Talk:Elazar Shach

My Recent Edits

As you noted Jayjg I am a new contributor so please indulge my asking for clarification.

I was not aware that so many things are covered by guidelines and it is somewhat daunting to see that one has to dedicate so much time to learning so many guidelines before contributing. But after reviewing the links you gave for reverting the changes I had made to this article I would say that I think that it is monotonous and boring to consistently refer to the subject of an article only by the surname.

Also, in the case of Rav Shach, at least in the circles I am familiar with, it would seem to me that it would be acceptable to refer to him as "Rav Shach" rather than as "Shach" under the following rule:

Where an honorific is so commonly attached to a name that the name is rarely found without it, it should be included. The honorific should be included for "Father Coughlin" (Charles Coughlin), the 1930s priest and broadcaster; Father Damien, the missionary in Hawaii; Father Divine, an American religious leader; Father Joseph, in 17th-century France; and Mother Teresa, a 20th-century humanitarian.

Also, I was wondering why you removed the link to http://www.chareidi.org/archives5762/chayesara/CS62aravshachbio.htm

It was listed under the title "Eulogies and Articles about Rabbi Shach" which it clearly is.

What about adding the following link: http://www.chareidi.org/archives5762/vayishlach/rshach30.htm

And/or the following speech: http://www.chareidi.org/archives5762/toldos/T62orshachspch1.htm

Mp1233 (talk) 14:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

The site you link to is actually owned and operated by the Yated Neeman which obviously fails WP:SELF WP:RS and WP:V. Additionally, eulogies inserted as paid advertisements also fail WP:RS and WP:V. --Winchester2313 (talk) 18:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

"Father Coughlin" and "Mother Theresa" were near unique exceptions, people known broadly by a name that included their title. Shach is not known as "Rav Shach" any more than any other Israeli rabbi. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:13, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

The Dei'ah Vedibur site is neither owned nor operated by Yated Neeman although it incorporates material that they own. It never was owned or operated by Yated Neeman either. If I may to learn about working in Wikipedia, even if it were owned or operated by Yated Neeman I could not see in your links anything that would make its content not linkable in an article about Rabbi Shach. Also, there was no link to any paid advertisement of any kind. I would be interested to know which of the links you thought was a paid advertisement. I note that no objection was raised to the speech of Rabbi Shach, so can I assume that is ok? Mp1233 (talk) 10:48, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't object strongly to the obituary, though it's not really helpful, just a hagiography. Regarding http://www.chareidi.org/archives5762/vayishlach/rshach30.htm , see WP:ELNO #9. Regarding the other link, why that particular speech? It seems random. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:22, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

The Dei'ah Vedibur site is full of propaganda and unverifiable information that definitely fails WP:V as has been discussed here quite some time ago. Additionally, everything on that site fails WP:NPOV. Regarding some of the obituaries that were removed, they similarly contained untrue information and were published in newspapers as paid advertisements. I have no objection to a working link to any of RS's speeches, and believe that they are actually beneficial, as they provide an honest and unadulterated view of what the man really was.--Winchester2313 (talk) 06:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

http://www.chareidi.org/archives5762/vayishlach/rshach30.htm is not a results page of a search engine. It is the index page of a special section published by Dei'ah Vedibur 30 days after the passing of Rabbi Shach. The collection of articles includes translations of a few speeches of Rabbi Shach and recollections from several of his closest students. I think the articles are relevant and of interest. The page has nothing to do with WP:ELNO #9. When I first read your objection I thought that you must have meant a different rule. Just now I realized that your citation was as intended but you misunderstood the content of the link. Mp1233 (talk) 20:17, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Almost everything published on the Deiah Vedibur site fails WP:V, and much of it fails WP:SELFPUB as well. Nothing on that site has any measure of verifiability as per Wikpedia standards - you may choose to believe it, but that doesn't justify inclusion in an encyclopedia. --Winchester2313 (talk) 04:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Links to Speeches and Letters of Shach

Recently I came across several speeches and letters from R' Shach on http://hebrewbooks.org/:

