Talk:Ovadia Yosef

message: The labels Orthodox, Reform, Conservative/Masorti, etc., are all Ashkenazi Rite traditions.  Yosef was SEPHARDIC!  We do not have these multiple religious traditions in Sephardic Rite worship, so he should not be identified as "Orthodox Judaism".  Instead, the better label would be "Judaism (Sephardic Rite)".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.31.244.28 (talk) 16:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Not "Orthodox" - He was Sephardic

message: What about adding his family info. How many sons/daughters, what do they do? Names? Wife's name? etc.Gavhathehunchback 04:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Family History

message: Why was the page moved? Everyking 11:50, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone (User:MathKnight) felt that the page should incorporate the Rabbi's title. This is in violation of policy, so I moved it back. JFW | T@lk 09:32, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Page moved

message: When the "controversy" section gets longer than all the "positive" sections on the page something must be amiss. Is this the result of constant negative media attention? Is it because the media don't understand that this man has also done good things, such as address the plight of improverished Sefardim? It is a great evil if Wikipedia content is determined solely by someone's negative exposure in the media. JFW | T@lk 07:25, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the addition of the line: According to an eyewitness at the lecture: ("I personally was there sitting in bet kenest tiferet yerushalayim adat yazdim & rav didn't say that."). 
- I am currently sitting next to a man who overheard my conversation regarding the Rabbi and he claims to have been at the lecture in question. He claims that Rav Ovadia has not said that and was sitting in the Persian synagogue during the lecture. [Anonymous]
Upon clicking on the source cited at the bottom of the article, http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/12/1664849.php, I noticed that Indymedia was itself quoting another source. The source cited is actually a reposting of libel from AlJazeera. I was redirected from Indymedia to AlJazeera. http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/2943BEB3-FF4E-4436-B5E8-91C494187230.htm
Please do not quote LIBEL in the future.
Al Jazeera is unlikely to be (1) informed (2) neutral about this topic. I'll see if this can be removed. JFW | T@lk 23:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: But it's also allegedly quoting Maariv. A better tactic would be to see if we can find the original Maariv article, or some confirmation of it. ShalomShlomo 23:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Found confirmation of it in a cached site quoting Ha'aretz, as well as an Arutz-Sheva op-ed criticizing the remark. ShalomShlomo 23:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dirty laundry 

message: There is a strong indication that footnotes are to be preferred over inline external links. Why were the footnotes removed? JFW | T@lk 22:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: JFW- That was me. I wasn't aware that footnotes are preferred. I'll change them back. ShalomShlomo 22:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes 

message: "blamed the tragedy... on black Americans for not studying the Torah" This is totally laughable and out of context.Ortho 02:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it a bit. He was most definitely not saying that non-Jews should be studying Torah. That is ridiculous, as anyone who knows anything about Orthodox Judaism would understand. PhatJew 21:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Jamieod, I've reverted your latest edit to the theodicy section. I've tried to modify and explicate the Katrina section further, hopefully it's a little better now. I appreciate you wanting to maintain the rabbi's dignity, etc., but I think we're better off trying to explain what he actually said than inaccurately paraphrasing him. Regards, ShalomShlomo 04:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Katrina 

message: THIS PAGES HAVE A LOT OF LASHON HARA OF RABENU OVADIA, AND MOST OF THE THINGS ARE HERE ARENT TRUE, JUST ARE STUPIDS THINGS. PLEASE, DONT SAY LASHON HARA OF A TZADIK LIKE THIS. HE LOVES THE ASHKEANZIM A LOT, LOVES THE HASSIDIM SO, HE CANT SAID THAT THE HOLY SOULS OF THE SHOA WERE EVILS, THIS ISNT TRUE..PLEASE, YOU BELIVE MORE IN MAARIV/HAARETZ/YEDIOT THAN THE POSKIM? COME ON THE STUPIDS THINGS MUST BE DELETE FOR A BEST WIKIPEDIA. 
Bresolver 13:26, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See the above discussion reg. dirty laundry. You liking a person doesn't invalidate their negative press. If you have information that something is out of context, write it into the article or mention it here so others can try and fix the problem. But if Yosef is in the news because he's said something (or something that was interpreted) as offensive, then, yes, it should be mentioned, particularly, as in Yosef's case, when they are a prominent individual, and their comments will get major reactions. Using you argument, the Pat Robertson and Louis Farakhan pages shouldn't have any quotes or controversy sections, either. Either help with practical solutions or suck it up. Waving the lashon hara flag is unproductive. ShalomShlomo 00:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: YES, I HAVE INFORMATION, THAT RAV OVADIA LOVES ASHEKENAZIM Bresolver 01:19, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Simply saying something doesn't make it so. Feel free to put up some information here on the talk page. Until then I don't see how we can do anything about your concerns. Don't get me wrong; I have no interest in slandering rabbis, but at the same time, it's not like wikipedia's job is to do Eli Yishai's work for him. ShalomShlomo 04:58, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really know about the neutrality of this article... :-/ MiniMary12 17:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: LASHON HARA

