Talk:List of British Jews

Please read before editing A credible source must be provided for each name, showing that the person is or was Jewish and a British citizen (subject). If the source is online, you can add an embedded link like this [1] after the name, or if it's a book, a Harvard reference like this (Smith 2005). Then ideally, a full citation should be added to a References section, but if you can't do that, do please at least add the source after the name.

Note that the following criteria for inclusion have been agreed:

1. Someone is Jewish ONLY if there is a REPUTABLE source saying explicitly that they are Jews. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources.
2. There must be a source saying EXPLICITLY that they themselves are Jews.
3. It is NOT sufficient to cite a "source" saying they are of "Jewish ancestry".
4. It is NOT sufficient to cite a "source" saying a parent or grandparent was Jewish.
5. It is NOT sufficient to cite popular beliefs or stories (e.g. like belonging to the Kabbalah Centre) that could supposedly "make" anyone "Jewish".
6. Anything that does not meet the above criteria violates Wikipedia:No original research and should be deleted.

---

Archives of past Talk pages:

• Archive 1: November 2005 – March 2006

---

JYB references

There are a number of references given in this article to "JYB", often "JYB p. 212". As I'm sure everyone is aware, the Jewish Year Book, is, in fact, a Year Book. That is, it publishes a new version every year. Could proper references for these please be provided, listing the specific year? Also, could someone explain why there are so many references to that specific page, 212? It looks a bit odd. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I think that when the JYB was first cited, only the (then) latest edition, 2005, was cited, so all references without a year are to 2005. I'll check. There is a section in every recent edition that lists current Jewish MPs, members of the Privy Council, Fellows of the Royal Society, etc, and most references to the JYB refer to that. There is also a "Who's Who of British Jewry" that is referenced occasionally. Since people are removed when they retire or die, it is also necessary to refer to older editions. - Newport 12:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Have you had a chance to check yet? Jayjg ^(talk) 19:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, everywhere where the year is not stated, it's 2005. - Newport 11:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Without wishing to be antagonistic, could I ask how the Year Book phrases these lists? Does it say "List of Jewish foos"? Are there individual bios on the people as well? Does it anywhere state its criteria for including people? Would you be willing to post those here, "Newport"? Grace Note 04:07, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

deleted personal attacks. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind remarks. I hope I'll have the opportunity to talk with you further before you are banned from editing here. Grace Note 03:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

An open note to the editors of this page: why doesw Gracenote get to decide a) the qualifications for listing here; and b) which sources are reputable enough for sourcing purposes. The Jewish Yearbook is widely considered a highly reputable authoritative source. How does Gracenote get to unilaterally decide that it no longer qualifies? Did I miss the section in the Wikipedia rules that Gracenote is the final authority on all things Jewish? And who is Gracenote, what are his qualifications, what are his biases. This is getting downright ridiculous.Incorrect 06:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Newport, you didn't bother replying to my note. Consequently, in a couple of days I am going to remove all names that are sourced to the Jewish Year Book. Simply appearing in a book whose name includes the word "Jewish" does not make a person Jewish. Grace Note 03:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

deleted personal attack. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

There seemed no need to reply, as I have already given the relevant information. The JYB has a section with lists of Jewish privy counsellors, peers, MPs, etc. Obviously, the inclusion of a name in such a list is a statement by the editors of the JYB that this person is Jewish. The JYB also has a "Who's Who" section with brief biographies of some notable British Jews. Many people are in more than one list; for example, Lord Moser is both a life peer and a Fellow of the British Academy. He is also in the "Who's Who" section, but not everyone in the lists is. Conversely, Eric Moonman is in the "Who's Who" but not currently in any lists, though he was in the list of Jewish MPs while he was an MP. There is no requirement in any policy that sources have to provide biographies of Jewish people, or that they have to state the crireria they use. On the contrary, to query the criteria of a reputable source would be original research. - Newport 11:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Do the lists say, specifically, "List of Jewish privy councillors"? I am not querying their criteria, you'll note; that's a strawman. I am simply asking whether they do meet our criteria. Grace Note 06:04, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

