Talk:Minyan/Archive 1

message: Jayjg reverted a number of my edits, for reasons I don't entirely understand.  Rather than get into a revert war, I am posting the edits here for discussion.
* The second paragraph ends in a comma.
**Good point. Jayjg 02:59, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Good find. Jayjg 02:59, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent "NPOV" edits

message: I'm not sure why the addition about where Orthodox and Conservative minyanim can coexist is relevant.  I know of at least one place where Orthodox minyanim meet in Conservative synagogues - not in commmunity centers.  chaitov 05:30, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The previous wording gave the impression that it was common, whereas in reality it is quite uncommon, as the movements generally do not co-operate to that extent. Jayjg (talk) 05:39, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, that makes sense.  chaitov 05:58, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orthodox/Conservative 

message: This is a controversial topic, which may be disputed. Please read the talk page and discuss substantial changes there before making them. (This message should only be placed on talk pages.)
*Someone () added a huge section, consisting mainly of original research, about a halakhic technicality used by some modern orthodox groups to allow women to participate in a minyan. The number of groups worldwide must be <50, making this a completely fringe phenomenon that serves only to show how easily people are willing to bend halakhah for political purposes.
:If this needs to be covered at all, a short section of 2-3 lines should do. The removed material is in the history. JFW | T@lk 00:07, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its own article? It would become a POV fork. Actually, reinterpreting the Gemara by totally ignoring the poskim is something more than what you are suggesting. JFW | T@lk 00:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  JFW, as much as I agree with the impropriety and distortion of halakha that this phenomenon creates; this is wikipedia, not MTJ, and this is not a forum for halakhic disputes. The phenomenon exists, as do other phenomena that people find distasteful. I agree that at this point it may be fringe; Google only finds one website, Tehila.org, last I checked. But the fact that this may be a perversion of halakha does not invalidate it from having an entry, per se, IMO. Avi 01:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

text: However, I still believe that it does not belong on this page, but on its own page. Avi 01:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

text:  The NPOV of WP does not mean that every last conceivable point must be raised, only that of the majority and  significant minority. See relevant policy page  NPOV#Undue weight, where Jimbo Wales is quoted as stating: "If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia ...". Remember this is just a general encyclopedia (allbeit very good with breadth & depth). David Ruben  Talk  02:32, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, it should not be included.Avi 02:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minyan Shivyoni Hilchati 

