Category talk:Antisemitism

message: :So are all the subcategories going to have to be renamed now too? I'm sometimes amazed that the absurdity of this place can still surprise me.--T. Anthony 04:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologies, I should have looked this up more thoroughly earlier. On learning more I see that the B'nai B'rith and Simon Wiesenthal Center prefer this spelling. I got thrown off by the statements about "scholarly concensus" which make no sense to me. However the people who have reason to care most about this now predominately use this spelling so I withdraw any complaints. Again, I'm sorry if I'd been insensitive.--T. Anthony 05:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2006 comments

message: The Anti-Semitism template is confusing and potentially misleading. Check out for instance the Host desecration page which has the Antisemitism template. It lists organizations and writers such as the Anti-Defamation League, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Deborah Lipstadt etc who are scholars and organizations involved in COMBATING antisemitism, i.e. they are Anti-anti-Semitism. To include them in the antisemitism template would make an unfamiliar reader think that they ARE anti-semites. It should probably include Anti-Semitic organizations like Neo-Nazis, and people like Hitler, the Protocols of Zion etc instead. Perhaps someone can correct the template to include a clarifying that Jonathan Sacks and Deborah Lipstadt are scholars who are NOT Anti-Semitic...maybe something like Organizations/Writers FIGHTING ANTI-SEMITISM would be more appropriate— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.199.177.246 (talk • contribs) 
I know this is not considered polite, and i don't very well know an alternative, but i think the german word jude in the antisemitism picture is not quitte apropriate.
(only a j perhaps like many europeans versions of the symbol. This one suggests the german stereotyping of jews is the most clear, when i would rather make the point it is actually the least clear, albeit the most obvious.)
Ofcourse I trust (what is that called? judaic? israeli? ) historical analyses, but i think this invites surplus anti-germanism, hardly a way to sincerely counter discrimination , and the resent of the poor suppressed masses in general, perhaps. Neither is it representative, for what actually may have been the root cause of this anti-semitism: The general contempt of  jewish and other minoritys(!?) human life. I don't mind, i don't want to be naughty either, i will try to forget of the hypocracy of this german word immediatly, (More russians died in german camps then did jews , they died there for rasist reasons.) If billions of ppl can't have it but this way, okay for me, but i think it helps not to trouble history. The J is much more representative because it was the lax rasist and antisemite attitude europewide and over many centurys that facilitated nazism and especially the jewish shoa/holocaust. Not specifically the german variety of it. If not that is the point made, what is ?77.251.179.188 09:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antisemitism template 

message: I just investigated Racism talk page and found Category_talk:Racism#Removing_names_discussion and left this comment, after original comment, also in box: 
So it looks like this is a topic that needs review on both Racism and Antisemtism articles. CarolMooreDC (talk) 00:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not seeing any reason for a review here. This category includes articles that mention or discuss antisemitism in some way, and long term consensus is that nothing else is required. Please don't continue trying to change the criteria for the category simply because you don't like seeing it at the bottom of one article on an individual you support. Jayjg (talk) 06:29, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Repeating the same attack does not make it right. See my 23:52, 1 August 2010 comment above. CarolMooreDC (talk) 23:44, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Results of Homophobia Discussion

message: Wikipedia:Categorization_of_people#Category_namespace_templates reads: This category may inappropriately label persons. See Wikipedia:categorization of people for advice on how to apply categorization to articles relating to people. How does this not relate to this category? CarolMooreDC (talk) 19:39, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a label for persons (unlike, say, :Category:Criminals). It's a category for articles that discuss or refer to the topic of antisemitism. A large majority of the articles in this category are not about persons. Artur Carlos de Barros Basto, Jan Gotlib Bloch, Itzik Feffer, Abraham Foxman, Richard J. Green, Norman Hapgood, Pieter Willem van der Horst, Uriah P. Levy, Rodrigo López (physician), Solomon Lozovsky, Frederick Mayer (spy), Irène Némirovsky, John M. Oesterreicher, Aaron Sapiro, Joseph Seligman, Henri Torres, and Benjamin Zuskin are all in the category, and it does not label them in any way. This has been explained to you many times. I'm not sure how continually asking already-answered questions helps. Jayjg (talk) 20:19, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is from guideline Wikipedia:Categorization_of_people. A guideline about "the categorization of people." Not about "categories that only list people." If this was not relevant, why would :Category:Homophobia declare: This category is for issues relating to homophobia. It must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly homophobic. Obviously editors felt that category was covered by BLP. CarolMooreDC (talk) 23:20, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: But :Category:Antisemitism doesn't categorize people, it categorizes article topics. And it certainly doesn't "label" anyone, much less "inappropriately", so it's not relevant here. This has been explained many times already. And finally, I have no idea who put odd notices on other categories, nor why they did so, but it's also not relevant to this category. Feel free to change that other category's notice to something else, if you find it inappropriate, but please discuss it on that category's Talk: page, not here. Jayjg (talk) 00:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And I've made my points repeatedly too :-) However, since WP:BLP talk is discussing a policy change that would impact here if eventually if more people get involved, it's not totally irrelevant to bring up other groups. Though frankly I've pretty much had my say here. CarolMooreDC (talk) 02:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You've repeated yourself, at any rate. Jayjg (talk) 03:28, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Namespace template

