Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:03, 30 April 2008

Shortcut

WT:JH

Template:WPJewish nav

Announcements

Votes for deletion

Consider monitoring:

Other votes

To do

Edit Reload Watch

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Beit Hadassah [he] • Beit Hazalam [he] • Beit Wittenberg [he] • Bornplatz Synagogue [de] • Excellent Zion Synagogue [he] • Haim Bejarano [he] • History of the Jews in Berlin [de] • History of the Jews in Budapest • History of the Jews in Essaouira [it] • History of the Jews in İzmir [he] • History of the Jews in Lublin [fr] • History of the Jews in Lviv [fr] • History of the Jews in Marseille [fr] • History of the Jews in Rome • History of the Jews in Warsaw [he] • History of the Pope's Jews in Provence [fr] • History of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews in France [fr] • Isaac Yaso • Jewish Battalion of the Ukrainian Galician Army [ru] • Jewish economics • Jews and the diamond trade • Jose Benoliel [he] • Menahem Zion Synagogue [he] • Occult writers and antisemitism • Ohel Moed Synagogue [fr] • Omri Teg'Amlak Avera • Pogroms in Belarus during the Russian Civil War [fr] • Sabetay Djaen [he] • Salomon Israel Cherezli [he] • Switzerland and the Holocaust • Synagogue of Bayonne [fr] • Tiflisites [he] • United Kingdom and the Holocaust • Vinohrady Synagogue [cs] • World Sephardi Federation [he] • House of Yamin Benarroch [es] • Yefet Alemu • Zelbshuts
Assess : Yahweh • V-2 missile launch site, Blizna • SS-Truppenübungsplatz Heidelager • History of the Jews in Alexandria • Ghetto in Svislach (Mogilev)
Cleanup : Xueta • Jewish assimilation • History of the Jews in Austria • Dreyfus Affair
Copyedit : International response to the Holocaust • History of the Jews during World War II • Anti-Semitism
Expand : Way of the Patriarchs • V-2 missile launch site, Blizna • SS-Truppenübungsplatz Heidelager • Knowledge of the Holocaust in Nazi Germany and German-occupied Europe • Susman Kiselgof • Joachim Stutschewsky • Sidi Tal • The Holocaust in France • Jews in New York City • History of the Jews in Kraków • Jews in Istanbul
NPOV : Yahweh • Zionist antisemitism
Stubs : Category:Jewish history stubs, Category:Jewish biography stubs
Update : Jewish quota

Perpetual problem articles

Ten Lost Tribes
Solomon's Temple —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jmabel (talk • contribs) 05:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Discussions

Participant template

This may seem a little like the four sixteen year olds who think that finding a good name for their band is the key to success, but I started thinking about the right iconography for our participant template. The Magen David is already "taken" by the Wikiproject on Judaism, so I have some options for discussion. It seems to me that we should find an image that is characteristically Jewish but has more to do with history than religion. Here are some ideas - feel free to add:

A dreidel
A (seven armed) menorah
A mezuzah holder
A Hebrew character, probably an Alef, though perhaps Chet-Yod (Chai, "life") might be uplifting
A scroll

I'm partial to the Chai, as it reflects vitality, surely the most important characteristic of Jewish history. --Leifern 11:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like the chai idea myself. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

from a historical perspective the menorah is more of a symbol of the Jewish people. In fact when archeologists find a magen david their first thought is that the site is fake. This is why on ancient coin you see many menorot but no magen davids. Jon513 19:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

חי would be lovely. Alternatively, we could use this

famous "clover leaf" map of the world with center in Jerusalem. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 23:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel strongly either way; my only concern about the Menorah is that it has a strong religious connotation - in fact, I would have preferred it rather than the Magen David in the Judaism wikiproject, but that issue is resolved. I think the clover leaf map is awesome and has just the right element of chutzpah to fill me with a little bit of glee. So, how should we decide? --Leifern 23:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, why not choose Chutzpa? A couple of arguments for the map: it is a map of the world (signifying the series History of the Jews in ... ), with center in Jerusalem. Its icon was adopted by [1]. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 23:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. And it looks pretty groovy. --Leifern 23:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great! ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 00:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the Jewish-Christian category because it's religious. I was thinking it would be good to steer this project away from religion, but please feel free to revert me. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree. While I sifted through the Cats, I found that we have Category:Anarchism and Judaism and Category:Jewish anarchists. Thoughts? ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 01:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that map looks pretty cool, but I was under the impression it was made and used by the Christian world, so it seems like it is only partially related to Judaism. Am I wrong?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 12:14, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No idea who used it, it seems unusable as a map. My POV: to me, Jerusalem as the center of the world is the most important here. If JCPA uses its outline as their logo, it works for me as well. Feel free to make a better offer, we can even decide to combine a couple of icons. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 19:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't really mean they used it as a map or anything, I meant that it was mainly a Christian Medieval practice of including Jerusalem at the center of all maps.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 01:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm open for anything better. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 05:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm actually fine with anything, I don't even know why I even argued.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 07:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moshe, I believe you are correct. Given the orgin (time and judenrein place) of the woodcut, one can easily conclude that it was made by antisemites for antisemites. I pointed out as much [here] last month. Please read it. I think it's as appropriate a logo for this project as the Palestinian Authority logo would be for the Israel project. Of course, this is just my opinion. What's yours?Doright 19:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see the JCPA logo? In general, I am against retreating every time we meet (or suspect) antisemities. Why should they own our symbols? Anyway, here's an alternative

This user is a member of the Jewish History Wikiproject.

Feel free to replace if you like it. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Humus, there is no retreat. The Woodcut made by and for Christian Antisemites would be a great art object logo for Christian History. Admittedly, it's a small point, but Jerusalem is important to Christians too and has an entirely different meaning than to Jews. See Crusades This is no more a retreat than refusing to call The Torah the Old Testament. It seems what you call not retreating, I call assimilating. Perhaps you can find a map of Jerusalem that relates to Jewish History rather than Christian History. Yes, I Did see the JCPA logo. Interesting, huh? Doright 05:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, since

seems less controversial, I took the liberty to switch the template image. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Humus. Of the options I've seen, I agree that it's best.Doright 07:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hasidic history artciles on AFD

Many articles, particularly on Hasidic rebbes have been proposed for deletion by User:PZFUN. See [log]. jnothman ^talk 12:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why PZFUN chose to discredit himself by going after those 36 rabbis (coincindence with lamed vav?) is beyond me. --Shuki 23:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

all Jewish summer camps on AFD

Can anyone tell me if wp isn't otherwise lenient on parochial enitities like the entire content of Category: Jewish summer camps he wants deleted? Should the camps he nominated for afd be relegated to a 'list of'? I disagree. --Shuki 23:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dual Jewish History/Judaism wikiproject userbox

Is anyone opposed to creating a userbox that says something like "This user is is a member of the Judaism/Jewish History Wikiproject"?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 07:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there is also Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish culture. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 22:47, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Query on voting (was: Introducing myself... )

I've done some lite editing of the article noted above, International response to the Holocaust -- though as I haven't anything substantive to add at present, it remains in need of attention.
This is my modest offering by way of introducing myself to the Jewish history project... Deborahjay 15:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, feel yourself at home! Please review the announcements above and consider voting. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 20:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! For affiliation's sake (and as a handy link), I've added the Jewish History WikiProject userbox to my User Page :-)

Holocaust topics will continue to be my main focus, but others in this Project will no doubt come in time.

As I'm a rookie at Wikipedia editing, I find the prospect of voting a bit daunting -- though I'm certainly willing to participate and exercise my good judgment. How might you suggest I familiarize myself with the process? (e.g. guidelines, previous examples, etc.) Deborahjay 05:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore if this feels overwhelming. I meant #Announcements at the top of this page. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 08:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha -- thanks.

As it happens, the particular pair of articles noted there now are terms in the contemporary Israeli lexicon that are particular bêtes noires of mine, as an editor and human rights activist. Having glanced at the discussion, I'm giving some hard thought about what, if anything, I may have to contribute there. :-/

Deborahjay 16:21, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for v0.5

Let's think of other important well written articles worthy of Wikipedia:Version 0.5 Nominations. The Template:Jew is a good starting point. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 20:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concentration camp Theresienstadt [sic]

Regarding Concentration camp Theresienstadt, I've raised some issues about the article's name and the language used therein (concentration camp vs. ghetto).
Would appreciate your input on the discussion page there. Thanks, Deborahjay 05:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting stubs (in List of...): bio or not?

I've just discovered the "List of " Jewish history and biography stubs. These are indeed handy tools for me, as I'm seeking articles for expansion in my subject fields of expertise (Holocaust and Israel).

Am just wondering, though: were these lists created by manual insertion of the topics? It seems to me that quite a few individuals' names appear in the "history" list rather than the "bio"... and if this isn't due to some factors I fail to appreciate, might it be worthwhile to move them, for the sake of enhanced utility let alone consistency?

NB: I did note that what's called the "Jewish biography" stubs list is for "people notable in connection with Judaism" [sic]. If that wording is to indicate the Jewish religion in particular, rather than Jewish history in general (i.e. the other list of stubs), I wouldn't have expected to find Mordechai Gebirtig there. Essentially, I don't get it! :-/

If this is simply a matter of reviewing the two lists and manually placing people > bios, all other topics > history, I'll volunteer to undertake the task -- but shall wait for feedback here lest I tamper inadvertently with an existing mechanism as yet unfamiliar to me.
:-) Deborahjay 19:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

JE citation format

I've been working on converting a lot of Jewish Encyclopedia articles to Wikipedia and I've developed what I think is a good citation format for the reference section that incorporates both the JE article itself and the sources for that article. For example:

Gottheil, Richard and Samuel Krauss. "Onias." Jewish Encyclopedia. Funk and Wagnalls, 1901-1906, which cites to the following ibliography:

H. P. Chajes, Beiträge zur Nordsemitischen Onomatologie, p. 23, Vienna, 1900 (on the name);
Herzfeld, Gesch. des Volkes Jisrael, i. 185-189, 201-206;
Grätz, Gesch. 2d ed., ii. 236;
Schürer, Gesch. 3d ed., i. 182, 194-196; iii. 97-100;
Niese, in Hermes, xxxv. 509;
Wellhausen, I. J. G. 4th ed., p. 248, Berlin, 1901;
Willrich, Juden und Griechen vor der Makkabäischen Erhebung, pp. 77, 109, Göttingen, 1895;
A. Büchler, Die Tobiaden und die Oniaden, pp. 166, 240, 275, 353, Vienna, 1899;
J. P. Mahaffy, The Empire of the Ptolemies, pp. 217, 353, London, 1895;
Gelzer, Sextus Julius Africanus, ii. 170-176, Leipsic, 1885;
Weiss, Dor, i. 130 (on the halakic view of the temple of Onias).

My reasoning is that if you're going to take a public domain article wholesale from some source you should identify the sources cited in that article (saying "this article came from JE" when the article is a verbatim repetition of the JE text doesn't seem very helpful).

I'd like to try and get this accepted as a standard, but obviously not without some consensus on the issue. Does anyone have any thoughts on the issue? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 12:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a great idea! Jayjg ^(talk) 16:54, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some relevant discussion from my talk page, where I discuss the citation issues with User:Nesher in relation to Jose ben Yochanan:

Hi Briangotts, I removed citations from the article as it was taken from the Jewish Encyclopedia. Thats fine. However, does wikipedia need the citations given by the JE? I'd contend not. As it is, the JE has been credited and anyone seeking further info can go there. Wikipedia has its sources (i.e. here the J.E.), while further down the line wikipedia's sources have their own sources (i.e. the JE's numerous sources). I believe I've conformed to WP:CITE. It clutters up the article and I've seen many other removals of such citations from other JE-based articles. See here.

Would you not agree that it would be impractical and bordering on the ridiculous if, apart from every source quoted on wikipedia (e.g. Britannica, Encarta), those sources own sources were quoted? Many thanks, Nesher 16:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your point is well-taken but I think the example you give is inapplicable. An article might be written that cites to or quotes from an Encarta, Britannica, or other encyclopedia article. I totally agree with you that in such a case, it would be silly to list separately all the sources cited in that article (unless, of course, the source itself was also used in the WP article).

