From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Matisyahu was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
January 16, 2007 Peer review Reviewed
January 16, 2007 WikiProject peer review Reviewed
January 26, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Wow, Jews are fast![edit]

I only edited the front page like 30 seconds ago and already it's switched back. Mucho props my friends from the old country! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:26, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Yiddish name[edit]

The opening of the article states "Matisyahu is the Yiddish and stage name of Matthew Paul Miller". Actually, "Matisyahu" is not his Yiddish name but rather the Ashkenazi pronunciation of his Hebrew name. While the two obviously employ the same accent, they are still different (as for the difference for this word between Ashkenazi and Sephardic Hebrew pronunciation, the only different is the use of the "s" sound in MatiSyahu instead of a "t" sound in MatiTyahu.

True. I am going to change this to Hebrew as it is a Hebrew name, not Yiddish. Bstone 13:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Maybe it would be worth including mention that the "t" in Matisyahu differs from the "s" in that the former is a tav with a dagesh (תּ), where the latter is the Ashkenazi inability to pronounce the rare phoneme which in English is "th", ie., a tav without a dagesh (ת). This phoneme occurs in English, Greek (theta - "θ", a descendent of teth -"ט", which the Ashkenazis pronounce "tace" for the same reason) and Castilian Spanish (c or z, both of which become "s" in New World Spanish, and presumably audible in OHG as in Neanderthal, whereas nowadays the "h" is, long since not pronounced, now no longer even written. Other languages? I'm not sure.This is the reason that it's Matthew in English, or Mattithias in reference to the Maccabee patriarch, ie., with an h at all. ProudPrimate (talk) 17:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

The Origin of the name section of the article states that the name is an Ashkenazic variant of the Biblical "Matityahu." This misleads the reader into thinking that the pronunciation of the name with the "T" instead of "S" is more authentically Biblical or more ancient. There is no evidence for this. I am rephrasing.--NYCJosh (talk) 19:17, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


Its noted that matisyahu is a lubavitch chasidic, however, that sect split into to camps upon the death of the grand rebbe (the one embroiled in the crown heights riots incident wherein his driver, with him in the car, ran down two children, killing one of them), one set looking for a new rebbe, the other set considering the dead rebbe to be the messiah, who would return from the dead before long. Is it known which of these two groups matisyahu belongs to? A few of his songs mention something that sounds like 'mesh-iak', would be interesting to know if he is talking about the rebbe.

Hi, regarding Chabad-Lubavitch, although there is disagreement on some isuese like Messianism, It is all one movement, not two, and there aren't any chasidim seeking a new Rebbe. Regarding the "crown heights riot", the incident was with a driver following behind the Rebbe, not the Rebbe's car. Shlomke 18:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Guy's, I'm restoring my RV'd comment about Matis's Messianism. I am not accusing Matis of being a Meschichist, nor am I bashing Chabad messianism. I am simply documenting accusations, and hopefully attracting some counter-opinions. --OneTopJob6 03:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

As long as the comment remains on the talk page, you should be fine. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 03:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
If you would like to attract discussion the proper place would be here, as you can only place things in the article that are facts, not opinions. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 03:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Also this that you write that his songs speak about the Messiah, this has nothing to do with the Messianism that you wrote in the first sentence. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 03:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I've recently heard a bridge at a live concert where matisyahu sang "yechi", so he has to be a meshichist.

Too much cruft[edit]

Way too much cruft. Wikipedia is not a forum for pulicizing tour dates. Additionally, not every article that has been written about him needs to be on the website; and certainly not the same article in two different languages. Daykart 18:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Vladimir and Zvi[edit]

Shouldn't this information be on Jewish names? Daykart 01:53, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Any Politics ??[edit]

There seems to be a complete political and religious contradicition. Rastafarianism has nothing in common with hassidism. Has this man expressed opinions on the Middle East, Jews and Arabs, the Iraq war or smoking pot ? 22:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

He has performed alongside Arab rappers, said that "Substance dulls the mind" in his song WP, and sings
3,000 years with no place to be
And they want me to give up my milk and honey
Don't you see, it's not about the land or the sea
Not the country but the dwelling of his majesty
in his song Jerusalem. Milk and Honey refers to Israel, the Land of Milk and Honey (Eretz Zavat Chalav U'Dvash). That about covers all those topics. -- FeldBum 12:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Has he ever claimed to be Rasta? What's the problem?

3000 years? Isn't it 1900 years? 18:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


Allegations of sexism should be included. For example, his refusal to shake hands with women. Another incident involved refusing to share a stage with musician Eve, for fear he might come in physical contact. --AWF

Ummm, dude, according to his culture it's about respect to his wife. It's not sexism, it's just that the only woman he wishes to come into contact with his wife. Try not to be so ethnocentric...Damn, all these P.C. [people] in the U.S. need to watch Star Trek to understand respect for other cultures. Keep viewing outside culture with your North American spectacles...And yes, I'm American, coming from Kentucky. Yahoo!

Hi, please sign your comments with the four tildes ~~~~ so we can know who made the comment. Shlomke 02:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with fear of physical contact with other women. It is a cultral respect to the wife which was agreed upon in the wedding contract. 18:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

actually, hasids think women are dirty. dirty, misogyny, same thing really. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 02:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC).
Actually, no they don't. The practice of only coming into physical contact with your wife and immediately female family members is one based on modesty. Nothing more. You're sharing some rather intolerant views. Bstone 13:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, Bstone, yes they do. Consider that Leviticus 15:19-30 prohibits men from touching menstruating women, or anything a menstruating woman has touched. The verses even apply to husbands and their menstruating wives. And that's precisely because menstruating women are "dirty" and unclean in the minds of orthodox Jews.--Spiff666 (talk) 18:55, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
No, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. The laws of purity and impurity are regarded in Orthodox Judaism as a suprarational "divine decree" completely not reflective of any lack of respect for women or anything of the sort. Perhaps next time get your information from rabbinic sources instead of hate sites. Not that this topic has anything at all to do with the content of this article about this individual, inasmuch as there are hundreds of articles on Wikipedia devoted to Orthodox Jews. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 20:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

For your reference, Matis is Shomer Negiah. It is a common practice among Chabad.

