Talk:Sons of Zadok

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Bible (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Judaism (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)[edit]

Please In ictu oculi (talk) 21:41, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Revert to Hebrew spellings 19:25, 13 September 2011[edit]

Revision as of 19:25, 13 September 2011 (edit) (undo)

I apologize once again for having to undo your work, I know you must have put in a large amount of time editing this article (and quite a few edits i find helpful), but please consider the vast amount of hours I spent researching the article detail and creating it. Below is a partial list of reasons for my revert;
  • Changing "Divrei Torah" ref. to "Torah study"! (the former is a book, the latter a mitzvah)
  • Changing the Mincha offering from plant life form to vegetable? (veg's -per common english usage- are not sacrificed on the mizbeach)
  • Kohanim the levites, sons of.. The word "the" does not exist in orig. text (if need be -for clarification- it may be inserted in brackets)
  • Largscale change of Kohanim to priests (this seems to be pending resolution at the Kohen:Talk page)

The above are just a few mistakes that can be easily avoided where proper research taken on your part. But, as said above helpful edits have been made and I encourage you to try again. If you do not feel up to it or do not have the time I will go through the page and return those constructive additions of your contribution.--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 19:27, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello Marecheth HoeElohuth
The 3 items you have given, even if correct, could have been changed in 1 minute, they do not serve as an excuse for reverting all the spellings to non-standard spellings such as "book of Yechezkel" (sic).
  1. How will anyone know what you mean by "Divrei Torah" if you fail to add proper footnotes?
  2. "Changing the Mincha offering from plant life form to vegetable?" - that was just better English, we don't say "plant life form" unless we are from Mars.
  3. "Kohanim the levites, sons of.." --- in regard to Ancient Israel WP:RS use "priests"

In ictu oculi (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I disagree that the error's you've made on this article are "minor", this case shows a lack of proper research on your part and neglect of tremendous efforts of other editors.--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 20:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
No personal attacks, please, instead comment on the content, not on the contributor. That's policy. See below for comments on the deplorable current state of the article. Andrewa (talk) 06:49, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Footnotes, cf. WP:PSTS[edit]

Hi Marecheth Ho'eElohuth, aside from WP:EN, please see WP:PSTS.

  • At the very least if publication years, editions, ISBNs, languages, are not going to added the sources should at least be wikilinked so that Wikireaders can click through to the primary sources:
not as 3. ^ Midrash ha-Gadol to Bereishit 6:4 et al.
instead 3. ^ Midrash HaGadol on Genesis 6:4, in Mordecai Margulies, editor and introduction, Midrash haggadol on the Pentateuch. Genesis. Edited From the Various Manuscripts Mosad Haraw Kook, Jerusalem 1947, reprinted 1975. ISBN.

FYI This is what happens when these refs are wikilinked:

1. ^ The term of popular Idol Worship initiated from the Rebellion of Jeroboam up until the destruction of the First Temple -Malbim to Yechezkel 4:5
2. ^ i.e. the services of/on the Mizbeach
3. ^ Midrash ha-Gadol to Bereishit 6:4 et al.
4. ^ Rashi, Tosfot to tractate Taanith p. 17b
5. ^ Maggid Meisharim (of Rabbi Yosef Karo) p. 55b, Rashi to Talmud tractate Zvachim p. 101b
6. ^ See "Torath HaKohanim", M. Rizikoff, Minor Chap. 200
7. ^ Koheleth Rabbah Chap. 1
8. ^ Rashi to Yechezkel 43:19
9. ^ Medrash HaBiur (Sadya Al-Dmari) to Haphtorah Parshat Emor
10. ^ Malbim to yechezkel chap. 2
11. ^ Abarbanel to Yechezkel 44:18, Chafetz Chaim to the Torah, Haphtorah to Parshat Emor
12. ^ Malbim to Malachi 3:3
13. ^ Rosh to Devarim 10:8
14. ^ "Elef HaMagen (Elishevitz) to Haphtorah Parshat Emor
15. ^ malbim to Melachim 2 23:9
16. ^ Ahavath Yonathan Jonathan Eybeschutz, Abarbanel, Malbim
17. ^ the former listed in Parshat Emor (in VaYikra) and the latter in the Haftarah to Parshat Emor
18. ^ "Ohel Yehoshua" to Haftarath Emor
19. ^ "Divrei Tovah" to Shmuel 1 2:37
20. ^ Yechezkel 43:19
21. ^ as per common Kaballah teaching that north is synonymous with monetary issue
22. ^ Ahavath Yonathan to Haftarah Emor
23. ^ "Ronni VeSimchi" vol. 4, as quoted from Chasam Sofer to Orach Chayim chap. 15 (second count)
24. ^ Elef HaMagen to Haftarah Emor
25. ^ Korban Nethanel (of Damascus) to Haftarath Emor
26. ^ Talmud Bavli to Kiddushin 78b
27. ^ malbim, yonathan eibshitz, et. al
28. ^ see The Torah instruction of the Kohanim
29. ^ "Torath HaParsha" (Ahron Zakkai) to Haftarath Emor
30. ^ "Ohr HaChamah" to Yechezkel (as quoted in "Bechor Yaakov")
31. ^ Yonathan Eibshitz
32. ^ "Rav Lipman" to Vayikra 21:14 (quoted in chumash Otzar Rishonim)
33. ^ Malbim to Yechezkel 44:15-22
34. ^ Chasam Sofer to Kiddushin 78b based on Radak
35. ^ "Mincha Belula to Vayikra 21:14 (printed in Chumash "Otzar HaRishonim")
36. ^ Sifri to Devarim 33:10 (and 21:5)
37. ^ Tzavrei Shallal" of the Chid"a to Haftarath Emor
38. ^ Malbim to Yechezkel 44:24
39. ^ "Avrohom Anochi" (Avrohom the son of Chaim Palagi) to Yechezkel chap. 44
40. ^ Mishmereth Tzvi to Haftarath Parshat Emor
41. ^ Ahavath Yonathan to Haftarath Parshat Emor
42. ^ Pri Tzadik to Parshat Emor
43. ^ Malbim to Yechezkel 40:41
44. ^ Then Kann measurment of the Book of Yechezkel is described as six Amahs, with each Amah consisting of six Tefachs
45. ^ with the greater tribe of Levi including Kohanim as well
46. ^ Yechezkel chapters 45 and 48
47. ^ Serech Hayachad p. 22 (B. T. Katz, Sod H'Mgilloth)
48. ^ "Sali and its elders", introduction to chap. 1
49. ^ Geiger, Urschrift pp. 20 &c
50. ^ Avoth deRabbi Nathan 5:2
51. ^ Sifri to Devardim p. 233 (Torah Ve'Hamitzvah edition)
52. ^ Rambam to Avoth chap. 2
53. ^ Hilchoth Avodah Zarah 10:2
54. ^ Additional aspects disproving that association include a Chazalic mention that the Sadduccee and Boethusian groups favored using vessels of Gold and Silver whereas the common vessel usage of Kohanim -to negate transmission of Tumah- where typically of stone

