Talk:Stereotypes of Jews

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Judaism (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Sociology  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sociology 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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Discrimination (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
 

Moved from article[edit]

I'm restoring this information because it's potentially useful. Censorship will not be tolerated. deeceevoice (talk) 01:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


I am trying to model this page on Stereotypes of African Americans

travb (talk) 00:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm restorings this because it's potentially useful. Censorship will not be tolerated. deeceevoice (talk) 01:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Deeceevoice, I don't agree with the editors deleting this from the talk page.
First, you must acknowledge that this topic is a sensitive one, and you must have known that your laundry list would inflame someone here.
Second, your list is completely unreferenced. You need references to push you point of view here, especially in an article as inflammatory as this one.
Third, to call wikipedia censored when I listed whole articles on some of the inflammatory terms you used is absurd.
If you are going to edit on controversial topics like this, you have to practice Passive aggressive behavior to thrive on wikipedia. Using the word "censorship" is not being passive aggressive.
The nominator just agreed to close the Article for deletion, and you seem intent on screwing this all up. travb (talk) 02:31, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Collapsing it is ridiculous. It hides the list from view, and people are less likely to read it. Let them see what we're discussing/writing about. deeceevoice (talk) 02:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm just seeing your note. Talk page information needn't be sourced. I've presented the list as a list of ideas. These are, indeed, stereotypes/archetypes/common perceptions about Jews, and as such, it is perfectly appropriate to have them here. There shouldn't be a problem. Have you taken a look at the article on Blackface? The talk page space on Stereotypes of African Americans? Nobody pulled any punches there, and nobody cried "foul". How can we write about a subject honestly if we can't even discuss it? If we can't even provide an outline/list of the concepts to be covered? This is just silly. People can write articles on Nigger and all manner of anti-Black bias and speak frankly -- but when the subject turns to Jews we have to put on kid gloves? Preposterous! deeceevoice (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I have attempted to compromise several times on your behalf, while you have become more and more shrill. I was able to get the AfD closed, and closed it despite your pointless edit warring on this talk page, I advocated for this article repeatedly, I rewrote the article, I restored these comments, I encouraged you every step of the way.
Your behavior and etiquette has been so bad, I thought you must have been a new editor, but come to find out, you have been here for almost 5 years, with 19,000 edits.
In response, there has been zero comprise from you, causing an editor to create an ANI just for you.
If this is a sample of the way you treat most editors and allies--it is a wonder you have been here this long. travb (talk) 03:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh, please, travb. I didn't visit your talk page and threaten you. And insisting another "editor" leave my legitimate talk page contributions alone is hardly edit warring. Again, edit warring refers to article content in the article main space because editors aren't supposed to tamper with other editors' talk page contributions. I'm not going to compromise on someone screwing with my talk page contributions -- because you've no right to tamper with them. Just lay off, and I'm cool. Now. If you're interested in working on the article, it would be nice if you would stop whining and get on with it. deeceevoice (talk) 03:50, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Some sources[edit]

Just a quick search yielded all kinds of useful source material. It isn't all scholarly, but much of it is -- and it all points clearly to the usefulness/importance of an article on the subject.

  • about.com
  • youtube.com
  • cwi.org.uk
  • "Stereotypes confronted head-on in Spertus show" [1]
  • Semites and Stereotypes: Characteristics of Jewish Humor[2]
  • Studying the Jew, by Alan E. Steinweiss [3]
  • Tobias, Josh. "Meet the Fockers, Larry David and the Jewish Archetype."[4]
  • Trachtenberg, Joshua. The Devil and the Jews: The Medieval Conception of the Jew and Its Relation to Modern Anti-Semitism[5]
  • A goldmine: German Propaganda Archive, Part II. Anti-Semitic Material[6]
  • Wistrich, Robert S. Demonizing the Other[7] (Googled "Jews depicted as devils")
  • Gerstenfeld, Manfred. "Anti-Semitism: Common Characteristics and Motifs[8]
  • Jensen, Gary F. The Path of the Devil.[9](Googled "Jews depicted as devils")
  • Anti-Semitic posters[10],[11][12]


