Jump to content

Talk:Ashkenazi Jews

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 79.99.144.141 (talk) at 09:23, 19 April 2013 (→‎Avaya1, stop removing Sholem Aleichem: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

A suggestion to replace 2 people in the collage

I suggest to replace Heinrich Heine with Marc Chagall and Gustav Mahler with Natalie Portman for 2 reasons: 1. Heine and Mahler people converted to christianity, and as much as I understand Jews are an ethnic group we must not forget that they are actually labled as an ethnoreligious group, which means an ethnicity which formed around the religious identity. 2. We need to give more representation to women! Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 23:49, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Under the Jewish religious law people converted to other religions from Judaism are still Jewish. Under secular common understanding Jews are ethnic group. However there are atheist Jews, agnostic Jews and even Christian Jews. So Heine and Mahler should be back. Natalie Portman is a great person, yet if you want woman in the section add Rosalind Franklin or Hedy Lamarr.--Tritomex (talk) 17:41, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not important what the Jewish religios says for anyone else except those who actually believe in it. If Heine and Mahler didn't consider themselves Jews then in their head they are not Jews and I don't see why we need to "force" them to stay with us. Natalie Portman is one of the greatest Jewish actresses ever and will be the only living person in the image (the rest are dead and it's kind of embarassing no one else there is alive). Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 18:02, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lack of political philosophers and theorists in the collage, and of course a lack of women, so why not Hannah Arendt? AzureClique (talk) 05:45, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the space for this persons are limited, clearly Jewish inventors and people with great contribution to humanity have to be priority.--Tritomex (talk) 17:48, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is to give representation to all fields Jews made an inpact in. "Contribution to humanity" is a very relative thing. Culture always gave people as much as technology, and in fact, while techology makes life easier to live physicaly, culture makes life worth living for, otherwise people would be robots. Marc Chagall is the greatest Jewish artist ever and one of the greatest artists in the 20th century and it's a joke he wasn't in the image before (his "contribution to humanity" if you like is the pleasure people get from looking at his images), while Portman is an academy winning actress and one of the best Jewish actors ever (her "contribution to humanity" if you like is the pleasure people get from watching films she takes part in). Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 18:02, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Considering Natalie Portman and Chagall they are already presented at Jews article. No need to duplicate it here. Jews are an ethnic group, with common origin and if I would propose change I would add Niels Bohr and Leonard Kleinrock Borh mother was Jewish, he went to exile because of his ethnic origin. Also Spinosa, Proust, Robert Koch even Heinrich Hertz or Von Neumman should be considered too- -Tritomex (talk) 07:37, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I thought Spinoza was Sephardic, not Ashkenazi? AzureClique (talk) 05:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have difficulty understanding the criteria for selecting individuals to be added to the collage. The only specifications that are made clear are that they must be significant in their fields and that not too many individuals from a single field monopolize the collage (lest we have half the Manhattan Project on there). So then why, for example, is Botvinnik on the list rather than Fischer or Kasparov, or Chagall over Rothko? Another thing that puzzles me is the omission of possibly the most famous, influential Jew (along with Einstein and Freud) in the modern world, Karl Marx. AzureClique (talk) 05:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One clear criterion should be that some of those in the collage should be Yiddish authors. The article boasts that Yiddish is the traditional language of Ashkenazi Jews; however, the only Yiddish writer in the collage, Scholem Aleichem, is continually being removed form the collage. There should be more