Talk:Mezhbizh

message: I don't see why we need this article, in light of the fact that we already have the Zhvill article. Please convince me not to put a delete tag on it.--Meshulam 11:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why we need to have a page that mirrors both the Zhvill page, and the Zhviller Rebbe's page. I am proposing that it be deleted. --Meshulam 21:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion debate

message: Meshulam: You should avoid this kind of move (the hasty nomination to delete) because it's a slippery slope and could lead to the nomination for and deletion of similar articles about smaller Hasidic dynasties - by people who are not experts and don't care - with unintended consequences. Votes to delete are open to the world and you are inviting people who have no idea what this topic is about at all to cast a vote, which is very unfair and lacking insight. It seems that you may have been better off trying to add a  template or considered MERGING the material at some point perhaps and WAITED (at least a month!) to do so. You should also have first started a discussion at a number of places where people who know something about this topic could have given their intelligent input, such as at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism and Wikipedia talk:Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week. Or you could have contacted other editors who deal with topics like this to solicit their views. This action of your is extreme and I do not condone it. I urge you to withdraw this nomination. Thank you. (I am cross-posting this message on a couple of relevant places, to get people's attention.) IZAK 10:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Do not delete at this time

message: The article has some serious issues with POV and OR. I am going to try to fix some of those problems.--Meshulam 21:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixing the article 

message: The article has some serious context issues. The authors should put together some information (that complies with POV and OR) that gives a context to the numerous names that are dropped in the article.
*Firstly please sign your comments with the four tildes ~~~~ so that we can know who is saying things around here. Secondly, while you are essentialy correct, most articles relating to the :Category:Hasidic dynasties have material in them that will need to be double-checked and sourced  even more over time. Finally, because so much of Hasidism is based on well-known "oral histories" (but sometimes obscure stories) care should be taken that these oral histories and stories are at least placed on the record and when they are written out that is when the process of double checking them and re-cehcking them can begin, which will time-consuming, but ultimately rewarding as it will provide a good encyclopedia on the subject for those who want to know more about it but would never find it anywhere else. IZAK 05:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Context

message: is this the place to mention Rabbi Moshe Bick zt"l, and his son Rabbi Avraham Yehoshua Bick, shlit"a, the Mezhbuzher Rebbe of Boro Park?  Itzik18 07:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not - it's not part of the same dynasty, and I think he is the Mezhbuz Rov (and poisek for Skwer Boro Park), not Rebbe. --ChosidFrumBirth 09:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that if a noted Rov has a connection with a Hasidic dynasty it is logical and acceptable that he be mentioned in a sub-section in this article, such as "People associated with Medzhibozh" or "Other notable rabbis associated with Medzhibozh." However if a rabbi or Rov is notable enough in his own right he can have an article devoted to him exclusively. This would be a good topic to bring up with editors at Wikipedia talk:Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week. IZAK 09:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, I added more details about the Bicks. I think it is important, as this is a true rabbinic dynasty that really did live and ran the show in Medzhibozh. More so than some of the other rebbes mention who may have never set foot in Medzhibozh. --Klezmer 01:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a large section on the non-hasidic Rapoport/Bick dynasty. How does that fit into an article entitled Medzhibozh (Hasidic dynasty)? Surely it should be in a  separate article, covering the Jewish Community of Medzhybizh?--Redaktor 13:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Redaktor. The Bick family has absolutely no place in an article about the Medzhibozh hasidic dynasty; they are a Rabbinic family, not a hasidic dynasty. The Bick family nowadays are Hasidim and maybe one day will become a Chasidus like Nitra, Dushinsky, Makeve, Vien which have metamorphosisized to Rebbes. Rav Moshe Bick was known as a Posek not as a Hasid. They do actually have a place in an article about Jewish Medzhibozh. To place it here is to stand history on its head. Itzse 22:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I also think Redaktor made a good point, as I said on the other talk page where this is being discussed (list of Hasidic dynasties). --ChosidFrumBirth 22:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Since no-one has disgreed with my suggestion, I am moving the section on the Rapoport/Bick dynasty to Medzhybizh#Jewish_History, where it belongs.--Redaktor 22:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't belong there. A dynastic listing has no place in the history of a town. It belongs where dynasties are listed. If you want to spin this off into a separate article, that's fine by me. But you can't make a claim about Medzhibozh rabbinic dynasties without mentioning the Bicks. And today, they are chasidic. All gets into the definition of what a dynasty is, which no one is willing to answer. --Klezmer 23:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I have no objection to a separate article about the Rapoport-Bicks. I guess you can also put the chasidishe Bicks in here. But you cannot put a non-chasidish dynasty in an article titled Medzhibozh (Hasidic dynasty). Especially when the proposal ahs been here for over a week and no-one else supports Klezmer's position. --Redaktor 00:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Such nastiness from ChosidFrumBirth is completely uncalled for. We are having a logical reasonable discussion here. No need for personal attacks. --Klezmer 04:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry -- didn't think I was being nasti -- but you don't answer when I leave comments on your talk page, and you ignore everyone else's opinion and just continue to revert to your own version over and over without any compromise --that doesn't sound like reasonable discussion to me -- and your calling us "Hasidic fanatics" whose making the personal attacks here? --ChosidFrumBirth 13:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish we could have a reasonable discussion, Klezmer. So far you have discussed nothing, reverting my reasonable edit without giving  a rationale. I really must ask you to desist from reverting my edit (explained carefully) without an explanation.--Redaktor 19:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See the discussion in Talk:List of Hasidic dynasties. That's where the discussion is. --Klezmer 19:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rabbi Bick?

