Template talk:Halakha

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Organizing the template and category[edit]

Glad to see somebody making an effort at a Halakhah template. Couple points:

  1. I'd like to see the template organized in some well-recognized hierarchical manner. For instance, it might be done via Talmudic or Mishneh Torah categories. (Shulchan Aruch would leave more gaps.) Or it might be done via the subcategories in a Wikipedia category.
  2. Speaking of Wikipedia categories. We had pretty much agreed to divide the Category:Jewish law and rituals so that there's be a single category for Jewish law, i.e. the subject matter of this template. Perhaps an effort can be made to improve the categorization of articles so that the Template eventually matches up with Category:Jewish law? Thanks. HG | Talk 10:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Just be aware, this template is in its early stages. As time goes on, and more articles are added, it'll be more clear how it can better be organized. Xyz7890 (talk) 20:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but it still looks pretty random. "Behavior" is not useful, since nearly all halakhah involves some behavior. Likewise, "special situations." I recommend you open a discussion about the organization before proceeding. thanks. HG | Talk 13:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:UE[edit]

Just a note that the template presentation would be a lot more useful as a navigation aid to Wikipedia users if it accomodated more to WP:UE, though that issue primarily depends on usage in WP:RS back at the original articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:45, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

  • In ictu: Not just Hebrew, but also Latin legal terms are kept intact, see Category:Latin legal terms. There is absolutely no attempt made to "modify" their proper names by dumbing and watering them down to "simple English" by incorrect application of WP policies. The job of explaining them is in the articles not in wiping out the original and correct Halachic Hebraic terms that are no less valid than legal Latin ones. IZAK (talk) 18:45, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi IZAK, actually a lot of legal Latin ones are not valid as WP:Article Titles. Per WP:UE and MOS:COMMONALITY in many cases they need to be replaced with English, the small number of Latin terms in legalese have since World War II increasingly been replaced with English. From that point of view it's quite possible that a genuine Hebrew loanword in English halakhic texts would be more valid than a Latin term, not less. The problem is when you get differing usages - some people use Soncino, some the Schottenstein, some Neusner.. en.wikipedia naturally defaults to English, per en.wikipedia policy. Same as it should default to English for Latin legal terms where English exists, as it almost always does. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:13, 28 November 2011 (UTC)