I think the situation with JE articles is somewhat different. In many cases, due to the public domain status of the JE, JE articles are copied in their entirety and reproduced verbatim on Wikipedia. So what usually ends up happening is that the article on Wikipedia is in fact the JE article. In such a case you can't really say that the JE article was a "source", because in fact the WP article IS the JE article- because of this, I think it's appropriate to cite both the JE and the JE sources in these situations. But I'm open for further discussion and willing to be convinced that I'm wrong.

--Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 16:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completely accept the point that many JE articles are copied verbatim - but my point still stands. Do "Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii" or "Schürer, Gesch. 3d ed., ii. 202, 352, 357" mean anything to anyone but the erstwhile scholar? A resounding NO. However, many users understand the link to the JE below - and if they want to continue in greater depth (and know where to find these dusty volumes!) then they can easily see the citations there. Only every millionth person or so knows what these sources mean (and even less will look them up).

Even if the "WP article IS the JE" - which is true at article inception but the archaic language and tedious formats are generally fiddled with and added to over time - why does that necessitate keeping unnecessary text that can be accessed a click away? Many thanks, Nesher 17:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would welcome listing old sources in Notes section - in hope that outdated claims would be either replaced or updated with newer sources & evidence. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 21:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"[T]he erstwhile scholar"? Meaning that current scholars have no use for references? If so then, in my view, they are not scholars.

I certainly agree with Briangotts that adding a references section in Wikipedia's format is useful. When we bring over an article like this, we are essentially using it as a first draft. It should then evolve, just like any other Wikipedia article. This means we need to know what is sourced from where, and the fact that it is sourced from the JE is only occationally as relevant as what the JE cited. We should absolutely make it clear what the JE used for sources. In particular, the specific Talmudic references seem to me to be an inherent part of the article, and simply saying that something is Talmudic is no substitute at all.

I also would preserve the inline source notes (or convert them to another format), retaining specificity as to what is cited from where. Remember that one of the main uses of an encyclopedia article is as a starting point for serious research, so these are highly relevant. I do, however, encourage that these be clarified: e.g. REJ should become Revue des Études Juifs, "San. 38a" should become "Sanhedrin 38a", etc. In the Schürer example above, "Gesch…ii" should certainly be lengthened to "Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi…vol. 2". In my view, people who are bringing these articles into Wikipedia ought generally to know enough to work that out; contributors should seek help from this project or similar projects if they can't work it out (I've certainly had to ask for help on some Talmudic abbreviations); for most of these (relatively abstruse) topics, we should expect a readership who can understand the long form of that reference, but perhaps not the short form. Your average high school student is not going to look up Exilarch; few people but scholars, of one sort or another, will. - Jmabel | Talk 21:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Offline?

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com seems not to be reachable this last few days. Does anyone know what's up? I tried emailing them, no answer, at least not yet. - Jmabel | Talk 18:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yiddish language

FAC vote underway. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 20:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rudolf Vrba

Current FAC nominee: Rudolf Vrba, who escaped from Auschwitz and brought the first credible information about it to the world. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Romania during WWII

Dahn has called my attention to the fact that the information about the Romania and the Jews during WWII is scattered over several articles: in History of the Jews in Romania, Romania during World War II, Ion Antonescu, and, for all I know, elsewhere. There really is no main article on the topic, but each of these goes on about it for 4-8 paragraphs. The information in them is in some cases identical, and in others complementary.

(There is also a separate, extensive if somewhat problematic, article on the Iaşi pogrom, which includes background information that is really background to the whole situation of the Jews in that country at that time, but some of which may not be accurate; I've fixed a lot there, but doubt it's all fixed; anyway, the part of that article that is not about the pogrom as such would be at least a fourth location of material.)

I think there should be on central article, and the first three I've mentioned should each have short summaries relevant to their respective topics, with a link to a common main article. I hesitate to call it The Holocaust in Romania because there is more to the story than that (in particular, the remarkably high survival rate of Bucharest's Jews). Maybe Romania and the Jews during World War II? What do others on this project think? - Jmabel | Talk 06:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it is time for Category:Holocaust by country. There is Holocaust in Poland, why not Holocaust in Romania, Holocaust in Hungary, Holocaust in France, etc. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Dahn points out that in Romania the Roma were also a significant percentage of the victims. So I think Holocaust in Romania or The Holocaust in Romania would be the possible titles. Shouldn't it be "The", because that is how our main article The Holocaust is titled? - Jmabel | Talk 18:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project Banners?

Is there no project banner for WP:Jewish History? If there is, please let me know, as I think it'd be nice to have on pages such as Fugu Plan and Tzippori. LordAmeth 22:03, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Easy enough to make one and start using it. See {{Ethnic groups}} for a model. - Jmabel | Talk 18:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a new Project Banner template for the project. I'm not sure how to make it add articles it is placed on to a category automatically; but I think it should serve its main purpose - giving the project some visibility and publicity. I realize I'm a brand new member of this project, and I don't want to horn in on others' business; I hope you all find this useful. LordAmeth 00:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, I have evidently mussed up the coding somewhere - anything placed after the template box doesn't appear on the page. If anyone knows more about coding, please help me out with this. B'vakasha. LordAmeth 00:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I just noticed you're saying that's a problem. I thought you had done it intentionally. Do you see that you can show/hide the talk page? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good. I added it to Talk:Rudolf Vrba. I like how it makes the talk page contents appear and disappear, although I wonder if others might object to that, because new editors might not realize there are comments there if they're hidden. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good job at {{WikiProject Jewish history}}. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 10:41, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's been fixed by Kirill Lokshin. Should work fine now. LordAmeth 10:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Night (book)

Night (book), Elie Wiesel's story, is up for featured article status. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 11:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hasidic dynasties

Hi. I wish to ask for your expertise and help in cleaning up Hasidic dynasties articles, specifically those curently listed in the last section of History of the Jews in Romania. I am not knowledgable in Hasidism, and, although I have improved one of the articles which seemed more approachable, I cannot contribute much to rendering them in proper format (except, perhaps, add proper and relevant links for names of Roamanian localities and events in Romania's history). I have done some major work on the History of the Jews in Romania, and am aiming to make articles in connection to it look the best they can - currently, they are merely chaotic. Many thanks. Dahn 19:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merchant of Venice

Jtpaladin (talk • contribs) recently removed from the article Merchant of Venice the statement that "English society in the 1600s was undeniably anti-Semitic," complaining that it was uncited for. As I remarked on the talk page, I'm not sure what one could cite to further show that a country where Jews could not legally dwell (a statement already in the selfsame paragraph) was anti-Semitic.

This had me look at his edits. Other recent work from this charmer includes Talk:Bar Kokhba's revolt#Correction on numbers regarding people murdered by revolting Jews. Judging by his edit history, I suspect he took great pleasure in writing the phrase "revolting Jews".

Anyway: does someone have a citation for the should-be obvious in this matter of England circa 1600 being anti-Semitic? - Jmabel | Talk 06:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a book here called Nazi Anti-Semitism: From Prejudice to Holocaust by Philippe Burrin, The New Press, 2005, ISBN 1565849698, which says (p. 17):

It was not until the twelfth century that in northern Europe (England, Germany, and France), a region until then peripheral but at this point expanding fast, a form of Judeophobia developed that was considerably more violent because of a new dimension of imagined behaviors, including accusations that Jews engaged in ritual murder, profanation of the host, and the poisoning of wells."

He then talks a bit about the reasons, and says the situation didn't change again until the Enlightenment. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 09:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! - Jmabel | Talk 05:27, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pogrom

I'm adding Pogrom to the project; the article is in serious need of review. --M @r ē ino 16:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Animal rights and schechita

In Animal rights - should a section on "Animal rights and anti-Semitism" make a reference to recent campaigns by animal rights activists to ban kosher slaughter? One editor says this is not an animal rights issue because it has to do with "but to the best way to kill animals for food"[2] however there are numerous sources that assert animal rights activists are involved in these campaigns - see Talk:Animal rights. Farnsworth J 02:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish WIKIVERSITY

NEW: On Wikiversity there is now a "Jewish Studies School." Will it become a "duplication" of many things on Wikipedia? What should it's goals and functions be? Please add your learned views. Thank you. IZAK 09:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by User:Fduffy to Hebrew Bible articles and topics

For anyone with an interest in all the articles about the Hebrew Bible; Tanakh, Torah and related subjects, User:FDuffy, who is very serious and devoted to the Biblical criticism POV (by his own admission he is a "third year theology student"), has recently resumed serious editing of Hebrew Bible articles and subjects. Please see the extensive edits via Contributions/FDuffy Your involvement, responses and edits would be important at this juncture, especially if you are capable of adding material from classical Judaic sources since most of these articles are lacking the teachings of Judaism, their obvious true source. Thank you. IZAK 11:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicting names with Christian and Jewish Orthodoxy

Hi: I posted the following at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy#"Orthodoxy" alone is ambiguous. Thank you. IZAK 03:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello: This message deals with a number of issues stemming from the unclear use of the word "Orthodox" and "Orthodoxy." In the past Wikipedia has tried to avoid confusion between the names of Orthodox Judaism and Eastern Orthodox Christianity by not using the word "Orthodox" or "Orthodoxy" alone in titles when other qualifying words, such as "Church" or "Christian" (in the case of Eastern Christian Orthodoxy) or words such as "Synagogue" or "Jewish" (in the case of Orthodox Judaism, would help to qualify the usage of the name "Orthodox" or "Orthodoxy" so that any reader or editor on Wikipedia should not be confused by a title and should know from an article's or category's name whether that subject deals with either Orthodox Judaism or Eastern Orthodox Christianity (also called Orthodox Christianity). In the past there has been no objection to inserting either "church" or "Christian/ity" where the Eastern Orthodox Church articles or categories are concerned and I have tried to move in this direction. It is for this reason that I have made the nominations to rename the ambiguous categories at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 September 14#Orthodox Christian categories. Yet it seems that some editors are not aware of this and I am bringing this to your attention. I will cross-post this message to Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism and to Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism for further discussion. The implications for Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy is that it too should be renamed to Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodox Church or Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodox Christianity to avoid any confusion with Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism. Sincerely, IZAK 02:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Destruction of the Temple

Currently, the content of the article Siege of Jerusalem (70) is leaning a bit towards Christian relevance, prophecy, etc. If anyone is familiar with the Talmudic commentary on the destruction of the temple, prophecy of the destruction within the Torah, or the (undoubtedly major) effects it has had on Jewish history and culture, please contribute to this page. Thank you. LordAmeth 08:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Host desecration

Any takers for some expansion and sourcing at Host desecration, IMHO preferably to a point where splitting of a separate article Accusations of host desecration against Jews would be justified (just as we have Blood libel against Jews split off Blood libel). Please see Talk:Host desecration#Recent disagreements over article introduction. --Pjacobi 20:32, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old biblical accounts

I have some concerns about User:FDuffy who seems to be knowledgeable and makes longs contributions, but bases too much undue weight on the work of "Finkelstein" unearthing the bible, which he uses as a ref for repeated claims "most modern archelogists" and basically sometimes it contradicts notions of King David, Joshua and other events or persons. I'd be glad if people with high knowledge looked around and tried to balance his edits on these subjects [3] as with United Monarchy, Mount Gerizim etc. Amoruso 00:52, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

unbelievably, I didn't see that IZAK had exactly the same concerns and same comment (!) above. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jewish history#Edits by User:Fduffy to Hebrew Bible articles and topics Amoruso 00:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Era notation (AD vs. CE) in articles related to Jewish history

Please take a look at Talk:Josephus#The AD CE thing (again). Relevant guidelines are WP:MOSDATE#Eras. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 00:49, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish history in Eretz Yisrael after Bar Kochva