I'm not Jewish, but I kinda like the fact that he (at least tries to) stick to his principles! Isn't this what religion is about? Respect, Matis! But by the way: He DOES perform on stage with women. I saw it once when he had this female violinist beside him on stage doing "Father in the Forest".
Practices like this are common amongst many cultures for both men and women. They have nothing to do with sexism, but modesty and respect. Also, please sign your comments with four tildes ~~~~ so that we know who made them. Thanks! Rudy Breteler (talk) 21:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Refusing to shake the hand of another human being simply because she is a woman is the very definition of sexism, regardless of what culture informs the behavior. You should not place religious motivations for sexist behavior on a pedestal. The fact of the matter is that he does refuse to shake hands with women simply because they are women, and that has caused controversy. If you want to supply the basis to explain the behavior, then that would help wikipedia. But currently, Wikipedia has no information regarding the fact that Matisyahu is seen by some as a misogynist for this very reason, and that is misleading, as it is a nontrivial information about the artist. I will place the information in the article citing Rolling Stone, where Matisyahu himself states that he does not shake hands with women, and San Diego CityBeat Magazine on March 8, 2007 which embodies the controversy. I am looking for input as to the phrasing of the section. Pink-thunderbolt (talk) 04:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

No, it's not because they are women, it's because Orthodox Judaism says not to do it (as mentioned, for reasons of modesty), and he is an adherent of Orthodox Judaism. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 04:17, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I think that this information needs to be put in. Although he may not find it offensive, and although it very well may not be offensive, it still can come off as offensive, as it marks a difference between the treatment of men and women (and does so concerning an issue that many feel is a matter of respect, a handshake). Also, just because something has a religious justification, this does not mean it is not sexist. I am not saying that Matisyahu is sexist, but only that the point of Wikipedia is to present the facts so that the readers can make up their own minds. Personally, I never fully understood the reasons for his refusal to go on stage with Eve (they don't have to touch, is it because of the no singing in public thing [that the second article below mentions]?), and I was hoping to find some answers to this issue on Wikipedia. I think both an explanation of what his actions are, and why he chooses those actions would be a great addition to Wikipedia. I would add it myself, but I see there is already a discussion going on about it, and I didn't want to step on any toes, although I can do it if no one who feels more comfortable gets around to it. The following two sources discuss the issues

I agree that it should be put in, but I think it should be coupled with a clear explanation of the Jewish tradition, and a clear justification of why it's NOT misogyny. In fact, the word misogyny shouldn't be included in the article at all. Perhaps it should be framed as a reference to Chabad. For example: "Matisyahu still adheres to certain Chabaddic practices, including refraining from physical contact with any woman except for his wife". Then, there should be a link to a wiki article which details Chabad and assoc rules. Any objections to that? (talk) 17:41, 13 July 2015 (UTC) - talks about his refusal to shake hands - talks about his refusal to perform with Eve (talk) 20:35, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not sexism. Women are to do the same (shake hands with only women and her husband). He glady shook hands with women before he was married. (talk) 02:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
If you had read the discussion, you would see that first, these are "allegations" of sexism. Wikipedia is not meant for taking stances, but reporting what is said. Part of what is said are these allegations. Second, you would see that this does not only refer to his not shaking hands with women, but also things such as his refusal to take the stage with female performers, at least in some instances. Third, you would have read that these allegations are not about your opinion. Whether or not you find it sexist is not the point. And neither is whether some religion finds it sexist. Although useful to note, it has already been noted many times, and is really pointless to keep repeating. Just because a religion condones the practice does not mean that others are not entitled to see it as sexist, and certainly it does not mean others cannot allege that it may be sexist. (talk) 17:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Oy, sh'miras negiah is Hebrew for guarding the touch. It's a stringency to avoid inappropriate touching between the sexes. A man can't shake a woman's hand and vice a versa at the most stringent level. More liberal views are that handshaking is so common place that it's not a "sexual" act. You can't look at it from a sexually desensitized world where posters in the city have barely clothed people. What many of the people here posted derogatorily is a double standard. When Muslims won't do the same practice it's always wow, what a wonderful culture, but when it's Jews it's an affront on women. When I was at a Matisyahu concert in the Spring of '05in Gun Wavin' New Haven, there was a girl crowd surfing, and she fell to the ground when she was pushed towards the Jewish guys.

Not touching women--"shomer negiah"--is generally prohibited in Orthodox Judaism; it's not regarded as a stringency. Now, although there are some Modern Orthodox rabbis who say it's permitted when not done with affection, that leniency is only binding on those who have taken upon themselves to follow the rulings of Modern Orthodox rabbis. And since this article identifies Matisyahu as "Hassidic", and all Chassidic groups hold that returning a handshake is strictly forbidden, as the article on negiah states, for Matisyahu and anyone else "Hassidic", this practice of refusing to shake hands is not a stringency but a strict prohibition. I hope that's clear. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 13:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Another issue is kol isha, a the singing voice of a woman is considered her nakedness. So he wouldn't be allowed to be on stage where a female singer could potentially sing.Saxophonemn (talk) 19:45, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
So instead of just repeating the same "it's not sexist" line and making random accusations about double standards (who mentioned Muslims?), why doesn't someone who understands the Jewish perspective of the issue add this to the page. I would attempt to, but I fear it would end up rather badly since I do not know much about Judaism, especially Orthodox. (talk) 01:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
To clarify, the strict definition of the prohibition of kol isha is not that one may not be in the room when a woman is singing, but that one may not consciously listen to a woman singing. Now, obviously it is completely not ideal to put oneself in that situation, and it is standard for G-d-fearing Jews to leave the room when a woman starts singing. However, if a person happens to be standing somewhere and a woman starts to sing, if he is able to ignore the singing and distract himself somehow, he has not technically violated the prohibition. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 13:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


Seems like just a mean spirited way to say "changed", by someone who wanted a slight anti-christian tone to the paragraph. At the bottom, about the name being "Corrupted" into the Christian form of Matthew.

"Corrupted" is the proper term. It's the word linguists use to describe the changing of a word through gradual re-pronunciation. It has nothing to do with judgement in this context.Flourdustedhazzn 22:12, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
per Flourdustedhazzn. Rudy Breteler (talk) 21:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with a slight anti-Christian tone. Please read what corrupted means: . (talk) 02:51, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Mishkan Tefila[edit]

Can anyone give a source to the fact that "Matisyahu belongs to Congregation Miskan (Mishkan) Tefila" ?

a google search for "Mishkan Tefila" brought up a Conservative synagogue in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, however Matisyahu is an orthodox jew living in Brooklyn. Shlomke 20:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I saw that addition a couple of days ago when scanning my watchlist. If I'm not mistaken, it was an uncommented insertion. It looked suspicious to me at the time, but I didn't mess with it. I suspect that your inclination is correct. If it is true, or was true, someone will come along and reinsert the fact with an appropriate cite. Dick Clark 22:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
It is more then likely that there is more then one congregation which goes by this name. Rudy Breteler (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

MC Truth[edit]

hey, to the wikipedian who removed the amazon link [1] with no further explanation: it is NOT advertising for the company or artist, especially since MC Truth aka Matisyahu is not even featured on that album in question. however, that link is crucial because the "About the Artist" paragraph contains a band line-up written by MC Mystic - and it is the only place besides of and the jdub board that info can be found at all.

my point is, many articles have that nice "article lacks sources citing" tag; but when you add sources, someone comes along and removes them all? I dont get it. feel free to enlighten me! who-am-i 21:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Matisyahu has actualy spoken about himself as MC Truth in the Rolling Stone article by Evan Serpick, February 24, 2006 [2]

good find. I removed the part about MC Mystic's complaint but added that rolling stone article. I think someone should rephrase everthing now who-am-i 17:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Who-am-i, that is in fact what I did, I inserted the link to the rolling stone article and i refrased the MC Truth info, as well as blend it in together with his bio. it seems you did not read my edit, or is there a problem with it? Shlomke 21:28, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

sorry my bad, i really didnt see it, thought it was completely removed and so reverted it. who-am-i 22:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanks Shlomke 03:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

West Chester or Westchester?[edit]

Which one was he born in, West Chester, Pennsylvania or Westchester, New York? The biography and the photo caption conflict.

