Talk:Mizrahi Jews

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Israel (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ethnic groups (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Judaism (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Jewish history (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Arab world (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To the poster below[edit]

Thats because the previous name of Mizrahim (Must3arb yahudi,Arabischer yidden,Arab Jews) is no longer PC but you should go to some Sephardic Froums especially the Turkish/Rhodes and Spanish Portuguese ones,they certainly object to anything that is not Ashkenazi being called Sephardi. The Situation not so long ago was more blurry also, because Moroccan Jews formerly spoke Spanish(haketiya) ottomons ruled most arab countries and apointed turkish (sephardic) jews as Hakham Bashis (chief rabbis) and Ladino (Jewish Spanish) was the primary Language of The ottomon empires Jews especially in Jerusalem, however Arabic became more dominant over time, untill all the Sephardim outside of Sephardic lands(turkey,greece,Jerusalem etc) Assimilated to Arabic language, I'm a member of some Message boards including a SYrian message board, they distinguish between Must3arabi and Sephardi, but also use Sephardi in the inclusive sense in day to day language.

the Difference between calling all Ashkenazim Ashkenazim and all non Ashkenazi Jews Sephardim is that even though the vast majority of Ashkenazi Jews are not from Ashkenaz, They have their origin there as Evidenced by Language & Names, With Mizrahim they dont have the same language as Sephardim though they often due share some names but not others. Simply put Sephardim in the limited sense is only those of the Spanish Diaspora like Turkish Jews,Yugoslavian Jews,Bulgarian Jews, & Spanish-portuguese(of Holland,germany & UK etc) & Morrocan Jews —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Numbers are wrong[edit]

In the citiation that gave for Mizrahi population in Israel there is no number (here: and in the last demographoc statictis that was published even in the Demography of Israel article is showed that the number is around 2.9 million not 3.1 million include the Sepharadi Jewish population And also for France and Morocco the ethnic idenety for Jewish population wether they are Mizrahi or Sepharadi is uncertained cause the Moroccan Jews are both Sepharadi and Mizrahi (Ari Davidoff) 07:25 24 August 2009 (UTC)

2.9 seems to be a more accurate number, but this number is for Sephardic Jews. While most Sephardic jews can be called Mizrahim and most Mizrahim can also be called Sephardic, the overlap is not absolute. Mostly I am confused because I am a Bulgarian Jew, which the other pages called Ashkenazi, though quite obviously my anscestor's community was Sephardic, speaking Ladino and having Sephardic surnames. Bulgaria is only vaguely oriental, and many Sephardic Jews come from Western countries and the Spanish colonies. I also believe that many older Eastern traditions do not consider themselves Sephardic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Current Arabia living Mizrahi[edit]

I think there could be an article dealing specifically with those Mizrahi who still live in the Middle East outside of Israel. This article, as well as Jewish exodus from Arab lands, deals primarily with those who left. There are individual articles, like History of the Jews in Morocco, History of the Jews in Lebanon etc., but no article which brings these all together, and deals particularly with these Jews current status. - Matthew238 (talk) 05:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at Arab Jews and see if you think this answers the quandary you pose? Let us know what you think, if you could.LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 06:16, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

they are numerically insignificant. indeed, up until the 1970's there was a community of several thousand still remaining in iraq, but that was about it. if you're interested, professor nissim kazaz documented their life and history until the community's demise. but there are no longer any viable communities in the non-african arab world, aside from a slight chance of viability for the yemeni jewish community. for all practical (encyclopedic) purposes, these communities don't exist anymore. MiS-Saath (talk) 20:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
The Arab Jews article is mostly history, with links to other articles about specific country histories. I don't know if there would be enough information out there to create an article, even one regarding the communities as a whole, that dealt purely with the current situation of these peoples (the Arab Jews article gives merely a few sentences here an there regarding current populations).

I agree that they are numerically small, but whether or not they are insignificant, encyclopedically speaking, I'm not sure. Samaritan has an article (about 700 people in two communities), and it has a section on "modern times". Maybe a "modern times" regarding Arab Jews. Most left 'Arabia', but surely those who remained have quite a story? - Matthew238 (talk) 01:38, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

to my best of knowledge, they don't. the samaritan community is active and is a focal point for genetic and ethnic research taking place. the remains of the jewish communities in arab countries are split to fragments and mostly don't run active community life and (for the most part) can't even field a 'minyan'. they're also not of much interest to researchers because communities who live in israel and maintain their heritage provide a much more accessible and live subject for research. there are some points worthy of note, such as the fact that in iraq, the few remaining jews lay claim to a large amount of communal property that survived confistication, the efforts of HIAS in rescuing some of the remaining jews to end their life in better conditions in israel, and some newer harassment affairs (Yahya sa'ad al hudair and the yemenite jews of sa'ada) [1]. but it'll be hard to scrape a decent article off of that material, imho. MiS-Saath (talk) 12:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

The population in this article includes Sephardic Midlle Eastern Jews. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShlomoHasoon (talkcontribs) 00:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Population numbers[edit]

The article on the Mountain Jews list the following numbers:

Russia     9,000 to 20,000         
Azerbaijan      5,500   

Since Mountain Jews seem to be part of the Mizrahi Jews, why are these not included in the count on the top of the page? Mhym (talk) 16:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Can someone check the numbers for France, please? From wikipedia pages: Sefaradi are 350K, Ashkenazi 200K and Mizrahi 400K (?), this would bring the total Jews population in France over 1,000M I think there is a typo, and it meant 40K (instaed of 400K) for Mirrahi Jews living in France. Needs to be fixed ?! Thanks. Ira —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:35, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Mizrahi vs. Sephardic+ Photobox[edit]

There are many figures mentioned in this aticle who are Separdic and not Mizrahi. More, the photo box almost only include third rate Israeli artists, some are of Sephardic origin (e.g.,Maya Bouskilla). --Gilisa (talk) 10:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

isnt Maya Bouskilla of North African Jew descent? However , North African Jews are of Sephardi rite , but they are als included in "Mizrahi" category.

