Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:18, 24 March 2008

• WT:JEW

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37 Archive 38 Archive 39

This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Category:Jewish porn stars

While perusing this edit, I discovered this new category. I don't know what Misplaced Pages's policies are on this kind of a category, but I'm about to delete all entries that don't specifically mention in the text of the article that the person is Jewish. Thoughts? --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 20:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

But I know that Category:Jewish American actors and Category:Jewish American comedians were both deleted. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

And while we're on the subject, if those two cats don't exist, why should Category:Jewish American models exist if the above two don't? --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 21:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The category is completely superfluous and should obviously be depopulated of all people whose Jewishness is not specifically indicated in the article. They may be of partial Jewish descent and not identify with their ancestors' religion at all. Can't we go back to discussing hummus? JFW | T@lk 21:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

As they do in mainstream Hollywood, Jews play a disproportionate role in the adult film industry, both in front of and behind the camera. There are essays about it here and here. WARNING: The links are not suitable for work, they include graphic advertisements for adult websites, and they discuss pornography. If you think you might be offended by such material, don't click on the links.

I think the category probably satisfies the relevant guideline ("the basic criterion for such a category is whether the topic has already been established as academically or culturally significant by external sources" ). So long as there's a WP:RS (a big problem with porn bios), there's no reason to keep articles out of the category. — ] (] · ]) 21:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Uh, Malik, the two links you provided above are to a self-published essay and a blog. That does nothing to establish notability, or even the truth of any of the claims made in them. Your claim that "Jews play a disproportionate role in the adult film industry, both in front of and behind the camera" is still completely unsupported. The "relevant guideline" you refer to above also does not support this category. It supports categories where there is a recognized, accepted relationship between the field of endeavor and the group, written about in reliable sources, like Category:African American musicians and Category:LGBT literature. Basically, the guideline says that if you could reasonably construct a valid article with the same title, you can have the cat. I don't think that applies here. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

dead links: www.tanakhpersonalities.org and www.tanakhprofiles.org

Many articles have external links to these two sites, but the sites seem to have been abandoned. "Personalities" serves a domain squatter's search page, and "profiles" just serves a blank page. -- 68.101.73.109 (talk) 15:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

58 for the former (link search)

12 for the latter (link search)

Does anyone have a spare bot that could get rid of this? JFW | T@lk 17:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I did them by hand. A lot of the pages had two links so it wasn't as bad as it looked. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 19:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Great. JFW | T@lk 21:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Kabbalah

Unfortunately the AfD against the Toledano Tradition article (above) did not succeed despite almost unanimous agreement that it was defective and in need of change because of its misrepresentation of the Kabbalah tradition as deriving from Neoplatonism. Also unfortunately, the same editor that created that article is in the process of re-writing the Kabbalah article. I urge anyone interested in the Kabbalah article to keep an eye on developments there, and to get involved also. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 18:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Aharon Kotler

In the article he is categorized in Category:Hasidic rebbes. He would be turning over in his grave if he knew he was categorized this way. He was well known as a Misnagid. I am unable to delete the category because it doens't come up in the category section in the edit page. I suspect that the cat originates from the infobox, and as I'm not sure what to do at this point I bring the issue here. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 23:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I have removed Category:Hasidic rebbes from the infobox. Some articles that were previously automatically included in this category will now have to be explicitly included. Jon513 (talk) 01:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. It looks like the cat can apply to the rest of the bios that have the infobox. It might be better just to remove the infobox from this article. No? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Sometime in the past few days I noticed that categories that are included in templates are being included in articles that the templates are transcluded to. This is a problem because some of those categories are supposed to apply to templates only. For instance Template:Antisemitism topics is in Category:Jewish navigation templates. This is a category for templates only. But the category now includes all pages that include the template, such as A Protocol of 1919, Anti-Defamation League, Anti-Judaism, and many others. This is clearly erroneous and has only been true for, I believe, less than a week. This must be a recent change to the Misplaced Pages source code (correct word?) because I noticed it change a few days ago. I just wasn't sure where to mention it. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 03:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I found out what went wrong with Template:Antisemitism topics here. Jon has fixed the issue with Template:Infobox Rebbe so there's no need to take it out of any articles. The categories for that template are no longer transcluded along with the template. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 07:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

It appears you moved the category inside <noinclude> by editing the version right after it was moved outside. I don't know whether it was intentional but it reverted all edits made to the template since. If you don't want to do that then edit the version before your latest edit instead. Note: I have not evaluated whether the reverted edits should be kept. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that wasn't what I intended to do, but somehow I did it. I just self reverted and then moved the tag, I think that fixes it. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 20:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Infobox Jew

