashkenazim in Mandatory Palestine—far more than there are in all 2024 Europe. The overwhelming majority of modern Ashkenazim (both generally and who wear ethnic clothing) live in Israel and the US, and that's been true since the 1940s. Another problem is that the "Ashkenazic" identity only really exists in contrast to "Sephardic"—a picture of 1920s Warsaw wouldn't be normally described as "Ashkenazic" because everyone in it would have thought of themselves as "Polish Jews", prayed using "Polish rite" prayerbooks etc., didn't consider themselves part of a pan-Ashkenazic identity group. The historical exceptions where you found specifically "Ashkenazic" identity are Venice, Amsterdam, London, Mandatory Palestine, where half were Sephardic Jews so the Ashkenazim grouped together. This presents a challenge because until 1945 or so, almost everyone who thought of themselves as specifically "Ashkenazic" necessarily lived far from Ashkenazic cultural centers and was unrepresentative of the median Ashkenazi Jew. Since the Holocaust, physical displacement and cultural contamination from Israel (which is 50/50 Ashkenazic/Sephardic) has meant the death of all sub-Ashkenazic identities in the US, even though 99% of Jews here are Ashkenazic. GordonGlottal (talk) GordonGlottal (talk) 20:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
In 1920 when this was taken there were some 10,000s of recognizably ethnic Ashkenazim in Mandatory Palestine—far more than there are in all 2024 Europe.
What point are you trying to make in comparing Mandatory Palestine in 1920 with Europe in 2024? Changing the variables of both the time and place corrupts the comparison.Another problem is that the "Ashkenazic" identity only really exists in contrast to "Sephardic"—a picture of 1920s Warsaw wouldn't be normally described as "Ashkenazic"
So should the article not discuss Ashkenazi history until the community came into contact with other Jewish groups?almost everyone who thought of themselves as specifically "Ashkenazic" necessarily lived far from Ashkenazic cultural centers and was unrepresentative of the median Ashkenazi Jew
so is this a disapproval of a lead image to represent all Ashkenazi Jews? إيان (talk) 22:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Bad RFC, no WP:RFCBEFORE. I see no problem with the lead image though. A better one could be proposed, but it hasn't. Filer removed the image citing the nonexistent WP:ethnicgallery, and the real policy under WP:GALLERY doesn't actually say not to illustrate an ethnic group with an image, it says not to use a gallery, which is very different. Unless someone has an argument why the image is bad based on an actual policy or guideline, it seems fine and certainly better than no image. I'm open to proposals for a higher quality image on the basis that it's a black and white, kinda shadowy photo. Andre🚐 22:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pincrete pointed out the issue with the current image above. It's not representative. There's also no such image of Mizrahi Jews. إيان (talk) 17:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand the argument. It's a photo of Ashkenazi Jews. It's not the best picture ever and like I said, a better one could be found, but it is a representation of Ashkenazi Jews, so yes it is representative. I think we could find a better photo like one in color and with better focus and contrast, or other aspects of the photo, but as far as I can tell, unless we have some other reason to suspect the people in the photo aren't Ashkenazi Jews, that would be definitionally, representative of Ashkenazi Jews. Andre🚐 22:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pincrete pointed out the issue with the current image above. It's not representative. There's also no such image of Mizrahi Jews. إيان (talk) 17:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Bad RFC per the arguments by Andre, but I agree that this image is fine and that an image is desirable, not hard preference regarding a specific outcome. FortunateSons (talk) 23:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Discussion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself
For the four editors so far who have chimed in to express their dissatisfaction with the RfC—the objective was to invite a wide community of editors to opine in what is an inherently contentious endeavor: discussing a lead image for an ethnic group. Although I skipped the phase of back-and-forth on this article, there have been robust conversations on lead images for ethnic groups or groups of people elsewhere on Misplaced Pages, as at https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:African_Americans/Archive_23#Should_this_article_have_a_lead_image?, so an RfC felt appropriate.
For the sake of organization, I've started this new section for anyone else who would like to give their opinion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself so as not to clog the discussion of the actual RfC question pertaining to the lead image. إيان (talk) 17:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- An appropriate response to the members of the community all chiming in that this is a bad RFC could be to withdraw the RFC so we can have a proper discussion. You "skipped the phase" that is actually the important part. People are open to compromise, but you jumped right to creating a new RFC, which the guidelines advise against. It's also not typical to create a section to segregate out different types of responses "for the sake of organization" on the appropriateness of the RFC, which don't clog the discussion but in this case are the discussion, or to claim that a discussion on African Americans could serve as the RFCBEFORE on an article about Ashkenazi Jews. Consistency is not a mandate on Misplaced Pages for good reasons, as different things are importantly different. I note that you also modified the RFC prompt after it was already underway. These are all, relatively soft, violations of the guideline. We don't stand on ceremony in general, but you also have exhibited a pattern of starting RFCs without much discussion, in at least one other instance that I can recall. Not every revert needs to start an RFC, there are other ways around this. I'm open to changing the image. However, that doesn't make the RFC or the rationales above valid. Andre🚐 22:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class Ethnic groups articles
- High-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles
- C-Class European history articles
- Mid-importance European history articles
- All WikiProject European history pages
- C-Class Germany articles
- Mid-importance Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- C-Class France articles
- Low-importance France articles
- All WikiProject France pages
- C-Class Israel-related articles
- High-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- C-Class Jewish history-related articles
- High-importance Jewish history-related articles
- WikiProject Jewish history articles
- C-Class Judaism articles
- High-importance Judaism articles
- C-Class Middle Ages articles
- Mid-importance Middle Ages articles
- C-Class history articles
- All WikiProject Middle Ages pages
- C-Class Anthropology articles
- High-importance Anthropology articles
- C-Class Oral tradition articles
- Unknown-importance Oral tradition articles
- Oral tradition taskforce articles
- Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press