Paula Abdul[edit]

Her page says shes a sephardic jew, those from the Iberian Peninsula, yet shes listed here which one would be accurate?--Shimonnyman (talk) 22:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Ethiopian Jews?[edit]

On what basis are they defined here as Mizrahim?Telaviv1 (talk) 19:58, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think they are and I don't think Jews of Central Asia are either way. Mizrahi are tradionally Jews of the Middle-East such as Iraqi Jews , Iranian Jews etc.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Tunisian Jews are traditionally Sephardi, while Yemeni Jews are Yemeni. The most obvious Mizrahi Jews are from Iraq and Iran, where Jews from Spain didn't settle. TFighterPilot (talk) 15:03, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Jews from Syria are also Mizrahim though, as well as Iraqi and Iranian Jews, Jews of other sub-ethnic divisions (Sephardi and Ashkenazim) were absorbed in their population trough the years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:35, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Mizra(im) ? Mizra(i) ? Mizra(hi)?[edit]

Mizrai(m) is listed as a son of Cham. The word Mizraim is wrongly attributed as being Egypt yet we know Egypt is Cham/Kham/Chem/Khem/KM.t. It seems clear that Mizrai(m) son of Cham/Kham(Egypt) is in some way related to Mizra(h)i which tradtionally implies Persian Jews which makes more sense than simply Mizraim being another name for Egypt. This obvious connection should explored. I cannot be the first to make the easy association, there must be sources. Mizrai, Mizrahi, Mizraim clearly are a plural form of Mizra(sowing?) or Mirza(Persian). ____ —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:01, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry: there is absolutely no connection.
"Mizrahi" comes from the verb "zarahh", to rise or shine, and is spelled with a "zayin" (English z sound). The final "hhet" is a strong guttural, and is an integral part of the root: you can't just elide it to *Mizrai. The word is in any case a medieval coinage, and means simply "eastern".
"Mizraim" is spelled with a "tsade" (ts or hissing s sound): in more modern transliteration it would be "mitzrayim". There is no doubt of its meaning Egypt: the ancient Assyrians called Egypt "Mudraya" and in modern Arabic it is "Misr" (again with a "sad", hissing s). It may just possibly be connected with "metzar" (narrow place), but this is probably folk etymology. The "-ayim" ending is a dual, probably referring to Upper and Lower Egypt.
"Mirza" is a Persian word, derived from Arabic "amir" (commander) and the Persian suffix "za" (son of). The Bible includes Madai and Paras (the Medes and Persians) among the descendants of Japheth, i.e. Indo-Europeans: there is no connection with Ham.
"Mizra" (sowing) has a final "ayin", another guttural, which is an integral part of the root and cannot be dropped or ignored.
Simply comparing how the transliterations look in English without reference to the original languages is a classic form of Pseudoscientific language comparison.--Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 10:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

"Mizrach" means "East". Thus why I think many people don't know what is the broad definition of "Mizrahi". This should be put into question. What is "Mizrahi" and which falls under this category. It doesn't seem "Mizrahi" has any cultural or historical basis thus is it a political term ?

Related category nominated at CFD[edit]

__meco (talk) 10:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Complete Garbage, they have nothing to do with Arab Semitic people[edit]

The article is complete garbage. The Israeli government has now renamed people from Europe in a new category "mizrahi" to try and validate their claim on Palestinian land. These people have got nothing to do with people in the middle east. To be Semitic means they would need to have the same genetics as the Arab Semitic people. The swab from the mouth and blood test would take less than 10 minutes to see if any of them have the same genetics as Arabs but its unlikely that they would ever do it as the tests always show them as russians, german, latvians, french, georgians etc. As usual the same nonsense of reports of fake genetic tests are shown. People have pretty much begun to ignore these things as typical Israeli government nonsense. TruthArrives (talk) 09:52, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

This article is not about "people from Europe" (russians etc). There were Jews living in Syria, Iraq, North Africa etc since long before the Muslim conquest and THAT is what this article is about. The genetic origin of European Jews (i.e. Ashkenazim) is quite another question, and NO ONE calls them "Mizrahi". Nor does this article mention genetics in any way. Are you sure you didn't add your comment to the wrong article? --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 10:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

That is exactly what I am talking about. Everyone knows that these people are Europeans who are claiming to be jews from the middle east because they don't want to label themselves as Ashkenazi. So now they are saying that they came from Arab countries at the end of the war and not Europe. There were pagans, jews and christians in the region prior to Islam. Majority of them converted to Islam eventually after the Muslim conquest. These people on the other hand are calling themselves as "jews from the middle east" when they are from Europe and have jack all in common with Arab Semitic people and neither were they ever "expelled" from the middle east because they never were in the middle east, they come from Europe. I did not say that genetics was mentioned in this article, I was saying that its mentioned in other articles claiming that even though so called "mizrahi jews" had majority European genetics they had some genetics in common with Semitic Arabs. That is utter nonsense they have nothing in common with Semitic Arabs, my opinion is its better to do your independent genetic test, come to terms with reality and live a real life than put fake labels and live a fake life. TruthArrives (talk) 14:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Please look up the articles on History of the Jews in Iraq, History of the Jews in Syria, History of the Jews in Tunisia, Exilarch, Saadia Gaon, Maimonides, Judaeo-Arabic languages, Judaeo-Persian and Aleppo Codex; also the detailed prescriptions in Islamic law about the treatment of Jewish and Christian dhimmis. I'm not talking genetics, simply about the continuous existence of Jewish communities in those countries. Are you saying it's ALL a forgery?? Pretty radical revisionism that; not what "everybody knows". --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 15:49, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Aaah yes that word again "revisionism" like how every person that says the common sense obvious truth about the holocaust is called as holocaust "revisionism" yup ..... sure. This is mundane you seem to be just going round in circles, I am only interested in saying the truth not made up fantasy stories. TruthArrives (talk) 06:46, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