message: Pinchas, we have precedent that the links need to be specifically-minyan related. A link to a general Chabad-Lubavitch page is beyond the scope of the article. If this should change should be discussed here, and not in a revert-war. However, until precedent is changed, I am removing the link (A Chazaka D'Mayikara if you will, until Acharei Rabim L'hatos changes it.) -- Avi 15:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look at the page you will see that it is not a general page rather it is a search for events, and Minyanim. About the link that you quoted I have added it as well but to the correct part of that site. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 16:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I am now removing the other link as it appears that it has no data once you do the searches. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 16:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pinchas, the Chabad link is not a minyan-specific link. It explicitly states it is a search for Educational Activities, Classes, Social Events, Prayer Services... Now if you had a link to all the various Batei Chabad or Lubavitcher shteiblach together with their zmanei t'fillah, then that would be appropriate. I beleive that precedent as it stands would hold this inappropriate. I also believe it would be helpful to poll the other editors of frumkeit-related issues on this topic. If that doesn't work, perhaps we should seek mediation. -- Avi 16:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: If you look on the page there is an option to select just prayer services. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 17:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as one could search for Minyanim on that page there is no reason why it should not be listed. For anyone searching for a Minyan, this would be the best link outhere. Henochz 17:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: That's right which is why it was removed... --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 17:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK thank you. The Chabad link is somewhat of the question of the full and empty half glass. Should we concentrate on what ought to be there or on what should not be there. I will go for the full half glass, since the minyanim are relevant. Yet also the Chabad list misses many regular minyan services that Chabad holds and entire countries in which the movement is active. It is not as bad as the other site. gidonb 18:13, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: If the criteria was that it had to be comeplete than the other two links shouldn't be there either. The other one had 0 results for any location! Try doing a search with a zip code instead, and you will get much more results. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 18:38, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Avi asked for my opinion. I have my doubts about all the links provided. None of these sites had useful information about the nature of a minyan, which is presumably the reason someone would be looking up that word in an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a link repository. These are closer to community forums (which are generally not OK to link) than to any category that is generally considered appropriate to link. If one of these is to be preserved, at least the GoDaven link has the virtue of being (at least apparently) broad and open rather than specific to a particular group. - Jmabel | Talk 18:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  (after an edit conflict) A zip code can give a huge range around it, through adjacent codes. The issue which we should address is whether these minyan pages that operate as "event calenders" do not suggest, through underdeveloped databases, that people should go the other side of their town, next state or even country to attend a minyan. This situation differs tremendously from the more reliable synagogue lists. Technically the problem is not necessary, recurring minyanim for all services throughout the year can easility be entered, reality is however that they are just not there.  gidonb 19:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Avi solicited my opinion on this conflict over which links are appropriate to include, so here goes...  I think all the links are problematic, at least the way they're presented.  The godaven one is probably the only one that's worth keeping.  While the others have merit in their own small way, they're really not exactly what they're presented as in the External Links section, and if their descriptions were changed to something more appropriately descriptive of where the links take you, the rationale for including them suddenly becomes very clouded.  Keep in mind, Wikipedia is not a link farm.  Now, as for the godaven link, it too has a problem with the way it's presented (and this is where I see serious problems with the other links as well)...it should say clearly in the description for all these sites that they list only Orthodox minyanim.  I have no problem not running around looking for a database of reform minyanim (if such things even exist), but I think NPOV rather clearly dictates that, while the sites linked to are not required to be NPOV, we have to be, as editors, including in our description of any POV websites; therefore, I think that link description should say something like "GoDaven.com - Find an orthodox minyan anywhere in the world".  Although the list is far from complete (woefully so, in fact), at least it's better than the chabad-only event calendar thing.  If you're really trying to connect people to synagogues or chavuroth, however, the best approach, imho, would be to include a link to mavensearch's synagogue listing, which is by far the most complete list I know of for the whole world, and irrespective of affiliation.  Now to some of the other comments, first, gidon, I think you may be confusing ZIP codes for Area codes.  For Pinchas and Avi specifically, what Joe says is very important to keep in mind, and hopefully will help resolve this issue--I think you're approaching the difference of opinion you have from the wrong perspective: instead of asking "is this a good link to include for listings of minyanim", ask yourself "is this a good link to include to help the reader learn more about what a minyan is (not what happens at a minyan by attending one, but by reading further information not included in this article)?"  That said, to Joe, even GoDaven has the arguable "weakness" I mentioned earlier about listing only Orthodox minyanim (and quite incompletely, I might add)...regardless of our personal views about what constitutes a valid minyan or valid practice of Judaism, it should not affect our editing... <additional extraneous ramblings deleted /> Tomertalk 22:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Tomer I am glad you agree with me. I am of course well acquainted with different level geographies. Although I have long ago broken away from geography, it is still very much my passion. Cheers, gidonb 22:36, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Tomer. The two Chabad links look like little more than free advertising for Chabad's many worthwhile outreach programs, and their listings are woefully inadequate. In all of Israel I only found listings for one minyan on the Chabad International Event Calendar—the one at Chabad House in Ashkelon. On Minyan Maps, nothing at all came up for Jerusalem, where you can find a minyan on every corner. While we at Wikipedia are constantly in the process of expanding articles with more information/details, is the same true for these links? The GoDaven link does have some benefit, though it should be clarified that it is for Orthodox minyanim. Mavensearch's synagogue listing is a far better link which should definitely be included. Yoninah 23:18, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Alright, those links look much more like what I was recommending.  All that remains is for Pinchas and Avi to shake hands and have a beer.  Tomertalk 00:15, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  :-) -- Avi 02:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Certainly looks better. I added another general link. The idea of Minyan databases is not wrong, yet the currently available sites are weak. Since as an encyclopedia we are not into event calanders, there is no need to worry about it. Cheers, gidonb 00:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

text: My point was not about Chabad. Anyone who wants to find a Chabad house can. I was talking about finding a minyan...which is why I suggested the OU link. But, some people can only see things in terms of Chabad/non-Chabad, which is pretty sad. PhatJew 18:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have nothing against Chabad. On the contrary. We discussed the general weaknesses of these minyan engines before. I am in favor of the idea, yet the execution is very bad. gidonb 19:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I have a few problems with Chabad on a personal level, but I have nothing against them from an editorial standpoint.  As gidonb says tho, well, as gidonb says, agreeing with me, there are problems with the links in question.  Let's not make this a matter of sectarianism, and stick with the subject at hand.  Tomertalk 21:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

