Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jewish history

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Jewish history (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
Shortcut:


WikiProjects related to

Hebrew Chai Symbol trans.svg Star of David 3.svg Menora.svg Flag of Israel.svg
Jewish topics


WP:Judaism

Discussion board
New articlesDeletions
Weekly Torah portion
Portal:JudaismPortal talk


WP:Israel

Discussion board
New articlesDeletions
Portal:IsraelPortal talk


WP:Jewish Encyclopedia

Discussion board


WP:Jewish history

Discussion board
New articles


WP:Jewish culture

Discussion board


Contents

Announcements[edit]

Votes for deletion[edit]

Consider monitoring:

Other votes[edit]

To do[edit]

Edit Reload Watch

Perpetual problem articles[edit]

Discussions[edit]

Category:Reform Jews[edit]

Hi, I've created Category:Reform Jews, having noticed that corresponding Categories representing most of the other major movements already seem to exist. Many of the most notable and accomplished Jewish people have affiliated with the Reform movement, and I think it's important to create a Category that shows this. I'm able to find information about which individuals belong in this Category in lists of notable people affiliated with specific Reform synagogues. Does anyone else want to help out with this? To me, this Category seems like important information. --AFriedman (talk) 23:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposals for a Jewish state[edit]

Hi, letting any interested Wikipedians on this project know that I've placed a move request to move Proposals for a Jewish state to "Proposals to establish a Jewish state outside of Israel". Full rationale can be found on Talk:Proposals for a Jewish state. 84.92.117.93 (talk) 18:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement[edit]

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Israel FAR[edit]

I have nominated Israel for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cptnono (talk) 14:33, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Russian American[edit]

User:Andrew Shane has been deleting references to Jews in the article on Russian American. He seems to have done so in other articles as well. In his last edit, he has deleted references to Sergey Brin and Isaac Asimov. Previously, he included Irving Berlin in his deletions. I started a section on the talk page, titled Talk:Russian_American#arbitrary_removal_of_Russian-Jews to discuss this issue. I am not Jewish, and am not an expert in this field, but I feel Russian Jews should be considered Russians, just as German Jews are considered Germans. If I am wrong, please tell me. If I am right, please support me or point me to the right discussion page. I would prefer not to get into an edit war on this issue.--Work permit (talk) 05:33, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


New editor needs assistance from Jewish History project[edit]

I am soliciting support from this project for User talk:Mhpjnac whose first article on The North American Council of the Museum of the History of Polish Jews has been proposed for deletion. Unfortunately, the name of the article and its content don't mesh up. The article is really written about the planned museum, not the roles and signficance of the Council. I personally do not know about the Council, nor can I judge its nobability at this point. I encouraged Mhpjnac to rewrite the article focused on the Council and to find reliable 3rd party sources to support its notability. Any help from members of this project to improve the article and help new editor Mhpjnac would be appreciated. Thanks--Mike Cline (talk) 21:02, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Jacob Frank now a mascot for Wikipedia sister project Wikiversity[edit]

Hi, I'm developing Jacob Frank (an 18th-century religious leader and follower of Sabbatai Zevi, and a topic within the scope of this WikiProject) as a mascot for Wikipedia's sister project Wikiversity. Wikiversity aims to be an online open school and university, and was also created to host original research. Because of its nature, it's open to educational resources in almost any format. Wikiversity's mascots appear on User talk pages when new Users are welcomed. In my opinion, the Wikiversity mascots could be used more fully as an opportunity to teach. The previously developed Wikiversity mascots lack intrinsic educational value. For example, they include a jack-o-lantern, a goat and twin babies not noticeably tied to anything else. In contrast, Jacob Frank is tied to a chapter of history that is relatively little-known and is probably interesting to some people who might not have heard of him beforehand. I'm also hoping to use his professed ignorance in real life and his doctrine of "purification through transgression" to introduce the Wikiversity policies of "Be bold" and "Ignore all rules" (Wikipedia has very similar policies with the same names). I would appreciate your going over to Wikiversity to provide feedback on the pages about the mascot: v:User:JacobFrank and v:Template:JacobFrank. The Template is left on new Users' talk pages; the Userpage is linked from the template and provides more information about Jacob Frank. Also, any ideas for other Wikiversity mascots? Thanks. --AFriedman (talk) 03:58, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


The New York Times and the Holocaust[edit]

The administrator helping me on my talk page suggested I seek comments from others on this topic. my article is being trashed by 3 users with no knowledge or interest in the Holocaust. First they tried to delete it entirely and were outvoted five to three. Now they have repeatedly gutted it place, undoing a longer, accurate and well footnoted article and putting an inaccurate two paragraph thing in its place.

I originally posted an article on a tragic, but non-controversial topic in Holocaust studies: the New York Times policy during the period of the Second World War to minimize reports of the Holocaust. I relied on two resources: the New York Time’s apology in 2001, and the work of Dr. Laurel Leff.

The issue is not controversial among knowledgable people because the Times itself acknowledged its guilt fully and publicly in its 150th anniversary issue on November 14, 2001, 56 years after the end of the war. Under the title, “Turning Away from the Holocaust”, retired executive editor Max Frankel wrote that the Times knew the accuracy of the reports on Hitler’s persecution of the Jews and the Final Solution, but that from the beginning to the end, chose never to make it a lead story, or the exclusive topic of an editorial. “… to this day the failure .. to fasten upon Hitler's mad atrocities stirs the conscience of succeeding generations of reporters and editors.”

In listing the details of the Time’s policy to ‘bury’ the Holocaust, Frankel cited one outside resource:

“No article about the Jews' plight ever qualified as The Times's leading story of the day, or as a major event of a week or year. The ordinary reader of its pages could hardly be blamed for failing to comprehend the enormity of the Nazis' crime. Laurel Leff...has been the most diligent independent student of The Times's Holocaust coverage and deftly summarized her findings last year in The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics.”

Three people who originally tried to delete the entire article and are now ruining it have never made any contributions to an article on the holocaust or world war II, and are not really interested. they came over from the new york times page, where they try to prevent criticism of the Times. when they were voted down re deleting the New York Times and the Holocaust in its entirely, they have proceeded to gut it in place. i don't have any allies on this page. The administrator helping me on my talk page suggested I go to a wikiproject page to say i would welcome comments from others.Cimicifugia (talk) 03:55, 29 May 2010 (UTC)cimicifugia

"The poor" in Judaism and Jewish history[edit]

Hello, all. I have recently been digging up a lot of material related to the Ebionites, a little known early Jewish Christian group. Maybe it was a single group, anyway. That question is one of the reasons I've been dredging up material on them. In any event, I have found a substantial article, about 30 pages long, in an encyclopedia relating to the word and concept of "the poor" in the era around the beginning of the Common Era. The term seems to have been used as a self-description of the Qumran Covenanters, for instance. I was wondering if the members of this project knew of any articles which already exist which might be able to hold some of this material which cannot fit in the Ebionites article. Individuals are, of course, free to offer comments on any of the other recent threads as well. The directly relevant discussion can be found at Talk:Ebionites#"The poor" in Judaism. Thank you for your attention. John Carter (talk) 15:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Jews in China[edit]