Yiddish authors added to the collage, for example Nobel Prize winning Yiddish author Isaac Bashevis Singer. The collage actually currently displays a bias against Yiddish, by only showing those assimilated, German speaking Jews - Einstein, Herzl, Freud, Heine, etc. etc. - and totally ignoring Yiddish speakers/writers.Jimhoward72 (talk) 04:36, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as Ashkenazi Jews are a Semitic group with origins in the Levant, it goes without saying that they share a good number of similarities with other Levantine groups, hence their inclusion. Although it is true that some of these identities did not emerge until later, the relationship is still there.Evildoer187 (talk) 23:40, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, how do these edits constitute vandalism in any way? Evildoer187 (talk) 23:59, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that user Galassi should explain his position of identifying the proposed edits as vandalism.--Tritomex (talk) 15:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree! Ashkenazi Jews are a sub-group of Jews who are a semitic people. Researches had shown that Ashkenazi Jews have genetical similarities with the populations living in the middle east. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 22:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an obvious political POV edit related to the Israeli-Arab conflict and doesn't belong here. The history, identity etc of the Ashkenazi don't have much to do with these nations. It makes more sense to maybe add these groups to Israelis, which may also seem political but at least won't seem out of place because Israel is in the Middle East while Ashk. history was formed in European lands. Yuvn86 (talk) 19:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not acceptable explanation, Ashkenazi Jews are genetically originating from Middle East as it is evident from population genetics. Culturally semitic traditions are preserved in Judaism. In the lack of any more reasonable explanation I assume that the revert of this edition was also politically motivated and this may lead us to restore it.--Tritomex (talk) 22:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted the edits before Galassi did. Because if we are talking origin (even spiritual origin or traditions like you wrote) then I don't see any problem with adding "Semitic-speaking people" to the related groups. But Jordanians? Palestinians? please... these people didn't really exist before the 20th century. Yuvn86 (talk) 23:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Although it is true that some of these identities did not emerge until later, the relationship is still there." Please read before you respond, next time. Thanks.Evildoer187 (talk) 05:47, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, your argument is that we should exclude Palestinians and Jordanians on the grounds that they "didn't exist before the 20th century", and yet you want to include Israelis? This is contradictory. Objective analysis and consensus have shown that they bear much more similarity to other Middle Eastern peoples in terms of culture, genetics, etc. than they do with native Europeans. You can't just say "they lived there for centuries", and so they're not Middle Eastern anymore, because that is a whitewashing of history and has no place in an encyclopedia.
For someone who is allegedly pro-Zionist, you have steadfastly and consistently attempted to sever diaspora Jews from their Middle Eastern/Hebrew identity. I was under the impression that this was an anti-Zionist argument. However, I digress.Evildoer187 (talk) 08:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What I meant is that if some here insist on adding Levant groups to this page then it's more logic to add 'Semitic-speaking people' than specific nations like Jordanians. And I mentioned the article Israelis because it's about citizens of Israel, just like Jordanians means citizens of Jordan. Yuvn86 (talk) 13:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's not specific enough. What about Semitic speaking peoples like the Maltese, who are not related to the Jews?Evildoer187 (talk) 21:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Galassi didn't even bother coming to the talk page to explain his position. He knows he has nothing to say against the genetic evedence regarding the fact Ashkenazi Jews came from Israel. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 22:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest to use the formulation used in the Jews article:

other Levantines[1][2][3][4], Samaritans[5], Arabs[6][7], Assyrians[8][9]

I think that one is neutral and literally no one could have any problem with that one! Though I don't see a problem with the current one. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 09:41, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not it is not neutral at all. I am asking again what is the problem with adding "Semitic-speaking people" instead? Yuvn86 (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Arabs outside the Levant have a lot of genes from those people who lived there before the conquest so they are not ethnically related to Jews, those groups who are related to Jews are those who are at the Levant. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 21:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"I am asking again what is the problem with adding "Semitic-speaking people" instead?" Because it wouldn't be specific enough. Jews are not related to every Semitic speaking people, after all. It's best to just leave it the way it is.Evildoer187 (talk) 21:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So what in the world is your criteria for relatedness? I suggested it because if Ashkenazi Jews consider ancient Israelites as their forebears (even spiritually) then it seems OK adding the group ancient Jews were descended from (which is Semitic-speaking peoples). Yuvn86 (talk) 21:57, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Modern Jews and not decedents of all ancient Israelis but only of those 3 tribes who lived in the Kingdom of Judea (Judea, Benjamin and Shimon). I wouldn’t put ancient Jews to the related category because the modern Jews are the decedents of those ancient Jews, they are the same group. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 11:46, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Genetic, cultural, linguistic, etc. If we are to use that criteria, then other Levantines, Samaritans, Arabs, and Assyrians are a natural fit.Evildoer187 (talk) 13:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lingustic? that's why I suggested Semitic-speaking peoples addition, because Hebrew the holy language of Judaism is related to other languages of that family groups. But cultural? What exactly, for non-Israeli Ashkenazi? Yuvn86 (talk) 21:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's because Ashkenazi Jews are not related to every Semitic speaking group. They are not related to Maltese, Ethiopians, Somalis, etc. However, Ashkenazi Jews are related to Levantines, Assyrians, and especially Samaritans in not only the linguistic sense, but in terms of genetics, culture, origins, etc. You can find some sources for that on the Jews infobox, but I can provide more if you need it.
However, I'm beginning to seriously wonder why you are so adamantly opposed to acknowledging any connection at all between Ashkenazim and Middle Eastern people. This is especially odd for someone who considers himself/herself pro-Israel, because I don't know any other Israel supporter who is this resistant to recognizing the Middle Eastern heritage of Ashkenazi Jews. Frankly, something doesn't add up. Whatever the reason, you have to realize that this is an encyclopedia, and facts are facts.Evildoer187 (talk) 03:22, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You wrote culture, but except love of Hummus, I can't think of many things culturally that unite a New York Ashkenazi with a Syrian. Please enlighten me. Yuvn86 (talk) 13:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it would help if you looked at the sources.Evildoer187 (talk) 18:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can come up with few. First of all, they have similar genes, which means they are related by blood. Second, even in Europe the Jews while speaking Yiddish still used the Hebrew Semitic ABC. Third, some of the Jewish religious tradition is similar to those in Islam but they don't have them in Christianity, and the reason is they were both influenced by local middle eastern pagan religions. Fourth, Yiddish music though influenced by European has the middle eastern touch the European one doesnt have. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 21:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A non-Israeli Ashkenazi is related to the other people of the middle east ethnically, which is even a stronger connection then a cultural one, and that's why it's worth mentioning them in the related groups category. Studies showed that the majority if Jewish genes are from the middle east, and the way the came to that conclusion is by comparing Ashkenazi genes with Arabic genes from the Levant. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 09:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I edited it to be:

Other Jews, Sephardi Jews, Mizrahi Jews, etc.
Other Levantines[10][11][12][13], Samaritans[14], Arabs[15][16], Assyrians[17][18]

I think Levantines makes it clear that who we are refering to are those who live in the Levant region. I tried to make a formulation similar to the Jews article, with reference to other Jewish groups. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 09:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it up a little, because it was too confusing.Evildoer187 (talk) 18:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks great, I don't think anyone can say anything against that one. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 21:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there are also studies which point a connection to Italians and even to the French, with links even in this article, and some indicate much more similarities to them than to the groups above. Again, some studies, not all. But you both of course will only add Middle Eastern groups to the related groups, becuase that's what you want to see, and what you want others to see; You both seem to make edits based on "look-they-are-related-genetically-to-levantines-so-israel-is-actually-ok!", when in reality it's pretty much irrelevant both for Israel and majority of Jews worldwide (just like trying to find, say, a Greek chromosome is irrelevant and even laughable for the continued legitimacy of Greece). Writing half-truths to push politics just don't belong in here. Yuvn86 (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I can't speak for him, but I'm not doing this for any political reasons. They really are closer in relationship to Levantines and Samaritans than they are to Germans, Poles, or French. I'm not just talking genetics either. However, you do raise a good point in that they are also fairly close to South Europeans (Greeks and Italians, more specifically). I'll add Mediterraneans to the list too.
Although I don't think you quite understand how genetics and PCA plots work.Evildoer187 (talk) 02:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