So let's get this clear. Are you actually saying that there were no Jewish communities in any Islamic country before 1948, and that it was all made up by the Israeli government? Funny, that. The information in the articles cited above largely came from the Jewish Encyclopedia of 1905, and I have seen original sets of that; unless of course every existing copy was forged by the Israelis in the 1950s and then deliberately foxed and dog-eared to look older. My father's birth certificate was signed in 1913 by the Chief Rabbi of Cairo, and his grandfather was born in Aleppo in 1840; are you saying he did not exist either? (So why am I here, or perhaps I'm a forgery too.) The British census of 1900 shows some thousands of Jews living in Manchester with birthplaces in Syria or elsewhere in the Ottoman Empire: another forgery by the Israelis? Sir Richard Burton (a pretty radical anti-Semite, that, and scarcely likely to be promoting a Zionist agenda) gives a detailed account of the Damascus Affair of 1840, and the world's newspapers of the time were full of it: yet another forgery? Going further back, are the travel diaries of Petahiah of Regensburg, Benjamin of Tudela and Pietro della Valle all forgeries? Russell's Natural History of Aleppo (1756)? Lane's Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians (1836)? Have you SEEN the old synagogues and Jewish cemetery in Cairo? Perhaps you should read Archbishop Whately's Historic Doubts, in which he proves that there was never such a person as Napoleon Bonaparte (as a spoof, I hasten to add).
Seriously. There is some room for manoeuvre on the question of how many of the Jewish communities of those countries are descended from people expelled from Spain in 1492, and how many represent older communities ("Musta'arabim"); that is why both Spanish and Arabic names are found among them. But that is scarcely the same as saying that they were all people from Poland called Goldberg and Shloimevitz smuggled in by the Israelis in the twentieth century, as you seem to be saying.
I'm not using "revisionism" pejoratively. There is always a role for challenges to the accepted scholarly consensus. But the onus of proof is on the person making the challenge: you can't just say "everybody knows". And given the evidence, including the volume of rabbinic material in both Hebrew and Judaeo-Arabic, both printed and in manuscript, emanating from those countries from the seventh century on, it would take an enormous amount of explaining away.
I'm not sure what genetic tests have got to do with it. Supposing that genetic tests show that Sephardim have the same genetic make-up as Ashkenazim, that does not show the inauthenticity of the Sephardim: it could equally show the authenticity of the Ashkenazim. No one is saying that Sephardim/Mizrahim are actually Arabs by blood (there is no such thing anyway, the present Arabs are a mixture of the Muslim conquerors from Arabia with the native Aramaeans, Jews, Copts, Assyrians, Phoenicians and you name it depending on the country they live in, the common factor is simply the Arabic language.) They were just Jews living in Arab countries. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 10:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Like i said before i am tired of replying to the same stuff again and again. The Arabs spread out from Arabia to the neighboring regions and began occupying them one by one, all the regions were Semitic people speaking Semitic languages except for ancient Egypt which was Afroasiatic but not semitic. The people living in Egypt now are Arabs as the ancient egyptians after living under Roman and Greek rule fled to the south of the country and eventually out of the country after the Arabs invaded Egypt. This rapid spread and multiplication of the population led to 300 million people speaking Arabic today. On the other hand the continent of Europe has more than 30 different languages but European people have majority of the genes in common with one another. It can be the other way as well for example Alexander conquered the Persian empire but the Iranian people are all indigenous Iranians with no genetic input from outside that is because countries dont "conquer" countries, the small army of one country tried to conquer the army of another country and in this case the population was too big to control and they were destroyed and pushed out of the country.

As far as "jews from the middle east" or more appropriately "Arab jews" are concerned, they had decades and generations of intermarriage with muslims that is because both Islam and Judaism are montheistic religions but Christianity is polytheistic. So it was fairly common for the minute jewish population to intermarry with the larger muslim population but rare for christian and jewish or christian and muslim intermarriage. Which obviously means that Arab jews would have the same genetics as Arab Muslims. Although now there is frequent intermarriage between Muslim and the minute Christian Arab population. The only reason why in the past there was no intermarriage between jews and christians or muslims and christians was because christians in the middle east started immitating the western world with blond hair blue eyed jesus. Christian arabs became more westernised so much so that 3/4 of chistian arabs have mixture of european genes in them. The more they became western the more the muslims and jews tended to move away from them, ultimately leading to islam becoming the dominant religion in the region. Although there was some jewish-christian intermarriage as both jews and christians follow the exact same religious book with Jesus being the only point of difference.

To answer your last question of why i mentioned genetics, I did not bring it up for any Islamic reason as genetics do not play any part in Islam. Its only your belief and righteous deeds that matter in Islam. The only reason i brought up genetics is because it irked me how the government is labelling europeans as "middle east" when they have jack all in common with the Arab Semitic people. You can continue with your Judaism calling yourselves as Jews from Europe not Middle East and you are free to believe whatever you want to believe but i think the rest of the world pretty much knows the reality that they are basically European. TruthArrives (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Intermarriage. Yes there was some intermarriage, as Islamic law permits a Muslim to take a Jewish wife. But their children would be brought up as Muslim. It was illegal for any Muslim to convert to Judaism. So there would be some Jewish blood in the Muslim population but not much Arab blood in the Jewish population. As far as the wider question is concerned, Arabs were just one Semitic people among many; Israelites, Aramaeans and Assyrians were others. So Middle Eastern Jews would have a remote cousinship with Arabs, but not be directly descended from them, and still qualify as "Semitic". (There would have been some hush-hush mixing, accounting for local features; a Shiite Iraqi friend of mine thinks I "look Syrian".)
You haven't answered my basic question. If we're all European, when do you say we arrived from there? --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 10:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Its not just Jews, Christians and Sabians that Muslims can marry. A muslim man / woman can marry ANY person that believes there is only one God i.e. monotheism. As long as that man / woman accepts that there is only one God and does not practice any form of idol worship or polytheistic notions of God. The man / woman must not believe in any form of blood religion i.e. the concept that a person has to be born into a religion. Since blood religion is regarded as polytheism in Islam and blood religion is a characteristic of old idol worshiping religions where a person who is born worshiping one set of idols can marry a person who is born worshiping the same idols. But another person worshiping different idols cannot marry the former. The concept of blood religion in judaism is fairly new as judaism was the first religion to proselytize or convert people. Which is how arab jews were converted from paganism to judaism. Arab christians were coverted from paganism to christianity which consequently led to greater intermarriage between arab christians and europeans.

The requirements i stated before are the only requirements for marriage under islamic law. Islam is strictly NOT associated with cultures or ethnic groupings or languages etc. It is a Belief in a singular God, the accomplishment of righteous deeds, punishment for sins and the ultimate judgement on the day of judgement. To answer your question, majority of european jews arrived on ships and by land to palestine. The region was only scarcely populated by palestinian farmers and shepherds and other arabs, whose ancestors were originally jewish and had eventually coverted to islam due to intermarriage with the larger arab population. During british colonial rule more and more europeans were allowed to settle in the region and ultimately after the end of world war 2 we know the rest. The region was unanimously voted by europeans to give it to the european jews even though the arabs opposed. Later sucessive migrations from germany, russia, poland and other european countries as well as america led to the region being completely occupied by european jews. TruthArrives (talk) 15:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Please come down to earth. We are not talking about religious dogma here, but about the physical existence of communities in different countries. Nor am I talking about whether there were Jews in PALESTINE before the Zionist movement. It is simply an abundantly documented fact that there were Jewish communities in countries such as Iraq, Syria and Tunisia from pre-medieval times to the early twentieth century, and that they had virtually nothing culturally in common with Ashkenazi Jews except the basics of religion. I do not care a row of beans about their genetic descent: Judaism is not a "blood religion" either (anyway, my sort isn't). If you are saying that the Aleppo Jewish community of 1900 was not descended from the Aleppo Jewish community of 900 (because of the amount of intermarriage, conversion and immigration going on all the time), fair enough: I might not agree 100% but it is within the bounds of possibility. But if you're saying that between 900 and 1900 there was no Aleppo community at all you are flying in the face of reality. It would be like saying that there was never such a language as Ancient Greek or that there is no such place as Ireland. There is just too much physical evidence to explain away. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 11:48, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Jacques Derrida?[edit]

