Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism/Archive 18

message: On Ten Commandments I'm more or less singlehandedly trying to deal with several people who have rather peculiar views on neutrality. I'd highly appreciate some assistance. JFW | T@lk 18:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Again, Ten Commandments 

message: I would like to see Sigmund Feist's scholarly work in matters pertaining to Jewish ethnicity and race mentioned explicitly in his article. Also, does anyone have any information relating to his activities outside the field of historical linguistics? The most pressing question in my opinion is whether this is the same Sigmund Feist that directed the Reichenheim Weisenhaus in Berlin. My preliminary research seems to confirm this, but I would like some corroboration if possible. (If he is the same person, then his article deserves to be expanded considerably, particularly in light of the 2002 volume Feldpostbriefe jüdischer Soldaten 1914 - 1918 by Hermann Simon, which gives insight into the lives of Jewish combatants in the First World War.) If anyone has any information or is willing to help with the article, please post on Talk:Sigmund Feist. Thanks. Varoon Arya 19:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As it turns out, the assumption I made above was correct. The article has been expanded to reflect this, though I would appreciate everything being worked over a time or two by more experienced editors. (Thanks again for the encouragement, Tom!) Varoon Arya 22:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Sigmund Feist]] 

message: If anyone is interested in doing a drive-by, I have about 100 edits on this article since late October and I can't even see it straight anymore.  I could especially use some input on what exactly Maimonides did regarding the calendar, and most of the later sections (running out of steam).  This was once a featured article.  It still needs loads more refs if we are going to get it back there. Kaisershatner 03:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Hebrew calendar]] 

message: The Ezra article currently has no traditional Jewish sources -- the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia is used to represent Jewish tradition and the Encyclopedia Brittanica and various non-Jewish source are used as sources of Jewish views and opinion. I added a short paragraph mentioning the Great Assembly, right now it's the only mention at all that at he had any role in Halakha. If anyone would have time to add a more thorough section on the traditional Jewish view of Ezra and his role, even a brief start, would be greatly appreciated. Best,  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shirahadasha (talk • contribs) 22:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is, as always, the choice of the ideal source. I can think about the introduction to ArtScroll "Ezra" or Yishai Chasida's biographical dictionary of Tanakh personalities. And of course Maimonides' introduction to the Yad, which is about as authoritative as one can imagine... JFW | T@lk 06:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose the view of the Union for Traditional Judiasm is ipso facto a "Traditional Jewish view", but I had kinda meant a small "t". I would classify Halivni's views on this issue as academic scholarship rather than religious views, although there's very little of either on Ezra's role in Judaism. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 07:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but if I recall correctly he cites several relevant traditional sources - the advantage of using HaLivni is that (a) the synthesis on those sources will not be WP:OR (b) those sources can be used as the start of a bibliography for sources with small 't'. Egfrank (talk) 09:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ezra]] 

message: * Jewish Rescue Committee. From a brief look at Google (1250 hits), it seems likely there were many such organizations in different countries.  I first noticed this missing article while reading Edward Teller. Ling.Nut (talk) 12:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  another article request 

message: Organ donation under Jewish law needs help with sources and citations. Anyone who knows something about this topic, please help out. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I found one news snippet That I can email you, if you have email set up. In addition, a quick search turned up the following sources:
* MATTERS OF LIFE AND DEATH:A JEWISH APPROACH TO MODERN MEDICAL ETHICS. By Elliot N. Dorff. Philadelphia and Jerusalem: Jewish Publication Society 1998. Pp. xix, 476. $24.46. ISBN: 0-827-60647-8
* A periodical called B'OR HA'TORAH seems to have dealt with the topic.
* Twersky, Abraham, Michael Gold, and Walter Jacob. 1991. "Jewish Perspectives." Pp. 187-98 in New Harvest: transplanting the body and reaping the benefits, edited by C. Don Keyes and Walter E. Wiest. Clifton, NJ: Hurnana Press.
* Medicine Meets Religion In Organ Donation Debate. By: Ramirez, Anthony. New York Times, 11/18/2006, Vol. 156 Issue 53767, pB2-B2, 1/3p; (AN 23283799)
* Ling.Nut (talk) 10:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added sources. More importantly, the article needs/deserves editing and improvement. I put in sections, cleaned up some mistakes, intro, etc. Still needs work. Also, am I missing something, or is there no article on pikuach nefesh?! I did find Self-sacrifice under Jewish law, but that's not quite the same. We also need to bite the bullet and clean up our categories, eg Jewish law, Jewish ethics, Jewish medical ethics. Ah, the day is short, the task is great, the editors are lazy.... but the Master is demanding! HG | Talk 13:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok, started Jewish medical ethics and its category. Input needed. Would still be happy if somebody could divide up the "Jewish law and rituals" category as previously discussed. Thank. HG | Talk 02:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organ donation under Jewish law 