on inclusion of Anne Frank

I believe that Anne Frank is completely out of place in the photo montage, and to me her inclusion feels disrespectful to the great people in it. 188.4.32.125 (talk) 15:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What?Evildoer187 (talk) 18:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think the concensus on Anna Frank is to strong. She became an important cultural figure due to the fact her diary which was written in a very good way despite her age became one of the most famous books in history, and that without even mentioning the fact she represents the victims of the holocaust. Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 21:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orientalism

See this diff: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ashkenazi_Jews&diff=533020007&oldid=532325314

Eligible for inclusion, or not? Discuss.Evildoer187 (talk) 13:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As i know if some born as jews who practices Christianity, is not a Jew. Then the picture of Lise Meitner as Famous Ashkenazi Jews should be removed since meitner converted to Christianity, following Lutheranism,[19][20].Jobas (talk) 19:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

She was not a practicing Protestant (b) in conformity with Nazi law she documented that her four grandparents were 'non-Aryan' and (c) after Kristallnacht, her lawyer arranged to have her identity papers changed from those of Lise Meitner, to Lisa Sarah Meitner, Sarah being the code term to indicate Jewishness. You can be a Jew in many ways. She should remain as a great Ashkenazi Jew unless evidence comes up that she disavowed her cultural and ethnic origins afterwards, which I don't believe she ever did. You can be both a Christian and a Jew, in your own terms, whatever Christian or Jewish orthodoxies might argue.Nishidani (talk) 21:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • she was baptized in the Protestant Church, which mean she not jew's by religion and she is Protestant Christian at least nominally, why i saied my point is because in previous debates has been defined Jews based on religion and ethnic, and it's includes atheists and agnostic jews, While the Jewish who changed his religion is no longer considered to be jews. anyway i understand your point.Jobas (talk) 23:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are many ways of being Jewish. Descent, religion, self-identification, conversion etc. Alain F. Corcos is a distinguished biologist, a Holocaust survivor, persecuted as a Jew, who never converted to any other religion. Yet neither he nor his brother, who is Jewish, say he is a Jew. He doesn't self-identify as a Jew, though of Jewish descent. Many Jews, in his memoir, insist he is Jewish. To repeat, it all depends on what Lise's personal statements say about her own beliefs. If, as opposed to the official documents she undersigned, she explicity denied, without being under constraint, that she was Jewish, you have an argument. If she never made such a free declaration, then you have no case. That Meitner converted does not, ipso facto mean she was not Jewish in her own view. It simply means she was a Jew who subscribed to Protestantism, like Karl Kraus or Simone Weil (who obviously suffered from something vastly abused by polemicists, the symptoms of 'Jewish self-hatred') to Catholicism. Nishidani (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