Acording to his own website its West Chester, Pennsylvania. Shlomke 02:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
hahaaha the same place as bam margera -- (talk) 19:56, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

White Plains, NY is in Westchester County New York, not West Chester, PA! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:09, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

minor change[edit]

should be Hasidic Jew not Jewish Hasidic

  • Hi, please sign your comments with the four tildes ~~~~ so we can know who made the comment. He is "Jewish" first then "Hasidic". IZAK 21:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
    • "Jewish Hassidic" is not a phrase that is normally used in conversation or print; the accepted term is "Hassidic Jewish." There's not necessarily a logical reason for this, but that's English for you. Would you say "Catholic Irish" when you meant "Irish Catholic"? Flourdustedhazzn 22:16, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
    • i am wondering why the genre post-rock is added. In my opinion the music matisyahu makes normally isnt categorised as post-rock. Machina82 13:12, 26 July 2006
Some of his songs can be considered post rock due to long sections of instrumentals without any vocals, for one. However, I would not really consider him post-rock, his music may be liked by post-rock fans due to many similarities of styles. Its a giant argument of semantics in the first place, and there really isnt much of a reason to get bent and start an edit war over 2 words.
Unitepunx (talk) 14:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Needs citation[edit]

Needs citation -

The otherwise critical New York Times' Kelefa Sanneh has compared him to "early dancehall reggae stars like Barrington Levy and Eek-a-Mouse." The Chicago Tribune's Kevin Pang has described a Matisyahu performance as "soul-shaking brand of dancehall reggae, a show that captures both the jam band vibe of Phish and the ska-punk of Sublime." Reviewers generally agree that Matisyahu may disappoint reggae purists, but acknowledge the unique blend of musical traditions that Matisyahu harnesses generally please the people who see his performances.

The New York Times quote is from a concert review that ran on March 8, 2006. Cites on Wiki usually have links to the source, but I'm not sure what the policy is when the article is in a pay archive (you have to be a subscriber to the physical NYT or a paying user of their TimesSelect service to access articles that are more than 30 days old). Calling Sanneh "otherwise critical" is almost an understatememt: The concert reviewed here was played the day after Youth hit stores and, in Sanneh's words, "The record is dull, and the concert was often worse." That's one of the nicer things he says.Andrewjnyc 14:26, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Chart positions[edit]

Chart positions in the Singles section do not agree with the King Without a Crown article. Cite some sources for the info?—mjb 23:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps there is a difference between the studio version from Shake Off the Dust...Arise and the live version from Live at Stubb's (plus ANOTHER version on Youth - how much mileage can you get from one song!) I only recently discovered the Billboard database and I'm not sure if the distinction is made on this page which corresponds to the Singles section. If this data is for the studio version, then the King Without a Crown article is out dated. Can anybody crack the code? Hoof Hearted 19:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Oops, I read the article too fast and didn't realize King Without a Crown covers all three versions. I'll be bold and update. Hoof Hearted 19:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Other Hasidic artists??[edit]

Am curious to what other popular ones there are, and if there could be any linking to them in the article? Mathmo 10:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


someone should write down something about Matis' cutting ties with JDUB! -- 16:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

hes a rap artist not a reggae artist right?

He mostly sings, but can rap. ~~Iamvery~~

Live at Stubb's (live)[edit]

In the albums section, the album "Live at Stubb's" has a bracket after it saying (live). I think the fact that the article is called LIVE at Stubb's sought of implies that the album is live. In fact, the bracket just makes the article seem stupid, almost scremer at the reader "I assume that you are a total idiot, so I will continue to point out the obvious to you". (And yes i actually have heard an article say that to me.) --Will James 02:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

3 Albums, 1 Live Album and 2 Remix Albums?[edit]

I'm not sure if this is accurate. Shouldn't it be 2 studio albums ("Shake Off the Dust" and "Youth"), 1 live album ("Live At Stubbs") and 1 remix album ("No Place to Be")? Is the Youth Dub even considered an album when it's more of a bonus disc? It's not a huge issue but I'm a little confused. 09:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Thats a good question, I'm not sure either. I know I got the Youth Dub disc separate from Youth, but you're right, it was supposed to just come with Youth. I think it could go either way. -- Chabuk T • C ] 16:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, it is accurate. Youth is actually his second proper studio album, not Live at Stubb's. A user named Lcnhop is reverting my changes, claming that Live at Stubb's was his second album, but it's not. Social Distortion also had a live album, but would you call it a follow-up to a studio album, as well? Alex 00:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Internet Archive/Taper-friendly[edit]

I re-added the Internet Archive link, which someone had removed (possibly under the misapprehension that it was some sort of link spam). It is, in fact, the only documentation, so far, that he belongs in the Category:Taper-friendly musicians. If you're going to remove the link, you either also have to remove the category (which would be inappropriate, since he clearly qualifies), or you need to expand the article to document his taping policies (which would be better, but I don't have the time to do it right now). The Internet Archive is a library—an official member of the American Library Association, in fact—and is funded by the Smithsonian, among others. There should be no problems with linking to it. Xtifr tälk 09:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Sorry about that! I wasn't aware of all that, nor did I have any idea what "taper-friendly" was. Thanks for re-adding it. --Chabuk T • C ] 14:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
No problem. I probably would have done the same in your shoes. As I say, I'd rather see the phenomenon covered in the body of the article, and since you're trying to take this to good article status, I'll try to do some better research in the next few days or so. I think it probably helped contribute to his popularity—although I'd never make that claim in the article without a reliable source to quote. But I think it's significant enough and interesting enough to deserve to be documented as well as it can be. Cheers. --Xtifr tälk 22:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Better picture?[edit]

One day I looked at Matisyahu's page and thought that there was something missing. As it turned out, I thought that Matisyahu's picture was not so great. I do, however, have some very good, full, face forward pictures of Matisyahu that would look much better. So, I will allow others to debate on whether there should be a change of picture before I do change the current one. I also thought I should say something about my idea before I went off changing things so.... And also while we're at it, I heard on the Jay Leno Show only about a week or so ago that, when Matisyahu was on his show, that Matisyahu is, in fact, from Philly....???Lana lang 17:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I absolutely agree - as long as you know the copyright status of the other images, feel free to add them!