History_of_the_Jews_in_China says there is a history of Jews at least in Kaifeng, Hangzhou, Ningbo, Yangzhou, and Ningxia. Only Kaifeng has a proper page (Kaifeng Jews). Hangzhou has only a brief reference and the other city pages do not make mention of Jews at all. Wakablogger2 (talk) 08:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

All of the Jewish communities in other cities died out centuries ago. The reason the Kaifeng Jews have an article is because we know the most about them. They received some holy books from Ningbo in the 15th century (if I remember correct). The Jews originally fled south to Hangzhou when the Jingkang Incident took place. Matteo Ricci made note of a synagogue in Hangzhou, but I think that community was probably dead by then.
I imagine the reason that the other articles do not make mention of historical Jewish communities is because most people are unaware of them. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 10:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Mention should be made so people can become aware of them. Pearl S. Buck's book "Peony" has a map of several more Chinese cities with Jewish settlements, but the city names on it are no readable. There must be other such maps somewhere. Wakablogger2 (talk) 06:06, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Discussions of proper names for the articles discussing the three Temples of Judaism[edit]

The recent move of the articles below has engendered concern on WP:ANI if the consensus reached was representative of the wider wikipedia project. Therefore, three RfCs have been opened to fully discuss the proper names of the articles, so consensus can be reched. Please visit and opine at the sections listed below.

  1. Talk:First_Temple#RfC:Proper_Name_for_this_Article
  2. Talk:Second_Temple#RfC:Proper_Name_for_this_Article
  3. Talk:Third_Temple#RfC:Proper_Name_for_this_Article

Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 17:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

RfC on Christ myth theory page name[edit]

Comments would be appreciated at an RfC about the best title for the Christ myth theory. See the discussion here. The article is about the theory that Jesus of Nazareth did not, or probably did not, exist as an historical being. Should it be moved from Christ myth theory to, for example, Jesus myth theory? SlimVirgin talk|contribs 23:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Footer template needed[edit]

I have noticed a need for a "History of the Jews in China" footer with links to relevant articles. This would replace the use of links in see also sections, which can appear bloated. Viriditas (talk) 01:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Dead Sea Scrolls related RfC[edit]

There is currently an RfC related to a matter related to the Dead Sea Scrolls at Talk:Ebionites#RfC. Any input is more than welcome. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 16:55, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Hasidic dynasty article names[edit]

I'd like to change these--see my post at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism#Hasidic_dynasty_article_names.Prezbo (talk) 02:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Merge proposal[edit]

  • I proposed to merge the article 'Jews and the slave trade' into 'Judaism and slavery' to form a single article, possibly titled 'Jews, Judaism and Slavery'. The overlap between the articles is huge, the articles are not too long, and a unified article covering all facets of the topic would be more useful to the reader. Please voice your opinion at Talk:Judaism_and_slavery#Merge proposal. Marokwitz (talk) 06:51, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Judaism and violence[edit]

Hi, I noticed an article which needs your attention - Judaism and violence. I think this article is one sided trying to portray Judaism as a violent religion, and Jewish History as dominated by violence against others, which is clearly not the prevailing scholarly view. Balancing information should be added regarding Judaism's key principles of love of peace and the pursuit of peace. Extremists using Judaism to justify violence are only a tiny minority, and are far from the widespread interpretation of Judaism. I began adding some such material, but your help would be greatly appreciated. Marokwitz (talk) 09:47, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree. This an anti- semitic paragraph that should be removed.

(Scotty Nolan) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottyNolan (talkcontribs) 17:12, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Fair-use discussion about a Holocaust image[edit]

There's a discussion here at files for deletion about whether we can claim fair use for a particular image from the Holocaust. J Milburn began it as a discussion about just one this image, but the same issues apply to most of the others we use too. Fresh eyes would be appreciated. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 14:53, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Holocaust-related Article nominated for deletion[edit]

The following article was nominated for deletion, The Other Side: the Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism. Since the article is part of this WikiProject, please feel free to raise your opinions in the AFD debate. Marokwitz (talk) 08:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


Jerusalem[edit]

There is currently a discussion taking place at Talk:Jerusalem over how the article should word certain issues. Some editors want the word "proclaimed" to be added to the first sentence of the article to describe it as the "proclaimed capital" of Israel as the international community does not recognise it as the capital of Israel, others disagree and think the status quo which has existed for about 3 years should remain (something that has been debated many times over the years but retained), and several compromises have also been suggested. The issue has now also spread to other matters, with some editors wanting it to say "proclaimed flag", "proclaimed mayor" , "proclaimed coat of arms" etc, to also highlight the fact the international community does not recognise the status of Jerusalem. This matter could have implications for other articles if changes are made and a similar pattern followed. So input from other editors would be helpful. Thanks BritishWatcher (talk) 14:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Jewish history-related articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release[edit]

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Jewish history-related articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:33, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Saul Isaac[edit]

I have just created a stub article on Saul Isaac, the first Jewish person to be elected as a Conservative Party Member of Parliament (MP) in the United Kingdom. Only a stub so far, but I suspect that there may be sources somewhere which would allow expansion ... not just in relation to his political career, but becuase of his business partnership with his brother Samuel (who has a DNB entry).

I have searched the archives of The Times newspaper, which doesn't seem to have given him either one of the paper's standard one-para bios of new MPs, nor an obituary. Maybe other editors have access to some appropriate sources? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Mention of Aleppo pogrom in History section of Aleppo[edit]

I would have thought that the following paragraph:

In December 1947, after the UN vote in favour of the partition of Palestine, an Arab mob attacked and devastated the Jewish quarter.[1] The ancient Great Synagogue was completely gutted by fire. The overall damage to the community was estimated at $2.5 million.[2] Soon after, many of the towns 6,000 Jews emigrated.[3]

would have been acceptable to add the the history section of Aleppo. A certain editor keeps removing it, claiming that the incident is covered in the demographics section. While the page does have its own Jews in Allepo section, I don't see why this occurance needs to be whitewashed in the history section. Also, should the demographics section hold historic infomation? Chesdovi (talk) 19:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

List of Jewish Nobel laureates[edit]

FYI, List of Jewish Nobel laureates has been requested to be deleted. 76.66.194.212 (talk) 06:15, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Stub template/category proposal[edit]

Hi - given that both Category:World War II stubs and Category:Jewish history stubs are close to the size where Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting would normally look to create some new subcategories, I am about to propose the creation of a new stub type, {{Holocaust-stub}}, to do with any articles related to the Holocaust and to relations between the Nazi regime and the European Jewish population. Any input to the discussion on this proposal from your project at WP:WSS/P#Holocaust stubs would be greatly appreciated. Grutness...wha? 08:20, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Judaism and Politics[edit]

I also posted this inquiry on the Jewish Political Movements page, and I'm not sure if I'm supposed to post this here as well. I noted there that there's an article on Jewish political movements, but there appears to be no wider page on the subject of the Jewish political tradition, which includes Jewish political thought and political life that is not connected with particular movements. There's a lot that has been written about the history of Jewish political theory and Jewish political life that doesn't connect with any of the subjects on the Jewish political movements page. Perhaps a page on Judaism and Politics could be set up as well? Lkjowa (talk) 18:05, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I see that there's a page on Judaism and Politics in the United States. I'm thinking about a more general article along the lines of the article on Christianity and politics, an article that deals with the history of Jewish political thought and Jewish political institutions in the pre-modern era, as well as modern Jewish approaches to politics that don't fit in the Jewish Political Movements or Judaism and Politics in the US category. Lkjowa (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I started to build a page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lkjowa/Judaism_and_politics. This is the first page that I've created on Wikipedia, and I'll take any help I can get. Thanks. Lkjowa (talk) 16:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Rabbi Sandy Eisenberg Sasso[edit]