Does anyone know why what used to be Template:Infobox Jew got userfied and redirected to User:Humus sapiens/Infobox Jew? The code for the template is now located at Jew and it's being changed against consensus by editors who apparently can't see the talk page history. I can't find any discussion on this anywhere. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 10:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

A number of templates that were used in only one article, including Template:Infobox Jew, were merged and deleted. Template:Infobox Jew was moved to User:Humus sapiens/Infobox Jew to preserve its edit history and Talk page. — ] (] · ]) 22:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

In that case, can anyone point me to any Misplaced Pages policy or guideline that forbids single-use templates? --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 22:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You'll have to ask User:Green Giant. He merged the template with the edit summary "moved single-use template here and fixed infobox name". His contribution history shows that he moved a lot of "single-use templates" on January 21, including Iranian ethnicity, British people, Polish ethnicity, etc. — ] (] · ]) 23:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You can see some discussion of Green Giant's rationale here (follow the links to see some of Green Giant's replies) and especially at the bottom of Tiamut's Talk page. — ] (] · ]) 23:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I left an inquiry at Green Giant's talk page. Unfortunately, he's on a Wikibreak and hasn't responded. I can't really find comments on his talk page relevant to this. I also inquired at User talk:John Reaves since he's the admin who deleted the redirect about 8 hours after the move, but he hasn't answered either. I have to say that it seems a little odd that Green Giant would do this without any discussion, consensus, policy or guideline (as far as I know) to back him up. Personally, I think the page was better off with the single-use template, mainly because it created a separate talk page for template issues. Oh, and I'm sorry if I should have taken this up at Talk:Jew.--Steven J. Anderson (talk) 23:43, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at the bottom of this page, where Green Giant explains the deletions. Green Giant points to Misplaced Pages:Template namespace ("templates duplicate the same content across more than one page" and "templates should not normally be used as a substitute for usual article content") and Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (infoboxes)#Why dynamic templates?.

I think Green Giant was aggressive in interpreting those guidelines and deleting several dozen single-use templates in a single day without any discussion. If you agree, we can move the template back from User:Humus sapiens/Infobox Jew to Template:Infobox Jew and harmonize it with the infobox as it's been edited in Jew (some population figures have been changed).

PS: Maybe Talk:Jew is the appropriate forum for this discussion, but we're discussing a strictly technical issue, not a content issue. I don't think anybody would feel that they've been left out of the discussion, but I'll post a note there just in case. — ] (] · ]) 00:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Malik, I poked around a little and finally found his comments after I posted. I agree that GG was quite aggressive and I'd like to restore the template. I just want to give it a little time to percolate and see if anyone opposes. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 02:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

After nearly a week with no other comments, what do you think? Should we move User:Humus sapiens/Infobox Jew back to Template:Infobox Jew? I'm in favor of such a move.
PS – Template:Infobox Jew wouldn't be the only single-use ethnic template. There's at least one other that I know of, Template:African American ethnicity, and there may be more. — ] (] · ]) 19:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm in favor of it, but a little busy right now. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 19:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Image for deletion

Image:Ben-yehuda.jpg transcluded at Israeli literature has been nominated for deletion. Since the uploader, User:Humus Sapiens hasn't posted an edit in a month, it would be nice if someone could help save this image. It's fair use and the nominator says the fair use claim isn't valid. Eliezer Ben-Yehuda died in 1922 so there may be a possibility that a public domain argument can be made. I don't know much about images. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 02:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

• If someone could find an image which was first published in Palestine back when he lived, that image would be in the public domain. Anyone know where the current image was first published? By the way, all fair use images end up deleted if they don't have the fair use rationale template. Funkynusayri (talk) 06:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

The picture's already available on Commons: Image:Eliezer Ben Jehuda bei der Arbeit.jpg. I'll fix the link at Israeli literature, which is the only article that uses the soon-to-be-deleted image. — ] (] · ]) 06:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

• Could still be in the danger zone, as we don't know whether the author actually died 70 years ago or not. Funkynusayri (talk) 07:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice work, Malik. Oh, and just for the record, I don't think that whether the author died 70 years ago or not is the only issue. I remember reading (somewhere) that any image published before a certain date (1927?) is automatically in the public domain. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 08:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

• Well, that's 1923, and only in America. So, if the image was published for the first time in America prior to 1923, it's in the public domain worldwide, but if the picture was published in for example Palestine in the 20s, I believe British copyright law would count, and it is ineligible to be uploaded to Commons, check this: Funkynusayri (talk) 13:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It should be in the public domain according to my understanding of the law. The author's death is not relevant in the British Mandate or Israeli Law. See the template below Epson291 (talk) 10:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