Dvora Weisberg, 'The Study of Torah as a Religious Act' in Four Centuries of Jewish Women’s Spirituality Ellen M. Umansky and Dianne Asliton, Beacon Press, 1992.
"For years I’ve been asked how a young woman from San Francisco with a modest Jewish background came to be an observant Jew and a Talmudist. I’ve never formulated a good answer. I keep thinking back, looking for the specific event or person that influenced the decisions that made me who and what I am today; but I cannot pinpoint it... Torah is a path that, having been chosen, seems to draw me further and further along, convinced that every twist and turn of the road brings me a little closer to G-d."
Dovida Ishatova, ‘What May Be Tsores to You Is Naches to Me’ in Nice Jewish Girls: A Lesbian Anthology, Evelyn Torton Beck (ed.) Beacon Press 1989.
"Dear Mom and Dad: So what’s a nice Jewish girl like me doing in a book like this? Why, flaunting it, of course, and hoping maybe to meet some other nice Jewish girls. Besides, Jewish girls make such nice lesbians. We’re loud, we’re boisterous, we know how to cuddle, we know how to squeeze. But to be a Jew, the daughter of a survivor, and a lesbian? How can that be? With a background like mine, how could I have ever wandered so far from the "chosen path"? But I’m telling you, I am a nice Jewish girl."
Blu Greenberg, On Women and Judaism:
A View from Tradition JPS, 1981.
"Two things I know for sure. My questioning never will lead me to abandon tradition. I am part of a chain that is too strong to break, and though it needs no protection from me, a child of the tradition, I want to protect it with the fierceness of a mother protecting her young. But I also know that I never can yield the new value of women’s equality, even though it may conflict with Jewish tradition."
Ellen M. Umansky, 'Reclaiming the Covenant: A Jewish Feminist’s Search for Meaning' in Four Centuries of Jewish Women’s Spirituality, Ellen M. Umansky and Dianne Ashton (eds.), Beacon Press, 1992.
"As a feminist I have begun to reclaim my voice; as a Jew, I am ready to activate my membership within the covenant and to reopen the dialogue with our G-d. As I think about my spiritual journey, I realize that my search for meaning may never end. What I’ve learned in the seventeen years since I took my Confirmation vows is that the ground rules are not pre-established, that it is my obligation as a Jew to help create a Judaism that is meaningful for my generation."
Source: "Generally Jewish, Specifically (Fe)Male: Jewish Stereotypes of Gender" at [13]

deeceevoice (talk) 01:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Did you search those sources I gave you a link too? Like google book or goggle archive news? Neither of those sources (youtube or about.com) will convince others to keep.

Further, whenever adding sources, but especially in a deletion discussion, always add the sources to the article page, not the talk page. Almost everyone ignores the talk page, and they always ignore the talk page when someone else asks them to do the work for them.

(edit conflict) good job! travb (talk) 01:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

  • I have added a section for links to sources at the head of this page. Books and Scholar are the best places to start. Colonel Warden (talk) 13:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

List removed again[edit]

This isn't censorship. We're not going to keep up an inflammatory, unsourced list in the hopes that it might be useful. Find some sources and then add the proper elements back in using sensitivity, judgement, and good editorial skills. AniMatetalk 02:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm removing the list again. All this has proved is that deeceevoice has written a list of unsourced, bigoted stereotypes. We don't throw everything up and hope it sticks or write articles from things we've heard or believe, we write articles from sources. Keep the list in your user space if you desire, but it is simply a collection of unsourced assertions from a single user it has no place in this article. AniMatetalk 02:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
He seems intent to shoot himself in the foot. I think I will back away so that I don't get any blood on me. He is a new editor, and should be given the benefit of the doubt, but he is about to hang himself with the rope we gave him/her. travb (talk) 02:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
He's not a new editor. He's been here since '04. I've taken this to WP:AN/I for some help. AniMatetalk 02:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
He can also be blocked for 3RR. How an editor from 2004, with 19250 edits, does not know anything about wiki-etiquette (talk page etiquette etc.) is beyond me. travb (talk) 02:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think this is crazy. You say all I've done is "written a list of unsourced, bigoted stereotypes." Uh, not exactly. I included some positive stereotypes as well. But even if I had just contributed negatives -- isn't that the point? The article is supposed to treat stereotypes.

Oh, my bad. Does that mean only the positive ones?

As for sources, this is a talk page space. Discussion/comments about possible article content needn't be sourced. But speaking of sources, I've provided a laundry list of useful sources. (Did you even notice? Do you even care?)