GA Fail[edit]

I am failing this due to several things

  • it has a trivia section, remove it or incorporate it into the body
  • It is POV, Popular is used six times
  • Weasel words and Peacock terms Contrary to popular belief, According to Matisyahu, of their respective songs, significant departure from Matisyahu's previous work.
  • This 'paragraph' Matisyahu is married to Tahlia Miller, the couple have a son, Laivy.[4]
  • Don't wikilink solo years, 2001
  • You wikilink New York twice in the first two paragraphs
  • He counts Bob Marley, Phish,[3]God Street Wine and Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach among his musical inspirations, counts?
  • In 2006, Matisyahu appeared once again at Bonnaroo, this time performing a solo set in front of an estimated crowd of over 80,000 people. reference?
  • References come after punctuation, ex . [9] should be .[9]
  • last third of the article is just lists and tables
  • too many external links
  • References are missing details such as, date retrieved, publisher, check {{cite web}} for more information. Some references also have the same name but lead to other sites, change the name
  • The image fails WP:FUC #1
  • external link in the text # Soundcheck, WNYC, New York, NY, (December 11, 2006) Listen
  • Automated Review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Consider removing links that add little to the article or that have been repeated in close proximity to other links to the same article, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and WP:CONTEXT.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
  • See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.[?]
  • If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]
  • Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.[?]
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, M3tal H3ad 06:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Genre Categorization[edit]

I noticed that under genre in the musician template it says "neo-psychadelia" and "dancehall". I think both of these can be heavily contested, especially neo-psychadelia. Matisyahu does not seem to have any direct influence at all from musicians like Hendrix or the Beatles. Also, the main tenet of dancehall is the use of digitally-produced riddims, which Matisyahu doesn't, at least ususally use (He might use one on the song "Indestructible", but that is all I can think of). He does have his own, rock-oriented band. I think that the genres he can be classified as most definately are reggae, rock, and hip-hop, and I guess to a lesser extent, ska, based on his bands' use of the distinctive reggae offbeat guitar in most of his songs (such as "Unique is My Dove", "King Without a Crown", "Close My Eyes", "Exaltation", etc.), and the use of guitar distortion and guitar solos as well. Obviously, Matisyahu has a very "fusion-ish" sound that has charateristics of multiple genres, but I really doubt neo-psychadelia is a direct influence. Also, Matisyahu has stated himself that he listened to reggae as a kid, and that reggae is his largest influence. I am going to remove neo-psychadelia and dancehall (dancehall might be alright), if anyone thinks different, say on this talk page. Arnesh 10:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


I'd like to know what are Matisyahu's views on homosexuality. I already asked it on the reference desk, but no-one could answer. Does anyone know it? Has he ever talked about it during an interview? A.Z. 07:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Why would anyone ask him that in an interview? He's a singer not a politician or religious leader... --Chabuk T • C ] 15:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
No, no. Only birds sing without any sort of political campaigning. And Matisyahu seems to acknowledge this when he says: "All of my songs are influenced and inspired by the teachings that inspire me. I want my music to have meaning, to be able to touch people and make them think. Chasidism teaches that music is 'the quill of the soul.' Music taps into a very deep place and speaks to us in a way that regular words can't." He obviously wants to be a role model for young people, as his lyrics reveal. So, I think he would be more than pleased to answer what are his views on homosexuality and whether his songs can be interpreted by gay teenagers to mean that they should fight for their freedom to express their sexuality, especially when he says: "Young man control in your hand / Slam your fist on the table / And make your demand / Take a stand / Fan a fire for the flame of the youth / Got the freedom to choose" and things like that. A.Z. 21:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Sounds more like an entreaty to resist masturbation, which would be in keeping with observant Judaism. I'm not an expert on Matisyahu, but I sincerly doubt that he's ever going to speak out in support of homosexuality. Anchoress 04:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
That's quite disappointing, but at least it was funny. I had never thought of that particular interpretation for the lyrics. I think someone needs to ask him that in an interview (what is his view on homosexuality), so he says once and for all "I am against homosexuality" or "I choose not to answer that question", so gay teenagers and those who are not against homosexuality stop buying his CDs altogether. A.Z. 20:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Seeing as he is a Hasidic Jew and they are known to be extremely conservative on many issues, I'm going to say that the chances are overwhelming he not approving of it. Personally, I must say that that is very refreshing and that I applaud him for it.
Honestly, though, I don't see why that matters. That has nothing to do with his songs at all. Especially "Youth" which isn't about sex at all. What's wrong with you people? Not everything is about sex! Sion 03:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
What is "Youth" about? A.Z. 03:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Have you even read the lyrics or heard the song? It's about being in control of your life and making the right choices. Sion 11:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
It is absolutely not alright to speculate on his political views on this matter without any knowledge as to the truth. There are many progressive Chasidim and there are many homosexual Chasidim. Under no circumstance should these speculative allegations make it into the article without proper citations. Rudy Breteler (talk) 21:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that has to do with anger and control... (talk) 02
54, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

The Torah is pretty against Homosexuality, it's considered to'eiva a disgrace. Eating pork is only liable for lashes, but sodomy is death.

Youth is to me is about standing up to the older people who have lived in a empty society. The aspect is that we all need some sort of spirituality and the consequences of what happens how a spiritual void is filled. It all clicked for me when I had to deal with the anti-religious Jewish establishment that ran the Hillel at the University of South Florida and I was working to do quality Jewish programming. Saxophonemn (talk) 19:53, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Straight Edge?[edit]

Could someone please tell me where he has mentioned that he is Straight Edge? Sion 04:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't imagine Matisyahu ever said that he is Straight Edge. Can you be Straight Edge AND Hasidic Jewish? I don't know! Straight Edge is a lifestyle, Judaism is a religion, and I don't think these two go together. --Elomas 23:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I highly doubt that Matisyahu is straight edge. One of the defining characteristics of his cult is the prevalence of alcoholism. [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
An open minded fellow if I've ever seen one! Bstone (talk) 06:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Matisyahu is not "straight edge" because he smokes cigarettes. To be straight edge you have to abstain from smoking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. And you can be both in a religion and a lifestyle. There are gay Christians, Jews, etc, as there are Christian and jewish straight edgers. Ha, and that poster called him part of a cult. What a nice guy! As far as Matisyahu goes, I'm pretty sure cigartte smoking cancels out the straight edge lifestyle. (talk) 02:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC) (talk) 18:41, 21 February 2013 (UTC)VT March 2013 no shankbone, no processed foods? What kind of a Messiah singer is he?