	This image is in the public domain because the Israeli Copyright law of 1911 section 21, (essentially the United Kingdom Copyright Act of 1911 as it was applied to the former British Mandate in Palestine), as amended to August 2005, specifies that: 1. Photographs become public domain 50 years after the photograph was developed from the negative. (See Wikimedia Commons: Category:PD Israel & British Mandate for details). 2. Photographs taken by a public authority become public domain 50 years after the date of publication. (See Wikimedia Commons: Licensing, Israel for details). PD-Israel Public domain in Israel //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism
This file is NOT necessarily in the public domain in the United States because a non-simple image can only be in the public domain in the U.S.: if it entered the public domain in Israel prior to 1996, or when, after that date, its copyright term expires in accordance with U.S. law. Information about the creation date and creator should be provided. If the image is not in the public domain in the United States, in addition to the license tag for its status in Israel an appropriate fair use license and rationale should be provided, or the image should be proposed for deletion. If the media is in the public domain in both Israel and the United States, it may be transferred to the Wikimedia Commons. Note: If this image is in the public domain in the U.S., modify the end of the copyright tag from }} to |commons}}. This will replace the preceding U.S. copyright notification with a nomination for this image to be moved to the Wikimedia Commons.

Another one

Could someone also have a look at Image:Mexico low.jpg? It was obtained from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum with a claim of fair use that's being challenged. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 19:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

• As with the other one, it just needs the fair use rationale template: Fair use images with that one are rarely if ever put up for deletion by rampaging bots. Funkynusayri (talk) 19:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Funkynusayri is right. All the image needs is an explanation of why it's necessary to use it on Misplaced Pages. — ] (] · ]) 02:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, now that I look a little closer, I don't think it will qualify. It's a book cover and those are usually only fair use for articles about the book depicted. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 11:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Organisation of Bible articles

Someone took the time to complain that this project hadn't been explicitly notified of the Misplaced Pages talk:Organisation of Bible articles discussion, rather than just doing so. So there ya go! -- Kendrick7 20:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Action at Hershel Schachter

A recent news story has generated the interest in the article Hershel Schachter of two new editors (] (] · ]) and ] (] · ])). I am glad to say that the edits have, in general, improved the article, and that disputes are being discussed instead of edit warred. As the article is now undergoing an expansion, I would invite any interested editor to get involved. Perhaps this can be, a least for a short time, a revival of Misplaced Pages:Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week. Jon513 (talk) 22:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Loans and interest in Judaism

I've added a maintenance tag asking for an expert to look at the article. The article is basically a copy from the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia with all its problems, not the least of which is complete omission of modern developments and its intersection with secular law (such as arbitration), as well as a very slanted view of halakhic aspects written entirely from a critical perspective. I know very little about this complex subject, but wondering if someone could take a look at it. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 03:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Any article lifted from 1906 needs very careful scrutiny. It is a complete failure as an encyclopedia for its distinct anti-traditionalist bias. JFW | T@lk 10:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Binding of Isaac article name change

Thanks for placing the article Binding of Isaac within the scope of your WikiProject. About 3 weeks ago, I proposed to change the name of the article to "Sacrifice of Isaac" at Talk:Binding of Isaac#Name of this article, but so far haven't seen any response. I plan to go ahead and rename the article on March 20, 2008 unless there are objections. I invite you to visit the article and submit any comments you have on the matter. Thanks! --Bryan H Bell (talk) 18:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Five editors have responded to the proposal described above. Four oppose and one is neutral. The consensus is opposed to the name change. I'll therfore leave the article as currently named ("Binding of Isaac") and consider the matter closed. Thanks to all who participated! --Bryan H Bell (talk) 03:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitions of Aleph - Tav according to Carlo Suarez

Re:Adoption request Re: Incomprehensible article. I've looked it over, and I'm still having trouble understanding the topical content. You might try asking for assistance at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Judaism where they know more about the topic. MBisanz talk 04:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC) Help?Johnshoemaker (talk) 11:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

John, please provide links. What is the name of the article? What points are you trying to make? JFW | T@lk 21:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitions of Aleph - Tav according to Carlo Suarez Re:Adoption request Re: Incomprehensible article. I've looked it over, and I'm still having trouble understanding the topical content. You might try asking for assistance at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Judaism where they know more about the topic. MBisanz talk 04:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC) Help?Johnshoemaker (talk) 11:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC) John, please provide links. What is the name of the article? What points are you trying to make? JFW | T@lk 21:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

JFW, my talk page has a conversation with MBisanz. Article is presently unnamed.

Points: plural. The main point is that definitions of the Aleph- Tav were given to Suarez and an understanding and appreciation of Torah will be advanced by their inclusion in WP.

Secondary point is that the definitions are esoteric, stringently so, but there was an opening in the ‘60s that revealed publicly that such definitions existed. Suarez states that this has happened a few times thru history. Without searching I can’t reproduce his words that describe world political conditions for these openings. Certainly Freud, Jung frameworks and the rebellion against received opinion in the ‘60s were ingredients. I have seen only two signs of the “opening,” the other in PARADE magazine in the NYT.