The section is Jewish Privy Counsellors, Peers, MPs, etc. The individual lists are not so headed, but that is not necessary. The question of the criteria for inclusion was raised, so I answered it. - Newport 11:41, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't quite understand. You are saying that the lists are not "list of Jewish foos"? But the section is headed "Jewish foos"? Or are you saying that there is nothing in there to say that the lists are of Jews and one just assumes it from the fact it is the "Jewish Year Book"? Could you please give the explicit wording a/ of the lists that you are relying on as sources and b/ of the part of the year book that you claim meets the criteria for inclusion? Please read the criteria given at the top of this page so that you are quite sure that these lists meet them. Grace Note 01:58, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Let me explain again. The section is Jewish Privy Counsellors, Peers, MPs, etc. The individual lists within this section are not so headed; for example, the first one is headed "Privy Councillors". However, obviously we can rely on the overall section head. Were this not the case, then within this article, since the individual sections just say politicians, scientists, etc. and not Jewish politicians or scientists, we would not be saying that anybody listed here is Jewish, so there would be no need for sources. - Newport 10:44, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry to have vexed you and to continue to do so but could you please supply the exact wording of the section heading? Unfortunately, I'm in Australia so I can't check in the library for myself. But given that you have added references to many disputed names from the source, you can understand why it's necessary to be certain that the criteria are met. Grace Note 07:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Newport, does the book say anywhere what its criteria for inclusion are i.e. whether it is saying the people listed are "Jews," or "of Jewish ancestry," or what. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

deleted personal attack. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL. Unfortunately, you can't be taken seriously because you weren't smart enough to note that I said I'm "in Australia" not I "am Australian". Grace Note 03:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Grace Note: I have answered the question twice already and will not keep repeating myself. The inclusion of someone on this list should not be disputed unless there is a source that says explicitly that he or she is not Jewish; the inability of other editors to find sources doesn't make for a dispute, still less the fact that an anti-Semitic source says correctly that they are Jewish. Who is in dispute? SlimVirgin: as you say, "How the person or publication defines that is up to them, not Wikipedia. We just report." - Newport 12:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, because you will not properly answer the question, I am going to remove all of the names sourced to the Jewish Year Book as inadequately sourced until you do. You have not demonstrated that the source you rely on states that the people concerned are Jewish. Your answers are evasive and I'm of the opinion that is because the source does not in fact state that the people you are including are Jewish. Grace Note 03:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with removing it. I'm at a loss as to understand the fuss over this. I initially supported it as a reliable source when it was first questioned months ago, but since then it's been used many times without even giving a year, questions about it don't get answered either at all or for days and weeks, and now no one will tell us what it actually says. Enough already. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 04:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

So the offspring of felons and his chief groupy have ganged up on valid editors to destroy their work; this felon and his co-conspirator have decided that they know more than the Jewish Year Book; in the real world the two of them would be in jail for offenses against humanity.Incorrect 07:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

The thought that a woman of the quality of SlimVirgin should be my groupy will keep me warm through the upcoming winter nights, Incorrect. I thank you for your contributions to this page, but so far they have amounted to no edits and several personal attacks. May I though advise you that with less tolerant editors you'll find the former much more welcome than the latter, and if you talk to others the way you have to me, you will find yourself in hot water. Grace Note 07:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion

I have to say that the criteria for inclusion here seem somewhat odd. I think that someone should be regarded as a Jew if their parents were Jews if there is no evidence to the contrary. Not for nothing are Jews considered to be a race under the UK's Racial Hatred Bill - it is a cultural thing as well as a religious one. For example, my father's family are Jewish, but my mother's family are not. I am not Bar Mitzvah and never go to shul. I do not believe in God. And yet, if I were notable, I would still want to be listed on here - the culture of Judaism is passed down over generations. --David.Mestel 19:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

If you were notable and wanted to be included in this list, all you'd have to do is be interviewed by a reputable news organization and tell them that you're Jewish (or regard yourself as such), or include it in one of the books you were notable for having written. :-) We're editing strictly in accordance with WP:V and WP:NOR, because people were adding names to the list who were neither Jewish nor British in some instances. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:25, 28 March 2006 (UTC) See previous discussion for more details. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:25, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Names removed

I have removed several names from the list. Some are not sourced. Some do not meet the criteria. Some are sourced to websites, which, as discussed previously, are not acceptable as sources. Some are sourced to the Jewish Year Book, whose reliability as a source is in doubt. A list follows.