Listen, people. If I as an African-American can write an article on blackface that mentions "coons" and "darkies" and "darky iconography," or particpate in the writing of articles like Mammy, and Nigger and material treating lynchings and the like, then I expect that others should be able to participate in the writing of an article such as this one without worrying about offending people simply by discussing the subject matter at hand. Frankly, if people are too sensitive to deal up front and unblinkingly with the matter of Jewish stereotypes in an article main space or in the talk page space, then it might be better for all concerned if they went elsewhere. This is just insane. People need to grow some.

And careful about writing about hanging Black folks and ropes, dammit! I'm sensitive! (Hell, yeah, I'm kidding.)

And one more thing. I'm a woman. deeceevoice (talk) 02:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

And one, last thing. The 3RR refers to editing in article main spaces -- not article talk pages. Why? BECAUSE PEOPLE AREN'T SUPPOSED TO EDIT OTHER CONTRIBUTORS' COMMENTS ON TALK PAGES. (Duh.) So, hands, off, please. And save your "editing" for the article. deeceevoice (talk) 03:01, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Um, Deeceevoice, you have edited my comments repeatedly. Whereas I have only refactored your comments, keeping the comments intact, and moving them below. Again, how can you have 19250 edits and still be editing on the top of a subtopic? travb (talk) 03:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
The only editing I've done is restoring my list. And the only way to do that was to delete your changes. So don't pull that; it just doesn't wash. And don't concern yourself with how long I've been here or the number of edits I've done, or trying to threaten/intimidate me. It's been tried by a whole lot of people around here, and it hasn't worked.
I have a suggestion, though. How about actually contributing to the article? All this complaining is simply ridiculous and a complete waste of time. deeceevoice (talk)
DEE WHO ADDED THE LIST TO THE TALK PAGE IN THE FIRST PLACE. You continue to delete my edits Dee. Lets remember WP:OWN, it is not "your" list Dee. travb (talk) 03:44, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
You're splitting hairs, travb. The fact is I contributed it, and you've no business tampering with it so people can't see it. Period. deeceevoice (talk) 16:50, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Please note - 3RR applies to every page on the encyclopedia, not only article pages. It is perfectly okay to delete disruptive talk page content. People generally give some deference to talk page discussions, but attempts to use the talk page as a sandbox are not a discussion. Stop playing games. There is substantial opposition to keeping the list here, and if people don't want it, it should not be here. Whether one calls it 3RR or not, disruptive behavior is blockable. Wikidemon (talk) 04:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I've deleted the list. It's not an appropriate use of this talk page. People who have material to contribute to the article can do so, but I don't think this page should be a dumping ground for offensive cultural stereotypes. Further, the list format for the article is all wrong - it turns it into an indiscriminate list of information. There probably is an encyclopedic article to be written, and I have said so on the AfD, but a random collection of bigotry, cited or not, is unencyclopedic. The various negative stereotypes are contradictory and don't seem to have much in common other than that they are for the most part antisemitic. An encyclopedic article would be something about the subject, giving context, history, importance, etc., to the subject, not a catalog of random stereotypes. Wikidemon (talk) 04:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Sourced commentary on cultural stereotypes and their backgrounds can be enlightening. A list of nettlesome taunts is something else. Edit warring over it also stirs up worries. Gwen Gale (talk) 07:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Merge[edit]

This should not be merged with Antisemitism because not all stereotypes are negative. Juzhong (talk) 02:50, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

You two should just take it outside and pound the fuck out of each other, get it all out of your system, and then come back and act like civilized editors. travb (talk) 02:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
That's a little bit off-topic. Juzhong (talk) 02:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing, Juzhong. ;) deeceevoice (talk) 03:05, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

All stereotypes are negative. "Positive" stereotypes are a less than subtle form of pressure to conform to an external social expectation, as well as being an intense source of awkwardness, embarrassment and so on when an individual doesn't match up tot he expectation of a so-called positive stereotype. ThuranX (talk) 04:21, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Oppose I agree with User:Juzhong. Jewish stereotypes such as the intellectual or protective mother are not antisemitic and so a merger would not be NPOV. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I like what you're doing with the article, CW. :) deeceevoice (talk) 16:51, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
  • In the AFD someone suggested a merge with Stereotype, which would be better in terms of the hierarchy of topics. Juzhong (talk) 21:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Vigorous Oppose Imminently notable subject, with more than enough material for a stand-alone, encyclopedic entry. deeceevoice (talk) 02:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

For now, the discussion is being had at the WP:AFD page, so this discussion is redundant. Wikidemon (talk) 04:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Positive stereotypes[edit]