message: The spelling situation of the town throughout this article is inconsistent. Frankly, it's a mess! 
Medzhibozh is the official way it is spelled (through Library of Congress transliteration methodology) using the Russian usage. This was in effect from 1795-1995. Prior to that it was the Polish usage, which is also a mess but fortunately not used in this article. After that, it is the Ukrainian spelling, which is Medzhybizh, which probably should be the official usage in wiki. Problem is that there are some Yiddish usages in the article, and depending on your Yiddish dialect, you might call it something different. Also, another problem is the title of the wiki article itself.
I vote for "Medzhybizh" to be wiki consistent. I can live with Medzhibozh, because it was in use for 200 years and during the time period covered by this article.--Klezmer 14:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In principle the use of the Ukrainian spelling Medzhybizh is preferred. However, it is standard practice in all the Hasidic dynasty articles to use the Yiddish town names, as these are what the dynasties are known by. It would be inconsistent for this article to depart from that practice. The dialect of Yiddish that is relevant is the one local to the town under consideration.--Redaktor 23:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I leave it to you to dink with. The Yiddish pronunciation in the town of Medzhibozh at the time when Yiddish speakers were there was "Mezhbizh" like the article says (mostly). However, the title of the article is wrong, if it follows your convention.--Klezmer 03:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling of Medzhibozh 

message: A long-simmering editorial dispute between  and  over how to deal with information about certain Hasidic topics has reached the Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal. Please see and provide any helpful input at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-04-29 Mezhbizh (Hasidic dynasty). Thank you, IZAK 15:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mezhbizh (Hasidic dynasty) at Mediation Cabal 

message: Klezmer claims that he has inserted the above "In the interest of preserving all the accumulated references found scattered in other pages" -- even though this has been rehashed over and over and over again -- the truth to anyone who has been following this and is that Klezmer has inserted the above repetition of his claims and arguments in order to push his own viewpoint once again that there is no Medzhibozh dynasty, that the article should be deleted, but if there is a Medzbhizbozh dynasty it is Apt (even though they're not called Medzhibozh, or Bick/Rapaport even though they weren't either Hasidic or a dynasty) and try to discredit anything else nobody what the sources or the proof.  That's just pure garbage.  Klezmer just won't stop.  Why not note that the Baal Shem Tov's last name was actually Bick or Rapaport, or that Boruch never really existed, and just erase this whole dynasty because Klezmer and his questionable research doesn't approve.  I've really had enough of this.  --ChosidFrumBirth 14:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conclusion 

message: I have deleted the text
 He is also one of three Zvhiller Rebbes who are cousins. The other two (who are not descended from Reb Mordechai or Reb Yaakov Yisroel
 of Mezhbizh or directly related to the Mezhbizh dynasty) are descended from Reb Yechiel Michel's younger brother, Reb Shlomke of Zvhil, 
 and are based in Jerusalem and in Union City, New Jersey.
which has no relevance to this article. This text belongs in the Zvhil (Hasidic dynasty) article.--Redaktor 22:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zvhil-Mezhbizh of Boston