I would like to call attention to [[Abraham's family tree]] because the family tree as I see it is wrong according to Torah. There is no mention of Keturah and her sons. I feel this is very important to change as Abraham was the first Hebrew and the first patriarch of the Jewish Nation. I just don't know how to do it as it seems that the tree is somehow already set without parts in the edit. Thanks. <ref>{{citeweb |url=https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/698144/jewish/What-happened-to-Abrahams-other-descendants.htm}}</ref>
I would like to call attention to [[Abraham's family tree]] because the family tree as I see it is wrong according to Torah. There is no mention of Keturah and her sons. I feel this is very important to change as Abraham was the first Hebrew and the first patriarch of the Jewish Nation. I just don't know how to do it as it seems that the tree is somehow already set without parts in the edit. Thanks. [[User:Vinnypatel|Vinnypatel]] ([[User talk:Vinnypatel|talk]]) 15:34, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
This page 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.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
Would members like to create a page about the Aleph Institute N.E. Region. Current page is only regarding Florida branch. Helpfulguy101 17:34 17 December 2020 (UTC)
I'll note that the result of the brief discussion was that "parashah" is correct. From my rudimentary Hebrew, this agrees with the way it is "pointed" in our article (פָּרָשָׁה). A Google search suggests the explanation that "parsha" is the Yiddish for "parashah" (which is what I guessed to begin with). Noach (parashah) has just been moved and Bereshit (parashah) is the only other use, having been moved in February 2019 by Lambiam. As mentioned in the move discussion, if "parashah" is "correct", there are many other articles that use "(parsha)" in the title as a disambiguator, which should be moved and probably edited for consistency. This is a search for those. —[AlanM1 (talk)]—21:33, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the English Wiktionary also spells the term parashah and transcribes Hebrew פָּרָשָׁה as "pārāšâ". The Hebrew Wiktionary gives "parasha" as the pronunciation of פרשה. (The Yiddish Wiktionary is of no help here; it does not assign a language code and gives a circular definition without transcription or indication of the pronunciation.) The form parashah seems to be the more common one in English texts, but parsha is also quite common, so it is appropriate to have redirects from [[<Torah section> (parsha)]] to [[<Torah section> (parashah)]]. --Lambiam23:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the above: all should be moved, and redirects kept. I don't think that "parsha" is the Yiddish variation of "parasha". The reason for the alternative spelling is perhaps that the vowel under the "r" is often reduced in Hebrew and is not usually pronounced. In this case it is, but often it isn't, and intuitively people may have reduced it. Debresser (talk) 15:02, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion does not change the main technical conclusions here, that all should be moved and redirect kept. The vowel under the "r" does not get "often reduced" in modern spoken common Israeli Hebrew, only maybe in Yiddish/Ashkenazi pronunciation by mostly Yiddish speaking charedim, in my view. Thanks, warshy(¥¥)17:48, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To the contrary, the real reduced vowels, called hataf, are not pronounced in modern Hebrew. This is not something that is specific to any group.
I am not putting anybody aside. It is just a common observation. Charedim in general speak more Yiddish as a common day-to-day language, and hence their Hebrew pronunciation has a stronger Yiddish accent, which is general stresses the first syllables (the farthest from the end of a word) rather than the last one, which is the one stressed in common Israeli (Sephardic) Hebrew speaking. In language pronunciation that stresses beginning and middle syllables rather than ending syllables (English is another language where this is done), the middle vowel is then more likely to get "often reduced." This is my theory. Thanks, warshy(¥¥)19:56, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the case of the word "parasha", the first and last syllable are stressed in Hebrew, as can be seen in Megilat Esther from the "meteg" under the "p", while the middle one is not stressed. It is therefore not something that is connected to Yiddish. Debresser (talk) 07:17, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You apparently don't know much about Yiddish either, do you? In Yiddish, the stress is more often on the penultimate syllable than on the last. Which in this case would mean the "p", which makes you very wrong. Debresser (talk) 07:24, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And you, of course, are right as always. I was referring specifically to the common spoken language stress, not written grammar, and as regards this stress the common spoken Hebrew stress is the last syllable, and the Yiddish common stress is the penultimate. As is usually the case in English also. That is why in America, most Hebrew words are commonly pronounced the Yiddish way: shabbes and not shabbat, suka and not sukkah, havdala and not havdalah, matza and not matzah, chutzpa and not chutzpah, parsha and not parashah, and so on and so forth. You should get the drift. But enough of this narishkeit. You are always right anyhow, so there is no need to reply any more. Thanks, warshy(¥¥)17:26, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Jewish and/or Israeli newspapers have to follow the same rules regarding reliability. That being said, "Most of the sources of the article come from Israeli or Jewish newspapers, which may not be suitable as their reliability is questionable. " is a very troubling sentence. I would ask @Berrely: to explain it and see if he was talking about newspapers in general, or just for this article (which is still troubling). Sir Joseph(talk)05:21, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I genuinely have no idea why I wrote that, as it clearly was a wrong and inappropriate thing to say. I think I just wasn't thinking straight at the time. I sincerely apologise for that statement. Regardless, the only reliable