His works[edit]

On the German Wikipedia, there's a list of his works, including Live at Stubb's etc. But there are also some titles I have never heard of, and they are not listed on this article. Does anybody know something about these two:

  • The So Called Seder: A Hip Hop Haggadah
  • Abayudaya - Music from the Jewish People of Uganda

--Elomas 17:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

  • He performed on one track (The Third Cup) of The SoCalled Seder. But he is most certainly not on Abayudaya. I have that CD, it's produced by the Smithsonian and it's a collection of songs and chants sung by the Jewish people of Uganda. Matis is definitely not on it. -- Chabuk T • C ] 22:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that! Then I'm gonna try to change that on the other Wikipedia! --Elomas 00:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Hockey Career[edit]

When I first heard about Matisyahu on MTV, they said something about him trying out for the NHL at some point. Does anybody know anything more about this, because I haven't heard any more about it since. It sounds very unusual, given what we know about his life.

This is what I know about Matisyahu's hockey career, here are some quotes
  • "I loved ice hockey. I used to play ice hockey. So, you know I wanted to be a hockey player" Matisyahu says. [4]
  • ... his big dream was to play professional ice hockey ... [5]
  • A la edad de 12 uno de sus primeros sueños era convertirse en jugador profesional de hockey para la NHL. [6]
He still plays hockey from time to time. Here some pics where he plays in Crown Heights []

--Elomas 23:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Shlomo Carlebach[edit]

Does anyone else feel that there is too much information about Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach (not 'Shlomo' as he is called many times) on this page? It is not really relevant. More importantly, can anyone verify this statement? "Shlomo became the first rabbi in history to play a guitar". It doesn't seem very likely to me (I mean, King David played a lyre. Wasn't he a Rabbi?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Commontater (talkcontribs) 10:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

King David was not a rabbi, he was a king. The whole "rabbi" thing developed way after he died, although he had a rabbi whose name was Ahitophel. (Avot 6:3) (talk) 20:07, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Matisyahu on House?[edit]

Last night's House episode featured a Hasid couple, and the husband looked a lot like Matisyahu, or maybe it's just me. I tried to figure out who it was but I wasn't able to see the credits or anything and I can't find anything online. Maybe someone could find out...? Rurouniyuudai85 (talk) 15:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

No. It was another actor named Eyal Podell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


I've looked all over and I can't find anything about this discussion article which relates to Belarus. I have therefore removed it from Wikiproject Belarus, as well as removed the Belarus related categories, assuming this to be (admittedly odd) vandalism. If I am wrong, please explain why below and revert my changes. Rudy Breteler (talk) 22:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. That is quite strange and was almost certianly vandalism. Matisyahu has no connections to Belarus and it's almost entirely likely that he has never even performed there. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 19:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


The example I found:

from "Matisyahu" Wikipedia entry, 1st paragraph

Known for blending traditional Jewish themes with Reggae, rock and hip hop sounds, Matisyahu is most recognizable for his single "King Without a Crown", which was a surprise Top 40 hit, and for being an Orthodox Jew.

from Google search page description for "Matisyahu" search result #1:

Known for blending traditional Jewish themes with Reggae, rock and hip hop sounds, Matisyahu is most recognizable for being a hasidic Jew. --from Google search page description for "Matisyahu" @ (talk) 04:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Vicki S.

He is no longer Chabad-Lubavitch[edit]

As you can see in this interview, he is no longer Chabad-Lubavitch and this might then affect some of the more controversial issues of his conservatism. From that page:

And on the other hand it was a very, like, dark experience as well, because I really sort of got into, almost into this whole loss, really, the line of where you draw when you’re trying to kind of lose yourself as to where it’s healthy and where it’s you start to become schizophrenic, you know, or totally lose your mind almost. I was really walking that line very, very much, and then I found, basically, I started doing my music. I had some people who really believed in me early on and kind of got me started doing my music, basically, and then I found this really amazing therapist, and we started really talking, who is the guy who became the co-writer with me on this record and stuff. Later we became just good friends, and I started to reevaluate everything that I had taken as ultimate truth, you know, and to pull back and say okay, that it’s time to start now reevaluating everything, questioning everything and not accepting everything as blanket—really reevaluate all the decisions I had made and to kind of reemerge, bring myself back into the picture and make decisions for myself based on what seemed right and what was wrong, and I was lucky to have this friend and guide to really help me to do that, and that process has continued, that balancing process of when you are dealing with religion and when you are dealing with ultimate truth, the idea of ultimate truth, or an ultimate idea is like such a little bit shady, dangerous place to be, and on the other hand you see in, like, American society, you know, in Western society, the total rejection of that based on history with whatever it was, Communism, Nazism, whatever it was. Anytime there was an ultimate idea it usually ended up not working. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reagle (talkcontribs) 17:14, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
and this morning he shaved off his beard. Some sources are saying he has moved towards the Litvish (Lithuanian) movement. Gavroche42 (talk) 20:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


On May 12, 2010, He was on Spicks and Specks, and australian game show. Just a heads up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Arab-Israeli Conflict[edit]

What are his view on the Palestine Question? Is he a zionist or does he support the ultra-othrodox no Israel position or his he a Jewish nationalist or none of the above? I would think and hope he supports the Israeli peace movement and the self-determination of the Palestinian people. cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:24, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

In what sense is the Hebrew name "legal"?[edit]

If no one can provide a answer, backed with applicable U.S. law, this assertion must be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:20, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

  •  Done The word had a Jewish meaning, but in the context it was misleading, and works better without it. --Dweller (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup, PLEASE???[edit]

The following paragraphs are syntactically and grammatically deficient. I would clean them up, but seeing the hackles that get raised by newcomers attempting to edit this page, I am keeping my hands off and just noting that without some cleanup, the page looks like a high school essay

Matisyahu then began playing with the Jewish band Pey Dalid.[5] At the age of 19 Miller converted to the Lubavitch school of Hasidic Judaism and renamed himself Matisyahu.

From 2001 through July 2007, Matisyahu was affiliated with the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic community in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, New York. However, as of July 17, 2007, he told the Miami New Times in an interview that he no longer "necessarily" identifies with the Lubavitch movement. In the interview, he stated that "...the more I'm learning about other types of Jews, I don't want to exclude myself. I felt boxed in."[6] Additionally, in the fall of 2007, while on a family vacation spent primarily in Jerusalem's Nachlaot neighborhood, he expressed interest in another Hasidic sect, that of Karlin.[7] As of November 2007 he has confirmed a preference to pray at the Karliner synagogue in Boro Park where the custom is to ecstatically scream prayers; however he continues to reside in Crown Heights because of his wife's affinity for the community.[8]

Soon after his adoption of hasidism, Matisyahu began studying Torah at Hadar Hatorah, a yeshiva for returnees to Judaism where he wrote and recorded his first album. He counts Bob Marley, Phish,[9] God Street Wine and Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach among his musical inspirations and gives credit to Rabbi Simon Jacobson's book Toward a Meaningful Life for the lyrical inspiration to Youth's title track. As part of his faith, he does not perform in concert on Friday nights in observance of the Jewish Sabbath. An exception to this occurred at a 2007 concert in Fairbanks, Alaska, which was allowed because the sun did not set until 2:00 a.m.[10]

Below are my suggested revisions. Do with them what you will....