Was Jacques Derrida a Mizrahi Jew? His family was from Algeria, but I can't tell if they were part of the long-term Algerian-Jewish population (i.e., Mizrahi), or more recent immigrants. Helene Cixous and Bernard-Henri Levy both come from recent-immigrant Jewish families who were only in north Africa relatively briefly, thus are not really Mizrahi even in the expanded use of the term. But I'm not so sure about Derrida. Aroundthewayboy (talk) 18:06, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Algerian is not Mizrahi but Maghrebi. Today Mizrahi are mixed-up with Maghrebi and Sephardi proper and sometimes whole Israeli Jews are named "Mizrahi", but originally the concept refers to Jews of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Caucasus, Bukhara and perhaps Yemen.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Dr. Shalomim Y. Halahawi?[edit]

Dr. Shalomim Y. HaLahawi is a man that claims to be a rabbi and a doctor although no one has seen his credentials. I suspect he is faking it. In fact, it is him that put his information in the Medicine and Therapy section. He had a book published but ANYONE can have a book published. Is there ANY WAY one would be able to check to see if he is of merit, before he is allowed to put HIMSELF on the page as a medical source? Rivka 01:08, 27 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RivkaRebecca (talkcontribs)

(observers response)- I am an observer & outsider looking in. I have observed for some time in how wikipedia & others use double standards when it comes to black/ethiopian rabbis, as opposed to white/european rabbis. Most of the information obtained about other rabbis of european descent, were no different than how information is obtained about black rabbis, such as this Rabbi Shalomim HaLahawi. It appears he gets scrutinized and disrespected just because he's not white looking. that is the only reason you and many others i see who write negative things about him, seem to speak about him in such a condescending way. name one rabbi listed in wikipedia whose credentials were in fact verified other than what is posted on the internet about them? did you go and get their credentials for direct validation, or did their white skin automatically qualify them just because their followers or sect posted about them. Yet I did a simple check and his medical biography is pretty clear. He has a NPI # just like any other physician. He lists the Yeshiva he graduated from along with the masters degree. There is information on his family background including DNA profile and there is United Nations registration information on this Rabbi, in addition to the books he writes, just like any other rabbis. what makes all the white rabbi's exempt and accepted, while he gets rejected, other than being white? I think its the typical bigoted attitude of white priviledge that is the driving force behind this. The idea that ethiopian and black rabbis simply can't be true because they don't fit in the box what you all want to define. Yet who gave any of you the moral authority or power to insult some-one about their heritage, background and tell them who they are and are not....This is pure double standard and its not just with Black jews you all do this with, you do it to all people of color. Inbred racism. And its very clear its racism, because its not hard to find information on healthcare providers in the USA. His NPI #1366778177 issued by the government, which has his medical background. Its as easy as that for anyone who is truly fair and balance. But bigots and racists don't see or can't find what they don't want to see or find in the first place... And if you are questioning his Jewishness, then you are really showing forth what your real motive and spirit is, in your bid to have him blocked or censored. Its says alot about Wikipedia and some of those in cahoots with racist propaganda behind it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:17, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

If you have no arguments to make, just want to accuse Wikipedia of racism, then please don't even bother. Further edits in this vain will be removed, just as I have undone today's edit, bringing 3 reaosns in the edit summary. Debresser (talk) 08:48, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Babylonian vs Jerusalem Talmud[edit]

The article says that (from a historical context) Mizrahi Jews mostly follow the Babylonian Talmud, whereas Ashkenazi Jews mostly follow the Jerusalem Talmud. Where did this information come from, as I'm sure it is wrong? Ashkenazi Jews also mostly follow the Babylonian Talmud. The Babylonian Talmud is given far more weight than the Jerusalem Talmud across Judaism. (talk) 15:31, 9 September 2013 (UTC)Adam

Absolutely right. It is thought that a few Palestinian customs form part of the Ashkenazi liturgy, where the corresponding Sephardi usage is Babylonian. But this is a very small number of instances, compared with the overwhelming preponderance of Babylonian usages in both Ashkenazi and Sephardi liturgies; and there are even instances of the reverse pattern. See the article Sephardic law and customs. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 16:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Mosaic Talk[edit]

I have changed the mosaic. Okay, it seems to me that there will be some complaining about the new mosaic, which I feel is accurate enough to display the many notable Mizrahi Jews, including Arab Jews who continued live in the Arab World, those migrated to Israel and their descendants among other "definitions" of Mizrahi.

Now since my mosaic get reverted under the excuse that there was no discussions, HERE IT IS - a section for discussion on the mosaic. Now have at it. PacificWarrior101 (talk) 02:53, 14 April 2014 (UTC)PacificWarrior101

First of all, do not undo a revert before you obtain consensus. Please read WP:BRD carefully in this regard.
I think the new mosaic is way too large. Both in number of people and in size. Also, compare other articles Jews and Ashkenazi Jews, and see that 9-15 is an accepted number. Even the 15 used to be less. Note also that all changes in the mosaics on those pages were first discussed on the talk pages, with non-discussed changes reverted automatically by multiple editors. Debresser (talk) 18:22, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

History section?[edit]

As a total outsider to the Jewish diaspora and related topics, I would find it helpful if there were a history section here. Where have the Mizrahi Jewish people migrated to, what have their relations been like with other Jewish groups and with gentiles historically, when were they first identified as an independent ethnic group? These are things which readers unfamiliar to the topic might want to know. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:18, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

That collage is horrible[edit]

I was shocked when I saw this collage, as it has every negative stereotypes about Mizrahi Jews in Israel.

  • Eyal Golan? The guy always was considered a "chav" singer (Arsim)... and now he had a scandal of sleeping with underage girls. It was always embarrassing to have him in, but especially now. Wouldn't it make more sense to have an international star like Achinoam Nini in? She is also a Yemenite Jew and will give more representation to women.
  • Ovadia Yosef? The guy who said Arabs should be killed and Ashkenazi Jews are not pure Jews? The guy was considered a clown in Israel, even many Mizrahis took the piss of him. Having him in makes a mockery out of the whole collage! He is seen as a clown by most of the Israeli population. Wouldn't it make more sense to add a respectable rabbi like Yitzhak Kaduri? 300,000 people took part in his funeral.
  • Moshe Katsav? The Israeli president forced to quit and jailed for being a rapist? If we want a political figure, shouldn't we have someone like Abie Nathan in the collage? An internationally known peace activist, one of whom Shimon Peres, the President of Israel, said: "He was one of the most prominent and special people in the country"

This collage needs a discussion and a lot of work, I feel. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 07:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