• Sydney Stern, Baron Wandsworth (1891) MP for Stowmarket JYB 5657 (1896-7) p102
• Alfred Mond, 1st Baron Melchett (1906) - JYB 1911 p297; Encyclopaedia Judaica 12:241-2
• Frank Goldsmith Conservative M.P. for Stowmarket (1910) JYB 1911 p297
• John Silkin (1963), Labour cabinet minister (JYB 1986 p186, 269)
• Samuel Silkin, Labour cabinet minister and life peer (1964) - JYB 1986 p185, 269-70
• Reginald Freeson (1964), Labour minister (JYB 2005 p212, 241-2)
• Eric Moonman (1966), Labour MP (JYB 2005 p279)
• Clement Freud Liberal Member of Parliament for the Isle of Ely (later North East Cambridgeshire) from 1973 to 1987 (1973) JYB 1977 p205
• Nigel Lawson, Conservative cabinet minister and life peer (1974) - JYB 2005 p212
• Joel Barnett, MP, Chief Secretary of Treasury (1974-1979) (JYB 2005 p212) and life peer
• Helene Hayman, MP / Life Peer (JYB 2005 p212)
• Michael Levy, Baron Levy - JYB 2005 p212, 270
• Edward Neville da Costa Andrade (JYB 1977 p207)
• Sir Michael Berry [2], mathematical physicist (JYB 2005 p214)
• Moses Blackman (JYB 1977 p207)
• Samuel Devons, physicist (JYB 2005 p214)
• Sir Peter Hirsch, physicist (JYB 2005 p213, 214)
• Dennis Sciama, FRS [3], cosmologist
• Herbert Brown, chemist (JYB 2005 p215) Born in London - see refs in article
• Sir Arnold Burgen (JYB 2005 p214)
• Sir Roy Calne (JYB 2005 p214)
• Jack David Dunitz [4], chemist
• Sir Aaron Klug [5], physicist & chemist, Nobel Prize (1982) (JYB 2000 p211-2)
• Ephraim Anderson, microbiologist (JYB 2005 p214)
• Sir Philip Cohen [6], biologist
• Sydney Cohen, pathologist (JYB 2005 p214, 230)
• Raymond Dwek, biologist (JYB 2005 p214)
• Sir Michael Epstein, co-discoverer of the Epstein-Barr virus (JYB 2005 p214)
• Sir Alan Fersht [7], protein folding
• Leslie Orgel [8], evolutionary biologist
• Abram Besicovitch [9], Russian-born British mathematician (karaite)
• Arthur Erdelyi [10], mathematician
• John Fox, statistician
• Klaus Roth [11], mathematician, Fields Medal (1958)
• David Deutsch [12], quantum computing pioneer
• I.J. Good [13], cryptographer, philosopher of statistics & computing pioneer
• Max Newman [14], mathematician & computing pioneer (Jewish father)
• Gordon Plotkin [15], computer scientist
• Leslie Valiant [16], computer scientist parallel computation
• Vernon Bogdanor, professor of politics (JYB 2005 p215)
• Gerald Cohen, Professor of Social and Political Theory (JYB 2005 p215)
• Marie Jahoda [17], psychology of discrimination
• Richard F. Kahn [18], economist: multiplier
• Nicholas Kaldor [19], economist
• Piero Sraffa [20], economist
• Sophie Okonedo [21], actress
• Alain Boublil [22], author and lyricist
• Jenny Abramsky, BBC Director of Radio
• Jono Coleman [23], radio broadcaster – not British, Australian
• David Jacobs, radio broadcaster (JYB p256)
• Mick Jones, guitarist, vocalist The Clash (mother of Russian Jewish descent). – mother’s descent irrelevant, see criteria
• Jason Kay [24], member of Jamiroquai
• Jon Moss [25], member of Culture Club
• Gavin Rossdale [26], member of Bush
• Malcolm McLaren [27], manager of the Sex Pistols (Jewish mother; raised Jewish)
• Harriet Cohen [28], pianist
• Jacqueline du Pré [29], cellist (convert to Judaism)
• George Henschel [30], singer & conductor
• Myra Hess [31], pianist
• Steven Isserlis [32], cellist
• Benno Moiseiwitsch [33], pianist
• Michael Nyman [34], composer
• Murray Perahia [35], pianist (UK-based) – but not British!
• Landon Ronald [36], conductor & composer
• Sir Georg Solti [37], conductor
• Lionel Tertis [38], violist
• Stella McCartney [39], fashion designer (Jewish mother) – so include her mother
• David Alliance, Baron Alliance, businessman & Liberal Democrat politician (JYB 212)