My dream is to make a really good article detailing everything that went through on the Jewish community, stats, wars and so on. My request is that someone that has knowledge in the area, plesae expand on this section Jewish history#Eretz Yisrael which I think is extremely important, or even start the article yourself and let me know... some information already exists in Category:Jewish-Roman wars and History of the Jews and the Crusades as well as a lot in the Timeline of Jewish history. Thanks. Amoruso 20:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't there an article History of Jews in Eretz Yisrael? Beit Or 21:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, good question. Perhaps it should be History of the Jews in the Land of Israel, as we have whole series on "History of the Jews in X", including even History of the Jews in Japan (which I have nothing against). ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 23:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that such an article doesn't exist is just because no-body, unfortunately, has written it yet :) The thing is the history before Bar Kochva is depicted in here History of ancient Israel and Judah . According to the template it's indeed missing : [4] and stuck in the history. it's complicated, there should probably be History of the Jews in the Land of Israel from which the first section will deal with History of ancient Israel and Judah and redirect there. Amoruso 23:07, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I started an article on the subject. I ask and invite everyone to make it a really good article. I've put a draft version at User:Amoruso/History of the Jews in the Land of Israel where we can then move it to the page when it's completed, so it won't be attacked by anyone until then... Please help improve and make this page valuable. :) Amoruso 18:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moriah

Needs total re-write not from the Finkelstein-Fduffy Point of View.... Amoruso 05:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jews in apostasy

Jews in apostasy article needs attention. IZAK 10:49, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Jews

The article Persian Jews is coming under fire by a lot of trolls who are trying to subvert and deny the Jewish history in Persia and Iran. We need to mobilize there and be prepared to confirm the information there. Valley2city 20:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hayim Greenberg

The article Hayim Greenberg generally needs improvement and expansion, as well as proof of notability. ~~Perhaps someone could add some of the material from the corresponding article he:חיים גרינברג in the Hebrew Wikipedia.~~ (I was mistaken. There does not seem to be a corresponding article in the Hebrew Wikipedia, although there probably should be.) The article was created by User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg, who is now banned. Some of the other articles listed at Special:Contributions/Sheynhertz-Unbayg may also require work. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 16:17, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming issue: Bar Kohkba

In Simon bar Kokhba, the very first mention of the name was recently changed to Shimon bar Kochva. I suppose "Shimon" is technically more correct, and I'm not at all sure about "Kochva", but "Simon bar Kokhba" is a much more normal designation in English. We don't start off the Moses article by writing Moishe. Anyway, I imagine there are conventions for what we do with ancient Hebrew names, I don't know those conventions, and I figure someone on this WikiProject will. - Jmabel | Talk 06:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. There is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew) and there was/is/should be some effort to add it to WP:MOS. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 02:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jewry

Recently, without (as far as I can tell) any clear consensus, numerous articles have been renamed to get the word "Jewry" into the title. I don't like it. For starters, a "Jewry" suggests a single community under a rabbinate. For another, the word is somewhat archaic. A recent example is that for some unknown reason the talk page of American Jews was at Talk:American Jewry. I moved it back.

I would like to see a consensus on this in this WikiProject. I myself would like to see the consensus be against this term, but most important there should be a consensus. - Jmabel | Talk 09:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even though I don't think there is something wrong with the word itself, I don't like it either. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 02:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CfD Anti-Semitic people

Hi: See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 November 23#Category:Anti-Semitic people. Thank you. IZAK 10:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Auschwitz

Hi; I am not Jewish; I am in fact Roman Catholic. But I have a deep and abiding loathing of the Nazi regime in Germany, and have made a large number of edits to both the Auschwitz article and to its talk page; and I have been to the camp. Am I welcome? --Anthony.bradbury 00:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure you are welcome! As WP:JH#Members says, "Our membership is informal. One doesn't have to be Jewish to join." ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 02:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The explicitly numbered, alphabetized list of members does not exactly underline a message of openness, since unless your name happens to be Zweibel, you have to renumber several people to add yourself correctly to the list. - Jmabel | Talk 16:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agreed and fixed. That was changed recently by a new user. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 23:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Messianic "Halakha" etc?

On 25 October 2006 [5], User:Inigmatus moved Messianic religious practices to Messianic Halakha with the lame excuse "moved Messianic religious practices to Messianic Halakha: As discussed in prior archives, with the creation of the new Messianic Judaism template, this page can now be targeted for clean up: This entire page is better split into two articles" [6] thus opening up a whole new can of worms. This fits into this new pattern of vigorous pro-Messianic Judaism POV edits, moves, categories, projects and articles, basically without warning and ignoring the consensus that has been maintained for some time. The main problem is that the over-all thrust of the recent pro-Messianic Judaism activity is to mimic and and get as close as possible to any and all Judaism, particularly Orthodox Judaism, articles and efforts, so that anyone looking at the one will arrive at the other by sheer proximity and similarity. And I repeat this again, because of its relevance: *User:Inigmatus (contributions), self-described as "A mystery user with a point to be made" (wouldn't that make anything he does as automatically POV?), has added a number of features to Messianic Judaism. A month ago he evidently plagiarized [7] the Template:Judaism and created Template Messianic Judaism based on it. He also created Wikipedia:WikiProject Messianic Judaism also obviously plagiarizing the Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism page. This may mislead unsuspecting readers and there ought to be some warning or guidance about this. I would suggest that a new template be develpoed that would be placed on Messianic Judaism pages with a "Note: This article deals with Messianic Judaism. It does not represent normative Judaism and does not have any connection with, or official recognition from, any Jewish denominations." IZAK 03:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome the NotJudaism template

Hi: In view of the above, please see the new {{NotJudaism}} template:

Note: The subject of this article or section does not represent normative Judaism and does not have any connection with, or official recognition from, any Jewish denominations.

Feel free to use it where applicable. Thanks. IZAK 05:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Judas Maccabeus and Judah Maccabee

I have found myself in a funny situation of creating an unintentional content fork (stuff happens), so now we have two article about the same person. Everybody is very welcome to discuss the issue on the relevant talk pages so that we could decide on the appropriate title for the article and proceed with the merger. Beit Or 21:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have further proposed to move Judas Maccabeus to Judah Maccabee. Comments on the talk page will be much appreciated. Beit Or 20:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Bloch

There is some disagreement if it should be mentioned that Marc Bloch was Jewish in the lead section of his Biography article. I created a straw poll here. -- Stbalbach 18:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this has been amicably resolved. - Jmabel | Talk 00:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goa Inquisition

An editor has raised neutrality issues with the article. The subject is part of Jewish history, particularly the section Goa_Inquisition#Persecution_of_Jews, regarding the persecution of Indian Jews during the Christian inquisition in India. I would greatly appreciate perusal and input regarding any neutrality issues. Hkelkar 04:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Second - The page has been blanked by users wishing to whitewash the horrific atrocities performed on Jews.Baka man 00:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for contributors to the Holocaust wikibook

I have started working on a wikibook on the events of the Holocaust. So far ideas have been that: The book will look at the situation in which the Holocaust was able to take place. It will look into those involved and where and when important events took place, to try and establish a clear picture of the extend of what has happened. What happened after the war and what ongoing impact will the events of the Holocaust have now? The idea is to write a book that is suitable for learning at a 'college' level. I have set up a basic structure and now looking for people to start discussing, writing and shaping the book. If you're interested, you can contact me: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User_talk:WietsE or leave a message on the books talk page: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:The_Holocaust/Content. O yeah, and have a look at the Wikibook: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_Holocaust. WietsE 20:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Examination of Holocaust denial

This article is currently up for Afd. Perhaps some here would like to read the article and debate, and state their opinions about its proposed deletion. Jeffpw 21:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zionism

This article is currently tagged POV and I am hoping to find a few people to debate issues on that page, both existing text and citations that I think are important to add. If you are interested, please review and comment at the bottom of the [ZIONISM] discussion page. Pco 16:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yasue Norihiro

Hello all. I've just written an article on Norihiro Yasue, one of the Japanese army officers involved in formulating the Fugu Plan, which, while quite misguided in the reasoning behind it, did save many Jewish lives during the war. The article on him on the Japanese Wikipedia indicates that he was involved in founding Israel, which is impossible since he was in a Soviet labor camp from 1945 until his death in 1950. However, he did meet with Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion in 1926. Does anyone know anything more about this, and what role he may have had? The Japanese Wikipedia article also indicates that he was inscribed in "The Golden Book" as a person who helped make humanity great or something to that effect. A quick cursory search reveals nothing about this Golden Book at all, on the English Wikipedia. Any thoughts? Thanks. LordAmeth 01:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion

Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion FYI: Hi Tomer! A Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion has asserted itself in the Korban article. The project indicates that it is an umbrella project for all of religion and that the current religion projects are subprojects of it, yet its member directory lists only six members. Where is the project coming from? Is it a broadbased project, a very small group with a very big reach, or what? If you know some background or some of its people, would be much appreciated. Best, --Shirahadasha 03:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shira: I noticed this comment. Their assertion is outrageous and false and should be rejected and disputed to the full. There is no "supreme council of religion" on Wikipedia and there never will be. Each religion has its experts and contributors on Wikipedia and none of them will ever tolerate interference from outside busy-bodies. Judging by their user pages, the members of this "religion" project are obviously coming from a Christian POV and seems they now wish to "double dip," pretty funny actually. See my notice on that page, below. Thanks, and may the Lights of Chanukah dispel all ignorance and darkness. IZAK 10:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NOTICE and OBJECTIONS to WikiProject Religion vs. Judaism

Hi: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Judaism. Thanks, IZAK 10:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NOTICE and OBJECTIONS:

No-one has the right to take upon themselves to be the controlling "project" for every religion on Earth!
Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism has been, and shall remain an independent project and will not accept interference in its work based on the assertion that editors not familiar with Judaism's traditions have a self-appointed "right" to interfere with Judaism-related articles by mere dint of being members of a "religion" project.
So far, as of 12/21/06 the mere six members of this project, are mostly Christian, (as self-described on their user pages) and raises the question, why don't they do their work in Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity (81 members as of 12/21/06)? How can a project with six members "pass judgment" on other projects with one hundred and twenty four members?
What will members of other projects, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam (64 members as of 12/21/06) think and react when "religion project" editors will advise what's best for Islam-related articles or not?
Note: Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism adheres to WP:NPOV and is one of the oldest Wikipedia projects with over one hundred and twenty members (as of 12/21/06), a number of whom are respected sysops as well, highly knowledgeable about many matters relating to Category:Jews and Judaism.
It would not be advisable for anyone to interfere with Judaism-related articles or Hebrew Bible-related topics that ignores the broad based consensus and general agreement that exists between Jewishly-oriented editors of Judaic articles, many of which touch upon Jews because being Jewish includes being both a part of Judaism as well as being part of an ethnicity, and a project on "religion" alone cannot and does not have the scope to touch upon issues that effects not just Jews and Judaism, but also Israel and Jewish history, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history (with 33 members as of 12/21/06) and a broad range of related issues and projects, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish culture (19 members as of 12/21/06) and Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel (23 members as of 12/21/06).
Finally, Wikipedia is not the forum to create a de facto neo-"ecumenical project" which is only bound to cause confusion and resentment and will result in confusion and chaos and inevitabley violate Wikipedia:No original research; Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought; and Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms.