message: The Agunah article needs improvement with sources and citations. Please help if you can. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's a great source for this kind of question. Jewish Law: Bibliography of Sources and Scholarship in English, search and ye/we shall find. For theoretical complexities, google Bernard Jackson, Aviad Ha-Cohen and Michael Broyde. HG | Talk 14:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agunah 

message: Isha katlanit needs citations and sources. IZAK (talk) 09:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a half dozen. Sufficient? Thanks. HG | Talk 12:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks HG: Good work. Ideally some citations should be part of the body of the main article. It takes work, I know. Thank you for your efforts. IZAK (talk) 04:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's continue on article Talk. Mention which sentences you think need citation. Ciao, HG | Talk 06:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isha katlanit 

message: Hi HG: Can you just remind me what your issues were with :Category:Jewish law and rituals? Thanks, IZAK (talk) 04:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion here. It's my impression that other comments agree w/my suggestion to separate the terms. Key reason is that "Jewish law" includes numerous non-ritual topics. So good support for :Category:Jewish law. Still up in the air whether the other category should be Jewish "ritual" or "practice." Obviously, some articles could get both J-Law and J-Ritual cats. Also: perhaps we can have a simpler :Category:Jewish ethics instead of "Jewish ethical law" (which is not a common term). Thanks. HG | Talk 06:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this seems to have some support and no opposition, I've gone ahead and created :Category:Jewish law. Started to switch some obvious articles over from "Jewish law and rituals" to the new category. Perhaps others can help re-categorize articles. Meanwhile, we can rename the Ritual/practices category and the Ethics ("ethical law") category. Thanks. HG | Talk 03:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update on Category:Jewish law and rituals 

message: Anyone able to flesh out Kvitlech? It's some sort of Hanukkah gambling game but it's wont for detail. Also, the article probably should have a dablink out to whatever article we (I imagine) have on those little Jewish prayer notes that, in Yiddish at least, go by the same name, but I'm not sure of the contemporary term for those. -- Kendrick7talk 00:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only decent article I could find on it is here.--Pharos (talk) 05:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's what I was looking for. Certainly striking similarities with blackjack, e.g. surrender versus "loaf." Thanks! -- Kendrick7talk 17:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speaking of Hanukkah, need help on Kvitlech article 

message: Hi, there is a need for an article about the History of the Jews in Singapore. At the present time there are articles about the Chesed-El Synagogue and the Maghain Aboth Synagogue in Singapore that have some facts that may help such an article. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the Jews in Singapore 

message: Started an article on Judaism and ecology, as a spin-off of Religion and ecology. For scope and name, see Talk page. Likewise, editing :Category:Judaism and ecology to be consistent. Anyway, perhaps folks would enjoy working on either the main article or the category? Thanks. HG | Talk 20:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: sounds good. elat chayim center has some valuable info. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 22:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judaism and ecology 

message: There's been 'non-stop' rampant, malicious vandalism of Hanukkah. Maybe its only during the period of Hanukkah, but the article is being ruined. Maybe some interested parties could get a temporary restriction on editing especially by people without user accounts. If this is not the appropriate or best place for this note, then please move and or copy it to a more appropriate place. I'm not a member of Project Judaism, I just noticed the vandalism 'in passing'. Thanks. AnFu (talk) 17:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As you suggested, I requested protection yesterday. (Anyone can submit a request at WP:RPP.) The page is now semi-protected, which should stave off most vandalism. Let folks here know if you need help restoring or improving the page. Thanks. HG | Talk 16:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Note:That's the formal way to do it, but there are also informal ways. You can also, for example leave a message with any administrator, such as one who edits Judaism articles. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 14:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rampant Vandalism Of [[Hanukkah]] / Possible Temp Protection? 