• Derech Halimud B'mishnas Maran Ha'Avi Ezri
• Yarchei Kalla Speech
• Speech at 8th Siyum HaShas
• Speech at Agudah Convention
• Talmudic Discussions with Rabbi Mordechai Gifter 2
• Talmudic Discussions with Rabbi Isser Zalman Meltzer
• Talmudic Discussions with Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodzinski
• Talmudic Discussions with Rabbi Moshe Feinstein
• Talmudic Discussions with Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner
• Letter regarding secular Zionism and other issues
• Letter regarding severity of reading improper material
• 5 Letters
• Letter regarding shaving
• Letter regarding Shmitta
• Letter to Ba'al Tshuva
• 3 Letters
• Letter of encouragement to Yeshiva student
• Letter regarding Yeshiva University in Israel
• Eulogy for Rabbi Moshe Feinstein
• Letter regarding study technique in Yeshiva
• Letter regarding secular studies

I thought these are very valuable in that they are directly from Shach, and I haven't found other places on the internet where they have these things available to read. I thought that some of these speeches and letters would be appropriate to be linked in the External Links section. I read through WP:EL carefully, and I think that these would qualify. (I believe that these links are more appropriate than the ones we discussed here Talk:Elazar_Shach/Archive_1#Bookspam) What do the other editors think? Yonoson3 (talk) 21:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

This would not be appropriate; please review WP:LINKFARM. A properly-written Wikipedia article has few external links. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:47, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok. So would ONE link to the following http://divreiaviezri.blogspot.com/ be ok? Yonoson3 (talk) 03:54, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

No, that's a blog, so it would violate WP:ELNO #11. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Zionism and Secularism

Regarding Shach's struggle against Zionism and secularism, besides secondary sources it would be helpful if there would also be links to primary sources (i.e. Shach's own writings and speeches). That was the reason for my recent edits, which were subsequently reverted here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elazar_Shach&diff=447198243&oldid=446685765 What do the other editors think? Yonoson3 (talk) 00:12, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Those links you posted are not relevant to the paragraph where you inserted them, and constitute WP:OR which is not allowed. Please read WP:V and edit accordingly.--Winchester2313 (talk) 04:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I can't understand why people keep restoring odd/meaningless prose. "Shach did not suffice with the struggle against secularism and Zionism."?? Perhaps that means something in the original Hebrew; it certainly doesn't mean anything in English. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:41, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

It's the exact wording of the quote, and IMHO is quite clear. While there may be a slightly better way of saying "Shach waged war against more than just the secular and Zionists" (which is the point the writer makes), I thought it best to restore the precise wording given the contentious nature of the page.--Winchester2313 (talk) 03:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Ynhockey has been kind enough to translate your prose into English. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:43, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Which I appreciate, as he has improved the language without compromising the substance...--Winchester2313 (talk) 21:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Not that there was anything wrong with the previous version. Also good English. Perhaps of a tad too high a level for some? Debresser (talk) 21:31, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps it was good Dutch, but it was certainly not good English. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:41, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Regarding quotes from the book "Al HaTorah V'al Ha'Temurah"

Recently I inserted quotes from the book "Al HaTorah V'al Ha'Temurah" (Chippenham, England: Anthony Rowe, 1992) (Can be seen here: http://identifyingchabad.org/al_hatorah.pdf). Winchester2313 removed them, claiming that it violates Wiki rules (WP:RS, WP:BLP, WP:OR, and WP:V):

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elazar_Shach&diff=443807405&oldid=443764652

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elazar_Shach&diff=443763836&oldid=443452329

Does anyone agree with me that these quotes are valid? Yonoson3 (talk) 23:11, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Nothing in that 'book' belongs on Wiki - it is simply an anonymously published polemic attacking a specific group, which is presumably what someone is attempting to use it for here. It fails WP:V WP:RS and many other guidelines. It also happens to be full of blatant forgeries and lies. If you continue to ignore the guidelines by WP:POV defamatory edits that fail WP:V, I intend to take it to ANI.--Winchester2313 (talk) 12:42, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I was not familiar with this site and its online publications. I must say they made a very unpleasant impression on me. Reminds me of some hate-sites. Debresser (talk) 19:21, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Who is the author? Do you have more information on the book, such as an ISBN number? Antony Rowe Chippenham appears, at first look, to be a vanity press. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:49, 30 August 2011 (UTC)