Thank you for taking this matter seriously. IZAK 09:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response to NOTICE and OBJECTIONS to WikiProject Religion vs. Judaism

Hi: It is very important that you see the points and the response from User:Badbilltucker about his aims at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#NOTICE and OBJECTIONS to WikiProject Religion vs. Judaism ASAP. Have a Happy Chanukah! IZAK 15:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish state

I strongly disagree with a recent anonymous edit to Jewish state. I reverted a few pieces of it that were clearly sheer liabilities, and I've commented on the other matters at Talk:Jewish state#Dubious recent edits. Trying to assume good faith & all that, so before any unilateral revert I want to allow some time for comment. However, I wouldn't object to anyone else reverting all or part of the edit in question, and I would welcome discussion (criticism is, of course, welcome, but also endorsement of my remarks so that I am not placed in the position of acting unilaterally if and when I revert).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmabel (talk • contribs)

Hasmonean dynasty

Hi, I'd love a little help with Hasmonean. I've been editing alone for a while and need a second opinion. It probably needs cuts, my intros are always too long, I can't find anywhere that states how this Kingdom referred to itself, and the sourcing needs major improvement. Just to get started. :) Best, Kaisershatner 18:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mala Zimetbaum and millions of Holocaust victims and survivors

How notable is this person Mala Zimetbaum, and does she deserve an article of her own? There were millions of Holocaust so should they all get their own articles now? Doesn't that trivialize the event? Seems that if someone gets to write a book or gets mentioned somewhere, they then "automatically" become notable. What do you think? IZAK 16:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adolf Hitler's contacts with Jewish people

Have you ever had a close look at this strange article: Adolf Hitler's contacts with Jewish people? It's full of red links for the supposed Jews he had contact with (do they deserve articles just because they were Hitler's alleged dentist/shoe-shine-boy/chimney-sweep/whatnots etc?) It's weirdly prurient. The heading stinks. Do all the Jews killed in the Holocaust get to be in it? How about all the theories about Hitler having a Jewish ancestor, does that also count as him having "contact" with Jewish people? I doubt that the originators of this article and those who worked on it have rational objectives. It should be merged with something else involving Adolf Hitler or even deleted for its stupidity. (If not, how about Adolf Hitler's contacts with gypsies, Adolf Hitler's contacts with Italian people, Adolf Hitler's contacts with Russian people, Adolf Hitler's contacts with retarded people, Adolf Hitler's contacts with murderers this can go on forever, and then we can even create Category:Adolf Hitler's contacts with people. IZAK 02:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anecdotal, Greece

I received the following emails. I can't think what to do with these anecdotal remarks without a lot of further dialogue, and I'm not going to be doing that. I'm posting the contact here. If someone wants to engage in dialogue with this person, email me (through Wikipedia) and I will pass along the contact address. - Jmabel | Talk 19:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[Content of emails follows]

I'm not well informed enough to post directly, but I'd like to point you to Josephus mentioning Jews in the Ionian Islands.

Now, this is controversial: a Greek diplomat who wasn't oarticularly (sic) pro-Jewish once told me the foundations of Athenian democracy resulted as a reaction to the mistreatement of two Jewish Athenians. I don't know what to make of that.

Keep up the good work.

My dad & my mom's dad hid Jews. Both my parents lost many Jewish friends.

Vasos Panagiotopoulos

[postscript in second email:] I think I read recently that Jews of Southern Italy and Egypt also spoke Greek
[End content of emails]

Is promotion of Holocaust denial and ZOG compatible with this project?

I propose to kick out User:.V. from the list of WP:JH members. The user is a promoter of Holocaust denial [8], see his other edits there and at the talk, and antisemitic conspiracy theories [9], see also its talk page. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 11:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a very logical person. And as such, I don't spend much time on arguments that are not based in logic. As you can expect, baseless accusations are annoying to me. So I'm going to forgo any commentary on this subject for now and actually examine the edits provided which supposedly show that I promote Holocaust Denial and antisemitic conspiracy theories. I think that if someone actually read the edits, they'd surely see that this is a completely inappropriate accusation.

Edit #1 (Holocaust Denial): I found that saying that only supporters refer to "Holocaust denial" as "Holocaust revisionism" was inappropriate for several reasons. For one, it's basically impossible to know that fact. The way that the current revision makes it sound is that, unless someone is a Holocaust denier, they won't call it revisionism. I don't see how this could be stated as true. Secondly, great lengths were taken in the article to differentiate between Holocaust deniers and Holocaust revisionists. An article can't say that two names are the same thing and then contradict itself later. There are other reasons, and you can find them at the Talk page for this issue.

I also fail to see how this somehow makes me a Holocaust denial supporter. Unless David Irving really likes the phraseology "also known as"... well, that must be the case. :P

Edit #2 (ZOG): This is about how I removed the category "Antisemitic Canard" from the ZOG article. This is because "Canard" means a "deliberately false or baseless story". It runs contrary to WP:NPOV to be calling such an accusation false and baseless. NPOV says we specifically cannot take a stand on contentious issues; and calling something "deliberately false" is taking a stand in the most direct way possible. It also violates WP:CAT. It's furthermore made redundant by the category of "Antisemitism". What Humus didn't tell you is that currently, there are more editors favoring removing the category than keeping it in. It seems that after not being able to have a majority on the talk page, he's moved on to smear attacks elsewhere. I have to say, that's pretty sad. You can read more about the issue, including in-depth reasoning behind the policy applied, here I think one user said it best when he said:

"So far as a canard is defined as a "deliberately false story", I can only believe it to be a huge leap of faith to assume all individuals who, for reasons ranging from paranoia to a plainer misinterpretation of historical facts, espouse a belief in this so called ZOG do so only to consciously mislead others and promote hatred. You'd have to interview all people who accept those ideas (and possibly make sure they give a truthful reply) in order to assess the true reasons behind their beliefs." - User: Ishikawa Minoru

I find it really disappointing that Humus has to pull the Holocaust denial card. I also find it very interesting that Humus decides to post this ~~less than 12 hours~~ (actually, I checked specifically: approximately one hour) since I removed that category from the ZOG article as per the Request for Comment discussion. (Of course, the removal was then reverted immediately as a minor edit, which contradicts the minor edit policy.) Coincidence? Maybe, but it doesn't seem like it. Seems more like some kind of harassment to me, which has arisen out of a content dispute. I don't know if this is sincere, WP:POINT, or what, but I'm going to keep assuming good faith. .V. (talk) 16:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This charge is completely unfair and I find it very disappointing that you should make it. .V.'s stated concern is with censorship. If you look at user:.V.#The Principles I Edit By, this should be perfectly clear. .V.'s conduct as an editor, as far as I can see, has been entirely consistent with this stated concern and there is no particular reason to believe that .V. believes in ZOGs, David Irving and all the rest of it.

However, even if my personal judgement of .V.'s beliefs and character is wrong, I consider .V.'s actions as an editor to be consistent with the stated aims and values of Wikipedia and therefore I broadly support them. I can assure you that I emphatically do not believe in Holocaust denial, ZOGs, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion or the rest of it, and that I personally consider David Irving and his like to be a cruel and devious demagogues. Equally strongly, I believe that if phenomena such as the Holocaust are treated as historical events, rather than as unquestionable myths, they may yield useful insights. Bruno Bettelheim understood this, even though he had himself been interned in a Nazi concentration camp, when he questioned aspects of the Anne Frank story. Hannah Arendt also understood this when she wrote Eichmann in Jerusalem.

Many editors of Wikipedia have chosen to be contactable be email. Sometimes contacting an editor off-wiki is a good way to resolve misunderstandings before they escalate. I think that if you had followed this route in this case we might all (including you of course) be feeling a lot less angry and upset right now. I'm not asking you to be any less passionate and adamant in your opinions about the Holocaust, ZOGs or anything else of that kind. I'm simply asking you to be more aware of how easy it is, when we feel passionately about something, to jump to unjustified conclusions.

As I understand it, your fear is, in essence, that if views that are false and objectionable are fairly represented in Wikipedia they are likely to be more widely believed. I sincerely believe this view to be mistaken because I believe that a well-balanced article will encourage the kind of critical reading that will enable people to disinguish what is true from what is not. I cannot speak for .V. of course, but I would be surprised if .V. would disagree with my point of view on this. If you and .V. are prepared to do the hard work of dialogue then you will definitely be able to find the common ground between you and to find a more amicable way to live with your differences. And Wikipedia will be much the better for it. Ireneshusband 18:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ireneshusband, you can't compare the work of Bettelheim and Arendt with the posturing of Holocaust deniers. There's no intellectual content to the latter.

My main encounter with .V. was on Template_talk:The_Holocaust#Controvery_Section, where he argued for adding Holocaust denial to the Holocaust template. The problem is not so much that he argued for it, as the way he did it; he was trolling, in my view, and we'd be at it still if we hadn't stopped feeding him. Out of 724 edits he's made overall, only 148 of them have been to the encyclopedia. Most of his talk page comments have been to (from the top) Holocaust denial, Zionist Occupation Government, Criticism of Holocaust denial, International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust, and 9/11 conspiracy theories. He's also turning up at other articles related to Jews to help revert on behalf of known troublemakers.

.V.'s first edit after he'd set up his user page was to add the citation needed template, so he's not a new user. His first edit to a talk page as .V. was to Talk:Minstrel show, where he argued that slaves in the U.S. should not be referred to as Americans. A previous user arguing the same position was Velocicaptor (talk · contribs) who has also edited as 71.240.17.138 (talk · contribs) [10]; the latter's sole edit was "What a crock! Free negroes could not vote or own land, therefore they weren't "Americans," with the header "Shoot from the lip articles." Velocicaptor restored a reference to Hitler in the New International Encyclopedia (an article he created in July 2005 as 71.240.7.68 (talk · contribs)) calling him "the most influential person of the 20th century," [11] then argued on talk that Hitler was "charismatic." [12] User:Velocicaptor was set up on August 22, 2006 and edited until September 24. User:.V. was set up on August 31, 2006 and edited sporadically until the beginning of November, then stepped it up a bit. Perhaps .V. could say whether he's Velocicaptor, and which other accounts/IP addresses he has edited as. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is my only account ever on Wikipedia, although I was editing off and on (mostly vandalism reverts) for about a month before I made my account. I had an account on Wikiquote which I forget the username of. As I recall, I started a quote page. Hmm, I wonder why most of my talk page discussion has been on controversial topics... maybe because the topic is controversial and requires more discussion? No, it couldn't be that, too obvious...

Anyway, I find this absurd. Your comments seem to be directed at this "Velocicaptor" user, not me. If you think I'm him, why don't you submit a request for Checkuser instead of bringing out baseless accusations? It seems in your extensive investigation, you forgot to look for any evidence that would actually prove your claims. Dates for joining and such is neat and all, but let's see some actual proof here.

As for this Velocicaptor, I don't know the user. I do recall the discussion however, and I believe my logic was that, until given freedom, the slaves were captured people from Africa. Would you say that American POWs in the Vietnam War were Vietnamese? No way. However, if the POW was given freedom and decided to stay in Vietnam... that's a different story.

So please, go do a Checkuser before bringing these unsubstantiated claims against me. .V. (talk) 23:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All you had to say was "no", yet you launched into a lengthy reply. Why are you a member of this project? Where have you contributed positively to the project, and where can I find discussion about Jewish history on your end? I'm a little confused as to why you are a member. What do you have to offer? —Viriditas | Talk 00:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All I had to say was "no"... when someone is going around calling me a Holocaust denier and trying to get me booted from Wikiprojects, I think I'm entitled to a response.