Stereotypes are not necessarily negative. There are also positive stereotypes of Jews, such as being good at math and financial matters, being well educated, and aiming for high-prestige, high-paying jobs like doctor or lawyer. These should be added too, once sources are found (which shouldn't be hard). —Angr 16:23, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Here is a source http://www.jinfo.org/Nobel_Prizes.html --melfa^ 18:54, 24 November 2009 (UTC)


As with the negative stereotypes they need to be verifiable and have some context and reason to be included both for WP:WEIGHT and due relevance to the subject. A catalog of random praises is inappropriate for some of the same reasons as a catalog of random jeers. Even though not as obviously bigoted, it is nevertheless ethnically/culturally insensitive as well.Wikidemon (talk) 16:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
So, I imagine you'll next be AFDing List of ethnic slurs? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Sure, they need to be verifiable; as I said, that shouldn't be difficult. But since the subject of the article is stereotypes of Jews, the WEIGHT and relevance of positive stereotypes to the subject should be blindingly obvious. Stereotypes, whether positive or negative, are ethnically/culturally insensitive; that's part of their nature. But that fact doesn't detract from this article, which only aims to be encyclopedic, not culturally sensitive. —Angr 18:28, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Sure, if it's encyclopedic information we don't censor. The point, I guess, is that indiscriminate collections of unverifiable, undue, and/or irrelevant information are normally fairly harmless and we can get to them in due time. But when the lists reflect bigotry or chauvinism they deserve faster attention. On the other hand, covering in an encyclopedic way that certain people hold these stereotyped beliefs is just fine, they can be as insensitive as the day is long. A list of ethnic slurs would have the same concerns - we would only want to cover the ones that are actually slurs, giving due mind to some reasonable inclusion criteria for notability, commonality, and so on. Collecting every slur that anyone has ever uttered would be indiscriminate, just like collecting every negative stereotype one can find however obscure is going overboard.Wikidemon (talk) 19:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
As more than one administrator has already said, removal of the list was improper, period. It's certainly sourced (again, not something that's required in article talk spaces) and useful -- and most certainly not OR. deeceevoice (talk) 17:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't know what you are talking about. It's perfectly fine to remove disruptive talk page content. If any administrator cares to intervene they may do so - however, their opinions do not control the subject. The editors here are free to decide that certain talk page content is inappropriate. If the goal is to sandbox random cultural stereotypes until they can be cleaned up and verified there are better ways to do this than putting them in a talk page boneyard. The whole effort looks very thin. There is not much encyclopedic content there. Wikidemon (talk) 09:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

A few minor points[edit]

I just edited a few subsections. Perhaps the article's creator might like to look up "stereotype" in a dictionary. I have a book in which there is a redheaded Jewish character. This does not make redheadedness a Jewish stereotype. I have another book in which there is an African-American Jewish character. This does not make being African-American a Jewish stereotype.

This article is full of WP:OR, and it isn't even good WP:OR. -LisaLiel (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The article as it stands now was not framed by me, and I probably would have done it differently. Last I checked, it's primarily simple, one-sentence examples -- but some of the information provides a useful departure point for treating various stereotypes. If you're interested in helping to frame the article, let me refer you to the (despised) list -- which is not OR and fairly well documented, with credible sources. Perhaps you have some you'd add. It seems the article has any number of critics, but few real contributors. Me -- I've got deadlines. deeceevoice (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
All the material that LisaLiel has challenged and removed was properly sourced to academic works which specifically and explicitly described the entries as stereotypes. The points made in the corresponding edit summaries seem to be OR, not supported by any other source. I therefore plan to revert but perhaps there is more to be said first. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Have a look at some of the other articles about stereotypes. They don't consist of one-liners with a note. That's called link-farming, and it's not okay on Wikipedia. Please don't revert. If you have actual content to add that isn't just a bunch of notes with what's really no more than a caption, feel free to do so. -LisaLiel (talk) 15:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I have already looked at the main article Stereotype and found it to be remarkably poor. I fail to understand why such a poorly-sourced and rambling article should be held up as a model when the complaint is of OR. Addressing the issue of OR is best done by making succinct statements supported by good sources and this is the style I favour. But now that the AFD is out of the way, I shall perhaps be more expansive and write paragraphs rather than sentences. Colonel Warden (talk) 18:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I understand, CW, perfectly well what you were doing with the article -- entering essentially blurbs and referring to source material (rather like my annotated list ;) ),while the article was up for deletion -- in an attempt to show potential voters that the subject matter wasn't frivolous and could be treated encyclopedically. I appreciate the work you've done so far and efforts in preserving and improving the article and look forward to what you come up with in the future. Regards, deeceevoice (talk) 15:42, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Jews as moral corruptors[edit]