What exactly is the problem with the new intro, which was reverted? as the article says, Ashkenazi Jews are people who trace themselves/parents/grandparents to the Jewish communities in what is today Poland, Germany, Romania, Lithuania etc. But the intro doesn't say it - it says "who trace their origins to the indigenous Israelite tribes of Canaan in the Middle East, and probably began settling along the Rhine in Germany, from Alsace in the south to the Rhineland in the north, during the early Middle Ages." Well, the Rhine and Middle Ages parts should stay of course, what do Judea and Ancient Israel have to do with anything? it belongs maybe to the history section, not the lead. It is about Ashkenazi Jews, not Jews in general. The first line should say shortly who this group is, but was reverted: "who trace their ancestry to the Jewish communities of Eastern, Central and Western Europe, from Jewish communities who probably began settling along the Rhine in Germany, from Alsace in the south to the Rhineland in the north, during the early Middle Ages." This intro tells more what this article is about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuvn86 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of the lead is to consolidate the information in the article and summarize it. Your proposed edit would be to arbitrarily omit a key part of who they are i.e. where they originated. I see no reason to leave it out, other than for POV purposes.Evildoer187 (talk) 17:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree with Evildoer187, Ashkenazi Jews do not "trace their ancestry to the Jewish communities of Eastern, Central and Western Europe" they are the Jewish community of Eastern, Central and Western Europe tracing their origin to Middle East.--Tritomex (talk) 10:17, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you Google "Ashkenazi Jews" and you'll see mostly "Jewish communities of Eastern/Central/Western Europe. Ancient Israel, Judea, the Temple in Jerusalem, the Diaspora etc all belong in the history section if you want, not intro. Just like the Sephardi Jews article says "is a general term referring to the descendants of Spanish and Portuguese Jews who lived or live in the Iberian Peninsula". You don't see biblical stuff in the intro there.Yuvn86 (talk) 11:42, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then it should be fixed too.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 11:54, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yuvn, the ties are not "biblical", and none of the citations here have made use of the Bible to ascertain their origins. In fact, it was only a few days ago that you tried to remove material on this article that was reliably sourced. Anyway, your recommended revision would be misleading as it would (inaccurately) insinuate that they are a native Central/East European group. They lived in the Middle East for many thousands of years prior to this, and in Southern Europe for several centuries before making their way to the Rhine.
Shrike, good point. I will get on that right away.Evildoer187 (talk) 14:06, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You probably didn't Google or looked in an online dictionary, because then you'd read that the meaning is, more or less, "Jewish communities who were formed in Eastern/Central/Western Europe and their descendants", and something like these lines should be in the intro. Whether they came to these places centuries ago from Middle East or locals or Alaska or anywhere else is irrelevant to the first lines because it doesn't explain who they are. Yuvn86 (talk) 20:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, because neither of those things are relevant to what we do here. Besides, what often comes up in Google searches is based on info taken directly from us. As it stands, your revision would be misleading and omit an important part of the context for the formation of the Ashkenazi Jewish communities. The intro paragraphs do an adequate job of explaining who they are.Evildoer187 (talk) 09:33, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Avaya1, stop removing Sholem Aleichem

Looking at the page I see there was definitely a concensus to include Sholem Aleichem. The collage with Sholem Aleichem lasted here for many month, until you came and started your revert war.

Very nice that there was a concensus years ago you were a part on, but stop being so sensitive. The old concensus was not the Holy Bible and clearly there is a new concensus in place so stop your pointless revert war. Sholem Aleichem has place in this collage!

  1. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/science/10jews.html?_r=0
  2. ^ http://www.ucl.ac.uk/tcga/tcgapdf/Nebel-HG-00-IPArabs.pdf
  3. ^ http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Shen2004.pdf
  4. ^ http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/05/000509003653.htm
  5. ^ http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Shen2004.pdf
  6. ^ http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Shen2004.pdf
  7. ^ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3032072/
  8. ^ http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Shen2004.pdf
  9. ^ http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/05/000509003653.htm
  10. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/science/10jews.html?_r=0
  11. ^ http://www.ucl.ac.uk/tcga/tcgapdf/Nebel-HG-00-IPArabs.pdf
  12. ^ http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Shen2004.pdf
  13. ^ http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/05/000509003653.htm
  14. ^ http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Shen2004.pdf
  15. ^ http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Shen2004.pdf
  16. ^ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3032072/
  17. ^ http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Shen2004.pdf
  18. ^ http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/05/000509003653.htm
  19. ^ Sime, Ruth Lewin (1996) Lise Meitner: A Life in Physics (Series: California studies in the history of science volume 13) University of California Press, Berkeley, California, page 1, ISBN 0-520-08906-5
  20. ^ "Lise Meitner and Nuclear Fission". Orlandoleibovitz.com. Retrieved 9 April 2012.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ashkenazi_Jews&oldid=551108642"