Arnold Weinstock, Lord Weinstock, Chairman of GEC - JYB 2002, p211

• Peter Keith Levene, chairman of LLoyd of London, Lord Mayor of London (1998-1999) (JYB 212)
• Andrew Lennard, Founder of Texel Finance
• Samuel Segal, Baron Segal of Wytham in the Royal County of Berks 4 June 1985
• Harry Golombek [40], British chess player
• Isidor Gunsberg [41], Hungarian/British chess player
• William Hartston [42], British chess player
• Bernhard Horwitz [43], German/British chess player
• John Patrick Kenneally [44], WWII British Army Victoria Cross recipient (Jewish father)

More removals to come

I was too short on time to do it today but I'm letting interested editors know that I am going to be checking out the entries on this page, particularly those that are sourced to websites. I saw quite a few in passing that did not look like they would pass but as I say, I didn't have the time to look into it. We have discussed this already. In keeping with our policies, it is not acceptable to use personal websites as sources on Wikipedia. Please refer to Wikipedia:Reputable sources if you are not clear what is allowable as a source. Lists of Jews on some guy's website are very unlikely to be reputable enough. Editorials on fly-by-night chatsheets are also very much below the standard we demand. These standards apply to all articles in Wikipedia. We don't have lower ones for lists. The following websites clearly do not meet the standard:

www.jinfo.org -- "JINFO.ORG has no outside organizational affiliation or sponsorship." Which means no oversight. www.jewsrock.org -- "It was born from a joke". Two guys with a website. www.jewishprblog.com -- Blogs are disreputable, almost by definition. www.televisionheaven.co.uk -- at best borderline. www.somethingjewish.co.uk -- two guys with a website.

Just because your website is flash, and you've got a designer in to make it look nice, does not make it any more than a personal website. We should keep that in mind. Consequently, if you want someone kept on the list who is sourced to one of these, or other similar, websites, start looking for other sources. These would not be acceptable sources for an article on, say, "Jewish culture", or on any of the people concerned, so they should not be acceptable for listing people here. I welcome comments, but please, if you just want to insult me, could you direct them to my talkpage? This page is for discussing the article's content, not your beliefs about my ancestry, criminality or whatever else. Grace Note 08:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

The recent deletions

The recent deletions are either an indication of a bad policy or one that is being poorly applied.

1. Why on earth is the Jewish Year Book not considered a good source?
2. Some of the removals seem downright bizarre. Is there even the slightest doubt that Clement Freud is Jewish? Michael Epstein of Epstein-Barr fame? Georg Solti (born György Stern, name Magyarized to deflect anti-Semitism, but come on).