There is a popular stereotype of Jews as morally and sexually corrupt, which claims that they dominate the porn industry. This stereotype could maybe be included in the article at some point, along with a source from the Jewish Quarterly. [14]. ADM (talk) 18:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

That is an article about the reality, not the stereotype, of Jews in the adult industry. The article mentions some specific examples but does not really prove its point that those examples add up to a general trend. I would be surprised if there is a prevalent stereotype about Jews in porn. Wikidemon (talk) 20:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Rabbi[edit]

A rabbi is not, strictly speaking, a stereotype of a Jew. A rabbi is an example of a Jew. Bus stop (talk) 03:55, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Jewish women stereotypes[edit]

You could add they are portrayed to be feminists of the extreme kind and how the Halakha rule of Jewishness passed on through the mother only, empowered Jewish women in a way they became involved in women's rights political causes. Feminism isn't predominated by Jews anyway, but you have a large number of well publicized feminists or women's rights activists like Gloria Allred, Gloria Steinem, Nancy Pelosi and Betty Friedan to be reportedly Jewish. + 71.102.18.28 (talk) 04:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Pelosi? That's pretty funny. --jpgordon::==( o ) 15:41, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

This article needs a lot of work[edit]

I found just found this article and I have to say it was (and still is) a sorry excuse for an article. I have tried to improve it somewhat but there's still a lot of work to be done. Just Google "Jews stereotypes" and you'll see that there is just a wealth of material on stereotypes of Jews in different countries and oodles of reliable sources that formalize what the various stereotypes are (a lot of the article text was unsourced) and discussions of where the stereotypes came from as well as statistical data on how prevalent the various stereotypes are in specific countries. I am starting getting this stuff incorporated into the article but it is a humongous amount of work so I would sure appreciate help from other interested editors.

BTW, there is also a huge amount of material on Stereotypes of Jews in literature so I created that article as a subsidiary article to Stereotypes of Jews. Once again, I started to flesh out this article but it's a huge topic and I sure could use help from other editors. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 09:00, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Merge suggestion[edit]

I don't see a significant reason why "Stereotypes of Jews in literature" is a separate page. IMO these are the same stereotypes. And the same stereotypes are in film, comedy, and wherever else. Kaligelos (talk) 21:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I disagree. I created Stereotypes of Jews in literature. It is true that they are the same stereotypes. However, there is enough material in Stereotypes of Jews in literature to warrant a separate article which is why I created it. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 07:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Further explanation... I view this article as describing the stereotypes whereas the Stereotypes of Jews in literature article is intended to follow the development of the stereotype in the literature of different cultures. It describes specific characters in specific works of literature at a level of detail that would be excessive for this article. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 09:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, it is too large to be merged. I will remove the templates. InverseHypercube 19:22, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Jews identified with 19thC capitalism[edit]

"There is not much evidence that Jews have a disproportionate representation in business. This statement stands in peculiar isolation, beyond time and place. The following references to Jewish fraudsters suggest that the U.S. in the 20thC, or even the present, is implied. In the case of Europe, in the century following the French Revolution, Jews were very much identified with the growth of banking and laissez-faire capitalism; thus giving rise to the anti-Semitic stereotype in some countries of conspiratorial Jewish financiers being the wire-pullers behind economics and politics. Some commentators in Central Europe, like the German economist Sombart, went so far as to identify modern capitalism as a Jewish creation. The article should perhaps reflect this, as it is important to helping people understand one of the main roots of modern anti-Semitism. Kim Traynor (talk) 15:13, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

A very poor article that has little encyclopedic value and meant to portray Jews as a victim race[edit]

It is these kind of "articles"(to me it reads more like the editorial of Jerusalem Post) that makes Wikipedia a very poor candidate to be considered as a serious encyclopedia Zencv Whisper 19:28, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Jewish lawyer stereotype, Nice Jewish boy stereotype, Jewish-American princess stereotype and Jewish mother stereotype to Stereotypes of Jews[edit]