I can agree with the first and third problems you raise, but I would seriously disagree with removing Yosef, who - despite the objections you raise - was a major figure in Mizrahi Jewry for decades, both religiously, politically and culturally. I would disagree that he is viewed as a clown. I live in Israel, and never heard that one before. Not to mention that I out of principle disagree with using such words regarding rabbis. Debresser (talk) 11:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
But that is my point, most people in Israel don't see him as a rabbi but rather as some weird figure that is parodied in comedy sketches. I am usually very respectful of rabbis, even though I am an atheist. Those are people who dedicate their lives to studying something they believe in, and even though I am for completely separating state and religion, I have respect for that.
But Ovadia Yosef with his comments about how Ashkenazis are not even Jews, you can't pick your nose on Saturday... do you read Hebrew? Look: [2] He actually said it's ok to kill a secular Jew who says Yeshiva students are "parasites" (in Israel if you are a Yeshiva student you don't have to work). He also said that IDF soldiers who get killed get killed for not watching Shabbas.
There are so many respectable Mizrahi rabbis. Yitzhak Kaduri was such a genuine good rabbi. When Ovadia died I still lived in Israel and I remember everyone were making jokes and find it funny (to an extent I found it uncomfortable). But when Kaduri died... even atheists like me felt sad.
I think rabbis deserve respect, but Ovadia Yosef did a lot (and I really mean, a lot) to alienate himself from the whole of the Israeli population. You can't make racist comments towards Ashkenazi Jews, towards Russian Jews, you can't say IDF soldiers who don't keep Shabbas deserve to die, and still get respect. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 19:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

I'll copy-paste what I wrote on Jews about him: The English Ovadia Yosef page doesn't show even half of it. And a bit more on Ovadia Yosef. He is the guy who said:

  • Ashkenzi Jews are not real Jews but Khazars.
  • It's allowed to kill a secular person for calling Yeshiva students "parasites".
  • IDF soldiers who don't keep Shabbas "it's no wonder they get killed".
  • In 2000 he actually said that the Holocaust was God's way of revenging on Ashkenazi Jews for becoming Secular.
  • He said that women are good only for sewing.
  • He is the guy who said Arabs should be annihilated.

Needless to say, the guy managed to alienate himself from the vast majority of the Israeli population. Not only the Secular and Ashkenazi, but even most Mizrahi Jews. Most of his "fame" later came from comedy sketches making fun of his character.

Now here is my question, why would anyone want to add a character who is completely anonymous outside of Israel, and is considered a laughing stock by most inside Israel, for a collage about Mizrahi Jews? Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

And it's not that I am against having a Mizrahi rabbi in, I am pro, I think it's a must, but why does it have to be him? Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
His status is a fact, all the above notwithstanding. Debresser (talk) 23:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
But that is the point, what status is for whom? Yes, he managed to gain supporters and followers, but even more of those who he managed to offend and discredit himself with. Regardless of his status, don't you think it makes more sense to use a less controversial figure? Like Kaduri? Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 23:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Kaduri was less famous and less significant politically and socially. Also, sometimes a person is notable not in spite of his controversiality, but because of it. I feel strongly he deserves a place in this collage. Debresser (talk) 01:12, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I really don't think Kaduri was less famous, living in Israel I can tell you both were known by everyone. Politically maybe Kaduri was less famous (because he saw himself as a rabbi more than a politician). But religiously, as a rabbi, he was much more respected and accepted among the religious Mizrahis.
While Kaduri was famous as a rabbi, as a respected religious figure, Ovadia's fame mostly came from embarrassing remarks which were later parodied on Israeli evening comedy shows. Sarah Palin is more famous than Conan O'Brien, but I don't see Irish Americans having a debate of adding her to the collage.
About your comment "sometimes a person is notable not in spite of his controversiality, but because of it."... there is a reason Germans didn't add Hitler to the collage (and no, I am not comparing). When all a person is known for is racism (against Ashkenazis, against Arabs) and a bed reputation... it is not something to add to the collage. Fame alone is not a criteria, otherwise you would have the likes of Justin Bieber and Sarah Palin "decorating" collages.
Mordechai Vanunu is more famous and controversial than Ovadia, and he is also seen as a hero by some (Yoko Ono, for instance), do you think he belongs to thiscollage? Do you think Noam Chomsky should be in the Ashkenazi Jews collage? People like Karl Marx were kept out of Ashkenazi Jewish collages because of controversy. If you allow controversial people in, you might open a pandora box, as many other controversial figures who were kept out despite wide support due to controversy will be pushed in again. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 21:30, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I have no problem with removing all kinds of controversial people. The question is more whom to keep or add? Perhaps you'd care to put up a proposal here? Debresser (talk) 23:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, that's what I'm suggesting. To remove Ovadia Yosef and bring in rabbi Kaduri in. Kaduri is not controversial, he is respected by everyone, he is known by as many people as Ovadia Yosef, but his reputation is of a learned rabbi and not someone who the vast majority of Israelis see as a lunatic. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

How did I miss that ? Ovadia Yosef was the most respected figure and the most influent Mizrahi Rabbi of the last century. With all due respect to the Rav Kaduri, he did not have half the influence and adulation of the Rav Ovadia Yosef. Saying that he was seen as a clown in Israel is a joke. There were close to one million people at his funerals, the greatest attendance ever. Mr. Sort It Out had clearly an agenda to push. So I will wait for a few days to see if someone reacts and I will change back to Ovadia Yosef. Benjil (talk) 10:28, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

  • I hope no one minds but I added Vidal Sassoon to the collage, as there was only 8 people in a collage when it should be 9. The guy revolutionized hair styling and is probably the best known Jewish name in the world of fashion. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 07:35, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
  • As there are 3 singers in the collage, I removed Shai Gabso (who was popular only for a while after the X-Factor), and added Jacques Attali to represent Mizrahi achievements in the academy. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 07:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Any more opinions about who to use, Ovadia Yosef or Rabbi Kaduri, in the collage...? Need more voices to reach a conclusion. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
  • For Shai Agassi, I once made a cropped upright image. Shai Agassi2 (cropped).jpg.
  • One could also consider David Sassoon to have some older historical figures in the collage.
  • As for Ovadia Yosef, he is indeed a very controversial figure, as far as I can judge from his article. I would also support the inclusion of another rabbi. However, I cannot judge on the importance of the different alternatives or make an own proposal. --Off-shell (talk) 19:46, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Brilliant! I added the cropped Agassi picture to the collage.
  • Of course David Sassoon should be in the collage, I think he is more notable than anyone in that collage. I will add David Sassoon instead of Dalia Itzik. The reason is even though Dalia Itzik is an MP, she is a very random one. Like, there is nothing that notable about her, and she had a big expenses scandal.
  • To tell you the truth after I saw dodgy characters like Eyal Golan (sleeping with minors), Moshe Katzav (rapist) and Dalia Itzik (expenses scandal) I actually started thinking someone did the old Mizrahi collage as a joke.
  • Are you happy with Yitzhak Kaduri as the rabbi instead of Ovadia Yosef for the collage? Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 08:46, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I've got three more suggestion for the collage:

He is probably the most famous military person of Mizrahi ethnicity ever. He played a big role in the Liberation of Bangladesh and later he was a Governor of two Indian states, Goa and Punjab. I think someone of his notability definitely should be in the collage.

