Talk:Aish HaTorah

message: 60% claim removed after it was removed from their website.
:Shalom,
:Thank you for writing to us and pointing this out. This has been corrected on our site.
:All the best,
--
--
*Hello everyone, kindly register with Wikipedia and obtain official user names so that you can sign all your comments with the four tildes ~~~~ Thank you. IZAK 16:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Mentioning Spielberg's inconsistency with the ideals of Aish HaTorah is relevant.  Aish HaTorah uses his endorsement, and as I recall he dedicated something which bears his name in the Jerusalam yeshiva.  Spielberg is married to a non-Jew, and his new movie "Munich" has been subjected to a torrent of criticism for its inability to make a moral distinction between the terrorist murderers of Munich and the Israeli hit team that tried to enact justice and kill them.  That's not the kind of man that Aish should be trotting out of evidence of their success.
:For now, try to integrate that context (with wikilinking), because that specific passage is untenable in isolation; it is simply too confusing and unclear as per relevance, and otherwise. Please keep the average reader in mind. Thanks. El_C 08:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Spielberg

message: I removed one person's criticism of one aspect of one activity by Aish. We know Barry Simon is opposed to the use of Torah Codes, which point should be developed in Bible Code and not here. JFW | T@lk 19:26, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Barry Simon claims that "virtually unanimous opinion of those professional mathematicians and statisticians". He is a respected mathematician in his own right, and the Discovery program that uses these codes is one of Aish's biggest items. Perhaps the criticism belongs  here, where the claim "Discovery Seminar ... uses scientific methods of research to explore the authenticity of Judaism" is made. This is challenged by scientists such as Barry Simon.Hyim 21:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barry Simon 

message: This organization recieved a total of one star (out of four) from Charitynavigator.com. (http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/3925.htm) This similarity between this name and the Jerusalem Foundation has led some to believe that Aish used this name fro deceptive purposes. The nomenclature was challenged in a 1999 article in Globes Magazine.Hyim 04:41, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jerusalem Fund 

message: Someone has felt it necessary to insert an URL to Mayim (literally "water"), a blog dedicated to critiquing Aish UK.
However, it's not critcism in this blog. It's bleating and aimed at "exposing" this or that. It only criticises the UK branch, which is only a small part of a much larger organisation.
I see no reason why this blog should be linked here. JFW | T@lk 03:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-blog 

message: The article relating to Aish is not balanced and provides no criticism to the organization at all.  Whilst I think this is proganda, I am not opposed to the article but think there needs to a balance to it with the criticism that is felt by many people.  I do not have enough sources to write the critiques myself but this article should be flagged as a very one-sided piece.
I don't have a reference to back this up, so I won't put it on the main page, but this passaage:
"However, the accusation is not only commonly dismissed by Aish HaTorah members and staff, but also the majority of religious Jews, who see the controversy surrounding Aish HaTorah as rooting from secular Judaism in an attempt to taint Aish HaTorah's name, and their outreach work"
is just false.  Most orthodox Jews cringe when they hear the name "Aish Hatorah" because they know the place is wacko.  I highly doubt anyone with smicha from Aish would be taken seriously in a serious religious setting.  But I dodn't have documentation so I leave it on this rarely-viewed page.
This whole page read like Aish propaganda. It ought to be cleaned up from a NPOVHyim 05:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the Controversy section is an unsourced editorial and thus is forbidden by the rules against original research.  It has to be either propery sourced or deleted.  The correct way to add criticism is to locate a published source of criticism and report what it says.  We aren't allowed to write our own.  McKay 14:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have added a 'Controversy' label at the start of this discussion; it seems clear to me that there those with both very positive and very negative views of the organisation making edits, based on a lot of hearsay, personal opinion, and making relatively emotive comments. The first paragraph is a good example of this - much of it is false (especially in the various branches of the organisation with which I have personal experience), and dubious at best; and the controversy section is an ongoing conversation between various editors. I don't see the point of editing as based on current trends it will be gone within a few days... Garry Wayland 17:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is an article that may shed some light on the Aish controversy.  Here is a an individual's take on Aish's recruitment.  Hyim 06:49, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