message: Proposing a merge of Vicki Polin into The Awareness Center. Please join the discussion. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Appears User:Avi has boldly gone ahead and merged the articles. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 19:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Vicki Polin]], [[The Awareness Center]] 

message: Still needed is an article about the History of the Jews in Wales to complete the History of the Jews in Europe. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 12:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the Jews in Wales 

message: A discussion is going on in Talk:Baruch Lanner about whether the article should link The Awareness Center's page on this individual. Since this issue will likely come up repeatedly in articles on individuals accused of conduct The Awareness Center covers, would appreciate feedback on this issue from a wider community. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Vicki Polin and her Awareness Center are not neutral parties on issues of rabbinical sex abuse cases, because, among other reasons, she is not bound by anyone or any standard and will publish any and all allegations at the drop of a hat, and has expressed highly-charged personal points of view on these matters, and so therefore neither she nor her Awareness Center's web site should be cited as references, sources, or as an external link in any Wikipedia article except the one about the Awareness Center itself and hopefully in an article about her too that should be created. IZAK (talk) 08:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with IZAK that it's just a "name and shame machine". Linking to the site is only indicated if someone being listed there has had any impact on his/her case. JFW | T@lk 09:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to the [[The Awareness Center]] in articles on individuals accused of sexual abuse 

message: Java has been going round removing project tags from a number of anti-semitism-type articles, most of which don't have Project Jewish history ones either. Eg Judensau, Mein Kampf. I don't have a view but thought you should be aware. Johnbod (talk) 21:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Many of those tags were added by a bot in a misunderstanding between the participants in this project and the bot's owner. Please see my rather embarrassingly overheated comments in the Chavez section above and these comments on the bot's talk page. From what I can understand of old discussions it was understood at the time this project was undertaken that it would concern religion, and antisemitism would be excluded from its scope. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK - does the Jewish history project aim to cover this stuff? Johnbod (talk) 01:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really know, but you're welcome to post an inquiry at that project's talk page. Also, if you look at :Category:Antisemitism, I'm sure you'll find most of the pages recently deleted from this project. They may even want to use the services of SatyrBot to populate them into their project. I think most people would agree that those pages have very little to do with the Jewish religion, but may be more relevant to the history of the Jews. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 05:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project tags 

message: I just created an article on an historically significant local congregation, Temple Beth El (Detroit, Michigan).  However, a few things: 1. I'm not sure what, if any, styles should be applied to the article to make it consistent with other articles, 2. I'm not Jewish, so I would like someone who is to take a look at the article to make sure I didn't misinterpret something, and 3. There is a good argument for naming the article Temple Beth El (Bloomfiled Hills, Michigan) (its current location) rather than Temple Beth El (Detroit, Michigan) (its historical location).  Anyone got a little time? Andrew Jameson (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahhh... I think so.  Not sure.  I'll put the relevant passages on the article's talk page. Andrew Jameson (talk) 20:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, Wolf, I messed up the redirect name above.  It should be Temple Beth El (Bloomfield Hills, Michigan) , not Temple Beth El (Bloomfiled Hills, Michigan). Andrew Jameson (talk) 20:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, where does this leave the Jews of Bloomfiled?  Kaisershatner (talk) 14:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could I Get a Set of Eyes? 

message: Ok, it seems like I may be the only one who cares at all about this, but I am still pretty upset that the Hannukah template links to "Chrismukkah" and "Hannukah Bush."  I am soliciting more views, again.  It is my view that the template pertaining to this Jewish holiday should not link to examples of American Jews celebrating Christian traditions, or if you take a less critical view, at least not to examples of American Jews celebrating some completely non-Hannukah-related cultural fads.  I am not saying there shouldn't be articles about these things, since they clearly exist, just that the template shouldn't point to them.  They also happen to be (1) regional (non)customs, rather than components of the Jewish observance of Hannukah, and (2) precisely opposite in intent from the core rationale of the holiday itself.  And just to emphasize this, I have contacted user Remember and made it clear this isn't personal (I appreciate the hard work that has been done in an effort to improve the article).  I have a very serious difference of opinion about it (it is my personal POV that (3) it is offensive to link to this; would we link to "Yom Kippur Brunch" on the YK template if some Jews "observed" YK by eating omelettes?).  I would like to know if I am alone in this.  Many thanks, Kaisershatner (talk) 14:30, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Christmas has had a big effect on observance on Hanukkah in the US, and not just among Jews with a Hanukkah bush.  The fact that it is treated as a major holiday at all (as opposed to something on the level of Purim), not to mention the gift-giving, is entirely down to the influence of the secular component of Christmas.  Perhaps we should really have an article on Hanukkah traditions in the United States or something.--Pharos (talk) 16:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hannukah Bush, Chrismukkah redux 