Anyway, I'm a member of this project because one of the fields I'm interested in is Jewish history. I find it interesting, and as such, it's always been a hobby of mine. I'm particularly knowledgeable in the subject, although not in a professional sense. I was under the impression that when you join a Wikiproject, you make an effort to improve articles related to Jewish History. However, I was not aware of any kind of time limit or required rate of edits. I have a busy life, so it's not always easy for me to take time out of my day to edit everything I want to edit. Might I ask, what's the required rate of edits (per month, week, whatever) to remain in the project? .V. (talk) 00:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are indeed entitled to respond, but you replied to only some of my concerns. I'm also concerned about the edits you admit to, and that most of your editing has been to the talk pages of Holocaust denial, Zionist Occupation Government, Criticism of Holocaust denial, and International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust. These are not articles about Jewish history, but about attempts to corrupt and deny Jewish history. It's therefore understandable that members of the project should be confused by your involvment here, and replying to our concerns by asking "Might I ask, what's the required rate of edits (per month, week, whatever) to remain in the project?" isn't helping to dispel the sense that you're trolling. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at. Because I am in this WikiProject, I can't edit those articles for some reason? I've noticed you've made edits to several of those articles as well. The people responding to me on those talk pages (well, some of them, including you) are part of this project also. So why the double-standard? .V. (talk) 01:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We don't only edit those pages. Can you give any examples of articles you've edited that scholars of Jewish history might see as part of the study of Jewish history? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why that should be a concern. Do I have to edit certain articles now? .V. (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're being asked for evidence of interests in areas that this project covers. If you have no such interests, it's not clear why you want to join. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given that most (I think most, maybe all) of the edits you're citing are within the examples of categories given by the project, I think that counts (as I said below.) If that's not enough for you, I'm afraid you'll have to take my word for it. .V. (talk) 02:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to note that on the front page of this project, it says examples of categories which are included. The articles you cite seem to be within those categories. So what's the problem here? .V. (talk) 01:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You said you were interested in Jewish history and had knowledge of the subject. I'm curious, putting the 20th and 21st century aside, what particular aspect of Jewish history interests you? —Viriditas | Talk 02:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm particularly interested in ancient Jewish history. I first stumbled upon it when I was learning Latin. I remember translating a bunch of information about the topic during that course. At the time I wasn't familiar with the ancient history behind the Jews, and as a result, I decided to look into it further. I found it very interesting. .V. (talk) 02:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give concrete examples of your interests? And if you're interested in ancient Jewish history, why the focus on Holocaust denial and ZOG? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which aspects of ancient Jewish history would you have translated from Latin? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give me an example of what you're looking for? I'm not quite sure what you want. As for the translations, I'll see what I can do about remembering specifics. It's been a while since I did those translations. Probably about... 7 or 8 years? Anyway, several were about Jewish people. I'm pretty sure they may have been based on actual events, but I believe they were created by the publisher of the textbook for the sake of providing a translation. There was also a first-hand account of the events of Masada, as I recall. .V. (talk) 02:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

People beginning Latin usually translate Roman texts about Roman society, for obvious reasons. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the program I did was a series of books consisting of stories which read like a novel in that it had chapters and an overarching plot. For example, one of the books was about a philosopher who lived in Pompeii before the eruption. As the books progressed, the Latin got harder and harder. More historical material became interspersed through as time went on, such as the Masada piece. Eventually we ended up translating Latin texts like the Aeneid.

But, it seems I forgot to answer your question about ZOG/Denial. When I search Wikipedia, I tend to surf from similar article to similar article. For example, I did a bit of restructuring on New World Order (Conspiracy), and followed a link to the VeriChip article and reverted vandalism, then followed another link elsewhere. As I recall, I came across the ZOG/Denial articles after I reverted vandalism on a page and then found these (as you can see, most of my early edits are vandalism reverts. I'm quite an avid recent changes patroller.) Because I have open discussions on the talk pages, I've been hovering around those articles recently. .V. (talk) 02:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since your interest is in Category:Ancient Jewish Roman history, you could help the project by going through those articles and categories, adding assessment or project tags, adding critical comments for improvement, determine image and move requests, and check naming convetions. You could then report back to the project on your findings. —Viriditas | Talk 04:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. I'll check that category out when I have the chance. .V. (talk) 04:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an example of .V.'s "assessment" related to Jewish history: [13]. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 04:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's an excellent example of the problem with Humus' allegations. It seems that neutrality is being interpreted as favoring a side. Changing an article to have more neutral language does not mean I support a particular viewpoint. I think the edit speaks for itself. Saying "widely criticized" without a source is inherently weasely, as per WP:WEASEL. It's inherently vague; widely criticized in academic circles? With historians? With the general public? It also is very similar to the "Some/Few/All" section of WP:WEASEL. Also, it's true that the IHR covers topics other than Holocaust Denial/Revisionism. The revision before my edit made it seem as if this was all they did. If you don't believe me, go check out their website. .V. (talk) 05:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to note that no editor other than Humus had a problem with this statement for about 2 months. It was in the article since 20 November and was removed about 25 minutes ago by Humus. Other editors even fixed corrections within the statement, showing that obviously people noticed it was there. So it seems it was an acceptable edit for months... odd that it would suddenly become objectionable now. .V. (talk) 05:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I recommend making some kind of contribution to the project sooner rather than later? Otherwise, some people will question your Holocaust-related edits in light of your membership. As it stands, working on assessing articles in the above category will both help this project and show your good faith. If you go back to making contentious ZOG and Holocaust denial-related edits prior to doing this, I don't see why your name should continue to be listed as a member of this project. Feel free to remove it if you want. —Viriditas | Talk 04:58, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to, but I'm preparing for a trip out of town. I probably won't have time to do any major editing very much until I return. As for continuing my current discussions, I hardly think that discussing contentious issues merits anyone from getting booted out of a WikiProject. I'd like to reach a conclusion to those discussions before starting anything new, anyway. .V. (talk) 05:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are your arrival and departure dates? You seem to have plenty of time for discussion, but little for helping the project. You've declared your topic of interest, and I've pointed you in the direction of contributing constructively to the project. Now, you say you have to go out of town. I would like to bring your attention to the nature of Wikipedia editing patterns. Editors who have been here for any length of time recognize contribution patterns that emerge out of seemingly random data. Geogre's Law is but one example found in AfD, while others may be found in topic-oriented discussions and article contributions. In your case, a pattern is emerging which is diametrically opposed to the goals of this project. If you can't find the time to contribute in your area of interest, again I ask, why are you a member? —Viriditas | Talk 05:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I like to finish things I start before moving on to new things. As for going out of town, I'll be leaving Wednesday and getting back Monday. I may have internet access, but I'm not sure. But before I respond further, might I ask why my edits are "diametrically opposed"? .V. (talk) 05:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed your name from the membership listing of this project. Your contribution history as well as your comments on this page, make it clear that you have no interest in this project. Have a good trip. —Viriditas | Talk 13:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... you won't even explain why my edits are diametrically opposed to the group. Why's that? Maybe because you can't? It seems like baseless assertions have won the day. Well, I guess that's all-too-common on the Internet, and I shouldn't have expected anything different here. Maybe I'm just used to people using reason instead of just doing things when they feel like it.

Well, good luck in your project (because it really seems to be "your" project, as you have this amazing power to remove people from it because you feel like doing so.) .V. (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(L-shift) And here is .V.'s attempt to remove Category:Anti-Semitic canards: [14]. All in the interest of NPOV, of course. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 05:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Canard: "a false and baseless claim."

NPOV: We can't take a stance on controversial subjects.

There's no way that calling an allegation "false and baseless" is NPOV. This was the issue we were discussing on the talk page of ZOG. There's a majority of opinions in the RfC that say it should be removed from the article, do you care to comment? We can go to mediation if you like, as I noted on your talk page.

The CfD passed with a "no consensus" vote, not a keep. Enough said. .V. (talk) 05:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest the reader to take a look at the category in question. A certain pattern of .V.'s view of Jewish history emerges. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 06:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason why you never respond to anything I say, but rather keep talking as if no reply was given? I do encourage the reader to take a look at the category in question, along with the NPOV policy and a dictionary definition of canard. Simple enough. The reader should also examine the discussion on the ZOG article about this category, and how a majority of users are in favor of removing it. .V. (talk) 06:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The basic rules would be:

Is the editor compatible with Wikipedia. If so, they are compatible with the project, if not they are not.
Their personal views are not important. Remember that original research isn't allowed, so it doesn't matter what their views are, as they aren't going in.
Don't be prejudiced about someone's editing, just because of the views they hold; they may still very well be capable of editing without prejudice. I dare say that anti-holocaust-denial supporters also have a view they would like to push, but many still edit neutrally.
No-one has a right to expel anyone else from a WikiProject.
If they are trying to bias wikipedia articles, that's a matter for RFC, not discussion here.

--User talk:FDuffy 20:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC) If you are a holocaust denier then you should be BANNED from a jewish project!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![reply]

I agree with you entirely, FDuffy. But if someone's going to hassle me this much so they can WP:OWN a Wikiproject, they can have it for all I care. .V. _[_Talk|Email] 04:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Location of the Jewish quarter in old Kaifeng

Does anyone on here know where the original Jewish quarter was in comparison to other famous land marks in 12th century Kaifeng City, Henan province, China? This was the home of the Kaifeng Jews. (Ghostexorcist 19:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Raoul Wallenberg

Raoul Wallenberg is up for a featured article. Please read the article and leave critical comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Raoul Wallenberg. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 14:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Carter's Peace not Apartheid

I'm hoping some of you might take a look at a dispute between myself and NYScholar at the bottom of the Palestine Peace not Apartheid discussion page (Section 19: "Criticism vs. Carter's response") and weigh in. To me it seems that the main article is very much not neutral and skewed toward's Carter's POV, but NYScholar is trying to reject my proposed changes. Any input would be appreciated. Gni 16:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music of the holocaust

A question at the reference desk demonstrated WP's lack of content regarding Music of the holocaust. (See Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Music_of_the_holocaust_and_other). Some red links brought to our attention by Antandrus (whose answer at the link posted above includes more relevant information): Dawid Ajzensztadt, Dawid Beigelman, Vladimir Durmashkin, Israel Glatstein, Jakub Glatstein, Jósef Koffler, Joachim Mendelson, Marian Neuteich, Nochem Shternheim, and Izrael Szajewicz. I didn't find a more suitable project for posting this observation. ---Sluzzelin talk 08:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for posting this here! Yes indeed; important topic, and it does not yet seem to have much coverage. I may be able to help some in this area myself. Antandrus (talk) 16:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have started an article: List of composers associated with the holocaust. While it is in construction it will be here [15] Feel free to add to it now. I know this won’t help fix the red links, but I hope it will help consolidate the information. S.dedalus 06:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Argentina

Apparently we have a major discrepancy on the Jewish population of Argentina. - Jmabel | Talk 20:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review for Jerusalem

Some input from members of WikiProject Jewish history is requested in regards to a peer review for the Jerusalem article:

Jerusalem

I have been working on this article for the past three months and I'm hoping to put this up for featured article status sometime in the near future. Essentially, I'm looking for a critique of the article and suggestions for things that might need to be rectified prior to submitting it for a featured article candidacy.

I was a bit worried about the length of the article, but I personally feel it is okay since much of the kilobyte-age comes from the large number of sources rather than from over-the-top text. However, if you disagree, please do offer up suggestions for shortening the article.
Because I know the Jerusalem article is (somewhat) controversial, I want to make sure any issues with neutrality (especially in regards to the capital issue) are squared away before making a final submittal. I believe I did a good job, but perhaps something is subtly biased that I did not notice.
A good look at the prose would be great. I just finished writing the last section, so I haven't gotten the chance to do a thorough proofread; I'll proceed to do that this week while this peer review takes place, but by all means chip in.
I want to ensure the facts are correct. I have never been to Jerusalem, so my writing comes exclusively from extensive research. If something looks factually incorrect, please fix it or make a note of it (although please use caution if the change will conflict with a source). If a source was misinterpreted, please please fix it or make a note of it.
I want to ensure foreign-language words are used and/or translated properly, since I'm not knowledgeable in Hebrew or Arabic.
I'm not sure what to say about local, city, or municipal government in Jerusalem. I may have to keep it short, but if anyone can think of any ideas, that would be great.

You are, of course, welcome to assist in other areas as well. Thanks in advance for any help you may provide. -- tariqabjotu 16:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance of more citations from the Holy Scriptures? WikiNew 16:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you believe additional citations from religious texts would be useful? -- tariqabjotu 17:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great overall; I have a few POV issues, but I'm sure these are just oversights, and I certainly do not make any accusations as to your opinions or anything like that; we must work together to make these sorts of things as objective as possible, and it's a tough business. I just have a few minor stylistic questions. Rather than go in and mess with your wording myself, I thought I should let you work on your own project.
1. "and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre among different sects of Christians." -- different from what? would this be better as "some sects" or "various sects"?
2. "while majority Palestinian areas dominate the north, east and south of the Old City" I think I get what you mean - "areas where there is a Palestinian majority" rather than "the majority of areas which are Palestinian/ majority of Palestinian areas" - but this is a bit ambiguous as it reads now.
3. The section on The Temple Periods ends by saying that for over 18 centuries Jerusalem was not the capital of any independent state; I like this. It's accurate, it's dramatic, and it's an interesting historical fact. But I think that as this could be taken as a political (i.e. POV biased) statement, it should perhaps be balanced by a brief description of the fact that no independent state called Palestine has ever existed and/or of the Greco-Roman origins of the word.
4. The last few sentences of the State of Israel section in the history also seems to be a bit tilted. Perhaps a slight expansion would be pertinent on the problems with the city being split, and the causes of the Six-Day War. As it stands right now, I feel it reads as though Israel's capture of East Jerusalem was entirely selfish and vicious, and that its rule/sovereignty over the united city is somehow unfair or unjust.
5. A more explicit mention of the Three Hills (Mount of Olives, Mount Zion, and Temple Mount) and Three Valleys might be good in the geography section.
6. In the Capital section, "only two members of the United Nations — Costa Rica and El Salvador — have their embassies located within the city limits of Jerusalem...and several consulates within the city itself." Are these consulates of Costa Rica and Ecuador, or consulates of other nations? Seems unclear from the wording.