message: Per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_February_9#Bias_categories I have changed the blue header box. I found out from someone who may be using a bot removing a BLP from the article. Not sure how it works. But let's all comply with policy :-) CarolMooreDC (talk) 22:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure that closure was correct, there was majority support but I didn't see consensus myself. I think this is going to get strong pushback, CFD is obscure and has little attention. Such a wideranging decision should have been advertised via an RfC. Fences&Windows 23:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree on all counts. Jayjg (talk) 02:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You can try to reopen the case. But see the discussions at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 August 12#Category:People accused of antisemitism etcetera - there is a majority against such categories. And there seems to be a tendency to use the category system for branding people and organizations. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:28, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are you responding to a comment made over a year ago? Jayjg (talk) 03:35, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, March last year! So it is not just a very recent decision;  and  are resisting the removal of biographical articles from this category. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

text: I agree with Iss246. The category does and should include individual victims of antisemitic events.--Galassi (talk) 16:19, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  All the millions?? Plus all the antisemites??? That is not what the category is for. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: March 7 decision to remove people/organizations from bias categories

message: Why isn't Anti-Zionism a category of Antisemitism? It is well recognised as the principal contemporary manifestation of Jew hatred and has been since Patrick Moynihan and Chaim Herzog's speeches at the UN.
Cpsoper (talk) 18:22, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Anti-Zionism

message: Considering that the above RFC ended with "no consensus", can it please be explained why that mass edits are taking place that state "rm category; per closure of recent RfC, no person or group can be categorized as anti-Semitic Category_talk:Antisemitism#RFC_on_purging_individuals_and_groups".165.166.215.220 (talk) 08:01, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it closed with no consensus for changing the old instructions. It looks as though the implications are that some categories should be completely depopulated. Dougweller (talk) 10:44, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  The RFC was about changing text on the category page, and the conclusion was that there was no consensus for any change.  I asked the administrator who closed that RFC, who replied “I did not find consensus to systematically remove pages from the category; that was not discussed in the RfC.”  As far as I have noticed, none of the other participants in that RFC, regardless of their positions or their votes, are doing this.  The editor performing the mass deletions of categories seems to be the only editor with that peculiar interpretation of the RFC results.   Unician ∇  11:33, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: So, take your bite at the apple. I agree with relisting the RfC. That the closing admin didn't understand that language such that this category "must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly anti-semitic" might actually mean exactly what it says is extremely problematic. But I've used up my chances and recognize that someone else needs to step up to the plate. -- Kendrick7talk 07:06, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "Allegedly" is the tricky bit, but I've raised this at Wikipedia talk:Categorization. Dougweller (talk) 13:30, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question on above and mass edits 

message: Yeah, I know, anyone here who reads this will find it to be pointless, but a Semite is a thing, and that thing is not Jewish.  If you are anti-Arab, you are anti-Semite, and that is just the most prominent example.  We are supposed to write articles to the reader who has no previous knowledge of the topic.  The beginning of this article defines that which a Semite is by defining its opposite.  And yet, taking that on good value, appraising that with good faith, leaves nothing and leads nowhere in relation to a wealth of information.  Now people here are going to say that doesn't matter because we are sourcing information and we follow it to the sources.  But in fact we are democratising sources, lending more weight to the bigger present-day swing.  But there are some sources and facts which stretch back and are more significant.  That significance is not about whose name gets scrawled on a wall after you beat each other up, but it is simply about who and what we are from before we had an influence, and that is a lot more important and significant and notable no matter how much spam the wars and their props receive!  ~ R.T.G 20:48, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Antisemitism doesn't mean and has never ment hostility to Semites in general. It has always ment anti-Jewish. Sjö (talk) 20:53, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's worth learning that usage, not etymology, is the determinant of meaning. Anti-Semitism, as any decent dictionary will tell you, is "hostility or prejudice against Jews", and that a Semite is "a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs".  That the etymology might mislead you into thinking anti-Semitism includes hostility or prejudice against Arabs is neither here nor there; that's not what it means. - Nunh-huh 22:49, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

text: I wholeheartedly agree, and have thus changed antisemitism to a disambiguation page for now. The hypen completely changes the meaning. -- Kendrick7talk 04:24, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

text: Well, that didn't stick, but it's nevertheless a fall back plan. -- Kendrick7talk 02:02, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  What a Semite is 

message: Recently, an editor took this category out of the Racism category; this was reverted with an edit summary implying that it's obvious that antisemitism is racism. I think anthropologists count only three races, White, Black, and Asian. Other groups that were considered races in the past are no longer considered such among scientists. I do not know how Semites, when defined in a wider sense more or less as Middle Easterners, are classified racially. Semites when defined as Jewish experience antisemitism based on Jewish birth, Jewish identification, or an appearance of seeming Jewish, so that Black Jews and converts to Judaism can experience antisemitism, and so being a Semite in the sense of being Jewish is not about race. The discussion at Category talk:Racism#2006 comments has a reply that relies on Wikipedia and on a Nazi definition. The latter has been discredited as only supporting a political agenda that was itself discredited by a war and subsequent suppression; it is not part of any consensus except among Nazis. The Wikipedia article (putting aside that Wikipedia is not a reliable source), now Race (human categorization), does not mention semites, being semitic, or antisemitism. I don't object to removing this category from the Racism category but, if an alternative is preferred, clarifying language can be added to the Racism category page in order to encompass this category and perhaps others. Nick Levinson (talk) 00:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  whether antisemitism is part of racism 

message: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jackie_Walker_(activist)#Request_for_comment_can_we_say_Jackie_Walker_is_Jewish  Slatersteven (talk) 13:39, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC at Jackie Walker