Shalom, I have worked on the Wiki page of Rabbi Sandy Eisenberg Sasso. But now this page is being considered for deletion. Please give yours opinions on this Discussion, Thank you so much for all yours contributions in this discussion , je vous remercie, אני תודה --Geneviève (talk) 01:01, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Unintentionally making Holocaust denial look reasonable[edit]

I'm concerned that the lede of Holocaust denial is unintentionally making deniers seem reasonable. The problem is that we define a key aspect of denial as estimating the number of Jews killed at 5 million or less. Yes, that is the "definition" per one of our sources, but all the rest speak of an order of magnitude difference. If, as we currently claim, a figure of 5.1 million is mainstream but one of 5.0 million is characteristic of denial, then it seems like an awfully petty difference, and by implication that deniers may be reasonable revisionists, as they pretend to be. [Now it's even worse: the current wording means that's the only difference needed to qualify as HD: that is, I could argue from it that the Anti-Defamation League and consensus among historians basically agree with the deniers!]

Of course, the rest of the article is well written and makes the situation clear. But readers often do not get past the lede. I'm also concerned that a denier could quote the lede to support their claim.

Holocaust denial involves falsifying the historical record to deny that the majority of European Jews were murdered. It does not involve arguing over whether it was 5.0 or 5.1 million any more than it does real historians arguing over 5.1 vs 6.2 million. One reference to the contrary does not override the all the rest (Mathis, Shermer & Grobman, Yad Vashem, the Anti-Defamation League, JPR) who speak of an order-of-magnitude difference. This is too important to muck around with, and we don't need to be giving ammunition to deniers. — kwami (talk) 23:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Kwami, I have replied to this at Talk:Holocaust denial. In short, the article does not define HD the way you claim it does. I join you in encouraging others to join the discussion there. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 03:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No, the article does not, but the lede does. That's the problem. — kwami (talk) 10:40, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
That assertion is false. See the article talk page. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 21:11, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Update: I eventually got my point across. Problem solved. — kwami (talk) 01:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Jews and Money[edit]

This article was just created and was almost simultaneously retitled Economic history of the Jews and put up for deletion. I also made a post to AN/I concerning the author, Noleander see this proposal. It has been tagged as an article in a series of articles on Jews and Judaism so members of this group should have constructive comments. Slrubenstein | Talk 22:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

This sums up its problems in a nutshell: User:Mathsci/example Slrubenstein | Talk 16:36, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Request for input in discussion forum[edit]

Given the closely linked subjects of the various religion, mythology, and philosophy groups, it seems to me that we might benefit from having some sort of regular topical discussion forum to discuss the relevant content. I have put together the beginnings of an outline for such discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/2011 meeting, and would very much appreciate the input of any interested editors. I am thinking that it might run over two months, the first of which would be to bring forward and discuss the current state of the content, and the second for perhaps some more focused discussion on what, if any, specific efforts might be taken in the near future. Any and all input is more than welcome. John Carter (talk)

Automated message by Project Messenger Bot from John Carter at 15:44, 5 April 2011

Jews and banking[edit]

I would like to request input on two draft articles that I have been working on:

Yes, I understand that having an article titled Jews and banking sounds like an antisemitic canard and I am open to changing the title. However, I do think that there is an encyclopedic topic around the role of Jews and the emergence of modern banking. My interest in this topic was sparked by the disastrous attempt by Noleander to create an article titled Jews and money, subsequently retitled to Economic history of the Jews which has since been deleted via AFD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Economic history of the Jews). It has been widely recognized by participants in the AFD discussion that there were many problems with Noleander's initial attempt including overly broad scope which suggested a coatrack, poor organization of the article, injudicious selection of sources and misrepresentation of some of the sources. However, a number of editors (myself among them) felt that there were one or more encyclopedic topics covered. It was proposed [1] that some of the issues could be resolved by pulling out the encyclopedic topics and making articles about those specific topics. The two articles above represent my efforts to begin that process.

I would like to ask enlist the help of members of this project to review the entire text of these proposed articles as well as critique the article title.

I think the judicious selection of article titles is almost as important as article text because titles change much less frequently than article text does and the article title implies a scope that strongly influences what text is added and deleted from the article.

I am not too thrilled with the title "Jews and banking" as it still sounds antisemitic to me. I'm playing with "History of Jews in banking" but I'm open to other suggestions.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

--Pseudo-Richard (talk) 18:29, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Holocaust nav box[edit]

I've noticed that many of the articles that the Holocaust nav box links to do not have the nav box listed on it. Is there a way to have a robot automatically do all of the linking of nav boxes on the articles that it links to? If not, can't Wikipedia create a robot to do stuff like that? This seems like the exact type of task that could be programmed into a bot. It would save a ton of tedious work for people.Hoops gza (talk) 00:56, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Article rename discussion for Jerusalem during the Persian, Hellenic and early Roman Periods[edit]

The article Jerusalem during the Second Temple period was recently renamed to Jerusalem during the Persian, Hellenic and early Roman Periods. There is an ongoing discussion regarding the proposal to rename it back to its original title. This article is listed as part of this WikiProject, and comments may be left at Talk:Jerusalem during the Persian, Hellenic and early Roman Periods#Requested move. • Astynax talk 19:05, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Temple in Jerusalem[edit]

Would someone please have a look at this edit done today by a new user with 29 edits? None of it is referenced, some of it is out of chronological order, and he used the wrong era style. I can't tell if it's right to revert the whole thing or try to clean it up. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 18:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Proposed move: Foreign relations of Palestine[edit]

It has been proposed that Foreign relations of the Palestinian National Authority be renamed and moved to Foreign relations of Palestine. Please see the move discussion here. Alinor (talk) 06:46, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Discussion closed and then re-opened again from scratch at Talk:Foreign_relations_of_the_Palestinian_National_Authority#Requested_move_.28open_version.29. Alinor (talk) 06:34, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Palestinian rabbis[edit]

Please see The Arizal was a Palestinian with various disscussions at User talk:Chesdovi, User talk:Debresser (with next 8 talkback sections), User talk:Supreme Deliciousness, Assesing regional identity. Chesdovi (talk) 14:59, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Bar Kochba Revolt coinage fake?[edit]

A recent edit to the Bar Kochba Revolt coinage page suggests that the coins are a forgery. This is supported by a single source dating from 1909. Please voice your opinion on the article talk page. Poliocretes (talk) 15:45, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Concentration camp coordinates[edit]

There are still quite a number of concentration camp articles needing geocoding: see User:The Anome/Concentration camp articles needing coordinates for a list of these, and WP:COORD for a guide to geocoding. Many of these are proving difficult to track down, yet all are historically important. Does anyone here want to work on adding location data to these articles? -- The Anome (talk) 22:32, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Walraven van Hall[edit]

