User talk:IZAK

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Note: If you post a message on this page, I will usually respond to it on this page.
11 years on Wikipedia!

During December 2013, I celebrated the completion of eleven years on Wikipedia. Once again, I would like to take this opportunity to sincerely thank the entire Wikipedia team and family and my many fellow editors for giving me the opportunity to use my time productively by allowing me to contribute from my education, knowledge, experience and skills to this amazing project over eleven very productive years. Thank you so much to everyone concerned and a special thank you to the many readers who utilize this encyclopedia. Feel free to leave a message at: User:IZAK/awards#And many more.

Replacement filing cabinet.svg This user archives talk pages when they become too large.

Archived talk:: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22; 23; 24; 25; 26; 27; 28; 29; 30; 31: 32; 33; 34; 35; 36; 37; 38; 39; 40; 41; 42; 43; 44; 45; 46; 47;


Dropping in and saying hi

I like the photo on your user page. lol. Very nice. Just to smile at you for being nice to everybody, I noticed. Regeane Silverwolf 03:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Dear Regeane Silverwolf: Thank you so much for the smile, it is greatly appreciated! IZAK 06:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Say, "Smile"!

--Trampton 16:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Dear Trampton, thank you, IZAK 19:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Information.svg Hello IZAK! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 8 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 1,863 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

  1. Yosef Mendelevitch - Find sources: "Yosef Mendelevitch" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images
  2. Meshulam Dovid Soloveitchik - Find sources: "Meshulam Dovid Soloveitchik" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images
  3. Avrohom Yehoshua Soloveitchik - Find sources: "Avrohom Yehoshua Soloveitchik" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images
  4. Haym Soloveitchik - Find sources: "Haym Soloveitchik" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images
  5. Elisheva Carlebach Jofen - Find sources: "Elisheva Carlebach Jofen" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images
  6. Shlomo Carlebach (rabbi) - Find sources: "Shlomo Carlebach (rabbi)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images
  7. Yonasan David - Find sources: "Yonasan David" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images
  8. Richard Gordon (AJC) - Find sources: "Richard Gordon (AJC)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

History of the Jews in Łęczna

Consider having a look. Thanks OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 11:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Category:Jewish life cycle

I'm trying to figure out what you mean by a category you created. Could you provide a little help? Editor2020 03:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

  • @Editor2020: and thanks for the question, see Wiktionary's definition of a life cycle, and the Life cycle page on WP, it's a disambiguation page that links to the many ways that the notion of a "life cycle" is meant and works. In Judaism, a life cycle in its simplest form/s, would be those rituals and events that cover birth, life, rights of passage, marriage, death. Please let me know if I can be of further help. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 09:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for responding.Editor2020 18:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Ohev Shalom Talmud Torah Congregation of Olney

"Final vandalism warning" (not)....just kidding!

Rescue Barnstar Hires.png The Article Rescue Barnstar
For your work on Ohev Shalom Talmud Torah Congregation of Olney. I appreciate sourcing work like that. It was good you came around when you did. Antrocent (♫♬) 21:56, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • @Antrocent: thank you so much! It took about 6 hours of serious searching simply because nowadays searching using Google is such a tedious process of sifting through all the cyber flotsam and jetsam that just clogs everything up. But the WP:V & WP:RS were out there as over the years I had even read about some of these developments at that particular synagogue. There are a finite number of such Orthodox synagogues in the USA outside of the New York City area. Thanks for your kind words and the barnstar, I really do appreciate it! All the best, IZAK (talk) 05:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Reform/Progressive etc.