text: You will notice that other Jewish sites like aish which are about the same size as chabad.org have links on all Judaism related pages, and for a good reason, they (chabad and aish) are the two largest sites on the internet that have Jewish content. and following WP:EL under "What should be linked to" it says "4. On articles with multiple Points of View, a link to sites dedicated to each, with a detailed explanation of each link. The number of links dedicated to one POV should not overwhelm the number dedicated to any other. One should attempt to add comments to these links informing the reader of their point of view. 5. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material not already in the article. Ideally this content should be integrated into the Wikipedia article, then the link would remain as a reference.", for this reason they are there, I am not the only editor that has added the chabad links, and there were plenty of them around before I started editing here. About your comment that I view wikipedia "as just another huge cyber-billboard" is outrageous as it is pretty evident from the more than 4,000 edits and numerous projects I am involved in on wikipedia. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 22:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pinchas: There is more to Jewish life, in reality as well as in cyberspace, than Chabad and Aish. They are both "attention-seeking" organizations that like to "toot their horns" for PR ends. That they have used millions of donated dollars to create wonderful websites is good and well, but they should not be allowed to have their links give the impression on Wikipedia that they are in any way shape size or form the "spokes-persons" for (Orthodox} Judaism in cybespace -- because they are not, and enough Jewish editors on Wikipedia know that, and therefore do not appreciate seeing multiple links to either Chabad or Aish sites on every Wikipedia article relating to Judaism. There are lots of other good choices available and we all know it. Kindly do not create noisy and verbose "smoke-screens" to detract from the complaints against you as stated above by a number of well-intentioned editors who mean you nor Chabad no harm, but wish that the Chabad-posters kindly tone down their "in your face" approach of link-encroachment which starts to take on the appearance of a "missionary" creeping annexation, to which the response will be "delete on sight". So let's avoid that kind of situation by everyone, please. IZAK 08:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: It's been pretty evident for some time now that User:PinchasC views Wikipedia as just another huge cyber-billboard to plaster as many links to Chabad-related sites no matter where and when, just the more the merrier (from his perspective). He has been called upon to stop this a number of times, but persists in justifying himself. Note to Pinchas: Maybe you may have noticed that other editors are getting just a little too tired of this habit of yours and they're not enjoying seeing all those Chabad links get peppered onto pages, so please slooooooow dooooooown sooooooon. Thanks. IZAK 21:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You will notice that other Jewish sites like aish which are about the same size as chabad.org have links on all Judaism related pages, and for a good reason, they (chabad and aish) are the two largest sites on the internet that have Jewish content. and following WP:EL under "What should be linked to" it says "4. On articles with multiple Points of View, a link to sites dedicated to each, with a detailed explanation of each link. The number of links dedicated to one POV should not overwhelm the number dedicated to any other. One should attempt to add comments to these links informing the reader of their point of view. 5. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material not already in the article. Ideally this content should be integrated into the Wikipedia article, then the link would remain as a reference.", for this reason they are there, I am not the only editor that has added the chabad links, and there were plenty of them around before I started editing here. About your comment that I view wikipedia "as just another huge cyber-billboard" is outrageous as it is pretty evident from the more than 4,000 edits and numerous projects I am involved in on wikipedia. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 22:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pinchas: There is more to Jewish life, in reality as well as in cyberspace, than Chabad and Aish. They are both "attention-seeking" organizations that like to "toot their horns" for PR ends. That they have used millions of donated dollars to create wonderful websites is good and well, but they should not be allowed to have their links give the impression on Wikipedia that they are in any way shape size or form the "spokes-persons" for (Orthodox} Judaism in cybespace -- because they are not, and enough Jewish editors on Wikipedia know that, and therefore do not appreciate seeing multiple links to either Chabad or Aish sites on every Wikipedia article relating to Judaism. There are lots of other good choices available and we all know it. Kindly do not create noisy and verbose "smoke-screens" to detract from the complaints against you as stated above by a number of well-intentioned editors who mean you nor Chabad no harm, but wish that the Chabad-posters kindly tone down their "in your face" approach of link-encroachment which starts to take on the appearance of a "missionary" creeping annexation, to which the response will be "delete on sight". So let's avoid that kind of situation by everyone, please. IZAK 08:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: User:Pinchas & Chabad links