Talk:Jews/Archive 13

message: I have recently been replacing the word holocaust with "alleged holocaust", which seems to have resulted in this page being protected from further editing. For the sake of the other wikipedians I will refrain from making anymore changes now to this page even if the protection is lifted.
I believe there is still far too much uncertainty over the holocaust as it's being presented.  The Institute for Historical Review has presented plenty of information that debunks the holocaust theory. Please see [ Institute of Historical Review website].
In my opinion there is not enough evidence to prove it one way or the other.  That being the case, it should not be refered to without some question. NSM88 10:55, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The rules of neutral point of view states that minority views are represented according to their prevalence. The_Holocaust#Revisionists_and_deniers discusses holocaust revisionism and denial. David.Monniaux 11:09, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Alleged Holocaust

message: There have been some major recent anonymous additions and changes. They offhand don't look all good or all bad. I'd be a lot more comfortable if some known reasonably expert individual would look through these, revert (or bring to talk) anything they think is wrong, and endorse the rest. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:19, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
:I started trying to do just that, but more keeps getting added.  Most of the changes are so-so, a few are good, and a few are mediocre.  In general, in my opinion nothing critical would be lost by a revert, but someone should go through in detail instead, as you suggested.  If nobody will, it might be better to revert and then re-add as needed.  I also left a message on the talk page of the anonymous user, though I don't expect a reply.  --Goodoldpolonius2 04:13, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with polonius; some good, some bad, and ideally should be gone through in detail.  I'm highly skeptical of the etymology changes. Jayjg (talk) 16:33, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major recent anonymous additions and changes 

message: The claim about the supposed descent of Sephardim from followers of the Palestinian Talmud is completely new to me, and very surprising. For one thing, halakha follows the Bavli in Sephardic communities. Could whoever
made that claim please give some sources. Otherwise, I feel the claim ought to be deleted. Hasdrubal 23:58, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read the section, you would have seen the claim was the exact opposite, that Ashkenazi traditions descended in part from the Yerushalmi. Jayjg (talk) 00:35, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Talmud Eretz Israel - Sephardim 

message: The newly added claim of 25,000 Jews in Iran should have a citation. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:17, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
:I see it here , though I have no idea how accurate these figures are.  The link on the page to the alleged source (the World Jewish Congress site in Israel) fails to resolve. Antandrus 23:26, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Elsewhere on the JVL, it lists 11,000, and this site lists 11,200. --Goodoldpolonius2 23:40, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The higher estimate is significantly older than the lower one.  I think the number should be changed to 11,000. Jayjg (talk) 04:09, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's reasonable.  I changed it; considering what the current situation in Iran is like (), I doubt the Jewish population has more than doubled since 2003. Antandrus 04:26, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The anon changed it back again to 25,000.  I left a note on his/her talk page  ( User_talk:134.130.54.14 ) to come here and give the source.  Antandrus 15:52, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed it back, pending a source. Jayjg (talk) 17:03, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iran