If anyone is interested, Walraven van Hall needs lots of work. Devcogneuro (talk) 19:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hebraic compass winds[edit]

Hi. I just wrote a rather large article on Classical compass winds, focusing principally on the development of compass systems in ancient Greece and Rome. However, in the preliminary, I add a note on the use of winds as cardinal directions in the Hebrew Bible. As I am unable to read Hebrew sources, I had to rely on secondary sources. I would appreciate if anybody more knowledgeable could look over that section and correct any mistakes. Moreover, as I bothered to give the names of the Greek winds in the Hellenic script, it would be nice if someone could also to do the same, and insert the names of the Hebraic winds in Hebrew script. Walrasiad (talk) 05:36, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Avraham Firkovich[edit]

Avraham Firkovich — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.127.238.78 (talk) 19:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

"In his later years he became obsessed with "proving" that Crimean Karaites were not Judean in descent, but rather Khazarian"

This is false and experts in the field like Dan Shapira take great pains to point that out. Firkovich claimed Israelite rather than Judean roots. The one who started with the Khazarian business was Hakhan (with an 'n) Seraya Shapshal. Shapshal completely de-judaized the Crimean Karaites and even banned hebrew! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.127.238.78 (talk) 19:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Historic designation of the Palestine region[edit]

Please comment at Historic designation of the Palestine region. Chesdovi (talk) 15:00, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Lemba people[edit]

This article as the Jewish history tempate on its talk page. Is that really appropriate? The issue has been raised at Talk:Lemba people. Dougweller (talk) 06:36, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Featured article review for Yom Kippur War[edit]

I have nominated Yom Kippur War for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 14:00, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Dead Sea Scrolls[edit]

I added the project template to Talk:Dead Sea Scrolls since the article was listed in the categories on the project page and because the sectarian texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls offer insight on Judaism practiced during the Second Temple period. Is it possible someone can review my assessment of quality & importance scales. Thanks. Mojoworker (talk) 19:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Please help, and collaborate![edit]

One man (and his collaborators) trying to delete these category:

Category:People of Jewish descent by nationality
Category:Jamaican people of Jewish descent
Jews and Judaism are both ethnicity and religion. Please help deletion. And help (collaborate) to recovery (resurrection) Category:People of Jewish descent. BevisMarks (talk) 05:50, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Alleging an editor be a "national socialist"[edit]

There is a discussion whether it is a despicable smear or not to allege that an editor be a national socialist at my (closed) RfC and at the bottom of my talk page.

My labeling this smear as "slander" (which I've clarified was used in a colloquial and non-legal sense) is now at ANI.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:12, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Or, to put it another way, your "pal" Lihaas has a userbox identifying himself as a National Socialist, and you consider it a smear for others to point this out and to draw the obvious negative conclusions from it.
It's disgraceful that you've tried to mislead this WikiProject in order to canvass support for your absurd viewpoint on this. You should be ashamed of your behaviour. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:44, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Lihaas collects user-boxes and displays hundreds, including that he is a libertarian. You picked one from those hundreds, to smear him and by association me.
You would do well to compare your edits with Lihaas's and show appropriate deference.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:56, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
No, he picked the National Socialist userbox, he added it to his userpage. "Deference", for that? Don't be ridiculous. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 09:41, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Actually, Lihaas created the National Socialist userbox, the Jobbik userbox, the L.A.O.S. userbox, the Ataka userbox and a few others. Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:11, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Lihaas also edits serious articles. What have you two done lately?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:13, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
So let's see if I've got this right, Lihaas has a userbox that says he's a National Socialist, so it's a smear for someone to point out that he has that userbox? And my right to answer that question depends on whether you think the rest of my editing is as good as his? Is that about what you're trying to say, KW? --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 22:12, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
To select one out of hundreds, most of which contradict that one. Read Geometry guy's ANI account, which lists the diffs.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


Khirbet Qeiyafa Vandalisation of Israeli history by user Zeero000,[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khirbet_Qeiyafa Please if anyone have time to take a look, all references that this inscription is Hebrew were removed, the section "Oldest Hebrew inscription" was deleted. and the whole article was rewritten in manipulative way. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tritomex (talkcontribs) 12:46, 4 November 2011‎

Actually the person who placed this notice appears to be vandalising the article as an IP, removing text and sources that refer to archaeologists discussing what script/language the thing is written in. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


Examples of manipulative editing

1. "Excavations were carried out by archaeologists Yosef Garfinkel and Saar Ganor of the Hebrew University beginning in 2007, who dated the site to 1050-970 BC by pottery styles and two burned olive pits tested for carbon-14 at Oxford University.[7] The theory that Khirbet Qeiyafa was a Judean city inhabited by 500-600 people during the reign of David and Solomon has been challenged by Israel Finkelstein.[8] Based on pottery finds at Qeiyafa and Gath, archaeologists believe the sites belonged to two distinct ethnic groups.[9][10] "

Although this sites are inaccessible, nowhere the findings of Haifa university scientists are mentioned, while Haifa university was solely responsible to examine the site and gave their verdicts regarding this issues. In fact anonymous criticism of officially established facts were written, while ALL FACTS WRITTEN BY EXCAVATION TEAM WERE SIMPLY REMOVED.


2. "Other readings are possible, and the official publication presented many possible reconstructions of the letters without attempting a translation.[21] The inscription is written left to right in a script which is probably Early Alphabetic/Proto Phoenician,[21][22] though Rollston and another expert consider that it might be written vertically.[22] Early Alphabetic differs from old Hebrew script and its immediate ancestor.[22] Rollston also disputes the claim that the language is Hebrew, arguing that the words alleged to be indicative of Hebrew either appear in other languages or don't actually appear in the inscription.[22] One expert believes it is mostly a list of names.[22] Hebrew University archaeologist Amihai Mazar said the inscription was very important, as it is the longest Proto-Canaanite text ever found.[23]

1.Who is Rollston and who is "the another" expert???

2.Where are the findings of those who examined Khirbet Qeiyafa inscription ?

3.Why all references about the Hebrew origin of text were removed?

4.Why all references that this was an Israelite city were removed?

5.What kind of edition is this "The theory that Khirbet Qeiyafa was a Judean city inhabited by 500-600 people during the reign of David and Solomon has been challenged by Israel Finkelstein.[8]"?

6.We didn't even see "that theory" which is in fact an official finding of Haifa university scientists,because it was simply censored by this people,yet we can read only the denial of "that theory" while I can not even find that Israel Finkelstein challenged that Khirbet Qeiyafa was Judean city, or inhabited by 500-600 people

7.What is this? "One expert believes it is mostly a list of names.[22]" ?? This manipulation is beyond imagination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tritomex (talkcontribs) 10:39, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


Deportation of Jews via Oslo in 1942[edit]

What ought to be the name of an article (or redirect) about the November 26, 1942 deportation of Jews via Oslo, if I or someone else were to start such an article?

(The Holocaust in Norway and SS Donau articles mention the deportation.)