message: see talk:Yemenite Jews Ling.Nut (talk) 02:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Yemenite Jews]] GA on Hold for minor repairs 

message: Let me know what you think of my new footer for Hanukkah. Remember 20:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think they are okay to add.  The SNL skit could go since it is minor but I thought the other movies showed how Hannukah is portrayed in American culture. Remember (talk) 12:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

text: 6. Follow the link to "Society." It's very general and questionably relevant to this context. Should it be here? - Changed
Also, does anyone know why "Chanukah music" spells the name of the holiday differently from the rest of Wikipedia?
Those are about the only problems I can see. I'll make obvious corrections and wait for comments. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 02:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Agree with all comments.  I put this together rather quickly and I figured others would help sort it out. Thanks for the help. Remember (talk) 03:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice job, should be helpful. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 10:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the template is very pretty and has potential.  However, I'm not sure I love the popular culture categories/inclusions.  In my experience, it's hard to draw a line and you end up with 1000 links to songs, parodies, poems, etc.  (I just killed a whole para like this that infested Talk:Gettysburg Address if you want to see one).  How long before you have to link the (offensive, IMO) "Hanukkah Harry" character Seinfeld did on Saturday Night Live. Also, I have a problem with "Hanukkah Bush," which first of all, has basically nothing to do with Hanukkah and much more to do with Jews observing a Christian holiday, and secondly, is an American thing, so is limited in scope. Kaisershatner (talk) 15:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoops, reading more carefully I see Harry is already in there.  I have serious objections to that.  Kaisershatner (talk) 15:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By this whole category, do you just mean Hannukah Harry or the songs and movies as well.  I would agree that it is typically difficult to draw a line when there are lots of movies, songs, and TV shows.  In that case it is best to include the category instead of listing each song or movie (see the Christmas template).  However, in this case, there is just not that much Hannukah media entries on wikipedia and so it is not really an issue.  Until it becomes one, my feeling is listing these songs and movies works in the template.  But I can understand taking out Hannukah Harry since he is such a minor media reference. Your thoughts? Any other opinions? Remember (talk) 16:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, Remember, thanks for your fast reply.  My view is take out the whole category of media: (1) it is USA-centric, (2) it is the type of category that will grow unbounded and require enormous POV arguments about what to delete/include, (3) as it stands it includes several works that only nominally have to do with Hanukkah (eg, the "Hanukkah Song" which is really about what celebrities are Jewish and not so much about the holiday), and (4) it includes works that are mostly about portraying Jewish/American stereotypes, not about the holiday.  Related to this, I am also against including Hanukkah Bush and Chrismukkah on this template.  To me this just strikes the wrong chord.  Kaisershatner (talk) 16:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I have removed the media section and put the Hannukah music article there based on the early response. If anyone wants to see how it looked like before the change they can check out this version.  As for the Society section, any further thoughts? Remember (talk) 23:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Applause to Remember for your time and effort on this template, plus your good natured acceptance and responsiveness to comments. Personally, I have no problem with inclusion of the Hanukkah Bush and Chrismukkah. After all, assimilation is one of the core traditional themes of the holiday. It might be a bit to Hasmonean of Wikipedia to exclude such syncretism from the template. Alas, we won't be able to editorialize on it either. ;->   Thanks again, Remember! HG | Talk 23:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Remember, thanks for making the changes.  Now I just have to convince you that the rest of my argument is right :)  Although HG's comments are clearly meant at least partly in fun, I'm sure he knows that resistance to assimilation is the core theme of the holiday.  Somehow, pointing people to examples of syncretism (a nice way of saying Jews abandoning their traditions to absorb Christian ones) is in my view totally backwards for the Hannukah template.  If you and/or the other editors here don't agree with that, then I would ask you to consider two more points: one, AFIK both the "bush" and "Chrismukkah" are completely American things.  There's no reason a British Jew or any user from anywhere looking at En.wikipedia should have highlighted for them a regional limited cultural fad (one which, no less, is not endorsed by Jewish organizations and which in the case of Chrismukkah was decried by a rabbinical board as "insulting" to Jews and Christians alike).  To be consistent you would have to add local Hanukkah traditions from Yemen, Mexico, Russia, or wherever.  Two, sure, you might say "Jelly Donut" or "MaOTzur" are equally subjective or random traditions to include, so why not these other ones?  The difference IMO is that at least those traditions represent Jews celebrating Hannukah in idiosyncratic or regional ways; in the case of the bush/Chrismukkah these are regional ways in which Jews observe Christmas.  I will join in the applause for Remember, both for making the beautiful template and for having the courage to take criticism, and I reiterate that I understand the whole thing to have been done in good faith, but I still strongly hope the remaining links to (non) Hannukah "traditions" be removed.  Kaisershatner (talk) 14:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no strong feelings about this.  I figure if anyone else expresses an opinion against this (or no one expresses an opinion for a good amount of time) anyone can feel free to remove the Society section in the template.  I am not monitoring this page so I may not respond to further comments here for a long time.  Also, I am going to copy these comments and move them to the template discussion page (just so people will know what went on).  Thanks for all of the kind words.  I really appreciate them because I like to know that my work was useful to others. Cheers. Remember (talk) 18:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Hanukkah footer 