text: You were right to remove the Scientology and Kabbalah Centre claims, but your own edit was a clear violation of the no original research policy.  The problem is that as well as linking to Aish's page of endorsements, you added your own opinion about it ("seem to belie...").  You aren't allowed to do that, you can only give the opinions and analysis of named reliable sources. McKay 04:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are making a strong argument for editing, but not for deleting the entire chunk. In fact, the statement "this is an accusation of which the organization is aware" which you left intact is very un-wikish - it has no source. Moreover, how can an organization be aware of something? I'm going to edit, taking into consideration your point (above) and challenge you to repair rather than delete if you see any problems. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Narcissus14 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Your text is Original Research, simple as that. Everything you wrote is your analsysis.  It is you claiming "these sources do not make the case" (btw, have you read Tapper's article?).  It is you claiming "The Wiki on NRMs would appear to fully invalidate".   That's not allowed.  Even if you personally were a world-renowned expert on cults, it still wouldn't be allowed.  Please read the policy!  You have to find a published reliable source where that analysis appears, then you can quote (or paraphrase) it. McKay 07:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, the controversy section should be readded, perhaps with a citation tag.  Yodaat 23:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy Section 

message: This article does not mention the fact that a large part of Aish's output is political polemic.  Examples: , , , , , .  Such articles form between 1/3 and 1/2 of all output nowadays.  I added a very weak mention to the article but I don't really want to edit it.  Someone should add more, including a description of Aish's political position (somewhere around the Netanyahu point).  McKay 00:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics 

message: Someone deleted the following subsection:
Aish HaTorah's methodology and impact on some people has led to comparisons between Aish and New Religious Movements (sometimes referred to as cults)Tapper, A. The "cult" of Aish Hatorah: Ba'alei Teshuva and the New Religious Movement phenomenon". Jewish Journal of Sociology, vol 44, nos 1 and 2, 2002.. This is an accusation of which the organisation is aware, and counters by claiming it is intellectually honest Aish.com - "How Can We Be Sure of Anything?".
That deletion was justified.  First, the description of Tapper's paper is woefully inadequate.  Second, the page of Aish linked in reply does not mention Tapper at all, so the charge "honest" (presumably supposed to be "dishonest") is unsourced. (Google cannot find Tapper mentioned at aish.com at all, which is what I would expect.) I don't want to write on this subject in the article, but if anyone wants to study Tapper's 25-page academic paper and use it to improve our article, send me email by the link on my home page and I'll send it to you.  As well as discussing the nature of Aish, Tapper gives a lot of historical and other useful information. McKay 06:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tapper paper and criticism section 

message: The speed dating claim is pretty astonishing, it would be nice to see it cited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.100.219.123 (talk • contribs) 
: It's correct.  See Speed dating. --John Nagle (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SPEED DATING 

message: Much of this article does sound like an advert (IMO, as someone who has never heard of Aish HaTorah). I would appreciate it if the relevant bits could be referenced or I will start deleting unreferenced content. P.S. I have tried to remove some of the "advertising-speak" without causing offence. All the best.Mmoneypenny 16:23, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An anon changed "stated mission" to "mission", and I changed it back. Aish does far more than its stated mission, especially in the advocacy area, and the cites reflect that.  --John Nagle (talk) 15:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advert 

message: Whoever put a rating of B-class on this article would be advised to compare it with other B-articles that are much better written. This still reads like a propaganda piece, and is nowhere near encyclopedia quality in terms of the presentation and writing. I downgraded it to start-class. Yoninah (talk) 22:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. This article needs a ton of work. It has serious POV problems, and needs more references. Enigmaman (talk) 18:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Quality rating

message: :Image:Aishcom.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 03:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Aishcom.jpg

message: Some minor things that ought to be fixed:
* The mission statement appears twice, once in the lede and once in "organizational goals". The one in "organizational goals" matches the Aish.com web site, but the other one does not.
* "Branches in 35 cities" also appears twice.
* The lede says "Orthodox", rather than "Orthodox Jewish".  Is there some good reason for this?
* "Jerusalem Fellowships" and "Hasbara Fellowships" are the same program. Actually they are not the same program at all. the first is goisrael.org, the second is israelactivism. com
--John Nagle (talk) 21:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor stuff 