From Norwegian media yesterday: "Investigation of the mass murders July 22, 2011 have top priority. But researchers seem to have forgotten November 26, 1942"; "The arrests were carried out with assistance from more than 300 Norwegians, from Statspolitiet, Kriminalpolitiet, Hirden and Germanske SS-Norge — In a [newspaper] column on page 28 and 29 in today's newspaper, Jan Erik Vold writes that the worst day in our modern [Norwegian] history, was November 26, 1942."

The quotes are from Klassekampen 2011-11-26 p.38; the following link [2] only has the first quote — the other quotes were in the infobox of the newspaper article.

--85.166.141.237 (talk) 12:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Merge of Mandate Palestine into British Mandate for Palestine[edit]

In 2010, the article "Mandate Palestine" was forked out of "British Mandate for Palestine" article, becoming an identical article since. Due to the almost complete overlap (technically both articles describe a former Mandatory geopolitical entity of Palestine under British rule, which has only one article in other languages) and ongoing confusion (some insisted that "British Mandate for Palestine" is more the name of a 1922 document and not a country), i propose to merge Mandate Palestine into British Mandate for Palestine, and make an additional article named British Mandate for Palestine (document) to prevent confusion between the document and the geopolitical entity. Please vote with a proper reasoning here.Greyshark09 (talk) 21:09, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Portal:History[edit]

Is up for FPOC. This is one of the highest (if not the highest) visibility portal on Wikipedia, I recommend commenting on it! Cheers, ResMar 23:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Ebionites and related articles[edit]

There has been a long-standing dispute on the above article relating to some proposals, particularly by Robert Eisenman in his book James the Brother of Jesus (book), and James Tabor, and his book The Jesus Dynasty, regarding whether the sources named above qualify as fringe theories as per WP:FT. While technically these articles relate to Christianity, they also deal extensively with Jewish history, particlarly Robert Eisenman's theories relating to the Dead Sea Scrolls. I had some time ago recused myself from editing the content because of some accusations of falsifying sources. However, I believe that an independent review of all the relevant articles by knowledgeable, uninvolved, editors, would be very useful. Thank you for your attention. John Carter (talk) 23:27, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Jewish settlement in Imperial Japan[edit]

I just gutted the lead of this article, which was basically a book critique, and not a summary of the historical info in the text. I'm not disputing the critique in the lead, just objecting that it was the remains of an old article with the rest of the text grafted on, grossly violating WP:LEAD. Perhaps someone here who knows their history can incorporate the relevant objections into the text where they belong. (Maybe in a final section dealing with "Popular accounts"? That's where book reports usually go.) — kwami (talk) 09:52, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Eh, never mind. I took my own advice. But the article could still use some review. It still reads as a SYNTH critique. — kwami (talk) 10:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Triplicate articles[edit]

There seem to be three articles on essentially the same subject:

Even though one can argue small differences in these titles, it is obvious the content will overlap excessively and that assumption is borne out by the current state. It ought to become one article, but what to call it and how to proceed? Zerotalk 08:03, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

A revision of Karaite and Jewish history from a fresh partisan/sectarian perspective[edit]

If any history inclined editors here are interested in Karaite history and its ramifications vis-a-vis Jewish history, an entire revision of it is being undertaken in Wikipedia right now by an avowed priest of a supposed "Islamic Mosaist" sect. For the interested, the hub/nub of this new attemtp to completely rewrite Karaite history from a purely Islamic perspective is here. warshytalk 18:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I hardly think that making sure there is a clear distinction between Turkish groups with Messianic beliefs (i.e. Karaimlar) and Jewish groups with traditional Jewish beliefs (i.e. Karaites) is revisionism. Unless you are suggesting that belief in Christ has always had a place in traditional Judaism are you? I suggest you read John Kinnamos. Kaz 17:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Request: Victor Vancier[edit]

I found myself in a dispute with user "Fairness and Truth" about the article Victor Vancier. He thinks the standing article is grossly inaccurate and unfair, I think his edits are grossly POV and partly irrelevant. So, It seems a good idea to let more people look at the article... The Banner talk 19:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Response[edit]

The article is libelous, completely inaccurate and blatantly biased:

  1. Victor Vancier is not the name that Chaim Ben Pesach uses or is known by. To call Ben Pesach by this name is like having the article on Barack Obama refer to him as Barry Soetoro, which was his childhood name. Or referring to Mohammed Ali by his English name Cassius Clay. Or referring to Malcolm X by his earlier name Malcolm Little, or Louis Farrakhan by his original name Louis Wolcott. Wikipedia recognizes in all of these cases that public figures should be referred to by the names they are best known by. To refuse to apply this same rule to Ben Pesach demonstrates a biased double standard. It can be noted within the article that Victor Vancier is Ben Pesach's English name, but the article itself should be under the headline "Chaim Ben Pesach".
  2. The article maliciously libels Ben Pesach, calling him a "virgin", claiming that he is not really Jewish and claiming that his mother is not Jewish. When I attempted to correct these flagrant libels, they were restored and I was told that I would not be allowed to correct them.
  3. The article libelously asserts that Ben Pesach formed the Jewish Task Force (JTF)"since Irv Rubin started to dissociate the JDL from Vancier because his terrorist activities had harmed their reputation". In reality, Irv Rubin committed suicide while in prison awaiting trial on charges of seeking to bomb the office of a Congressman - so to claim that Rubin was trying to change JDL's "terrorist" reputation is absurd since it was Rubin himself who gave the JDL that reputation. Ben Pesach was convicted of damaging Soviet diplomatic property to demand freedom for 2 million Russian Jews, but no one was ever injured in any of these incidents. But Rubin sought to literally blow up a Congressman. When I sought to remove this libelous twisting of the facts, the libel was restored and I was told that I would not be allowed to correct it.
  4. The article takes a handful of quotes out of context to distort their meaning and create an impression that Ben Pesach is insane. Many court cases have held that this tactic of selective quoting out of context can also constitute libelous defamation. A review of the thousands of videos that Ben Pesach and his followers have uploaded to YouTube and other sites reveals that these quotes do not accurately reflect what Ben Pesach and JTF espouse.
  5. The article libelously claims that Ben Pesach is barred from entering Israel because of his "terrorist" activities. In reality, Ben Pesach is barred because of his Kahanist views. No proof is offered that Ben Pesach is barred because of "terrorist acts", as the article libelously contends.
  6. The article libelously contends that Ben Pesach was involved in organizations "which has been outlawed in Israel and[7] were proclaimed illegal terrorist organizations in 1994 and the groups subsequently officially disbanded". As you can see from this last quote, the article is also poorly written and grammatically incorrect. In reality, Ben Pesach was never a member of the two organizations that were outlawed in 1994 and no one in Israel has ever claimed that he was. So this again is flagrantly libelous.
  7. The article deliberately omits the most important and relevant information on Ben Pesach: that he heads a movement with two forums that have thousands of members. There are over 5000 members on his English forum and 3500 members on his Hebrew forum. His Hebrew forum is comprised almost entirely of young Israeli Jews who reside in Israel, proving that Ben Pesach's organization is perfectly legal and fully functioning in the Jewish state.
  8. The article deliberately omits the other most important fact about Ben Pesach: he has uploaded thousands of videos in both Hebrew and English with millions of views. The Israeli media has reported that many Israeli Jews watch Ben Pesach's videos. I attempted to introduce proof of this in the article that I wrote, but that was removed.
  9. User:The Banner proved his bias when he restored the original article with the comment: "Your denial of terrorism has nothing to do with truth or fairness." In other words, The Banner wants the article to reflect his opinion rather than objectively reflecting the facts.
  10. The new article that I wrote is completely accurate and truthful. It objectively presents Ben Pesach and his movement. After years of allowing the most vicious libel against Ben Pesach, the least that Wikipedia should do is restore the original article and not allow anti-Semites to again introduce libelous defamations.