After more than a month, clear consensus for all four merges pbp 21:37, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The first two don't have enough content to justify having their own articles. The second two are slightly longer, due in part to the fact that large portions of them are cruft. I think it would be best to merge all the sub-stereotypes to here pbp 17:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree about the merge for the reasons you have stated.QuizzicalBee (talk) 06:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Note that a few days ago, I merged Jewish lawyer stereotype and Nice Jewish boy stereotype to here, as there were no objections in a month. Staszek's comments below are apparently not vigorously contesting that merger. pbp 23:34, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Nope. The two first merges are OK. I wrote "the rest" , didn't I? (PS/Q: "not vigorously"??? did you mean "now"?) Staszek Lem (talk)
  • Oppose the rest of the merge. Huge articles on clearly separate topics are not merged in wikipedia. "cruft" is a rather ridiculous opinion about "Jewish mother" page. "Princess" is cruftish, but this is everywhere in wikipedia, and the cruft there is not exactly trivia: it is a collection of notable examples. To merge small pages is OK-ish, but pointless. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Jeez. All these stereotypes are Jewish stereotypes for heaven's sake. They belong in an article about Jewish stereotypes, not in separate articles. It should be set up like this one African American stereotypes. Ridingdog (talk) 02:25, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
    • It seems you have no idea how wikipedia works. By your logic, we just as well may put everything about the Jews into a single article, Jews. Not to say that your argument shows you have no slightest idea what is written in other wikipedia articles. - Altenmann >t 02:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Strong support, per 'pbp'. These two articles should also be covered in this main article - they are all part of the same topic, i.e. stereotypes of Jews. As opposed to what 'Staszek Lem' claims, these two articles are not huge at all (one is just 13,336 bytes and the other is 16,505 bytes) and are not "separate topics", so that's not an issue at all. Currently, there are 4 editors here who agree and are in favor of this proposal, will only one has has some objection. So with 80% in favor of the proposal, I think it's safe to say there's a consensus to merge the remaining articles as well. Yambaram (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2014 (UTC)


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Modern image[edit]

How come this image is nowhere to be found:
http://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/q/thumb/1347/98/1347986520227s.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.142.52.112 (talk) 11:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Belle juive[edit]

The section is unreferenced. Anyway, the contributor seems to confuse the concept of 'stereotype' and 'stock character'. BJ is the latter. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Better Example of Jewish Mother.[edit]

"An example of the Jewish mother stereotype is the character Sylvia Fine from TV series The Nanny." This TV series is not familiar to people outside the US. It would be better to give an example from a movie that has been released internationally. 31.185.241.136 (talk) 13:57, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

In any case I tagged it as unreferenced. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:04, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Merge from "SoJ in literature" article[edit]

Since you merged all stereotypes into one, the next logical step is to merge the article Stereotypes of Jews in literature as well. Reasons:

  • The (main) SoJ article would provide a general discussion, while SoJinL must provide examples, as well as a historical perspective.
  • The SoJinL seems to me a bit of WP:SYNTH and original research and WP:TRIVIA, which should be cleaned during merge.
  • Why "In literature" would be a separate topic? Literature is a reflection of real life. I am not aware of any "fictional stereotypes of Jews" which could possibly warrant a separate treatment.
  • We don't have neither "SoJ in film" not "SoJ in visual arts" pages, and rightly so.

Staszek Lem (talk) 21:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Great suggestion, I strongly support this proposal per the reasons you've provided. There has been no opposition to this so would you be willing to carry out the merge? Yambaram (talk) 20:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Aquiline nose is a Jewish stereotype[edit]

I think that one of the biggest stereotypes about Jews is a big aquiline nose. This stereotype was not made up by the German-Nazi soldiers or by Adolf Hitler, it was however present among all the nations where the Jews lived. No matter if Ashkenazic, Sephardic or Oriental - all of the Jews were said to have a hook-nose. This racist stereotype should be stressed as being the most characteristic and popular when it comes to Jews. Nonetheless, aquiline noses are also said to be present among Arabs, Persians, Indians, Armenians, North African Berbers and Native Americans (especially Cheyenne and Cherokee). The article aquiline nose should be also edited in terms of Jewish stereotypes and the rhinoplasty popular especially among the Middle-Eastern ethnic groups. 78.8.182.178 (talk) 19:39, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

no mention about LE HAPPY MERCHANT?[edit]

i think le happy merchant should be mentioned — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:7:5380:5DC:8CBF:EDA1:B276:6EA0 (talk) 08:31, 21 October 2014 (UTC)