Thanks for your hard work. I truly do apologize for introducing POV issues into this, but I think a few minor changes here and there would be good to ensure the objectivity of the article's message. LordAmeth 19:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get back to you on a couple of these points, but it may be best for you to address a few yourself because I don't see the ambiguity with some of them, particularly with your second point. I added the number of consulates in regards to your second point, but I didn't specifically mention that those consulates did not include Costa Rica and El Salvador (since it wouldn't make sense for a country to have an embassy and a consulate in the same city). I fixed the first point, but take issue with doing something about the third point (because mentioning Palestine rather superfluously might sound like a subtle desire for a nation-state by the name of Palestine). -- tariqabjotu 15:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've eliminated the ambiguity I had perceived in the "majority areas" phrase. As for the thing about Jerusalem not being the capital for 18 centuries, all I'm saying is that inclusion of this fact could be interpreted as an argument against the legitimacy of Jewish/Israeli claims on it as their capital. By explaining that there has never been an independent state called Palestine, you discount their claims on it as well, balancing the POV. That's my thought. LordAmeth 12:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would shorten the religious significance section. The sub pages should be sufficient for most of what is there. That would help with the length issue. I might also link to category: neighborhoods of Jerusalem somewhere. --יהושועEric 03:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to disagree on the point regarding shortening the Religious Significance section. In comparison to the five articles on the religious significance of Jerusalem, the section is quite short, only touching upon the most basic facts about the significance of the city in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. I'm thinking that perhaps the History section could be cut down, but Jerusalem does indeed have a very long history; the summary in the Jerusalem article is much shorter than the full piece at History of Jerusalem. However, I encourage you to make whatever changes you feel are necessary to cut down on the length. At some later date, I'll calculate how much readable prose is in the article (so we can compare the article with WP:LENGTH), but I'm rather confident there won't be a tremendous issues since there are a heck of a lot of sources that do not count toward the readable prose total. For comparison, this is 63kB of prose. As long as this article is less than 50-55kB of prose (WP:LENGTH actually says less than 60kB), any objection based on length alone would not be warranted. -- tariqabjotu 15:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I determined that the article in its current state is 34 kB of readable prose, well within the limits of WP:LENGTH. See User:Tariqabjotu/Jerusalem. -- tariqabjotu 04:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)\[reply]

It is important to distingush between the Old City and the New or West and East Jerusalem. Fbc215 18:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kraków pogrom

Hi, could someone please take a look at the Kraków pogrom article? I've recently tagged it as part of this project, and there has been some discussion regarding sources and its status as a pogrom due to the confirmed number of deaths being one. I would appreciate if someone could stick their head in for a look? Thanks SGGH 08:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jerusalem on WP:FAC

Jerusalem is currently undergoing a featured article candidacy. The FAC page is transcluded below (feel free to remove it from this page if the FAC gets too long):

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jerusalem

Jewish Question needs work

Jewish Question is currently stubby and needs more cites. I should think that we'd be able to do quite a lot with this. -- Writtenonsand 13:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gathering of Israel

Oh boy, what a beautiful OR essay. I wish that more editors would read up on WP policies before spending long hours writing new articles. --Shuki 23:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what's wrong with that. Certainly, this person needs to cite their sources, but it's not as if they're proposing a whole new idea. Surely the ideas they discuss here have already been proposed, discussed and published... LordAmeth 01:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli currency

There's a discussion over the naming of "Israeli lira" or "Israeli pound". See Talk:Israeli lira#Requested move. Epson291 08:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hebrew calendar FAR

Hebrew calendar has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -Kicking222 15:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image collages in Jew, Ashkenazi Jews, American Jews

There is a sudden effort by new user(s) to turn the infoboxes in these articles into a crazy POV tapestry of images. Some of them are just too much (to my taste), some misrepresent the subject as misogynistic freakish (Einstein with tongue out) bunch of revolutionaries. Please consider joining the discussions at the corresponding talk pages. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 23:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My preference is for historic images. They could be living persons whose fame is long established (Sandy Koufax, Lauren Bacall, Stephen Spielberg, Joseph Lieberman etc.). But should this be a constantly changing mosaic of the latest pretty face Jewish movie stars, popular musicians, and atheletes? Let's have the collage instead be a fixed mosaic of persons who will still be remembered 20 years from now.Metzenberg 09:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comments - collage image at Ashkenazi Jews

A controversy currently exists at the page Ashkenazi Jews concerning the selection of a collage image with a sampling of famous Ashkenazi Jewish individuals. The collage appears in the Infobox for the article. Please visit Talk:Ashkenazi_Jews to offer your opinion. --Metzenberg 09:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Holocaust Trains

Hello! Could I ask members to review the article Holocaust trains, which through a large re-write was saved from an AfD proposal. It would also be welcome if members could input to the dialogue on the articles talk page about an appropraite name for the page. Thank You! Rgds, - Trident13 11:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles needed

Is anyone capable of writing articles about:

History of the Jews in Kyrgyzstan and
History of the Jews in Turkmenistan (it's only a blank page.)

Thank you, IZAK 08:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warsaw Uprising

I don't know how related to the project this is, but the article may be demoted from FA status soon, so any help in improving it (especially adding inline citations) to prevent that would be excellent. nadav (talk) 21:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

stub rename

proposal here to rename {{Jewish-hist-stub}} to {{Judaism-hist-stub}} may be of interest ⇒ bsnowball 18:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assesment and importance pages and header created

I have brought the header template into accord with those such as {{WikiProject Israel}} allowing for the small, nesting, quality assesment and importance assesment flags. I have also created the appropriate categories. Now its time we all try and start assessing/rating the articles. -- Avi 20:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also set up the assessment bot to collect stats, and added the matrix to the project page. -- Avi 21:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bad article on Jewish Slave trade

Hi. I've just come across Jewish Slave trade, which was created by Serenesoulnyc (talk · contribs), who has since been banned for sock-puppetry. The article is poorly written, barely cited and smells to me of POV and OR.

The "References" section lists specific pages in four books:

Marvin Lowenthal, The Jews of Germany: A Story of Sixteen Centuries p. 1–18
David Brion Davis, The Problem of Slavery in Western Culture p. 64–66
Chaim Potok, Wanderings: Chaim Potok's History of the Jews p. 395.
Aymn Almsaodi, The Historic Atlas of Iberia p. 93.

The same books and the same pages are listed in White slavery#References. I suspect someone has been sneaking anti-Semitic POV into Wikipedia. I suggest checking the contributions of Serenesoulnyc and his/her socks.

I don't have access to any reference libraries, nor do I know much Jewish history. Could someone please take a look at these articles and clean them up? Or perhaps Jewish Slave trade should simply be deleted?

Cheers, CWC 11:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Potok reference is complete bunk. Page 395 talks about medieval interpreters of the Talmud. Davis 64-65 deals with slavery in biblical times. I suspect the other references are similarly nonsense. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This garbage has been inserted into Sharmuta, Sarmatians, and God knows how many other articles. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Briangotts has deleted Jewish Slave trade, and cleaned up White slavery and Sarmatians. Thanks for that. Other editors have cleaned up and prod'd Sharmuta. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jewish Slave Trade.

Someone probably should check the edits of Serenesoulnyc (talk · contribs) and his/her socks for similar garbage. I'm afraid I'm not volunteering. CWC 17:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Important figure categorization

People like Nevi'im, Rishonim, etc. are they part of WP:JEW, WP:JH, or both? -- Avi 17:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ebionites

The Ebionites article is featured on the Wiki main page July 9th. Vandalism of the article has already begun. Please help to monitor the article and rv vandalism as needed. Thank you. Ovadyah 02:59, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dab

Is there an established precedent for whether to disambiguate a title as (bible) versus (biblical)? There seems to be dual usage, as well as others like (ancient city) etc. Do let me know, Tewfik^Talk 22:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that there is no standard: take a look at Category:Hebrew Bible people and Category:Torah people and their sub-categories. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 22:29, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warsaw Ghetto

Warsaw Ghetto and related articles (Warsaw Ghetto Uprising etc.) - pretty important and quite good quality IMO. --HanzoHattori 21:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red Auerbach

Odd place to advertise for a WP:NBA guy, but Jewish Boston Celtics NBA legend Red Auerbach is currently a GAC. Feel free to feedback and improve on the greatest Jew basketball has produced. —Onomatopoeia 07:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed extra condition on category:jews

I added the extra condition for the category:jews that people should only appear in this category if their jewish ethnicity or adherence to Judaism is a defining characteristic or related to their notability. I was reverted very quickly. Please let us know what you think at category_talk:jews. Andries 17:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC) I moved this here from the main article page and put it in chronological order --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish Slave Trade article is a mess

Someone needs to clean up this article.

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

I think that completely replacing it the Jewish encyclopedia version would be a step up. Jon513 15:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further improvements to the Ebionites article

Can anyone help out on further improvements to the Ebionites article? The editors that guided it through FA need a break. The article is currently beset by an aggressive editor pushing an Essene agenda. I have asked for commentary from Ft/N and an RFC to bring in a more balanced perspective. The Religious perspectives section also needs expansion. Ovadyah 21:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review for Israel

I have put forth a peer review for the Israel article at Wikipedia:Peer review/Israel/archive1. Comments are welcome there (and on Talk:Israel, if you prefer). -- tariqabjotu 19:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom case status

At this moment, a significant case is occurring at the page for arbitration proceedings, at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Allegations of apartheid/Workshop, a subpage of Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Allegations_of_apartheid.

A group of editors has been developing an article entitled "Allegations of Israeli apartheid." In response, a group of editors attempted to build a set of articles detailing allegations of "apartheid" in other countries.

In response some editors of the Israel-apartheid article allege that editors who worked on articles about other countries have violated WP:POINT. However editors of articles on other countries say that they were trying to foster some objectivity.

Currently, the ArbCom case has shown somewhat of a pattern of conflicting allegations about various users' conduct, related to both sides in the dispute. This was inevitable, since ArbCom's primary focus is user conduct, not content disputes.

Your help might be useful. Please go to this proceeding and insert your comments on what you feel are the best ways to achieve fairness and balance, in accordance with Wikipedia principles.

If you wish, you may also weigh in at WP:VPP, on the question of whether ArbCom or some other body should address content disputes, in order to somewhat reduce the cycle of accuations and allegations.

Thank you. --Steve, Sm8900 03:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eliezer Silver

User:Eretzprevails keeps on adding a personal account at the end of the page - It has been transferred to the talk-page twice. But User:Eretzprevails is persisting it be on the main page. I am not quite sure how to stop this? Chesdovi 11:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ebionites FAR

Ebionites has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Avi 18:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

We've uploaded nearly all of our encyclopedia topics, a list of which is available here. Most are under Judaism category "The Holocaust." Only the content copy and pasted from this user name is available for public domain usage from the USHMM. We also plan on adding pictures (we have already uploaded a good many from our Buchenwald collections as a trial onto the Wikimedia Foundation's site under "The Holocaust" category) but, again, only those selected by the museum are free from copy violations--USHMM T·C 20:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yisrael Meir Kagan mystery

The non-hassidic Chofetz Chaim is categorised under Category:Hasidic rebbes, however I can not see this category on the edit page to remove it?! Chesdovi 11:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it is from Template:Infobox Rebbe. Jon513 17:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Telshe yeshiva photo

I found this photo among my uncle’s belongings. I think it is a photo of the Telz yeshiva in Lithuania which he attened in his youth. Can anyone help establish what the photo is of and who is on the podium? It was taken around 1936. Thanks! Chesdovi 16:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Center for Jewish History

I was quite surprised today to discover that there was no Wiki article on the above.