I could understand that if someone thinks the citations are weak they might add {{citationneeded}}, but removing obviously prominent British Jews from a list of British Jews does not do our readers any favors. And, again, why is there any problem with how these are sourced? At most, if there is some reason to doubt the Jewish Year Book as a source we should add a caveat to the article about why there might be some limitation on the value of the source, but that seems to me like exactly the sort of work one would normally go to in a library when trying to compile this sort of information. - Jmabel | Talk 12:04, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I read through all of the previous comments and still do not see the problem with citing from the Jewish Year Book. If the citations are not absolutely clear as to what edition, fine, lets clean the citations, but, again, we do not do our readers any favors when we remove obviously true information just because someone was slightly sloppy in their citation. If we followed that standard consistently, we would have to remove most of Wikipedia. If it weren't for WP:POINT, I'd be inclined to track down your "favorite" articles and go at it with equal lack of mercy, or even decency.

And just to be clear: no, I am not one of the authors of this article, and personally it's not an article I particularly care about. I just think that what Grace Note is doing here is a terrible approach in terms of improving Wikipedia.

Again, if there is a generally reliable source that may have some issues, we can explain those issues in a footnote, or in the references section. We have to do that sort of thing often with things like census data. But to say that it is "original research" to say that the Jewish Year Book is about Jews is to carry the concept of WP:NOR to the point of absurdity. This is like saying that it is original research in the Israel article to say that the land that is now Israel "was ruled by various Muslim states (interrupted by the rule of the Crusaders)" prior to becoming part of the Ottoman Empire. Has someone tracked down the names of each of those states and, for each found a citation explicitly calling each state "Muslim"? Of course not. Nor should they, unless there is some reason to doubt it. Compelling authors to cite for the obvious at every turn is a waste of everyone's time.

If there is actually reason to doubt that some individual mentioned in this article is a Jew, then absolutely ask for rock-solid citation. But where there is no reason for doubt, a routine level of citation should suffice. - Jmabel | Talk 12:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Joe, the situation is more complicated. The accounts that mostly use the JYB have been determined to be multiple accounts operated by the same person, who has been using the JYB for several months while resisting almost all enquiries from several editors about the precise years being used (often, no year is entered) and what exactly the criteria for entry into the JYB are (it presumably says somewhere in its introduction). The same person has engaged in serious (i.e. defamatory) personal attacks against some of the editors making those enquiries. There is therefore a justifiable suspicion about the way in which the source is being used. For example, it could be the case that the names are identified as having Jewish ancestry without being Jewish themselves. After waiting several weeks for an answer to his last query about this, Grace Note decided to move some names to the talk page for alternative sourcing. He didn't delete them, but moved them to talk, per V and RS. The job now will be to find a good source for each name that shows the person in question has been identified as Jewish by a reliable publication, and not just as someone who has, say, a Jewish grandfather, because many of the names on this list have turned out to be along those lines; some of the names have even explicitly said in print that they are not Jews, yet were added here nevertheless. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 12:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I strongly disapprove of random removals of names simply because there is no source. {{citationneeded}} is your friend. Eric Moonman is president of the Zionist Federation and writes in the London Jewish News. Raymond Dwek went to Carmel College (only admitted halakhic Jews). Etc. In the vast majority of the above examples only the most superficial Googling is required.

The Jewish Year Book is fairly well researched. I have access to a recent copy and would be able to verify a short list of otherwise unverifiable people. I'm fully aware of the RB situation, but the behaviour of one editor should not mean that all her information is automatically discredited. JFW | T@lk 12:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jfd, it would be extremely helpful if you could check your copy and see whether it says anywhere (for example in the introduction) what their criteria for entry are. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 12:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know why there is a problem with the Jewish Year Book as a source. It is edited by the president of the Jewish historical society and they would never put anyone in there who was not Jewish. Jayjg has agreed with this. It was stated above that all the JYB refs without a year were 2005 (and just to clear this up, Newport is RachelBrown's flatmate Lisa which is why they had the same ip address, Rachel left after she was bullied on this very same issue of the JYB). Arniep 18:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Another flatmate? Well, there's no problem with the JYB as such, Arnie. The problem is only that we can't get Newport or anyone else to tell us what it says, and in particular what its criteria for entry are. I'm not sure that Jayjg has agreed with any of this. I seem to recall him asking the same question somewhere, or perhaps it was the year he asked for. The point is that questions about the source go unanswered for weeks on end. I'm assuming by all the attention that Newport/Poetlister has been doing the usual e-mail thing. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:21, 5 May 2006 (UTC)g