"Matisyahu then began playing with the Jewish band Pey Dalid.[5] At the age of 19 Miller associated himself with the Lubavitch movement of Haredi Judaism and began using his Hebrew name "Matisyahu". From 2001 through July 2007, Matisyahu was active in the Chabad-Lubavitch community in the Crown Heights neighborhood of Brooklyn; however, in 2007, he told the Miami New Times in an interview that he no longer "necessarily" identifies with the Lubavitch movement. In the interview, he stated that "...the more I'm learning about other types of Jews, I don't want to exclude myself. I felt boxed in."[6] Additionally, in the fall of 2007, while on a family vacation spent primarily in Jerusalem's Nachlaot neighborhood, he expressed interest in the Karliner Hasidic sect.[7] he has since confirmed his preference to for the Karliner synagogue in Boro Park where the custom is to pray ecstatically; however, he continues to reside in Crown Heights because of his wife's affinity for the community.[8]

Soon after his adoption of Hasidic practice, Matisyahu began study at Hadar Hatorah, a yeshiva which serves the baal teshuva movement. Here is where he wrote and recorded his first album. He counts Bob Marley, Phish,[9] God Street Wine and Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach among his musical inspirations, and gives credit to Rabbi Simon Jacobson's book Toward a Meaningful Life for the lyrical inspiration to Youth's title track. As part of his faith, he does not perform in concert on from sundown on Friday nights through sundown Saturdays in observance of the Jewish Sabbath.

there ya go...

Sesesq (talk) 20:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

On Rototom Sunsplash boycott[edit]

I am having troubles trying to make clear which were the claims of the BDS movement to promote the boycott of Matisyahu. One can think that these claims are false, or one can even think that they are falsely stated by the BDS movement to support a conciously racist action. But these are opinions. The only real fact is that the claims that the movement indicated were not against Matisyahu's religion, but against his support of zionism and of Israel military actions. The real statements of the movement should figure clearly in the article, and then if someone wants, together with the judgement of these statements by other organizations, and the respective opinions of those. But it is umbalanced that only the explicit opinion of the sector against the boycott appears.

Luiscob (talk) 15:03, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

The problem is that you are not supporting what you are saying is a fact. Your changes clearly state that the reason for them asking him not to perform is because of his views on protective edge, etc. You cannot use an article from April to support that. Yes he said it, but you need a WP:RS to support that the claim is a direct link, otherwise you are doing WP:OR
Second you are saying that the BDS movement claimed it wasn't racist, yet despite that there was outrage in the Jewish community. That is backwards. There was outrage, then in an effort to defend their stance they said it was not racist, they did not say it preemptively as your wording suggests.
All articles on WP should be written with WP:NPOV in mind. You have added opinion to it when before it was just a statement of neutral facts. - GalatzTalk 16:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
I do not agree with your point of view:
1. I did support my statement that the reasons for the boycott were those mentioned, by providing a direct link to the official webpage of the BDS movement which mentions their reasons. This link is to material with August date. The material of April is just to provide additional references in which the BDS movement bases its claims; material which, of course, contains past declarations of the artist ---it cannot be another way---.
Saying that "BDS promoted a boycott because this and this and that" is by no mean giving an opinion, but actually stating a fact. Hiding what BDS really said and giving instead just the opinion of third parties on what BDS meant is biasing the article. This is what the actual writing does. I think that the original reasons and intentions of the BDS boycott should be clerly stated, as they are important data on what really happened.
2. You say that supporting that the boycott was not racist by using later declarations is "backwards". But this is nonsense: It is the people who want to state that the boycott was racist that need to provide concrete material on why the boycott was actually racist from the beginning. If there are no real facts for stating so, but only subjective opinions of third parties saying such a thing, there is no point on stating it in the article as a fact. It is an illegitimate assumption.
If that could be done, then I could state now that "Mr. X" is racist because he has done an action that "seems racist to me", and because he did not explicitly said that it wasn't racist before my claim, but only as a defense afterwards. This is nonsense. If someone does an action that he really considers not to be racist, he will not provide proofs on this fact unless someone else accuses him of racism; in which case he may defend himself properly or not, but definitely he has the right to do it afterwards. And he may actually come to show that he is not racist now, and also that he was not racist either with his previous action. A proved defense against an accusation is not valid because it is done after the accusation? That is nonsense.
While there is no objective proof on the racist character of the BDS boycott ---and there is not as far as I know---, the afterwards words of the movement that I referenced only further support the fact that the boycott was not racist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luiscob (talkcontribs) 18:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
You wrote flat out that the boycott was because of his comments on Israel and referenced the April article. That is the exact definition of WP:OR. You need a source that states they wanted to boycott him, in August, because he said this in April. If you dont have something that directly correlates the two, to that exact issues, its OR. Plain and simple. Read what WP defines OR as and you will see thats exactly what it is.
I am not saying that the boycott was racist. The point is that you stated the course of events were 1) Appearance Canceled, 2) BDS said it wasnt racist 3) Jewish groups claimed it was racist anyway. If you stated 1) that it was canceled, 2) Jews groups screamed racism, 3) the BDS movement responded by denying the claims of racism, and explained their position; thats fine, but you cannot change facts and order of events. - GalatzTalk 19:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok, now I understand your concrete critics on my redaction, which I might actually have agreed with. What I cannot undestand is how, instead of just fixing these problems, you decided to go back once an againg to the previous text, which is actually hiding the real reasons with which BDS supports the boycott. In any case, here are new answers to your points:
1. Out of the references that I included, one of them was actually provided by the BDS movement in the communication. I could keep this one, drop the other, and add some others provided also provided by the BDS.
2. The order of events is the one that I gave, although it is true that I did not provide enough references to support it. However, in the new reference to the BDS communications that I include, with dates previous to the cancellation of the concert, the BDS movement already claims, as an answer to some Rototom messages, that "the boycott is not against jewish".
3. The link to the communication of the Rototom organization is broken. Unless someone finds a good link, I leave just the reference to the news on Matisyahu's re-invitation.
With all these, I propose the following new redaction:
On August 17, 2015 the Rototom Sunsplash festival in Spain canceled Matisyahu's scheduled appearance, at the request of the BDS Movement, due to his support of zionism and of many Israel goverment actions which this movement considers to be criminal actions, such as the Gaza flotilla raid or the Operation Protective Edge.[1][2][3]. From the very beginning, the BDS Movement in País Valencià explicitly stated that their request for boicott "in no case is against jewish people, in fact there are many jewish around the world that are part of this [the BDS] movement".[4] In spite of that, the decision led many organizations around the world to criticize the organization of showing racism toward Jews.[5] Two days later the Spanish government condemned the decision to cancel his appearance.[6] On August 19, the festival apologized to Matisyahu and re-invited him to perform as original scheduled, following the pressure of the sectors of opinion that presented the decision as jewish discrimination.[7] - Luiscob (talk) 07:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
No, that's clear POV crap, WP:synth and based on extremely biased unreliable sources by the people involved in the boycott campaign. Current version is impartial, neutral and based on reliable secondary sources.-- (talk) 05:11, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, but even in the Talk page please keep manners. "Crap" is not an adequate word to discuss. Also, you have to follow the discussion already started here, which is what I have been doing, and not just start from zero giving your opinion. Here are my counter-arguments to yours:
1. I have correctly overcome the two previous issues raised in this talk on my redaction: I give the references to the concrete statements of Matisyahu on which the BDS supports the boycott, and I give explicit declaration of the BDS movement saying that the campaing was not racist ---with date previous to the cancellation---.
2. Giving the declarations of people as a source to support what were their words is definitely not WP:synth nor POV. In my redaction, I do not claim that the boycott "was not racist", because there are people thinking that it was. I claim that "the boycott supporters said it was not racist". I write that: "From the very beginning, the BDS Movement in País Valencià explicitly stated that their request for boicott in no case is against jewish people", and I give their own communication to the media to support that these were their words. This is perfectly legitimate: It is giving the statements of Mr. X as a proof of what he did say.
(By the way, it seems that, in your opinion, in the frame of these controversy it is biased to provided the statements of the BDS movement but not those of Matisyahu, of the jewish organizations, or of the Spanish goverment... Wow! What a biased concept of biased!)
The rest of the sources that I give are the ones that contain the concrete declarations of Matisyahu on which the BDS movement supports its opposition. This is exactly what I was asked to do before in this discussion.
3. The previous redaction to mine was by no mean impartial and neutral. It gave the opinion of Matisyahu, of the jewish organizations against the boycott, of the Spanish goverment, and of the festival after the acceptance. All these opinions are favorable to Matisyahu's position and against BDS. There was no explanation of the real position of the BDS movement, no statement on their opinion. Now, all positions are explicitly mentioned: Unlike you, I have kept all opinions and sources, also those of the goverment, of Matisyahu, of jewish organizations, and of Rototom. Actually, there are still more opinions pro-Matisyahu than pro-BDS in my redaction.
After some discussion here, the arguments on which I base these last changes, which were couter-arguments to those previous ones of GalatzTalk, were displayed in this discussion page for many days with no one claiming against them. As I already mentioned, unless someone shows the opposite here, they collect the result of this discussion up to now. Thus, I will keep the redaction resulting from these changes. If someone has something concrete against this redaction, please discuss here before changing it.--Luiscob (talk) 14:46, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I must have missed this post but there are still a number of issues. The April article is WP:OR no matter what your context is. You are doing the research to say how it relates. You must only use August or later article that directly reference those comments only.
I still do not believe the course of events is correct. You write From the very beginning then write thats its not racist, then say there was uproar. Why would have have defended themselves before there was the uproar? I believe the order is that there was uproar and then they defended themselves. Do you have a source that says they preemptively tried to defend themselves? It wouldn't make sense for them to.
The entire second half of the sentence stating following the pressure of the sectors of opinion that presented the decision as jewish discrimination serves no purpose. Why repeat what was already said? Additionally why only mention that one piece, why not mentioned following the government reaction as well? Better to just state they reinvited him without a reason.
Additionally the entire article is written in American English except for your edits. This should be consistent. - GalatzTalk 18:01, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