Another person, a woman:

Some say she is the greatest Bukharian singer ever, and we must have one Bukharian person in the collage as they are a high percentage of the Mizrahi Jews.

And another person:

He is a billionaire, art collector, and we need to have a Persian Jew for the collage.

Those three people can be added as an extra line, no need to remove anyone. That way we will have 4 lines of 3. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 08:49, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I really see no need for more than 9 people. In addition, why add more people nobody ever heard of?
I think we need somebody to work on the collage to make all the pictures the same size, like in Jews. Debresser (talk) 17:32, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
I would not say no one heard of them, all three reached a cult status in their countries. How many people did you hear of on the Latvians collage, let's say? It doesn't mean they are not notable. The difference between Mizrahis and Ashkenazis is that while Ashkenazis are one ethnic group, Mizrahis are in fact a name for many different ethnic groups, and I think as many as possible need to be represented.
And J. F. R. Jacob is known to everyone. Unlike the other two one might argue are unknown outside of their countries, fair enough, J. F. R. Jacob is a major name. His name at the time was reported on the news a lot, in America he was very famous for a while and in India he wrote his name into it's history to an extent he is mentioned in every book about modern Indian history. That's how big he is! I do think J. F. R. Jacob is someone who should be in the collage.
If you don't want to add another line to the collage, no problems. Just suggesting. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 19:22, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I just realized Vidal Sassoon is not Mizrahi, he is Sephardic. His dad is a Sephardic Jew from Greece, while his mum is Ashkenazi from Kiev. Adding J. F. R. Jacob instead. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 19:23, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

What about Mirra Alfassa? I'm not sure if she may be considered here or on the Sephardi Jews page. She was born in Paris to Turkish Jewish father, Moïse Maurice Alfassa, and an Egyptian Jewish mother, Mathilde Ismalun. --Off-shell (talk) 23:29, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

She is a brilliant suggestion and good for the balance, her father might be Sephardi but her mother is Mizrahi. The problem is we don't have an image of her! Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 07:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Here it is: Mirra Alfassa in June 1916.jpg. It is free. --Off-shell (talk) 08:57, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Wow, amazing. Now, who should we use her instead? We have two economists in the collage, Nouriel Roubini and Jacques Attali. Roubini is a more notable and major figure in world economics, so in my opinion she should replace Attali. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Sort It Out (talkcontribs) 18:11, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Agree. Besides, isn't Ofra Haza better known than Achinoam Nini? --Off-shell (talk) 23:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Wow, thank you for re-styling the selection! With the addition of Mirra Alfassa in the collage I did the thing where the central line is female, to stick to the style we did with some other collages.
It's a hard one, Ofra Haza has more of a cult status in Israel (and so does Shoshana Damari), but Achinoam Nini has more international fame than any musician in Israel ever had. Because this article is not just about Mizrahi Jews in Israel but Mizrahis in general, I thought it makes more sense to use the one who is better known internationally. I'm not fussed to change if needed, though. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 06:46, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
I also support your idea of including the representatives of the different ethnic subgroups, such as Bukharian Jews. I think the best would be to have Malika Kalontarova, the "Queen of Eastern Dance", instead of one of the singers (Paula Abdul or Achinoam Nini). Kalontarova was quite famous in the USSR (the only woman from Tajikistan to get the title "People's artist of the USSR") and also got some international recognition. Unfortunately, there is currently no picture of her. --Off-shell (talk) 09:31, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Great new format. Perfect.
I also think Ofra Haza is the better choice. If only because I heard of Ofra Haza when I lived in Europe, but never heard Achinoam Nini, not even after living 15 years in Israel. Why do you say Achinoam Nini has international fame? Ofra Haza has international fame!
Are Bukharian Jews part of Mizrahi Jews at all? Debresser (talk) 20:52, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
To your first question, I think Bukharian Jews are Mizrahi, the article says they are. like Indians.
I grew up in Israel but live in England and in both cases I hardly heard of Ofra Haza, mostly from the older generation, but heard a lot of Achinoam Nini. So did you! Do you remember Life Is Beautiful? She sang the theme song and wrote the lyrics for it (Beautiful That Way[3]). She sang with Stevie Wonder on CBS TV Special, she did duets with Sting, Sheryl Crow, Santana, and she was invited to some charity songs (live aid style) with many other singers... she was even a "good will ambassador" for FAO. The fame she reached no other Israeli singer ever had, even Ofra Haza. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 22:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
I think while Paula Abdul was considered cheesy pop which no one really remember, Achinoam Nini is one which is highly regarded, especially by musicians. As I mentioned, she sang Beautiful That Way for Life is Beautiful and did duets with Sting and Santana. Definitely think we should keep her and drop Abdul. Among the awards she won was won "Critics' Award" at the 56th Sanremo Music Festival. Achinoam Nini, in my view, is definitely a must in that collage. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 22:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Well, I have heard none of this, but Ofra Haza is definitely a famous name in my book. Please note that so far you are outnumbered 2 to 1. Debresser (talk) 05:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
I thought we have more a discussion than a vote, but if you want to change it to Haza I won't revert it. But before I'd change it to Haza, if I'd be you I'd speak to few Israelis from different age groups and different ethnic groups, and I think you will be very surprised with the results.
I don't mean it rude Debresser, I do think most of your edits are brilliant and you have huge knowledge, you definitely are very intelligent and a great contributor.... but you also said before that you did not hear of Shai Agassi, and he is probably one of the most famous Israelis ever, literally every Israeli knows him as for years he was compared to Steve Jobs and was talked about in the local media almost on a daily basis, so what I am saying is before making such comments you should ask some Israelis. Mr. Sort It Out (talk) 21:03, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Okay, will do. Debresser (talk) 17:04, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

If the idea of including the representatives from the different ethnic subgroups in the collage is further pursued, I would propose a very good candidate for Mountain Jews:

I agree. In addition, if further proposal are made in the future, one may add one more line to the collage, and put Nathan back. But as long as there are only three raws, I support the proposal of replacing Nathan by Ilizarov. --Off-shell (talk) 19:13, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Refimprove tag added to Usage section[edit]

Currently the Usage section, as well as the lead, appears incoherent, weaseled and lacking references for current content; it also contains WP:OR as it relates to the term's presently stated association with immigration. While that association is valid, referenced material concerning its historic and modified current usage may be found at Jewish ethnic divisions#Modern divisions. Regards, CasualObserver'48 (talk) 04:51, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Mizrahi Jews[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Mizrahi Jews's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 06:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but where did you see a citation error in this article? Debresser (talk) 18:07, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
@Debresser: See here. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:41, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Ovadia Yosef[edit]