I've changed my username recently, I quite sure I've mentioned it on the AfD's. For the matter of discussion, I may have been somewhat sneering and contemptuous, but I've spent several weeks combing through articles and discussion pages concerning the topic. English wikipedia, for the moment, does not have a single accurate article describing the belief system of a large and important Jewish denomination; instead there's a horrible mess. Fact is, period. Jewish beliefs and practices in the reform movement, German Reform movement (Judaism), Reform movement in Judaism, Progressive Judaism and Reform Judaism are, well, bad [so are Orthodox Judaism and Conservative Judaism, btw] and I doubt an interested reader would understand anything. I presume you've done research - real research, not just accepting the claims of people who wrote that Reconstructionist leaders took part in the foundation of the WUPJ in 1926, when Reco. did not exist even in the mind of Mordechai Kaplan, and other numerous, quite awkward mistakes - on the matter. I still contest that there is a unique 'Progressive Judaism' with its own doctrines in Israel, or that the relations between Reform and Liberal Judaism in Britain deserve a separate article. Not to mention that there's much in common between Reco. and the large current known variously as Liberal, Reform and - until the former joined the WUPJ in the 1980's, this could have been an ideal name - Progressive. Thanks for reminding me how Wikipedia works; I'm not cynical at all, I got too involved in something which nobody cares about. Anyway, thanks. [P.S, and truly unrelated to what's above, you should consider stopping using Litvak pronunciation by default for people's names. Some of those are Hungarians, and they would have not appreciated it.] AddMore (talk) 18:34, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

  • @AddMore: thank you for contacting me. Just from reading the above you reveal serious problems about your approach, such as 1 When you say about yourself that "I may have been somewhat sneering and contemptuous" you show that you are not being objective and that you are violating WP:AGF & WP:CIVIL and do not have the right mental and intellectual frame of mind to undertake editing in the required WP:NPOV manner about anything let alone such complex topics you cite. 2 When you say things such as "I still contest that there is a unique 'Progressive Judaism' with its own doctrines in Israel, or that the relations between Reform and Liberal Judaism in Britain deserve a separate article" -- just who is supposed to adjudicate such complex sweeping claims?? 3 The best way to start improving what you feel needs improving is by starting discussions with editors who share your interests in order to build the basic required WP:CONSENSUS in order to move forward. But you cannot come along with "guns" blazing and move to "delete" articles and information simply because WP:IDONTLIKEIT. 4 Because you are alleging and making sweeping judgments about articles relating to various religious movements and mostly negating them and coming up with your own "versions" of how to interpret them, it sure looks to me that without having serious discussions and gaining some allies then all you are really doing is a violation of WP:NOR and even of WP:NOTMADEUP. 5 So my advice to you is to take many steps back. Stop nominating what you don't like and disagree with for deletions that only causes an atmosphere of WP:BATTLEGROUND and start again MORE SLOWLY and CAREFULLY and yes it is more time-consuming but you will get to your objective much easier that way. Try looking at the page histories of the articles you don't like and try contacting as many editors as you can and see if you can get a few of them to join you in the venture of improving the article and thereby improving the quality of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia and of course helping those who rely on it. Thanks again and please stay in touch with me. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 09:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Village pump bot discussion

Your initial statement was that you wanted to "gather information and arrive at a rough WP:CONSENSUS" 14:3 consensus wise, and I don't think there's any new info to be gained at this point... maybe time to call it? Cheers JMJimmy (talk) 09:23, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

  • @JMJimmy: Thank you for contacting me. I respectfully disagree with you! Because any serious discussion of this sort should be open for at least one to two weeks (7 to 14 days). Certainly, a minimum of one week would be fair, not 24 hours or 48 hours. As you can tell, and it has come to my attention, there seems to be a group of editors who feel they WP:OWN the status of categories. Other users who do not agree with them are perhaps intimidated. With each passing day there seems to be another user, who has expressed an alternate view to the prevailing group-think and it would only be fair to hold off closing off discussion using the usual benchmark at most WP:AFDs of not less than one week, often-times more, and in fact when it comes to WP:CFDs they often let discussions stay open for many weeks up to a month even, if you are at all familiar with those forums. In any case, the ones on whose behalf you wish to "close" for have nothing to lose, if as you seem to think their opposition to my proposal will prevail, then they will have a much better archived debate to refer to, so they should not fear they have anything to lose at this point. But thanks for asking and please stay in touch! Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 09:51, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:22, 17 August 2014 (UTC)