message: Sarah Posner.  Aish HaTorah’s New ‘Obsession’.  The Jewish Week.  October 28, 2008.
--John Bahrain (talk) 16:05, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The article exists in real life, check your local library, and there is a mirror online here .  Citations to information that is not online is allowed.  Please do not remove properly cited information.  --John Bahrain (talk) 14:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Careful about that free trial!  They will automatically bill you for a non-free subscription unless you cancel within 7 days.  McKay (talk) 08:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

text: While I agree that the original source is preferred, it is not true in general that web pages are disallowed as sources.  Anyway, CJCurrie found an alternative source which is perfectly reputable. And here is another copy on a citable page. McKay (talk) 08:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

text: I have changed the lead sentence of that section to be more reflective of the relationship and removed the uncited claim.  It would be best to grab a sentence from somewhere that the Clarion Fund uses to describe itself.  --John Bahrain (talk) 20:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Informative article on Aish HaTorah, Clarion Fund, Obsession Movie controversy 

message: A new editor has been repeatedly removing the criticism section which follows the praise section in the first paragraph.  That's a bit much. We might want to break up the first section; though; it's long for a lede. --John Nagle (talk) 16:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Seven years later and all criticism seems to have been removed. This is just advertising now. Sad. ☸ Moilleadóir ☎ 13:15, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of criticism section 

message: Aish.com has not been the most visited Jewish site for a long time - at least 6+ months. Even chabad.org get more traffic. To the editor intent on maintaining the lie, please stop, do your research
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/chabad.org+askmoses.com+aish.com+lubavitch.com+kehos.com#trafficstats
99.237.138.36 (talk) 04:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet - Aish.com is NOT the most visited Jewish site. 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?SectionID=4&SubSectionID=17&ArticleID=10173&TM=25850.02. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Dana boomer (talk) 02:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: What do you think?
http://www.stljewishlight.com/opinion/commentaries/article_c35ce1bc-2e0a-11e4-96b3-001a4bcf887a.html
By Mike Minoff | 0 comments
In 2010, my wife went to Israel with Jewish Women’s Renaissance Project (JWRP) and Aish Hatorah. When she returned, she had a spark in her neshama (soul), but she couldn’t explain to me,  who had never been to Israel, what was so magical about the trip. All she could say was, “You have to go to understand.” 
So when Rabbi Yosef David told me he was leading a JWRP/Aish HaTorah trip to Israel, I said “I’m in – I want to experience what my wife felt.”
Adamreinman (talk) 20:47, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with articles about organizations, but it doesn't promote them or promote their beliefs. McKay (talk) 06:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

text: You are free to have your own beliefs, but Wikipedia must remain unbiased. As everyone has differing ideas, it is best for Wikipedia to remain neutral. I agree with @McKay. User:Cool hat6| Cool hat6  (talk) 14:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article to add as a reference?  ‘Am Yisrael Chai’ is a fight song for our people 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Aish HaTorah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090227171455/http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/129789 to http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/129789
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:27, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.aish.com/ai/96244754.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  /wiae /tlk 22:57, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: The philosophy section currently leads with:
Aish HaTorah describes itself as blending the traditions of the Lithuanian yeshivas with the doctrines of Hasidism.[citation needed]
I attended Aish HaTorah for almost seven years. Not only did *no one* ever describe the yeshiva in those terms, but in fact, the rabbinic staff had a decidedly anti-hasidic bent to their hashkafa. I distinctly recall a weekly shmooze when the machgiach, Rav Gil shlita (a hasidic Jew himself) specifically admonished a group of students for attending extra-curricular shiurim, tishn, etc at hassidic rebbes.
The reason this line needs a citation is because it's not remotely true.
Or, to put it like I heard from some of Rav Noach zzl's students:
Rav Noach was the last of the misnagdim, so as punishment, they made him a rebbe
Aish HaTorah's focus (at least when I was there) was on
* Personal responsibility for clal yisroel, especially as expressed through kiruv rechokim
* Awareness of and Pride in Jewish History particularly as a progression towards a goal or the accomplishment of a Jewish national mission 
* Relative agnosticism to questions of modernity (in other words, not being particularly anti-zionist, while retaining a generally haredi worldview)
* "being normal" i.e. for the uninitiated, not adopting religious practice too quickly  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bennyp (talk • contribs) 13:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philosophy section