First of all, I do not think it is fair what you are doing: You are using the excuse of "a number of issues" on my redaction to go back to a writing that is highly biased: It contains plenty of material on the different opinions, except for that of the supporters of the boycott. This is a very important drawback of the actual redaction that I have mentioned many times, and that you have not denied or refuted explicitly ---rather you ignored it---. Thus, if you have issues with my redaction just tell me to solve them or solve them yourself, but please do not destroy my work on trying to solve a defect which is much more important.
Going into details:
1. All the secondary source articles that I added are provided by the BDS movement as hyperlinks in their statement (the statement that I also reference to), in order to provide support to their claims. You can check this in the reference to the BDS statement that I provide. Thus, there is a proved direct link. THUS, NO WP:OR. Of course, if the BDS claims "Matisyahu said A", this claim must be based on material previous to the claim itself (no temporal loopholes).
(If you think that providing the very same references that the quoted source provides is OR, then anything you could pick from the quoted source is OR, since "you have to research in order to pick it". This is nonsense. The only reference I decide to provide really by myself ---with an obvious good reason for this paragraph--- is the reference to the BDS statement. The link between this reference and the others is done by them in their statement, not by me.)
2. Sorry, but I do not care what you "beleived" the order of events was. I have provided a link to a communication of the BDS movement with date previous to the cancellation ---and thus necessarily previous to the outrage--- and explicitly saying that their actions are never based on racism, neither this one.
(If you let me move out of the redaction discussion for a second: Yes, unfortunately they usually have to provide this explanation in advance, because the "joker" of calling someone anti-Semitic just because he goes against Israel policy (not against jews at all) is really extended. Take this controversy as an example. In any case, it shouldn't matter why: They did so, and I provided the proof. I find incredible that you constantly blame me for OR and for making links by my own, and now you want to wipe out a fully proved statement just because of some "detective suspect" that you have of things that don't fit in your head.)
3. Saying "following outrage around the world" is quite inequivalent to saying "without a reason". It throws the (not necessarily true) image of a vast mayority of opinion going against BDS, and not against Matisyahu. To be honest, if you want we could drop both phrases and leave it really without a reason.
Finally, feel free to correct my English. Indeed, feel free to correct what you consider. My only intention with all these is not POV-pushing at all. It is just to leave a fair redaction by providing two important facts: 1. What were the reasons really claimed by BDS to promote the boycott, and 2. that the BDS clearly stated from the beginning that there was no racism in their actions. I do not want to write that what BDS claims is true, but I want to leave clear that it is true that this was what they said. In a paragraph containing the opinion of Matisyahu and of Rototom ---which is natural--- and even of third parties such as jewish organizations or even the Spanish goverment ---which are clearly secondary---... how is it possible that the real position claimed by the BDS does not appear?
Unless you explain here why the "number of issues" that you mention ---and that I think I have refuted--- are actually worse than not even mentioning the BDS opinion at all, I think it is unfair to keep the actual worse redaction just because of some other problems in the new one. Saying it differently, I wish that, apart from the issues that we are discussing, we could already agree here and now that not providing the BDS reasons and statements is definitely unfair and should be solved as soon as possible, without waiting to solve the other minor issues.--Luiscob (talk) 23:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

1 - If you say they mention it than only their source should be used not the April one. 2 - I never said the order of the events came cancellation then explanation, I said outrage then explanation. Big difference 3 - I am not saying to write "without a reason" I am saying the sentence should be cut off before you get to that point.