Fairness and Truth (talk) 15:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

This argument seems to be ongoing on several talk pages. The two of you should pick a forum where you want to discuss this and stick to it. Here are a few thoughts.
1. Fairness and truth, if you think the article violates Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living persons, the best way to resolve that is at WP:BLP.
2. You should realize that you're a very inexperienced editor in a dispute with a very experienced editor. The chances that you're right and he's wrong are consequently low.
3. I haven't carefully looked into every footnote, but the article as it is now appears to have high quality sources, mainly the New York Times. Conversely, your preferred version of the article deletes most of those sources and replaces them with lower quality sources, several of them written in Hebrew, which is a language most editors of English Wikipedia do not read and therefore cannot verify.
4. You would be wise to be circumspect about the use of words like "libelous". That sort of talk puts you at risk of running afoul of WP:NLT. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 20:32, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
The current article on Ben Pesach is a malicious hatchet job pure and simple. There are no sources cited for the bogus claims that Ben Pesach is a "virgin", that he and his mother are just pretending to be Jewish, that he formed JTF because "terrorism" was hurting Irv Rubin's reputation, that Ben Pesach was a member of organizations which have been outlawed in Israel, that he was banned from entering Israel because of "terrorist acts", etc. All of these claims are completely unsourced, absurd and false. As far as high quality sources, when speaking about large forums or widely seen videos, there is no source better than links to the forums themselves and the sites that host the videos. In regard to those sources that are in Hebrew, when speaking about activity in Israel, there will be sources in Hebrew. In terms of experience versus inexperience, I am far more familiar with the relevant subject matter than the person who is restoring the biased article. Finally, if an article is libelous, it is the duty of Wikipedia members to bring this to the attention of all parties concerned. Should a Wikipedia member be silent if he sees libelous material which can create serious legal problems for Wikipedia, or should he be responsible enough to alert everyone so that the problem can be corrected? Fairness and Truth (talk) 01:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

History of Palestine Template[edit]

Could you guys take a look at {{History of Palestine}}, it seams to exclude Jewish history. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 21:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Start reading again, it is there, but almost at the bottom. The Banner talk 22:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Portal Review[edit]

I submitted Portal:Judaism for a portal peer review. Take a look and contribute! ypnypn (talk) 01:55, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Philo of Alexandria copy and paste from Jewish Encyclopedia[edit]

Philo is almost exclusively copied and pasted from the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia article Philo Judaeus. While the JE is in the public domain due to its date, copy and paste is almost never allowed (Wikipedia:Copy-paste) and there are certainly better, more up to date, and diverse sources to create a better article on Philo.

I have placed a banner at the top of the article and started a section on the talk page Talk:Philo#Copy_and_paste_from_Jewish_Encyclopedia. I am willing to host a User page to start work on a new article while leaving the copied material until it can be replaced. However, starting from scratch might be a better idea, as some of the sections are very weak, even if they were properly cited. It would also be more open to all editors. Please continue this discussion on the Philo talk page. Mnnlaxer (talk) 18:41, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't completely understand the intended procedure here. Are you saying that the two entire sections you have removed so far ('Influence of Hellenism,' and 'Stoic Influences') were removed because they are incorrect/innacurate and have no place in the article at all, or they were temporarily removed until they can be rewritten and reinserted back in the article? Even though the JE may be outdated by more recent material it is still a pretty good, reliable, and accurate source, and in general a solid foundation from where to start, in matters of Jewish history. I don't think it can be simply completely dismissed just on the basis of the age of the material. Thanks, warshytalk 19:05, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I've replaced the Copy and Past template with the Template:Jewish_Encyclopedia and Template:Refimprove templates. The article still needs a lot of work. Please pitch in and help out! Mnnlaxer (talk) 21:14, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment[edit]

Please comment on Talk:Land_of_Israel#Usage_by_Palestinians. Debresser (talk) 11:55, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Moshe Friedman & Holocaust Denial[edit]

Have tried extensive truthful changes and their sources dont even say what they claim in the Holocaust denier Moshe Friedman article. Pls help and comment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moshe_FriedmanTellyuer1 (talk) 05:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Haviva Reick[edit]

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Haviva Reick#Requested move, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 04:31, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion[edit]


Dreyfus Affair[edit]

Let's work on improving this article. Dreyfus Affair — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJ-Joker16 (talkcontribs) 23:32, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Japanese-Jewish Common Ancestor Theory[edit]

I just came across this funny article that presents a remote fringe theory in the words of the theory's proponents, but never actually points out that no serious historian buys it. I really wanted to divide the article into sections (one for each quotation) and add the sentence "However, this view has not achieved mainstream accepts among scholars of either Jewish or Japanese history."

However, I don't actually have a source by a credible historian that even acknowledges this viewpoint, so I can't actually provide a source for that statement. Could someone with more expertise in this area take a look at it? Thanks!

elvenscout742 (talk) 07:22, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Famous photos of the holocaust, on which individuals were identified.[edit]

Recently it was in the news about the passing of “Yosef Chaim Enzil”, one of the people identified in the famous Buchenwald Concentration Camp photo on the day of the liberation. He was one of about eight people identified.

This got me thinking. Maybe famous photos of the holocaust where individuals were identified should get a page on Wikipedia?

Something like this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Situation_Room_(photograph)

Bloger (talk) 22:23, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Yiddish in Palestine/Israel[edit]

The article Yiddish language is rather poorly sourced and could benefit from some effort in that direction. Recently someone added a "source" consisting of an essay by a person without obvious qualifications on the Chabad website. It relates to the history of Yiddish versus Hebrew in Palestine/Israel, a topic which is very well covered by accessible academic sources of high quality. Someone with more time on their hands than I have might like to improve this situation. Zerotalk 17:30, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Jerusalem lead RfC[edit]

There is currently a request for comments open about the lead section of the Jerusalem article, and all editors are welcome to give their opinions. The dispute over the lead section is one of the oldest on Wikipedia, dating back to 2003, and focuses on whether or not it is neutral to say that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. The discussion was mandated by the Arbitration Committee, and its result will be binding for three years. The discussion is located at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jerusalem, and will be open until 22 June 2013 (UTC). — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Jacob Schiff bio reference question[edit]

I recently noticed this edit on the Jacob Schiff article and questioned the validity of the changes. Since the content (both before and after) is attributed to the book Under the Sign of the Scorpion with no actual citation, I browsed thru an online copy (PDF version) to try to verify the content (the telegram statement is verified, sort of, on page 276 [PDF page 272]), which entailed a fair amount of searching and skimming. Maybe I just didn't read enough, but overall, the book struck me as something that could make The Protocols look like a pro-Zionist diatribe; every villainous action mentioned is specifically identified as having been performed by a Jew, a Mason, or Masonic Jews (like B'nai B'rith). I know nothing about the author, Jüri Lina, and don't really have enough facts to raise a valid concern at WP:RSN, but under the WP:DUCK theory, I wanted to ask if anyone here has any familiarity with this work and its suitability for use in Wikipedia. Fat&Happy (talk) 01:47, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