message: Judaism and ecology is IMHO a good start but could use some work. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 13:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Judaism and ecology]] could use some work. 

message: In looking at the IDF's Military Rabbinate article, only Chief Military Rabbi Shlomo Goren has an article. Articles are still needed for rabbis:
*Mordechai Peron (1968-1977), 
*Gad Navon (1977-2000), 
*Israel Weiss (2000-2006), 
*Avichai Rontzki (2006- ). 
Happy Chanukah! Thanks, IZAK (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IDF Chief Military Rabbis 

message: I just reverted a cut-and-paste move of the article from one spelling to the other. I figured this would be a good place to look for consensus on which spelling we should be using. Thoughts? Thanks.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 15:48, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not just KJV, but pretty much everything else I looked at had it that way. I've put in a move request to get it over to the right location, since I can't do it myself after the cnp move...--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 14:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Jephtha]]/[[Jephthah]] 

message: The Maccabean Revolt article needs a lot of work if someone wants to take this on as a project. Remember (talk) 14:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Maccabean Revolt]] 

message: There has been a sharp increase in the debate at Template talk:Chabad#Controversy Again! as part of ongoing differences of views between opposing editors, some of whom are pro-Chabad POV warriors and others. Please drop by and give this matter your consideration and input. It may help a lot because the way things are unfolding it looks like it may be headed for more serious arbitration which can hopefully be avoided. Thanks a lot, IZAK (talk) 17:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As usual, IZAK violates WP:Assume good faith, and disparages fellow editors merely for disagreeing with him. Of course, if his own motives were so pure, then there would be room to ask why he so vehemently wants to tarnish Chabad's image...--Meshulam (talk) 22:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Truth be told Izzak is not the only once labeled anti chabad i myself and lobojo are also being accused by the pro chabad editors as being anti. so more insight from impartial users is desperately needed thanks--יודל (talk) 23:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guidance needed at Template talk:Chabad 

message: There's a minor edit conflict going on at Template:Infobox Jews over whether Emma Lazarus or Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau is more appropriate for the template. Any thoughts from project members are welcome and would be very helpful. DanielC/T+ 14:29, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jews Infobox 

message: Please take a look at the Rabbi Hanoch Teller article, as his notability has been questioned by someone who knows nothing about the subject. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 08:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have entered into a dialogue with the editor who may actually know something about the subject but feels that his notability is not established. We are all aware that he has written books, but the article does not support their popularity with sources, and it also tries to establish his notability on the basis of being a shadchan, tour guide and other community-related functions that do not normally justify encyclopedicity. JFW | T@lk 09:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Dr. Wolff: I have heard from User  who has said she will improve the article. IZAK (talk) 08:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hanoch Teller 