Here is my proposal:

On August 17, 2015 the Rototom Sunsplash festival in Spain canceled Matisyahu's scheduled appearance, at the request of the BDS Movement.[8]. The decision led many Jewish organizations around the world to criticize the organization of showing racism toward Jews rather than Israel.[9] The BDS Movement in País Valencià stated that their request for boycott "in no case is against Jewish people, in fact there are many Jewish around the world that are part of this [the BDS] movement".[10] Two days later the Spanish government condemned the decision to cancel his appearance.[11] On August 19, the festival apologized to Matisyahu and re-invited him to perform as original scheduled.[12]

Additional changes made: - I took out the explanation from the first sentence. The source doesnt really say what they told BDS, only that they asked for them to cancel. Their explanation came later so its hard to know what they really said since we were not in the meetings - I took out some added wording throughout that didnt seem to really add context, nothing - Fixed some capitalization and spelling

I feel that this captures all of your changes you wish to make but in a more concise paragraph, without any POV pushing or OR.

Thoughts? - GalatzTalk 04:03, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

@Luiscob: There are several issues with your changes. (1) You have removed well sourced well sourced text while at most you should have added the POV of the BDS movement. (2) The BDS blog is of course highly partisan and even if could considered RS for some info this story got so much coverage, you should find better sources. (3) "support of zionism and of many Israel government actions which this movement considers to be criminal actions, such as the Gaza flotilla raid or the Operation Protective Edge" should be most be mentioned as "support of zionism and of many Israel government". The rest is propaganda. (4) "In spite of that"??? Seriously? Settleman (talk) 06:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
@Galatz: @Settleman: Ok, I think we can make advances, although I have still some important differences. Let's see if we can arrive to an agreement.
1. If you consider that it is not neccesary to further add the references already appearing in the BDS communication, that's fine: Let's drop them and keep just the link to the BDS communications.
Answering @Settleman: I am not using the POV of the BDS to state the truth of what they said, but just to state the truth of the fact that they did say so. I am not writing "Matisyahu is pro-zionism" and using the BDS communication as a proof that Matisyahu is actually pro-zionism. I am writing "BDS says that Matisyahu is pro-zionism", and giving the communication as a proof that they actually said so. This is perfectly legitimate. You cannot reference partial opinions to state the truth of these opinions, but you can reference them to state the truth that these opinions were actually given by whoever did so.
2. The reasons claimed by BDS to promote the boycott still don't appear in the new writing. I do not agree with that. You give the reasons for the outrage of the jewish organizations against BDS, but you don't give the reasons for the "outrage" of BDS against Matisyahu? I think we shall keep a sentence mentioning the reasons claimed by BDS. Looking carefully, I have found that the BDS communications points directly to the Matisyahu's support of Zionism and of Gaza flotilla raid, but not of the Operation Protective Edge (this only appears in other sources). We can then drop this last point, but the other two, or something equivalent, shoud be kept. The information on the reasons claimed by the BDS is crucial to have a good knowledge of the event, regardless of each one's opinion on this reasons.
3. If the outrage came after the cancellation, and the cancellation came after the explanation... how could the explanation come after the outrage!? In the reference I provide there is a communication of the BDS movement dated 10th August, thus before the cancellation and necessarily before the jewish organization's outrage that followed this cancellation, in which they already state the non anti anti-jewish character of their movement. It is true that this communication is already an answer to some Rototom festival director's previous words. Thus, you can drop the phrase "From the very beggining" if you want. But we are writing the paragraph following the timeline, and in the timeline the BDS "non anti-jewish statement" must appear before the jewish organization's outrage that followed the cancellation.
With respect to the link "In spite of that", I think it is a reasonable sentence link. You come from a sentence stating that Mr. X already said that he is not anti-Semitic, and you go to a sentence stating that Mr. Y, in spite of that, blamed afterwards Mr. X for being anti-Semitic. One of them must be right in his claim, but not both. The link does not reveal who is right (this would be an opinion), but rather stress this contradiction between Mr. X and Mr. Y claims.
4. I find it fine if we drop both the phrase "following outrage around the world" and the phrase "following the pressure of the sectors of opinion that presented the decision as jewish discrimination", and stop the sentence there, as in the new redaction.
In summary, I have agreed with you in points 1 and 4, but I keep points 2 and 3 as disagreements, although with some fair concessions on my side. Hope that we can find an agreement soon.
Regards.--Luiscob (talk) 15:00, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
@Luiscob: Instead of taking out source material, try to focus on adding well sourced material. If those represent two different point of view, make sure it is clear.
Also, what BDS wrote and how it came out are two separate things. If the act was perceived in one way, though they (supposedly) meant it in another way, it should appear according to how RS describe it. Use common sense to add what you think should be added and if comments are due, they will come. Just keep in mind, writing "In spite of that" is not neutral. BDS might say things one way but the public take them another way. Checkout WP:Verifiability. Settleman (talk) 15:46, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
@Settleman: I insist on my point: I am not using what BDS says in its webpage as a source for supporting nothing else, but only to be able to claim that BDS DID SAY SO. This is not using its webpage as a source. Taking a quick look around many other articles, I have found hundreds of other references to manifests, releases, notes... of many different groups, organizations... that could never be used as reliable sources ---they are biased opinions---, but that are used ONLY to support the fact that the corresponding group, organization... did claim whatever appears on the reference.
Please, tell me: If I want to write in an article that "the newspaper A published the article B"... can I reference directly the article B in the newspaper A to support my claim, or shall I find another reference C which actually states that "the newspaper A published the article B"? This is nonsense.
@Galatz: I think that you do not dispute the validity of my references any more, once I dropped those mentioned in the point 1 of my previous entry. Please answer on the still controversial points 2 and 3 of my previous entry as soon as possible.
Regards. --Luiscob (talk) 07:53, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
@Luiscob: You can probably use it to write this is what they say but don't forget this isn't the document Matisyahu was asked to sign AND we don't know what ewxactly went behind the scene. Like I said, try focusing on adding an additional narrative instead of removing a valid, widely accepted one. Settleman (talk) 12:27, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Matisyahu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Matisyahu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:53, 1 March 2016 (UTC)