This journal article by Weiss-Wendt describes Jüri Lina as a leading Estonian holocaust denier. I'd be happier with this assessment if Weiss-Wendt's article was not itself full of polemic overstatement, but without evidence to the contrary there is no way Lina should be used as a source. Incidentally, you can open a WP:RSN section just based on the information you give here. A consensus there, which is very likely, would be a defensible reason to remove Lina from articles. Zerotalk 03:22, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Moshe Peer[edit]

I saw a comment on Facebook about Moshe Peer. When you try to find information about him, the top Google hits are from Holocaust denialists (see for example the denialist site Metapedia), who love to point out that his claim of being gassed six times in Bergen-Belsen concentration camp is clearly false, with the implication that all holocaust survivor stories are lies. Are there enough good sources to write an authoritative article about him? --Slashme (talk) 17:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

If it's a common holocaust denial argument it would go in that article. I don't know anything about him so I don't know what the real story is. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:12, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Jewish question‎[edit]

Please take part in this discussion, unless you want users with 115 edits to decide for you. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 17:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Is Judaism a race/ethnicity or a religion? IP editor edits instances, making them say it is a religion[edit]

Just as a heads up an IP editor is editing instances of Judaism insisting that it is a religion and not a race or an ethnicity: Special:Contributions/98.100.17.34 If the edits are justified, then so be it. But it's good to know about these edits. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:01, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

It seems like this IP isn't active anymore. Anyway, the article "Who is a Jew" may answer your question. -Yambaram (talk) 23:49, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:Pogrom victims[edit]

Category:Pogrom victims, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for possible deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. XOttawahitech (talk) 04:31, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

As close as the end result was, the category was eventually deleted. I wouldn't call it a shame but I think this isn't something a Wikipedia Project which goes by the name "Jewish history Project" should be happy about. -Yambaram (talk) 23:49, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

1947 Aden pogrom[edit]

The article is currently unsourced, and requires attention and expansion from editors familiar with the subject matter, of which I am not. Coretheapple (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the article does have three sources currently. As no professional expert is really needed to improve this article, I encourage anyone to do so. -Yambaram (talk) 23:49, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Category:Children of Holocaust survivors has been proposed for deletion.[edit]

Category:Children of Holocaust survivors has been proposed for deletion. Anyone interested in commenting can do so here. This category is listed on the talk page as being within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history.__ E L A Q U E A T E 06:07, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

RfC: Pogrom list inclusion criteria[edit]

An RfC has been opened at Talk:Pogrom, regarding the appropriate WP:LSC for the events listed. Comments are requested with thanks. Oncenawhile (talk) 11:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Jews and Communism[edit]

I have submitted the article "Jews and Communism" for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jews and Communism. TFD (talk) 06:12, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Dispute at Talk:Invasion of Banu Qurayza[edit]

The Invasion of Banu Qurayza article may profit from input by people more knowledgeable than me. The way I understand it, there's a dispute at Talk:Invasion of Banu Qurayza#About Daniel C. Peterson and Martin Lings about the reliability and the appropriate coverage of some sources. Huon (talk) 21:15, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

There's also a discussion as to whether this should simply be part of Banu Qurayza which covers the incident (which possibly is not best described as an invasion anyway). Dougweller (talk) 21:42, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Please share your opinion[edit]

Hi, on Category talk:People of Jewish descent there is an ongoing discussion about whether or not sub-categories of people of Middle Eastern (and Southwest Asian) decent should be included in categories of people who reliable sources say are of Jewish descent. It has been discussed before here and on various other occasions, but apparently this debate never reached an official consensus. Since this topic is directly related to this WikiProject, you're welcome to participate in it. Thanks, Yambaram (talk) 05:55, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Merger discussion[edit]

I've tagged Jews and the slave trade to be merged into Judaism and slavery. I'm requesting further comments here, where I make my case: Talk:Judaism and slavery#merger proposal. My argument, in brief, is that I don't see any reason for two separate articles, especially when neither of them are particularly long right now. I note that only Judaism has two distinct pages on the practice of slavery as well as views of slavery, as opposed to Islam and Christianity, who have far longer pages. I also wonder if Judaism and slavery should be renamed Jewish views on slavery, in line with the Islamic and Christian pages. mikeman67 (talk) 01:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Announcing an Editathon[edit]

I'd like to announce an upcoming Editathon on Women in Jewish History on this Project Page. Is there a designated place for Events or should I create a new section? Bibliosaurusrex (talk) 00:55, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

This response is not relevant for this event since it already took place (hope it was nice), but to the best of my knowledge there is no such designated place for events. This talk page, as well as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism, are the best and most appropriate places to make such posts. Yambaram (talk) 21:43, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Should "History of the Jews in southern Florida" be converted into an article about the Miami area?[edit]

I notice History of the Jews in southern Florida is not sourced to good sources. I want to turn it into an article relating to Miami and its suburbs. Anyone in favor? WhisperToMe (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi 'WhisperToMe' and thanks for bringing this up. Actually, I think it'd be a much better idea if we could turn it into a more inclusive article about the Jews in the state of Florida, add more information to it and then rename it "History of the Jews in Florida". The current article definitely needs some work, and I plan to improve on it soon and to expand the template Template:History of the Jews in the United States (anyone willing to go ahead is welcome). Yambaram (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Coming late to this, but I agree with User:Yambaram. I was brought up in Miami and Coral Gables and would expect a separate large section on Dade County for obvious reasons, but I think that the entire state should be the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talkcontribs) 08:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

category emptying?[edit]

The following categories have been tagged for deletion because empty. I had edited these cats in the past, and I'm pretty sure they weren't empty at the time. However, I don't know of any way to tell what was previously in them. Has anyone seen removals of these categories from articles pop up on their watchlist? Or are there articles which clearly belong and were previously there, that we can find and then see who did the removals (I wouldn't be surprised if it was one editor). This is a wikipedia mystery, help needed.

  1. Category:Antisemitism_in_the_Netherlands
  2. Category:Antisemitism_in_Lebanon
  3. Category:Antisemitism_in_Jordan
  4. Category:Antisemitism_in_Bahrain

thanks, --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 23:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Antisemitism in Norway[edit]

Input in the discussion here would be appreciated. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 20:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

The Holocaust in France[edit]

Dear all,

I've just created this article using a translation of a French article, but it's pretty stubby. It's a quite high importance article and we would all welcome contributions to it. Brigade Piron (talk) 07:22, 2 May 2014 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jews_and_Communism_(2nd_nomination)[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jews_and_Communism_(2nd_nomination). Thanks. MarkBernstein (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Silberman[edit]

Hello, Jewish history experts. This old Afc submission about a historian was rather rambling and not written with NPOV in mind. I've been fixing it up, but I can't take it any further because I don't know where to look for information. Is this a notable writer, and are there additional sources that could be added? —Anne Delong (talk) 01:31, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Editor intending major changes at Biblical Mount Sinai[edit]

There's a discussion at Talk:Biblical Mount Sinai which needs input. A new editor wants to make major changes but his outline suggestions would violate WP:NPOV and WP:FRINGE. Input and eyes would be useful. Dougweller (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Map deletions[edit]

There's a discussion at Tuqu' talk, and Halhul talk, and Dura talk that may interest some of you.