Last year, following a discussion based on false premises, the pic of Ovadia Yosef was taken away and replaced by a picture of the Rav Kaduri on the pretext that Yosef was seen as a joke in Israel. Ovadia Yosef was the greatest, most respected and most influent Mizrahi rabbi ever in Israel, here just an example with what happened at his funeral: I am neither mizrahi nor a big fan of Ovadia Yosef but if someone needs to be on this page, this is him. Benjil (talk) 14:53, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

We have been here. As you said yourself, there is no consensus to have him. If you reinstate him again without prior consensus, I will have to report your actions. Debresser (talk) 17:00, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry - is Wikipedia your propriety ? There is consensus since nobody objected but you and for no relevant reasons but your urge to behave like the boss of Jewish related content. My change is sourced and incontestable by anyone with the minimum of knowledge about Israel. So I will let you try and find a relevant objection and then revert back to Ovadia Yosef if you are unable to do it. Benjil (talk) 17:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
By the way the previous change (Ovadia to Kaduri in 9/2014) was entirely unsourced and based only on the weird opinions and prejudice from *one* writer here. So you are the one in the wrong here according to WP rules. Benjil (talk) 17:28, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
No objections is not the same as consensus. And if you needed an objection, you have mine! So per definition, you do not have consensus. As opposed to the present version, which has consensus at lest for as long as it exists. Also notie\ce that the collage is heavily discussed here, which also means consensus.
Now, you behavioral issue is of more concern here. You can not start deciding on your own what is "incontestable". Also, no need to invole WP:OWN, when you yourself are in violation of the most important rule of all: WP:CONSENSUS.
What do you mean that you change is sourced and the previous edit was unsourced? We are talking about adding a photo. What needs to be sourced here? It is contestable, as you see. Debresser (talk) 17:32, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Ovadia Yosef is the single most important Mizrahi Jew of the last 100 years. This is a fact and not contestable (of course everything is contestable, even that the Earth is round). And I gave you a link but I can give you 1000 if you need. You removed him because someone decided he was "seen as a joke", "less famous than Vanunu" (???!!) and so on, obviously someone who has no clue or an agenda. I wish to put back his picture because as the most important mizrahi Jew of late, he has to be on this article. Benjil (talk) 17:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
This was discussed in the #That collage is horrible section above, and the consensus of quite a few editors is that he should not be in this collage. Debresser (talk) 21:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry : are you reading what I am writing ? There was no "consensus" but *one* editor and what he said was wrong and unsourced. So for the last time, unless you have any relevant argument, I will reverse to the original picture that was changed for no good reason. Benjil (talk) 05:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Benjil Just read that discussion. It clearly shows a consensus of various editors not to have him in the collage. Debresser (talk) 06:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Now you are insulting me ? Read yourself the discussion. A consensus of one or two people is no consensus. Furthermore the discussion was based on false premises and wrong information. Since Ovadia Yosef was one of the most important figure of Judaism and not just Mizrahim, and close to 1 million people came to his funerals, the highest ever in Israel, and since you are incapable of presenting any argument and just trolling for the fun of it, I will revert it. I invite you to report me, because if you reverse my edit, I will report you. Benjil (talk) 08:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Debresser, now that your attempt has failed, can you discuss seriously ? Since Ovadia Yosef is a much more known, influent and respected figure than Kaduri, it stands to reason to at least add him to the gallery. Now I am waiting for a clear argumentation this time. Benjil (talk) 08:43, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

1. What attempt are you talking about? 2. I am always discussing seriously. 3. The argument is as it was: no consensus.4. By the way, the closure at WP:3RR/N was invalid. Debresser (talk) 17:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
The "no consensus" argument is a nonsense - you change the picture of Oviada Yosef without consensus - the proof is I oppose it. Anyway, consensus can change and we can explain why your change was wrong. Now can we speak seriously or how you going to troll us to the end ? Your attitude has been noted by everybody, you are not trying to discuss seriously, you just oppose putting Ovadia Yosef for no real reason. 800,000 people at least came to Ovadia Yosef's funerals, and he was lauded by everybody from left to right as a giant of Jewish thought. Now explain to me how he can't be on the picture gallery, in particular, I remind you, since he was on it and you removed it. With no valid, sourced, response, I will restore the pic. Benjil (talk) 05:01, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
You are correct: consensus can change. In this case it didn't. You change the picture, remember you are warned that that course of action will lead to you being blocked. Why do you continue rambling about sources for a picture? WP:DEADHORSE. Debresser (talk) 06:07, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Your conduct proves that you are a troll and a bad one. Anybody following this discussion can see it. Consider yourself warned. Benjil (talk) 06:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
You are the first editor in the seven or eight years that I am active on Wikipedia, who decides I am a troll. So statistically speaking your changes of having hit the nail on the head are low. :) In any case, you are warned not to make non-consensus edits.
On a more productive note, if you feel you have a case, why don't you try to make it, instead of edit warring? Open an Rfc, and try to establish a new consensus. Debresser (talk) 07:29, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I made my case a few times already and you never even bothered to answer. You are on the verge of being blocked so you should be less pretentious. Benjil (talk) 10:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC) Another proof of your lack of seriousness: I do not speak of source for a picture but for the debate about the relevancy of Ovadia Yosef. I remind you once again that I am not the one trying to change the article, you are the one who changed it and removed him, after a debate including 2 people, your famous "consensus", a debate that had no sources, you just accepted what another editor said at face value without even checking. I will open a RfC later when I have time. Benjil (talk) 10:49, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

An analogy

Some years ago, there was a debate about whether to include Johann Hari in the gallery of famous alumni in the King's College, Cambridge article. He was better known than some of those shown there now, but, to put it politely, less widely respected. The consensus was that, while the text of an article should be impartial, the gallery is mainly decorative, and should be unambiguously flattering to the community portrayed. Maproom (talk) 09:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

There is no analogy here, Ovadia was widely respected and the most influent man of Mizrahi origin in the recent decades or even centuries. Benjil (talk) 10:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

You are at least as much on the verge of being blocked as I am, and probably more so, since I at least claim consensus. In any case, if you refuse to try and establish a new consensus by way of an Rfc, you can not make the change you want to make. Debresser (talk) 12:01, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

RfC : Picture of Ovadia Yosef in the gallery[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of the discussion is that yes, the picture of Ovadia Yosef should be restored. The consensus is that prominence within the scope of the article (i.e. Mizrahi Jews) should determine inclusion in the gallery, and not political involvement or popularity of the persons themselves. The discussion finds that Ovadia Yosef is more prominent within the scope of the article, and as such would better exemplify the topic. Respectfully, Mz7 (talk) 16:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Should the picture of the Rav Ovadia Yosef be put back in the picture gallery ? Benjil (talk) 15:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


