Talk:Mea Shearim

message: The move from "meah" to "mea" is because:
* "mea" is several times more common in actual use (says Google)
* Academy of the Hebrew Language, US BGN, UK PCGN, and UN GEGN all agree that we don't romanize final letter he in place names when it has no mappiq.
* article Mea Shearim was on Wikipedia:Requested articles/Other categorization schemes
--Hoziron 03:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And I am moving back, since in the Jewish world we do write Meah. I don't particularly care what all of those organizations say. I care about what us, those involved in the area, say. --Daniel575 | (talk) 17:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As Daniel575 has been indefinitely blocked for abusive behavior, and his moving the page was done merely on his personal opinion, I have moved the page back to 'Mea'. .אבי נ (talk) 11:21, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romanization 

message: What on Earth does this mean?  The neighborhood is many things, but quiet is not one of them, nor was it before tourists.  Residents of Mea Shearim may have plenty of reasons to not want tourists around, but "disturbing the quiet" is pretty silly.  I'll wait a little while before changing this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattcarl (talk • contribs) 
As for me, this is something I am legitimately curious about: while I wholeheartedly understand the objections to people wearing immodest outfits in the neighborhood, why do its residents object to "large groups" passing through? And what size groups would offend them? --75.110.158.43 20:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "large groups disturbing the quiet" 

message: I have heard rumours that jewish people spit on christians who is wearing their crosses. Is this the reason why christians is advised not to wear anything that identifies as christians?
:Unfortunately, 99% of christians in Meah Shearim are there to proselytize. See http://www.jewsforjesus.org . That type. We in Meah Shearim aren't waiting for such things. If you want to complain about this, complain at "Jews For Jesus". --Daniel575 | (talk) 20:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rubbish, plenty of Christians go on holiday in Israel without trying to proselytise Jews. If anyone's trying to proselytise it's the Haredi trying to coax other Jews into wearing ridiculous eastern European clothing, which is completely inappropriate for the Israeli climate.--87.127.115.178 (talk) 13:55, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Why can't christians wear their crosses?" 

message: "Preferably colored" yarmulke? That doesn't sound like Meah Shearim. I would think the Haredim there would prefer a black, velvet kipah. -- 09:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. The reason why that was written is because an outsider wearing a big black velvet kippah immediately identifies himself as a non-Jew. An secular Jew / Israeli would wear a small colored kippah, of the type you will commonly see at weddings, funerals etc. If someone would be walking around M.S. in secular clothing with a big black velvet kippah, it's like wearing a sign around your neck, "I am a goy". So while at first it might sound weird, when you think a little further, it is very logical. --169.132.18.248 10:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are very wrong, and it is strange that you are so adament about this. As it says at kippah, "Haredi men, who mostly wear large black cloth or velvet yarmulkes, often wear fedoras with their yarmulkes worn underneath" and "The Israeli Religious Zionist community is often referred to by the name kippot serugot (Hebrew כיפות סרוגות), literally "knitted kippot," though they are typically crocheted." The residents of Mea Shearim, being haredi, wear the former, not latter, kind of kippah. nadav 05:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kipah Shrugah? 

message: :Image:Copy of mea shearim 8.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Copy of mea shearim 8.JPG

message: Gilabrand, Please don't change articles based on unlegitimate reasons.
I assume you misunderstood me and were offended by my deletion of a blurry b&w picture of a haredi and his cellphone from the article Meah Shearim.  This is no reason to delete two relevant pictures, one of them describing the paragraph "Neighborhood Regulations". And there was absolutely no reason to insert a very large image, without consideration of the article's layout.
RonAlmog 17:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC
::Sorry, but the removal of your images was entirely legitimate - they add nothing and the writing on the sign is illegible. If you think that the photo of some people with white shirts is representative of Mea Shearim, I disagree. The photos are dark and hellish and make it look even more decrepit than it is in real life.--Gilabrand 16:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Gilabrand, I really can't understand your pettiness. There is a paragraph about "Neighborhood Regulations", and the image you repeatedly removed describes exactly this. The posters in the image are mentioned specifically in the article. The second image is of a group of  ultra-orthodox teenagers in Meah Shearim. If you want to add a picture describing "Haredi lifestyle" - feel free to do so, but please - do so with considiration of the page's layout (and not 300 pixels width).  Thanks for your contributions.  RonAlmog 20:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images removed by Gilabrand 

message: What is meant by the reference to Old World?  The referenced article does not use that phrase.  I suggest that it be replaced with the word insulated which is mentioned in the article.  Otherwise we ned to say what Old World is being referred to. Since the development is reasonably modern, it is a strange phrase to use. Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 17:54, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haredi Lifestyle 

message: I have added details from this article on attacks on bookshops. I hope they are not removed, but add here in case. .80.57.81.114 (talk) 17:18, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Calling a group "violent" is POV and libel, even if it's sourced. Material has been removed from other pages for the same reason. You must provide a balanced picture, and not just throw in a line sourced to Haaretz and The Jerusalem Post, which are both blatantly anti-Haredi. I'm not a fan of the Sikrikim, but I know you have to provide a balance. Moreover, this issue of "violent censorship" does not belong under "Neighborhood Regulations," but perhaps under its own "Internal politics" section. Yoninah (talk) 09:27, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Violent censorship

message: Do the signs requesting modesty carry the force of law? If not, who put them up; the Government (out of concern for the resident's wishes)?
If there are restrictions for just walking through there, what about living there - can anyone just buy a place? - 124.191.144.183 (talk) 12:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Law

message: I don't find this in the source given, which doesn't look reliable anyway.  A highly reliable source (Kark & Oren-Nordheim, Jerusalem and its Environs) has this chronology for "Jerusalem neighborhoods outside the walled city": Mishkenot Sha'anamim 1855–1860, Russian Compound 1858-1864, Schneller Compound 1861, Mahaneh Yisrae'el 1866, Nahalat Shiv'a 1869, Mas'udiya 1870s, German Colony 1872, Georgian Houses (Eshel Avraham) 1872-1876, Bet David 1873, Me'ah She'arim 1875. So it wasn't the 5th, but either 9th or 10th. Zerotalk 08:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe fifth Jewish settlement outside the walls?GreyShark (dibra) 18:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not just play it safe and say "among the first neighborhoods outside the wall?" Sir Joseph (talk) 18:44, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "the fifth settlement outside the walls of the Old City" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mea Shearim. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070613210514/http://www.eyecomvisual.com/illusisrael/01/Meah-Shearim.htm to http://www.eyecomvisual.com/illusisrael/01/Meah-Shearim.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131005010019/http://www.orianit.edu-negev.gov.il/shafamcm/cp/homepage/PSHONOTAnat17kern.htm to http://www.orianit.edu-negev.gov.il/shafamcm/cp/homepage/PSHONOTAnat17kern.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:39, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is there any source that explains which Hasidic groups make up a large percentage of the population of Mea Shearim? Which Hasidic sects are the largest in this neighborhood? Toldot Aharon? Satmar?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.69.244.203 (talk) 18:34, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hasidic groups 

message: The reference to an "IDF officer" needs to be explained. I have no idea what IDF means. 2601:200:C000:1A0:3014:AB85:A6F4:70EF (talk) 16:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: fixed, Huldra (talk) 23:52, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  IDF