Rachel only has one flatmate Lisa, User:Newport who took on watching Rachel's articles and went on to add articles that Rachel was intending to create before she was driven away back in December because of bullying by other users in relation to the yearbook. Jayjg has specifically said above that if a person is in the Jewish Year Book that is an acceptable source for this list as he knows it is a reliable respectable publication. Arniep 18:29, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

You have no idea how many flatmates someone in England may or may not have, Arnie, and it's anyway irrelevant; so long as the various accounts aren't posting together on the same pages as they used to, I don't care. I've also said the JYB is a respectable publication, by the way, but I'd still love to know what the criteria for entry are. I may e-mail them to ask. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I have my own eyes and ears and I am quite sure that these people were all different, but as you say it is really irrelevent to this discussion. There is a description of the Year Book on the Vallentine Mitchell website:

"Updated annually, edited to provide the latest, up-to-date information, it includes contact details for Jewish institutions, local and international organisations, details on leading Jewish personalities, obituaries and major events as well as principal festivals and fasts." It doesn't say people of Jewish descent or anything else, it just says Jewish (as far as I am aware no people referenced with the JYB are not Jewish under Halakha). Arniep 22:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that's very helpful, Arnie, thank you. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I've been looking at the kinds of publications that use the Jewish Year Book as a source and they're all respectable, including academics. I also came across a talk given by Israel Shahak, in which he says that Karl Popper rejected an approach to be included because he didn't believe in the concept of race and didn't practise Judaism. [45] If that's correct, it speaks well of the Jewish Year Book as a source because it means they're basing their entries on self-identification. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I hate to throw a spanner in the works here but I thought the rules that were agreed on specifically did not mention self identification, but just said a person must have been described as a Jew or Jewish in a reputable source. Insisting on self identification would be problematic for people considered Jewish under Halakha but who had converted to another religion for example. Arniep 01:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

You're right; we don't require self-identification. I meant only that it's an extra thing in favor of the source because it indicates they check their entries carefully. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

So would you be OK in including Clement Freud even though he was in the JYB but asked to be removed as he is an Anglican (of course he is still considered Jewish under Halakha)? Arniep 01:28, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's a conflict: under WP:V, we need a source saying explicitly that he is Jewish (not of Jewish heritage, ancestory, whatever, but that he himself is Jewish) and you may be able to find one other than the JYB. However, under WP:BLP, we're expected to show extra sensitivity toward living persons, particularly regarding private issues that don't affect their notability. Clement Freud isn't famous for being Jewish, so that's regarded as a private matter. If he has expressed a strong view about it, and doesn't want to be identified as such, then we shouldn't go against that. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:49, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

OK (note his brother Lucien Freud hasn't expressed a wish to not be identified as Jewish/is not Anglican) [46] [47]. Arniep 02:07, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

The bottom line is none of the people who want to use the JYB as a source will do the following:

1. State what the lists they are using have as headings.
2. State what the sections the lists are in have as headings.
3. State what leads them to believe that the JYB includes people on account of being Jewish and not of "Jewish ancestry" or being connected with the Jewish community in some way. I am concerned that an almanac might consider the "Jewish world" in a broader sense. We require sources that explicitly state that a person is Jewish, not ones from which we can infer they are.

It is of absolutely no account how certain you, I or any other editor is that someone is Jewish. I don't care if they're your own brother and you go to the synagogue together.

And I do not care how many "flatmates" Poetlister/RachelBrown/Newport claims to be. I treat their edits with the utmost suspicion, not least because they have been so evasive over a source that is not easily available to all here. They need only have typed in what the book says, after all. -- Grace Note.