message: In the past I spent quite a lot of work on Seven Laws of Noah (7LoN) , and defended it from POV pushers. In the last few weeks, anonymous editors have gradually been heaping in content, mainly in the section Seven Laws of Noah#Christian observance of Noahide Laws. I believe most of this is original research. Until Chabad placed emphasis of the 7LoN, very few non-Jews had heard about it and none were actively observing them. To therefore ascribe "accidental" Christian observance of the 7LoN as "adherence" would be a gross invention unsustainable under Wikipedia policy. Could someone familiar with the details review the most recent edits, and remove whatever is unsuitable? JFW | T@lk 22:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seven Laws of Noah 

message: There are some issues with the Yeshivish and Yeshivish Jews articles. Are two articles neeeded? And indeed is there validity to have an article about a sub-species of "Yeshivish Jews" when we have a Yeshiva article? I tried moving some of the "Yeshivish" info there but was opposed. A discussion and vote has started at Talk:Yeshivish Jews#Merge/s, please share your views. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 04:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yeshivish vs Yeshivish Jews vs Yeshiva 

message: Chabad-Lubavitch related controversies is currently listed  as an article that needs to be wikified. Article was created 20 February 2007. Article (strongly) survived an AfD in February 2007. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 21:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Chabad-Lubavitch related controversies]] needs to be Wikified 

message: IZAK, I don't understand.  Why is it so important to you that whether the main umbrella article on non-Orthodox Judaism is called Progressive Judaism or Reform Judaism?   It's not even your personal position anyway.  It seems to me that Egfrank has put down some pretty solid reasons why Progressive Judaism is the more appropriate wording -- much the same reasons, in fact, as why the group gathered round Lily Montagu's dining table in 1926 came to that view.  In contrast, I don't think I've seen from you yet a single substantive reason why you object to the term Progressive Judaism.  So: what's your problem?
As to your question about pork, I think most Progressives would agree that if you think that is the most important thing to you about Judaism, then you have picked up a pretty stunted idea of what Judaism is.  
For what it's worth, I think most UK progressive rabbis of whichever stripe probably do broadly keep kosher - though I suspect they may not be too fussed about whether their milk has a stamp from one of the Orthodox beit dins or not.  On the other hand, here's an interview I wikilinked yesterday into the article on respected UK Liberal Rabbi Julia Neuberger, where she says that she's not particularly bothered about the dietary laws, and is quite happy to eat shellfish for example.  What I've heard some UK Liberal rabbis emphasise rather is the ethical element - was the animal humanely treated? was the land sustainably managed? (was the land justly occupied?)  I suspect some of them might rate an Organic mark from the Soil Association rather more highly than a Kasher stamp from the London Beit Din.
On the other hand, as Egfrank has set out, other groups under the Progressive umbrella take a much narrower position.  Whereas with UK Liberals their attitude has been characterised "Is there a good reason for xxxx tradition, to continue to uphold it?", in UK Reform the attitude has been characterised "Is there any good reason why xxxx tradition should not continue to be upheld?".  And there are other groups, members of WUPJ, who would take an even higher view of traditional halachic decisions.  Even so, I think they would all see Ethicism and Spirituality as more important than Legalism (never mind legalistic loophole hair-splitting). And that's a general take on Judaism with a history that goes back well before the year zero CE. (Cue the prophets, anyone?) 
But lumping all these views together as "Reform" (i) serves to confuse; and (ii) is seriously U.S.-centric.  The word all these groups identify on is "Progressive".  Jheald 15:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Should Reform or Progressive be the main umbrella article/s

message: There are a variety of topics under discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Progressive Judaism.  They might be of particular interest to some of the members of the wider judaism project.  All are invited to attend.  I personally have no personal objection to moving those discussions to this page if there is sufficent general interest.  However, despite my vocalness I am not the only member of that project.  Given that fact, I do ask that the decision be discussed first with time permitted for other members of the project being given time to respond.  :-). Egfrank 11:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Progressive Judaism topics under discussion 

message: As a direct result of issues debated here, and the way they were debated, another long debate was held at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#User:IZAK. It is re-posted here to ensure that major points made by all the parties not be lost od deleted(updated till--> IZAK 12:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Relying on the Wikiquette Alert regulars to properly archive this discussion, Izak, I've removed your reposting. It's also feasible to leave a diff here. Thanks. HG | Talk 14:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I understand. IZAK (talk) 10:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

text: The discussion at Wikiquette Alert, mentioned by IZAK above, is archived here. Thanks. HG | Talk 15:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Continuum