The PARADE article describes the conditions that keep the definitions esoteric; only being revealed to Jewish males who have memorized Torah and studied all of Talmud—and promised not to talk about it till they are “50.” Since this is only a paragraph supporting Suarez claims of “an opening” it can be included to see if a scholar disagrees that conditions to keep definitions esoteric exist.

Using the Oxford Abr. definition of spirit: the non material part of man, the article will clearly present the definitions of the Spiritual glyphs as elements of the intellect and intuition. I envision the first page only providing two of the nine archetypes; 2 and 6 which are corroborated by dictionarys. As in the conversation with MBisenz.

I don’t see myself as an editor but as a reporter requiring editing. Certainly this subject needs overview to keep it available to those who have never glimpsed Torah, and are repelled by formulas and occasionally prone to envision Casper the Ghost at the word “spirit”.

On a different topic: At the Maya Round Table discussions in ’89 a dentist talked on the use of Jade fillings in ancient Maya teeth. He said that we still haven’t determined how they worked the Jade but the procedure didn’t work. Serious Jawbone degeneration was commonly associated. My suspicion is that Jade was associated with healing. In Palenque Chiapas Mex. A five ton rock over a sarcophagus(~~700CE) holding a man with a Jade mask is carved with the symbols of the Caduceus and a man dying before a cross. The man is falling backwards(meditational death) before a cross around whose crossbar is a serpent with head at both ends. At the top of the cross is a bird of prey. The Mexican flag and money is adorned with an eagle and snake.

If the snake is symbol of feeling, intuition, the ubiquitous fangs signify the chemicals that are associated with an emotion(they take time to dissipate). “Everybody knows the bird is the word”(a 60s song) The wings of the Caduceus could symbolize the words, wisdom that passes between a healer and patient. The wisdom coming from bodily experience of the healer. Respect, review of ancient symbol systems could be healthy. Thanks for your consideration. JSJohnshoemaker (talk) 12:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

terminological help, please

I need to distinguish between two historical characters, one of whom is Antonio de Montesinos (Dominican friar).

So... Which is correct (or better)?

• Antonio de Montesinos (Sephardic Jew)
• Antonio de Montesinos (Portuguese traveler)
• Thanks! Ling.Nut (talk) 13:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

A bit of context is needed. Does he actually need his own article? JFW | T@lk 13:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I dunno; that's for others to decide. However, he is wikilinked in the following articles: Menasseh Ben Israel, History of the Marranos in England and John Dury. Ling.Nut (talk) 13:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

• Hi Ling: It would be best NOT to use either "____ (Sephardic Jew)" or "____ (Portuguese Jew)" as "title suffixes" or "appendages in parenthesis" at any time because that may be called an ethnic or religious slur ("Jew" is not always used in a complimentary way in the world, unfortunately.) Therefore the best advice for you is to use his profession or what he was know for, and not his religion or ethnicity. Thus, one could use Antonio de Montesinos (rabbi) or Antonio de Montesinos (Talmudist) or Antonio de Montesinos (Kabbalist) or Antonio de Montesinos (astronomer) or Antonio de Montesinos (philosopher) or Antonio de Montesinos (mathematician) etc all of which are NPOV and not laden with baggage. Hope this helps. IZAK (talk) 22:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but I don't know what he... was.... he was like George Psalmanazar, a charlatan, or perhaps deluded. Ling.Nut (talk) 23:56, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Framework for clarification in synagogue editorial dispute

I have created a "framework for clarification" to help resolve the editorial conflicts at the Temple Shalom of Northwest Arkansas page, see Talk:Temple Shalom of Northwest Arkansas#Framework for clarification that should help deal with this. Please contribute if possible. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 22:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Gilad Atzmon

There appears to be an attempt to remove Category:Antisemitism from the Gilad Atzmon article. Please read the article, its history, and participate with what you best believe should be according to policy. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 17:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

• Is there some system in categorizing some articles under antisemitism and others (such a Supersessionism) under Anti-Judaism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malcolm Schosha (talk • contribs) 15:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Expand {{Infobox church/sandbox}} to cover all places of worship?

There is a proposal to convert the draft infobox template {{Infobox church/sandbox}} into a template that can be used for all places of worship. We would like your views on whether you think this is a good idea, and if you are able to help identify parameters that would be relevant to the religion that your WikiProject deals with. Do join the discussion taking place at "Template talk:Infobox church". — Cheers, JackLee 03:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

What is presently sitting in the sandbox is huge and not yet customised for multi-faith use. JFW | T@lk 22:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Judaism: Articles of unclear notability

Hello,

there are currently 22 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)