  • Yes - Until October 2014, the picture of Rav Ovadia Yosef was in the picture wall of the article. Following the intervention of one user who claimed that Yosef was seen as a joke and not that famous, he was replaced by a picture of the Rav Kaduri. While there is no denying that the rav Kaduri is an important figure, he pales in comparison to Ovadia Yosef who was the most important and influent Mizrahi rav of the last century, who shaped Israeli Sefaradi and Mizrahi identities and changed the face of Israeli politics. He was also a huge religious decision-maker, noted for his liberal judgements in comparison to the Ashkenazi haredim rabbis. Over 800,000 people flocked to his funerals two years ago,[4], [5], [6], the greatest number ever, by far, in Israel and he was eulogized by everybody from left to right as one of the greatest figure of contemporary Judaism. So it seems to me that his presence among the pictures should go without saying, but more infuriating is that he was erased for dubious reasons, without any checks nor sources. Full disclosure: I am neither Mizrahi, nor a religious Jew and have no love (or hate) for Ovadia Yosef. Benjil (talk) 15:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Mild no This rabbi was highly controversial. His lenient stance on many issues, and his break with traditional Sephardi traditions of halakha in favor of a return to the times of Yosef Karo, have been criticized by many. He also played a role in the polarizing of Ashkenazi vs. Sephardi Jews, a major negative influence in Israeli society. Yes, he was learned, and yes he was influential, but those are criteria many rabbis and secular persons fit, and are not in itself sufficient reason for inclusion. In any case, I can live with whatever the consensus will be, but I personally prefer the holy and widely beloved figure of Rabbi Kaduri. Debresser (talk) 19:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • No as not representative of the subject, given his direct association with a political party. (Summoned by bot) - Cwobeel (talk) 01:58, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand the logic of your argument. Why the fact that he was the spiritual leader of a Mizrahi party makes him "not representative" on an article about Mizrahi Jews ? This makes no sense. Benjil (talk) 08:09, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
The party was not Mizrahi. Political parties by law can not be restricted by ethnic origin. Debresser (talk) 12:49, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
The party is Sefaradi and appeals to Mizrahim for votes. And in Israel you have ethnic parties, in case you never heard of Arab parties for example. Since I don't understand how all this is relevant to the discussion. Benjil (talk) 13:58, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
The party appeals to Sephardi people, as you say, not only Mizrahi. Debresser (talk) 18:33, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Are you aware than in Israel "Sefaradi" and "Mizrahi" are used interchangeably ? And once again, how is it relevant to the discussion ? Benjil (talk) 06:14, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
That is most certainly not true. Mizrahi and Sefardi are not the same, and are not used interchangeably, not in Israel and not on Wikipedia. Just read the respective articles for an explanation of the difference.
The relevance has been explained to you above. Moreover, you don't have to agree with it. You seem to have a general problem accepting the fact that people have other opinions than you do. I do not mean this as a personal attack. I just want to ask you to agree to the fact that so far the two other editors reacting to your Rfc disagree with you. Debresser (talk) 09:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Absolutely yes. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:33, 9 September 2015 (UTC)


  • Yes. It's got nothing to do with whether we approve of the man, which is what most of the above discussion seems to be about (except for the part devoted to personal abuse). We might think he had a deleterious effect on Israel and on the interests of Sephardim and Mizrahim generally. We might disagree with his interpretations of Jewish law. We might think he was a complete [expletive deleted]. But we cannot deny that, for better or for worse, he was in fact a very prominent figure to whom a great many Mizrahim looked up. --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk)

(edit conflict) Come on. It's Elul. Can you two please dial it back?

  • I think one can legitimately argue the question as to whether a major religious figure like Rav Ovadia should be so involved in politics. However, I categorically reject User:Cwobeel's argument that Rav Ovadia's involvement in politics automatically excludes him from consideration here.
  • One can legitimately argue the preference of Rav Kaduri vs. Rav Yosef, if one feels constrained to limit this montage to a single rabbi. But why not then argue that someone completely different should be removed?

Personally, I consider Rav Ovadia to be the most significant Sefardi personality of his generation, for better or for worse, and probably sometimes for both. Whether you like his halachic rulings or not, he was an extremely significant halachic decisor, widely viewed in his generation as a gadol. Whether you like his politics or not, he was an extremely significant political figure in his generation, too. So, yes, I think he ought to be there. (So I fully endorse what Sir Myles says above.)

(I'd personally drop either Mirra Alfassa or Paula Abdul. Yes, I appreciate that this montage is supposed to show some diversity in background and talent. But Alfassa was involved in religious/spiritual teaching that was substantially non-Jewish in nature [and even contrary to Judaism in nature]. Also: I see no particular reason that it's more important to have two singers here than two rabbis. And given a choice between Abdul and Achinoam Nini as a singer, I'd keep Nini any time—her music is related, at least to a great extent, to her Yemenite Jewish and Israeli background. Abdul is certainly involved as a Jew, but her background is incidental to her career, rather than central to it. Just my two cents.)

שבת שלום, and כתיבה וחתימה טובה. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:39, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

  • Yes. I came here from the RfC notice, and I am otherwise completely uninvolved in this page. It seems to me that the purpose of such gallery images on pages about groups of people is to show, especially for Wikipedia readers around the world who are not members of the group but who would like to learn about them, a range of persons who are representative of the group. The selection should not be based upon making the group of people look either good or bad, and popularity of a person within a group should be of greater importance than how that person is perceived outside of the group. I've read the discussions above, and the biography pages about each rabbi. It seems to me that either Rav Ovadia or Rav Kaduri would be acceptable for inclusion in the gallery, but that Rav Ovadia, comparatively, is seen within the population of Mizrahi Jews as the more prominent of the two (as indicated, for example, by the attendance at his funeral). The fact that he has been criticized by people outside of the group does not change the fact of his influence as a member of the group. Including his picture does not make for a criticism of Mizrahi people in Wikipedia's voice. Therefore, the controversies about him do not disqualify the use of his picture, and his prominence points towards its use. I hope that helps. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:07, 24 September 2015 (UTC)


So we got 4 yes and 2 no (including a mild one) - can we add back Ovadia now ? Benjil (talk) 10:23, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

In due time some uninvolved editor will come and close this Rfc, based on how they will view the above discussion. Also, please donn't forget that consensus is not a vote. Debresser (talk) 23:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Anyone can request a close at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
I thought the discussion was enough and that we could close this at last but as you want Debresser. Benjil (talk) 04:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
There is eminent reason for closings by uninvolved editors. That is a big rule Wikipedia wide. As Tryptofish said, you can request the closing to be made. Debresser (talk) 12:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.