source I can find (at least based on WP:RSP) in that article is from Jerusalem Post, which doesn't appear to cover the subject in significant coverage. The majority of the other sources are about a poll the subject carries out, not the subject itself. I once again apologise for my earlier statement, I genuinely have no idea what made me write that. I have since removed the comment. I am very sorry for the comment, and the inconvenience I have caused. — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs08:23, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Israeli and Jewish newspapers have varying levels of reliability. In the UK, the The Jewish Chronicle and the Jewish Tribune can be considered reliable, but the Yated and Hamodia, not so much. It should also depend on the topic and the writer, so on matters relating to history and halacha, Yated and Hamodia can be considered okay. ScrupulousScribe (talk) 17:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge proposal for Hillula of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai
I've tagged the MV Missourian (1921) article for this WP as she was used to transport Jewish migrants from Argentina and Tunisia to Israel. There may be some categories that need to be added to the article, so please feel free to add them. Mjroots (talk) 19:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This article could use some attention if anyone from this project has time. It would be nice to get rid of that tag that has been there for five years.4meter4 (talk) 15:17, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Book order in the Hebrew Bible
Is there any systematic information in Wikipedia about the differing order of books in versions (Masoretic, Septuagint, etc.) of the Hebrew Bible (Christian Old Testament)? I haven't found anything, although a few articles do mention the existence of ordering differences. I propose that we start an article on this topic, provisionally "Book order in the Hebrew Bible". Any thoughts? Any offers? Feline Hymnic (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Painting17: Thanks. Those articles mentions the existence of the different orderings but don't give any discussion about how or why these differences arose. Shouldn't something somewhere go into more depth? Hence my proposal for that new article. Feline Hymnic (talk) 19:56, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Ilhan_Omar#RFC has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.
Potential Christian bias on Wikipedia
As I read through the articles of Tanakh and Ketuvim, I noticed that much of it was clearly written by Christians. For instance, "Song of Songs" was frequently written as "Song of Solomon", despite (from my experience) no Jew ever referring to it as such. Obviously, Christians call it "Song of Solomon", but these are articles specifically written about Judaism. Does anyone have any thoughts on this matter? Painting17 (talk) 15:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused where you are looking. Tanakh is a redirect to Hebrew Bible and there is only one mention of Song of Solomon where it is "Shīr Hashīrīm (שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים) – Song of Songs, also known as Song of Solomon (on Passover)". And Ketuvim only calls it Song of Songs, never Song of Solomon.Naraht (talk) 21:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Naraht The reason those two articles only reference SoSolomon once is that I edited a section that kept referring to it as SoSolomon. The part I edited was identical on both articles, and all other mentions were SoSongs. This leads me to think that the section was copy-pasted from a Christian website, which is a different problem. I am also well aware that Tanakh is a redirect to "Hebrew Bible". Painting17 (talk) 21:38, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Shem HaMephorash, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you.
Hi! Is anyone available to lend an eye to this article? It needs a new name for sure, but I'm not sure what that should be. Jewish community of Louisville, Kentucky? Possibly Orthodox Jewish community? There doesn't seem to be anything about this neighborhood having a name, Dutchman's Lane could possibly also work since the businesses seemed centered around it, although the synagogue has moved. Thanks! Not watching here, so please ping if needed. StarMississippi18:16, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On the Languages panel in the sidebar of the article Jerusalem Faction (a community in Israel), the article was linked to the Hebrew article he:בני תורה (מפלגה), about the Jerusalem Faction's political party. However, a Hebrew article about the actual community was recently written – he:הפלג הירושלמי – and the English article should therefore be relinked. Can anyone take care of that? Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 19:49, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Language links operate through Wikidata, so to change which pages on one wiki are associated with which on another, you just have to go to the Wikidata page and change the sitelinks there. From the en:Jerusalem Faction page, in the sidebar under "Tools" there is a link to "Wikidata item"; clicking that takes us to the Wikidata page. The problem here is that Jerusalem Faction (the community/political organization) was linked with the Wikidata item for Bnei Torah (the political party), instead of the Wikidata item for the Jerusalem Faction. I went and fixed it (by editing the sitelinks at the bottom of the Wikidata pages), so it should be correct now! (Though I will note that I can't read Hebrew, so I'm just hoping that Google Translate and what you said are both correct.) Aerin17 (t • c) 20:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Remphan
This article Remphan, relating to an obscure idol mentioned in the old testament, has been filled with self-published sources and wikisource articles, and basically turned into a long conspiracy theory rant with sections like this:
"In the modern age, some have associated the Zionist emphasis on the Star of David to represent Judaism as being related to this scriptural "Star of Remphan" that was condemned as idolatry. It has also been suggested as an "obscure" reference to the Antichrist, or by the Jewish Encyclopedia as being a reference to a "Star of Abomination".