So I started a "stub" on it.

Immediately thereafter I encountered a dispute with an editor who hold that it's not "notable"!

I ask all Jewish history and culture buffs to speed over to the article and help out!

Best regards, --Ludvikus 15:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concentration camp brothels

I just stumbled over this sentence about WWII concentration camps: "Jewish male prisoners had access to (and used) Jewish women forced into camp brothels by the Nazis, who also used them.". This is in the article Violence against women. Alfons Åberg 14:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan Czarniecki

Information about persecutions of Jews by troops of Stefan Czarniecki is being removed from article as not relevant. Jewish history tags are removed also. I might be wrong of cause, but somehow I feel persecutions of Jews does have something to do with Jewish history. Opinions? M0RD00R 16:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see discussion on talk. Being a commander during a period many Jews (and others) suffered does not merit inclusion of details of those sufferings in a biographical article, for the same reasons that few bios of WWII commanders go into any detail on Holocaust.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 17:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He was not "a commander during a period many Jews (and others) suffered" he was a commander of troops that massacred Jews throughout the Poland. See the difference? M0RD00R 17:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In those times, soldiers of various armies would massacre anybody, it did not matter if Jews, Poles or Germans. Czarniecki was not an anti-Semite, he was the typical product of the 17th century Tymek 17:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The massacres of Jews were not random acts of violence. Jews were specifically targeted under accusations of supporting the Swedes. If you'll find academic source for "he was not an anti-Semite he just massacred Jews from time to time, you know typical 17th century thing", you can include this information into the article, but do not delete referenced information about destroyed Jewish communities. Let the reader decide how typical is that. M0RD00R 17:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

During the Swedish invasion of Poland, several Jews showed disloyalty to Poland, actively cooperating with the Swedes. Czarniecki would punish all traitors, no matter of their origins. Read Wespazjan Kochowski and his "Klimakteria" or Jakub Los Tymek 18:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And this explains why you are removing referenced information about destruction of entire Jewish communities (not several Jews) throughout the Poland, how? M0RD00R 18:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The times of Deluge reduced Polish population by millions. Dead included hundred of thousands of Jews - but also Poles, Ruthenians, Germans, not to mention Swedes, Cossacks or Muscovites. We don't include information on destruction of Jewish, Polish, Ruthernian or other communities, entire towns were burned, villages wiped out. This is not relevant to the biographies of military commanders - just as the details of more infamous Jewish killings by Cossacks are primarily discussed in Chmielnicki Uprising, not in the biography of Bohdan Chmielnicki.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 20:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take a good look this section [[16]]. And I'm not seeing any persistent attempts to delete it. Sadly it's not the case here. M0RD00R 20:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took a good look on it before I wrote my previous post. Chmielnicki article has good sections on how his person is seen in Polish, Russian, Ukrainian and Jewish historiographies. They, first of all, clearly identify their national/cultural biases. Second, they cite modern research (and not decades or centuries old encyclopedias). Third, Chmielnicki, unlike Czarniecki, is a major person in Jewish history, and his article, without info on his role on it, would be vastly incomplete - however it is only a short summary of information found in Khmelnytsky_Uprising#Jewish. If you don't see the difference between Czarniecki's and Chmielnicki's roles in Jewish history, please, read up more on those subjects (and read up on it outside old encyclopedias) - and edit the relevant articles afterwards.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Judaism vs. Jewish history

I'm not sure what's the difference?

Can anyone offer an explanation?

Jewish history Project‑class

	Judaism portal 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.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

vs.

Judaism Project‑class

	Judaism portal 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
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 21:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Participation is requested

Please see this [17] - can someone explain to me how to get wider participants ? thanks, Zeq 21:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish history of Wales & N. Ireland needed

The series of articles on the History of the Jews in Europe is complete. All the European countries have articles, even if they are stubs for now. However there are still two more: History of the Jews in Wales and History of the Jews in Northern Ireland (see related articles History of the Jews in England and History of the Jews in Scotland) that are listed as countries in template {{|Europe topic|History of the Jews in}} that require someone to add information and start the article. If you are able to, your efforts would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, IZAK 07:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/The Protocols of Zion (imprints)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Protocols of Zion (imprints). Thank you, IZAK 09:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/The Jewish Bolshevism

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jewish Bolshevism. Thanks, IZAK 10:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion - Jewish Texan History

Many articles in both History of the Brenham Jewish Community as well as History of the Galveston Jewish Community are being considered for deletion. These are two Jewish communities that have over 150 year histories and many notable individuals. Thanks. Bhaktivinode 22:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - The first Jewish Texan article proposed for deletion today was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Temple Freda. Thanks. Bhaktivinode 22:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just listed the AfD at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism. You should consider doing that for any future AfDs. A listing there will get a lot more attention than one here (you can list it here anyway, but also list it there). — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 05:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations of Texas Jews articles for deletion

Hi: Your input would be greatly appreciated at the discussion Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Nominations of Texas Jews articles for deletion. Thanks a lot, IZAK 21:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting Ashkenazi intelligence as a separate vote

In a sweeping nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Race and intelligence (history), the Ashkenazi intelligence article was not listed as part of an original group in the AfD until a later user mentioned the article and then the nominator decided to add it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Race and intelligence (history)#One more? Ashkenazi intelligence. Unfortunately, by that time the nomination had already attracted a lot of negative attention with ten delete votes already having been cast making it essentially impossible for those only concerned with the Ashkenazi intelligence subject to be heard or noticed, and among the votes that are still coming in afterwards it is not clear if they understood what the serious tinkering additions by the nominator were all about, or if he was even right to do so. Futhermore, being "Ashkenazi" is not a "race" by any definition. The Ashkenazim are a cultural and historical group of Jews, not really even an ethnicity, consisting of a variety of Jews with a common religious and historical culture originating mainly from France, Germany, Poland, Lithuania, and Russia, so that Ashkenazi Jews are a recognized and respectable group, not a "race" in any way, so it is a mistake to match them up or compare them to any "racial" articles. For the sake of clarity the Ashkenazi intelligence should be removed from this nomination due to the confusion and the non-orderly and out of sequence manner in which it was included. The Ashkenazi intelligence article survived an AfD in February, 2007, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashkenazi intelligence. Based on the incorrect manner and negative timing that the Ashkenazi intelligence was included in the general vote about "Race and intelligence" it must be withdrawn from this AfD. If anyone wishs to have a new nomination, they can go ahead, but it definitely should not have been lumped with a set of articles not connected to it in content or spirit. Your input and intervention is requested. Thank you, IZAK 19:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SEE: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Relisting Ashkenazi intelligence as a separate vote: "I think that pages should only be grouped together on XfD if all the following criteria are met: (1) There is a single place to discuss all the pages. (2) It is unlikely that any user will have diferent opinions about the pages. (3) They were all listed within an hour of when the discussion page was created. As the third criteria clearly wasn't met, I think that lumping it in here was the wrong thing to do. Od Mishehu 08:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)" Thank you, IZAK 19:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC) IZAK 19:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Serious discussions about using the names Reform vs. Progressive Judaism

Please see the present discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/open tasks#WikiProject Judaism needs help - geographical bias concerns. Your input would be greatly appreciated. (They are the result of discussions that unfolded at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#Concern about duplicating Reform and Progressive labels.) Thanks so much, IZAK 00:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:The Haunted Angel request for adminship

This admin candidate has a Nazi emblem on his user page. Any thoughts [18] about his fitness for adminship? I'm not Jewish and I thought it was very ill judged, he considers it a joke ('I copied this box from another user's example, because I thought it was funny') and hasn't seen fit to remove it despite several complaints in his RFA. Perhaps he's right and I'm completely off base here, or perhaps not. Nick mallory 15:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Massacre of Uman

HI: User TShilo12 (talk · contribs) asked me a question about Massacre of Uman and perhaps someone here can help him out. The qustion he asks is: "I just listened to a program of Gavriel Aryeh Sanders' (http://www.gavrielsanders/com/) on Uman, and went and looked up the city article, and found a link to this article, which seems to have no references and a lot of weaselwording. I don't know whose attention it would be best to bring this to, to effect some improvement, so I'm hoping that by bringing it to your attention, that you will know whom best to contact." Please contact User:TShilo12 if you are able to help him. Thank you, IZAK 05:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish history by century

Although I'm not presently a member of the project, I question User:IZAK's adding multiple categories and multiple articles in multiple categories related to Jewish history. I think, at the very least, no article should be in more than two of the Jewish history by century categories, someone needs to make sure that subcategories are subcategories rather than possibly supercategories, etc. Wikipedia:Categories is being streched beyond recognition, if not just being ignored. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nachtigall Battalion and Roman Shukhevych

Attention is needed from project members on these two articles. User:Bandurist is using unreliable sources, such as Wikipedia mirror answers.com and the Ukrainian Wikipedia in order to justify their edits to the article. The user is also removing or attributing to "Jewish sources" the well-sourced material on the involvement of the Nachtigall Battalion and its commander Roman Shukhevych in the massacre of Jews in Lviv in July 1941. Beit Or 20:52, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Frank Featured article review

Anne Frank has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Tvoz |talk 16:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also added the WikiProject Jewish history banner to Talk:Anne Frank - I'm not sure how this is supposed to be done, but it seems obvious that the article should be covered by your project. Apologies if I handled it incorrectly. Tvoz |talk 05:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Winrod articles

The Gordon Winrod and Gerald B. Winrod articles are being skewed by an editor who may be a family member of the subjects. Tactful help from additional experienced editors who are interested in nailing down facts of living persons would be useful. Sources beyond those listed might include: [19], [20], [21]. I bring it here because this project seems the closest to dealing with antisemitism. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 15:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Raoul Wallenberg

Hi, this article was a wreck. I didn't have much time, but I tried to make some fairly radical changes to bring it back to a decent state, after a series of edits by Attila Lajos (who wrote his PhD thesis on Wallenberg [22]) that gave the article a rather non-neutral point of view. I hope that by posting here I can draw some attention to it so that someone might be able to give it the time it deserves. –Joke 21:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Jews in Wales

Still needed is an article about the History of the Jews in Wales to complete the History of the Jews in Europe. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 12:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Jews in Singapore

Hi, there is a need for an article about the History of the Jews in Singapore. At the present time there are articles about the Chesed-El Synagogue and the Maghain Aboth Synagogue in Singapore that have some facts that may help such an article. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 15:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan Czarniecki again

Opinion of an expert needed. This persons role in Jewish history is constantly beeing censored out by certain group of hyper-patriotic users. Because this person is mentioned in Polish national anthem any different reaction would be a surprise, but nevertheless Czarniecki troops destroyed dozens of Jewish communities all over Poland and this fact is worth mentioning in Wikipedia I guess. So far Jewish encyclopedias and other sources are dismissed as WP:FRINGE and the section is being deleted. M0RD00R (talk) 19:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the problem is that you are trying to portait him as singling out Jewish communites while ignoring the fact that hundreds of thousands of people from other ethnic groups died also during the war. In short the article reads as he was leading a war against Jewish people which is obviously false and manipulative--Molobo (talk) 20:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This doed not change the fact that the Jews there targeted intentionally. The destruction of dozens of Jewish communities was the collective punishment for alleged support for Swedes. M0RD00R (talk) 20:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Poles, Germans, Protestants, Ruthanians who supported Swedes were also punished intentonally in collective punishment--Molobo (talk) 20:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are more than welcomed to expand the article on Czarniecki's crimes against Poles, Germans, Protestants, and Ruthenians. But don't delete sourced information that does not suit your bias. M0RD00R (talk) 21:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish history