In ictu oculi (talk) 01:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Move of article from Sons of Zadok to Kohanim Sons of Zadok, 13 Sept[edit]

This move goes against WP:RS and WP:EN. I'll submit to requested moves In ictu oculi (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. The precision argument by andrewa is persuasive and there is no evidence (below) that reliable sources overwhelmingly use the longer title. --regentspark (comment) 13:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Kohanim sons of ZadokSons of ZadokRelisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2011 (UTC) Move back to "Sons of Zadok" firstly as per WP:EN, secondly per WP:RS, WP:IRS, thirdly per "Kohen/Priestly sons of Zadok" is redundant/oxymoron as all the ancient references and notable descendants of Zadok were priests. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

  • Oppose RS usage is specifically "Kohanim sons of Tzadok" (and -BTW- not all sons where functioning kohen's).--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 20:37, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Please see WP:IRS, what RS?? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:58, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment: Current lead [1] reads In the context of the written Torah, the Kohanim sons of Tzadok (Hebrew: הכהנים בני צדוק‎) are a family of Kohens (Jewish priests) who are of patrilineal descent from Zadok, the first high priest (Kohen Gadol) to serve in the first temple. Based on the Book of Ezekiel, this specific Kohanic family proved themselves as loyal to the service of Yahweh in terms of not submitting to the then popular theme of idol worship -as did the general population of Jerusalem as well as the Kohanim (plural form of Kohen)[1]. The book of Yechezkel details that the family line of Kohanim, sons of Tzadok, will execute the primary services in The Third Temple[2]. According to Oral Torah ("Masorah"), the choosing and appointing of the Kohen Gadol depends on the appointee being of the progeny of Tzadok[3]. As well, the Jewish establishment of the Second Temple -upon return from Babylonian exile- included this specific prerequisite of the Kohen Gadol being of Tzadokite descent[4] (my emphasis). What a mess! Is it Zadok or Tzadok, Ezekiel or Yechezkel? I'm sorry to be disparaging but these variant spellings with not even a note to say that they are variant spellings of the same word are a blatantly poor excuse for an encyclopedia article text. Fix that (see #Revert to Hebrew spellings 19:25, 13 September 2011 above) before quibbling about the title is my advice. Some links as to exactly which RS is being quoted in the discussion above would be good as well. Andrewa (talk) 06:42, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:precision: Be precise, but only as precise as necessary. There are no other Sons of Zadok likely to be the subject of an article, so use of the longer phrase however common it turned out to be (and I'm skeptical of that too) is unjustified. I note that this seems to be simply reverting a previous and apparently undiscussed move [2]. Andrewa (talk) 08:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Sons of Zadok remain hidden to the goyim...at least this one anyway. This Wiki entry is too obscurantist for the lay person. For example, what is "Chazalic"? The term hits you like a slap in the face by a smug Professor :P