The section above uses as a reference a self-published source. I removed the non reliably-sourced material, only to see the editor who added them (and this is the only article he's edited) revert my edits. Any additional input would be appreciated. Drsmoo (talk) 02:22, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - " relating to an obscure idol mentioned in the old testament," the statement is incorrect and/or misleading. The idol is mentioned in the New Testament only, not the "Old." It is assumed by Christian exegesis of the New Testament to be related to another obscure term in the prophet Amos in the Hebrew Bible. Just to clarify. Thank you, warshy(¥¥)13:43, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As a person with not much of a biblical education, I have to admit I found that article impossible to understand. Ideally Wiki articles should be explaining things to non specialists so I wonder if there is a problem with the quality of the writing and explanation as well as the sourcing - maybe partly to do with the mention of fringe concepts as you allege. --Dan Carkner (talk) 14:40, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please pass on to 'someone'
I've just now reviewed the results of someone moving the page Cantillation to Hebrew cantillation. While saying cantillation is a broader subject and needs a disambiguation page sounds fine, the fact that they moved the page in 2019 without fixing any of the ~260 usages of the link Cantillation is beyond distressing. I've found only 3 of those 260 that aren't actually about Hebrew cantillation.
Having now ranted at that soul, I'm too disheartened to approach the repair work needed. If any of y'all can think who or what group might want to fix all this, please pass this disaster description onwards to them. I suppose AWB might be in order, but sheesh, the mess people make! Depressing. Shenme (talk) 06:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing this out... I've gone ahead and (manually) fixed the links, except for on user pages, talk pages, etc. –Ploni (talk) 19:53, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
compiling HTML page with verses from Masoretic Text
am not Jewish, and have little experience with the Jewish script and language. however am trying to compile an HTML page with verses from the Hebrew Scriptures, on my mobile phone, that is a learning exercise on small part of the Hebrew alphabet..ideally would like to copy the verses from a reputable website, with an accurate edition of the Hebrew Masoretic text, and all the diacritic marks..would appreciate some guidelines on where to start, how to do this.. Gfigs (talk) 19:39, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
seem to be facing the same problem, copy pasting Hebrew text from PDFs, that text is reversed, some letters, and most of the diacritics are being lost. is this a common problem, or will updating PDF reader resolve this?.besides, do not really know what would be the most accurate Masoretic text to use online?. Gfigs (talk) 23:10, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gfigs, this doesn't appear to be a Wikipedia-related question. I would recommend visiting a website development- or phone-related community forum. –Ploni (talk) 15:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Thank for inquiring. I checked the opening sentence, and the expression given (Trey asar) is indeed Aramaic, not Hebrew, and it does mean "The Twelve [Prophets]." So the opening paragraph does look OK to me. Thank you, warshy(¥¥)16:41, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! But that raises another question: given that the book is written in Hebrew, surely the Hebrew title should be given, not the Aramaic title? The lead currently gives the title in Aramaic and Greek. I can understand why Greek is mentioned second, given the historical significance of the Septuagint. But I do not understand what an Aramaic title is doing there at all. Adpete (talk) 22:10, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I checked my own preferred printed version and it does give the name/title in Hebrew (I thought it also used the common Aramaic title used mostly in modern printed versions of the Tanach) So I went ahead and added the Hebrew title also. Hope this resolves your doubts? Thank you, warshy(¥¥)15:56, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to call attention to Abraham's family tree because the family tree as I see it is wrong according to Torah. There is no mention of Keturah and her sons. I feel this is very important to change as Abraham was the first Hebrew and the first patriarch of the Jewish Nation. I just don't know how to do it as it seems that the tree is somehow already set without parts in the edit. Thanks. Vinnypatel (talk) 15:34, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
