Talk:Hebrew Bible views on women

message: *Old Testament views on women, Old Testamentical views of women: not improved by being moved from Christian views of women, mentioned above, with which it shares numerous factual errors. Shows little promise of ever being anything but a point-of-view essay. -- Someone else 06:22, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: From [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion|VfD]]

message: I've attempted to improve the very first section, (while accidentally masquerading as  207.236.234.180), largely by removing the references to Lilith (who is not a feature of the Old Testament), and adding in a much more significant reference in Genesis. I will try to improve further sections as time permits, which may not be very often. I will also try to look at Christian views of women. However I'm not a biblical scholar, especially Old Testament, so any other scholarly input would be appreciated. DJ Clayworth 18:14, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: First draft done. Feedback welcome. I was also bold enough to remove the dispute notice. DJ Clayworth 03:51, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

text: What is it about the article you think is not neutral? DJ Clayworth 18:03, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

text: As an example, note that the stories about Eve in the creation sequence in Genesis play a much larger role in the Christian world than they do in the Jewish world. Judiasm does not extract the same theological implications from these narratives that Christianity does, and does not give them the same level of influence. There is no single view of these narratives common to Judaism and Christianity, and there of course many viewpoints within each. --Shirahadasha 05:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Attempt to improve

message: The introduction reads like an essay, and is not easily verifiable. It needs to be amended. Rintrah 19:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, nevermind. I need to go to bed. Rintrah 19:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  introduction 

message: I'm tempted to put this article up for deletion, no offence to all who have worked on it. The entire text is more interpretive than reference oriented. As others have noted, it is significantly biased in POV, detail, and even the entry title. So much so that I can't even get a handle on where to begin to correct it. I originally came to the page to do copy-editing but was discouraged from attempting it because of basic faults I see in it. It is entirely original research as well. I'm putting it on my watchlist and will try to come back to it. Sorry to be such a downer. --Pigman 21:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What a Mess 

message: If after three years it still doesn't 'cut the mustard' then it is time for deletion. So nominated. Shir-El too 13:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I agree with Pigman, Someone else and Dwmyers... 

message: As written this article presumes a certain view of women is inherent in the Hebrew Bible, versus the meaning overlaid on the text by various hermeneutics.  For example, the interpretation of the Adam/Eve creation story would likely be very different for an early Talmud scholar than it would be for a modern day feminist Hebrew Bible scholar.
I suspect this article was originally conceived as a place to provide information on modern, feminist-friendly critiques of the Hebrew Bible.  If that's the case I suggest renaming it to something like Modern Feminist Critique of the Hebrew Bible, which is a much more managable scope for an article than attempting to critique the Hebrew Bible from all perspectives.  Also, that modified scope seems appropriate for an encyclopedia.  RainbowCrane  | Talk 19:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no consensus to move this page through the discussion you initiated, but you might want to try a WP:BOLD move yourself. I'd advise against colons to denote qualifiers in the title - parentheses are better, per our naming conventions. Dekimasuよ! 11:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separating "Hebrew Bible" from Interpretation 

message: The article has been turned into a stub to remove as much of the original research and POV problems as possible, in accordance with the comments on this talk page over the past 2 months or so, as well as the comments in the AfD discussion.  Feel free to expand the article, but please stick to the core policies of neutrality and verifiability when you do so. --Darkwind (talk) 00:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stubbed