I don't want to sound like a crank, but does anyone here watch pages? Jewish history got shredded back in October, when this edit took out over 5000 bytes. None of it ever got restored until today when I did it. It was one of those situations where three or four acts of vandalism were committed consecutively and only one got reverted. I'd be happy to join up and try to help. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 11:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Houston Stewart Chamberlain

Please, somebody visit Houston Stewart Chamberlain, and look over the somewhat heated discussion on Talk: Houston Stewart Chamberlain. The article is in my belief an insidious piece of apologia/revisionism and is in desperate need of a recasting. This is a position I try to state clearly and source amply. But I am finding myself ill-equipped (emotionally) to deal with the editor who has taken it upon himself to protect it. Some of the statements that are made are pretty shocking. I am an animal ecologist - and had no idea how intense meddling with history could be! By all means leave questions/comments here or on my talk page or on the Chamberlain talk page. Thank you, Eliezg (talk) 10:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the record this is the edit + reversion that triggered the discussion, but the problems with the article are much much deeper than the lead. Eliezg (talk) 10:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish history in Saudi Arabia

An odd situation has arisen in the course of adding to Category:Jewish history by country. In that parent category (part of the larger Category:Jewish history) the "Jewish histories" of any country has been categorized under "Category:Jewish country-xyz history" but Category:Jewish Saudi Arabian history has now been challenged because it contains articles about events "before" Saudi Arabia came into official existence. But my objection is, in that case, one could then exclude the facts and events of Jewish history within almost all modern countries because when Jewish history events happened in them hundreds or even thousands of years ago, the modern countries in whose territory they happened had not yet come into existence. See the discussion at Category talk:Jewish Saudi Arabian history. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 04:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Judeopolonia"

Please have a look at League of East European States, an article which was originally titled "Judeopolonia", a term for this which is apparently mostly used in conspiracy literature. It'll be difficult to tease out the particulars of this obscure historical event, but we should be careful that popular mythologies don't adversely affect the article. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 05:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Jews in Europe

History of the Jews in Europe has been added to the request for expansion list. At the moment it's got a very brief and incomplete history, and a list of individual country articles. Can anyone help make this the article it should be? Grunners (talk) 18:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Holocaust heroes - proposed list

As one of the editors on Oskar Schindler, I've noticed that the "See also" section there has become a virtual list of Holocaust heroes and is growing to an unwieldy size. Maybe it's time to create a "List of Holocaust Heroes" article (for want of a better term)? I'd be happy to do so, but first wanted to propose it here. JGHowes ^talk - 18:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(further comment): I see there are already List of people who assisted Jews during the Holocaust, Righteous Among the Nations and List of Righteous Among the Nations by country. The problem is these aren't always shown as "See also" wlinks on some articles, which may also lack {{The Holocaust}} tags, thus the existence of these list articles is not always readily apparent to the casual reader. I'll do a Redirect page from "Holocaust rescuers" to List of people who assisted Jews during the Holocaust, matching the piped wikilink at {{The Holocaust}} JGHowes ^talk - 06:00, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I post this here in error, but I thought it might be of interest. I'd like to point out that our article about Albert Kesselring, among other things, asserts that "Kesselring attempted to save the Jews of Rome - as he had earlier saved those of Tunis - by employing them on the construction of fortifications", as if Kesselring was sort of Mr. Schindler in Field Marshall uniform, which left me speechless, so to speak (not quite: see here)... --Piero Montesacro (talk) 18:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shoah in Norway

I have started what is likely to become an extensive article on the Shoah in Norway. Any help is appreciated, whether it's adding material, source references, or copyediting. I have also created Jewish deportees from Norway during World War II, which includes a comprehensive list of those who were deported to concentration camps, where the overwhelming majority were murdered. There has been one attempt at blanking this page, as it's quite specific; but as far as I know it's the only place on the web where this list exists. --Leifern (talk) 03:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have written several additional articles, most of them biographical, of notable individuals who were deported from Norway - among them Cissi Klein, Ruth Maier, Berthold Epstein, and Moritz Rabinowitz. Leo Eitinger has had an article for some time, but articles will also be written about Herman Sachnowitz, Kai Feinberg, and Samuel Steinmann. There will also likely be separate articles about the underground railroad to Sweden, though this will include all those who made their way across the border; and also the restitution case in the mid-1990s, and what was known as the Feldmann case. With time, the issue of legal culpability for crimes against Jews in Norway will also get its own article, but this is a highly contentious issue, to this day. One question for the group: what should be the right category for articles related to the Shoah in Norway? Should it be Shoah in Norway, or perhaps Holocaust in Norway, or more specifically Persecution of Jews World War II Norway? Any thoughts? --Leifern (talk) 15:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Postage stamps and postal history of Israel

For the Israel stamp collectors and lovers, there is no article yet for Postage stamps and postal history of Israel (part of Category:Postal history by country) that would have so many Jewish themes. Feel free to go ahead and start it. (See the other country's in Category:Postage stamps by country that have theirs.) Nothing for Israel on Category:Postage stamps by country neither on List of country articles containing postal sections nor on List of philatelic bureaus. (but just a teeny note on Israel at Compendium of postage stamp issuers (Io - Iz).) This is truly a great shame and pity because Israel, and before that when it was the British Mandate produced and continues to issue the most beautiful and extensive stamps by any country. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 11:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Jewish Gestapo" and "Rabbi" Abraham Gancwajch?

Seems that User Lysy (talk · contribs) has just added articles about Jewish Gestapo and a "Rabbi" Abraham Gancwajch who worked with.for the Shoner HaTzair? Is this legit? Sounds very odd and the sources seem POV antisemitic. I redirected Jewish Gestapo to Group 13. See also some of the "funny" discussions at Talk:Tykocin pogrom. IZAK (talk) 13:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism in Britain & Ireland

Why is there virtually nothing written on Wikipedia about antisemitism in Great Britain or Ireland?? This is a major historical & cultural subject. Antisemitism around the world has sections for numerous countries, but not the UK or Ireland. The History of the Jews in England details the medieval persecution & expulsion of Jews, but does not cover the modern history of Antisemitism, or attitudes & portrayals of Jews during the 19th & 20th centuries. It seems like a huge subject has just been glossed over. 86.133.3.140 (talk) 01:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Jews in the United Arab Emirates

Am I the only person who has a problem with the title of this article?--Kimdime69 (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What problem do you have with it? --MPerel 19:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My problem is that this article is about antisemitism in UAE and about UAE-Israel relations, it's not about the "history of the Jews in the United Arab Emirates", anyway I'm not sure that a jewish community existed in this country.--Kimdime69 (talk) 19:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably a more suitable discussion to bring up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jewish history, since it's not about Judaism, the focus of this project. --MPerel 20:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again : ) The article does seem to be more about modern policy toward Jews rather than about history of the Jews. --MPerel 21:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, so the title is incorrect ;)--Kimdime69 (talk) 21:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kimdime69: You are being too hasty. The Jews, as long-time residents and citizens of all areas in the Middle East have been part and parcel of all parts of the Arabian Peninsula as well. The information varies from location to location. The UAE leadership has carefully expunged any mention of its own country's Jewish history. As part of a series on the History of the Jews in the Arabian Peninsula the fact that the UAE dedicates so much effort and time to the question of Jews, makes it part of its own focus on Jewish history by default. Would you prefer that the article be called Antisemitism of the United Arab Emirates which it documents very well? IZAK (talk) 02:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: See the important new additional information with citations added at History of the Jews in the United Arab Emirates#Early history based on the notable journey of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela to that part of the world 1165-1173. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 04:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Jewish history

Can someone explain why the {{WikiProject Jewish history}} template is broken, and hopefully fix it. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 05:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Solomon Marcus Schiller-Szinessy

Hello Sir or Madam I am the great-great-great-grand-daughter of the above. By chance I came up a Site yesterday on english Wikipedia titled Solomon "Mayer" Schiller-Szinessy and was more than astonished and shocked! His name was SolomonMarcus not Mayer, this is nonsense.

I saw the link to the jewish enceclopedya, they have it wrong, I already sent them a protest- email. I uploaded a copy of his death certificate on the "Mayer" site. Nobody ever in my family had a name like Mayer, it makes no sense having 3 Last names. The last name is Schiller-Szinessy. I have all my ancestry up until today, so I know his name well.

Check in Trinity College in Cambridge, I also have more proof about that, other certificates, I would be glad to help out with it if needed. It really did upset me when I saw it!

Most of the sites I googled, so many of them, have the name right, please check on it.

Also, I am not an expert on Wikipedia, I don't know how to change all the links to it, I tried desperately last night.

I really owe it to my ancestor to get things right. Thank you!

Barbados66 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbados66 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Endangered image

Image:1938 Jews arrested during Kristallnacht line up for roll call at Buchenwald.jpg is tagged for deletion since it's an orphaned fair use image. Does anyone know if the image has ever been included in an article or whether a valid public domain claim can be made? It's from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum archives. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 07:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of Jews in Poland FAR

History of Jews in Poland has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

FAR nomination

Ku Klux Klan has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 23:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Szmul Zygielbojm

A question has come up concerning the Bundist leader Szmul Zygielbojm and whether his religion should be shown in the infobox. Please comment at Talk:Szmul Zygielbojm#Religion. Thank you. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 23:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

History of the Jews in...

I don't think this heading is appropriate for the histories of the religion of Judaism of a particular country. Judaism is a religion, and it has even been suggested that Jews be properly called "Judaists," though this is not part of my proposal. The article History of the Jews in the United States, for instance, should be renamed to a simpler title like Judaism in the United States. You never see an article beginning with "History of the Roman Catholics in...," "History of the Protestants in...," "History of the Muslims in...," and the list goes on! Some of you may say Jews are an ethnic group, but even that doesn't support the supposed name of an article like "History of the Italians in the United States" or "History of the Caucasians in Africa." As far as I know, my ancestors were Italian Roman Catholics on my mother's side and Russian Jews on my father's side. Therefore, it can then be understood that I am half-Catholic and half-Jewish, or half-Italian and half-Russian. If we can see it this way, it will all make perfect sense. Thoughts? Marcus2 (talk) 19:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The articles are not histories of the Jewish religion in this country or that, they are about the Jewish people. I think the same general rule applies with respect to Catholicism and Protestantism. An article about the history of the Catholic religion would be named History of Catholicism in X, but a history of Catholic people would be named History of Catholics in X or History of Catholic people in X.

I did a quick search for articles about "History of X in Y", but here are a few:

These are histories of religions:
These are histories of ethnic groups:
This is a history of the Muslims, not of Islam
- History of Islam in southern Italy

With the exception of the last article, which is misnamed in my opinion, the articles are titled consistently. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 21:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Here's an obscure one for ya: History of the Jews in China. I agree with Malik. There is a line between Jewish ethnicity and Jewish religion. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The two of you make very good points, and I'm very impressed. There are people with other faiths, such as Roman Catholicism, Islam, and atheism, who profess themselves as being Jewish. But maybe we should separate "History of the Jews" from "History of Judaism" and have two separate articles titled, for example, "History of the Jews in the United States" and "History of Judaism in the United States." One article can focus on Jews as ethnics, and the other one can focus on adherents of Judaism. Or we could incorporate both into one article for each country, having a title such as "History of Jews and Judaism in the United States." I hope these suggestions help. Marcus2 (talk) 14:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the major focus of the "History of Judaism in the United States"? Do the Jews of America have rituals that differ greatly than those in other countries? I guess one thing would be to comment on the spread of Judaism within the continent, but, again, that falls in line with the spread of Jewish ethnic groups. Has Judaism itself (and not Jewish ethnic stereotypes) influenced American culture? I'm sure you could have a section about people who "profess themselves as being Jewish", but it seems like this small bit of material should be added to the "religion" sub-heading of the American Jews article. Or at least the "Judaism" sub-heading in Religion in the United States. Anyway, the questions above apply to any country with Jews. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 17:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 *[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hayim Greenberg]]
 *[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Examination of Holocaust denial]]
+*[[Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_April_18#Image:Anne_Frank_the_Hollywood_photo_Oct10_1942.jpg]]
 ==Other votes==