In short, the 3 articles discuss the history of the locations from Biblical times.

But when a map reflecting the text was added, the map was deleted (e.g., here) on the basis that the map was: a) not related to archeological evidence; b) undue; and c) "probably" a "myth".

Views of the community might be helpful. --Epeefleche (talk) 18:33, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Rudolf Höss[edit]

The article could use some work. The lede isn't thoroughly written and it's a bit short on details for many things. A copy edit is needed too. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:01, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Gyula Gömbös Edits Anti-Semitic?[edit]

I'm very concerned about edits made to Gyula Gömbös by 78.92.108.24. I'm no expert on Gömbös but these edits have a subtle appearance of being a POV defense or whitewashing of Gömbös. I even find some of the edits subtly anti-Semitic in themselves. The fact that these are the only edits made by an editor with no username or profile makes me even more suspicious.

Here are the quotes pertaining to Jews.

"Gömbös also supported certain political actions against Hungary’s Jews, having noted that Kun and many of the ministers in his Communist government were Jews. There was widespread sentiment in the country that the Jews were the primary backers of Communism."

"The Jewish leadership under Stem and Szanto supported the appointment of Gömbös and his programs in exchange for Gömbös promising not to enact any anti-Jewish laws and through his policies does not cause economic harm to the Jews. Gömbös kept his promise, and did not enact any anti-Jewish laws and his economic programs were favorable to the mercantile interests."

I'm afraid I don't have time to pursue this further at the moment, but I at least wanted to call attention to these concerns.Hirschjoshua (talk) 03:29, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

The article has almost no inline citations, so it is impossible to know where the material came from. The same is true of the above complaint. Only an argument based on reliable sources can resolve the question. Zerotalk 10:10, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
True, but what about this bit: "Gömbös did not enact any anti-Jewish laws and his economic programs were favorable to the mercantile interests." Does this not strike you as classic anti-Semitic language, implicitly equating Jews and "mercantile interests"? And what about the fact that both the sources are in Hungarian? I wasn't able to find anything significant online in English on Gömbös. I do know a good book about the Holocaust in Hungary, which I don't own unfortunately. Like I said, if I had the time, I'd seek out the book and see what I can do, but it doesn't happen to be a priority of mine right now. I guess I was hoping someone would do it for me! Come to think of it, I should post this on the WikiProject Hungary talk page.Hirschjoshua (talk) 20:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Groups claiming affiliation with Israelites[edit]

Needs attention. So does Israelites, see Talk:Israelites where I've removed a big chunk of recently added material relating to groups claiming Israelite ancestry. Dougweller (talk) 11:18, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Replacement of the word 'God' with YHWH[edit]

Just noticed that this has been done at Israelites. Is this appropriate? Thanks Dougweller (talk) 11:22, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

The reason given is "Yahweh is a linguistically retarded estimation)". Dougweller (talk) 05:42, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
after I saw him doing this on maybe 50 articles, changing quotations, changing "Canaanite god Yahweh" to YHWH, between that and other problems, WP:ANI#New editor with multiple problems, restoring copyvio, changing Yahweh to YHWH in perhaps 50 articles, etc. Dougweller (talk) 14:49, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Misattribution of Ashkenazi Hebrew to Yiddish and non-attribution to Ashkenazi Hebrew rampant[edit]

Nearly every time I look at an article with a Hebrew word in the title or of Hebrew origin, I see that whoever has included Hebrew in the lead seems to have no awareness of the existence of different liturgical dialects of Hebrew. These contributors seem to only understand Hebrew as being the Sephardic Hebrew-based modern standard and regularly misattribute traditional Ashkenazi Hebrew to Yiddish when the two are very different and the former is also used by non-Yiddish speakers. For example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_diaspora

It gives "Hebrew" galut and "Yiddish" golus. When galut and golus are both Hebrew and both written the same way. In Temani Hebrew, the same word is pronounced goluth or joluth, but you would not say it's Judeo-Arabic. It's a Hebrew word in one of its many dialectal manifestations. Sometimes Yiddishized Hebrew words are written out in full Yiddish orthography like in Shabbat (though the Yiddish "shabbes" is spelled in romanized Ashkenazi Hebrew "shabbos" in the article, ugh...) or Hazzan (khazn in Yiddish rather than khazzon in Ashkenazi Hebrew) and those are fine, because the Yiddish and Hebrew are different, but in other circumstances it's inappropriate.

Granted, there is some overlap, but there are plenty of languages used by Ashkenazi Jews which use the Ashkenazi Hebrew so often given as "Yiddish." If the pronunciations do not originate in Yiddish or are particularly Yiddish in form, they should be designated as Ashkenazi Hebrew which is the variety of Hebrew that Yiddish gets its Hebrew vocabulary from so this would be implicit in the designation as Ashkenazi Hebrew rather than misleading readers into believing that Ashkenazi Hebrew pronunciation is the Yiddishized pronunciation which is incorrect and is what several articles seem to imply.

As far as I'm aware, there are really only two differences in individual sounds. 1) When tet has no dagesh it's pronounced as an /s/ in Ashkenazi Hebrew. 2) Sephardic Hebrew has merged patah and qamatz but Ashkenazic Hebrew maintains the distinction with an "o" pronunciation of qamatz. Otherwise, in terms of spelling them out they would be the same. The Hebrew tag should require some qualification beyond "Hebrew" i.e. Modern, Ashkenazi, Temani, etc., some subjects for example are only of interest to the Ashkenazi community and would appear odd in modern Hebrew so only Ashkenazi Hebrew would be given for those certain articles.

These articles should ideally look something like this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jews

Or maybe this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tallit

...where the distinction is made clear. Some standard should be enforced, the lead is different in every article with different kinds of attributions all over the place making everything seem sloppy, disorganized, and uncoordinated. Here are some examples of mis-attribution, non-attribution, and general messiness:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zemirot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalom_bayit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashrut

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tkhine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiryas_Tosh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazel_tov

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seudah_Shlishit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misnagdim

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinnot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_midrash


-Devin Ronis (d.s.ronis) (talk) 17:54, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Archaeological finds Roland de Vaux at Qumran[edit]

In the book is written - de Vaux died in 1971 without having published all of the material from his excavations...Although we still await a final excavation report, in 1994 Humbert and a Belgian archaeologist name Alain Chambon published a large volume described as the first in a series....Although this volume contains some previously unpublished information, there is still much that is unpublished and inaccessible.

As is currently the situation is with the full publication of all archaeological finds Roland de Vaux at Qumran? Published, planned to be published or unpublished, will never be published? Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ James A. Paul. Human rights in Syria, Middle East Watch. pg. 91.
  2. ^ Willem Adriaan Veenh. Case studies on human rights and fundamental freedoms: a world survey, Volume 1, BRILL, 1975. pg. 90. ISBN 9024717795.
  3. ^ American Jewish year book, Volume 50 and American Jewish year book, Volume 50, American Jewish Committee, 1949. pg. 441.