message: I already foresee a big discussion starting about this, due to his importance. I say that he is not. As a side note and full OR: it seems that the Shas and Lubavitch attitudes towards the State are completely identical. Both seem to support a "new kind of Zionism" which includes replacing this state with a Torah-based state, which will seek to have a "greater Israel" - but, emphasizing, that this state is not the means through which that goal will be achieved. Thus, both Shas and Lubavitch strongly support the state and oppose land withdrawals - but do not say any prayers for the state.
;Praying for the state?
Initially, he ruled that one should say the tefilah for the medinah. However, soon after, he reversed this ruling. My understanding, based on personal knowledge from friends who are Shasnikim, is that no follower of Rav Yosef says any tefilah for the medinah.
;Land withdrawals
Shas supports land-for-peace arrangements. But only when there is an agreement. Not unilateral, such as last year's disengagement.
See http://meria.idc.ac.il/news/2006/06April10news.html "As a non-Zionist force, Shas does not rule out the possibility of territorial concessions." (=scientific article)
I propose that there should perhaps be a new article specifically on the issue of Sephardic Haredim. --Daniel575 | (talk) 19:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he's not at all. Shas in its entirety isn't. Hardal doesn't mean zionist Haredi, it means haredim involved in the same aspect of religious zionism, i.e right wing map, or even more extreme. Mordechai Eliyahu is the best example to Hardal. Amoruso 22:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I most certainly agree. He doesn't say any prayers for the state and he agrees to land-for-peace arrangements. Hardalim would not consider either of those things (well, some of the extreme-right ones do refuse to pray for the state now - but that has wholly different reasons). However, I am sure some right-wing R-Z will show up here and claim that the Satmar Rebbe was Hardal, let alone they will claim that about Rav Yosef. So I figured I might as well bring up the issue myself. --Daniel575 | (talk) 22:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly... but I don't think Shas is ANTI zionist though since they're so active in politics and everything. that's why I think hardal doesn't deal with zionism that much but more about right wing map zionism. Amoruso 22:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, indeed. See my above comparison of Lubavitch and Shas. They seem to have very identical views. I think Rav Shapiro does also qualify as Hardal. Most, if not all of the "Sanhedrin" (see Modern attempts to revive the Sanhedrin) also qualifies as Hardal. Rav Eliyahu's shul (oops, I mean, beit knesset) is only 300 meters away from my home. I can say that 90% there wear a knitted kippah, colored clothing, and no jacket and hat. He himself does. --Daniel575 | (talk) 22:59, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Rav Ovadia is definitely haredi, not hardal. We tend to associate haredi only with streimel wearing ashkenazim, but white-shirted, black pants sepharadim do not serve in the army, and do not have tv's.--Shuki 23:15, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: As for land withdrawals, the famous 'land for safety' ruling by Rav Ovadia, it was unique to its time and has since been retracted by him as irrelevant. --Shuki 23:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: What is your basis for saying that he would consider peace "agreements"? I had understood that he changed his mind and has ruled out any "peace" deals in principle. Yehoishophot Oliver 15:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is no comparison between Shas and Chabad. Shas betrayed the Jewish people by voting for Oslo, enabling it to pass, and for various other atrocities. They were willing to enter Olmert's mass expulsion coalition.
The Rebbe holds, based on clear sources in Halacha, that we cannot surrender land to non-Jews under any circumstances, both because it endangers Jews and because of the prohibition of surrendering Land in Eretz Yisroel. Obviously, since Jews should follow Torah, the Rebbe holds that the state should be run according to Torah. As for "greater Israel": If we can find a legitimate way of gaining control of more land in Eretz Yisroel, then we should, both because that involves liberating Jewish land, and because the more land we have as a buffer zone, the safer we are. Don't give an inch; every slight concession will be viewed as weakness and increase their desire to pressure and murder Jews G-d forbid. That's the Rebbe's view, light years away from Shas'. Yehoishophot Oliver 15:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rav Ovadia Yosef: Hardal or not?

message: I downgraded the ratings because this is the most lopsided article I've yet to see on Wikipedia. It seems to just love sinking its teeth into every juicy, controversial quote that Rabbi Yosef ever made, and not saying much of anything about his Torah scholarship or why he is considered THE halakhic authority for Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews the world over. Can some of this rabbi-baiting be taken out or moved to a separate article? Yoninah (talk) 21:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree with you that the "rabbi-baiting" stuff should me moved elsewhere. These controversies are intrinsic to Rabbi Yossef's biography. But I do agree that much more weight should be given in this article to his huge outstanding decades-old dedication to Torah, his hatmada (perseverance), his phenomenal memory, the admiration of MANY great Jewish leaders (Ashkenazim and Sefardim) toward him even at a very young age, etc. etc.--Deep Guy (talk) 15:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: What happened to the biography?

message: What do you make of this?   Stonemason89 (talk) 03:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a fan of Obama, or of the United States

message: The complete quote should be added to the article:  "All these evil people should perish from this world ... God should strike them with a plague, them and these Palestinians,"  --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 15:35, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the type of length of quotes which can be inserted. Chesdovi (talk) 17:59, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incomplete Ovadia Yosef quote 

message: There is glaring POV the introductory section of this article. So the POV tag was applied. It should be noted prominently in intro section Yosef's status as 'shas party spiritual leader' and specifically his controversial 'death to Palestinians' 'show no mercy' statements. See here  and here  for a start.Haberstr (talk) 16:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The article already mentions these controversies explicitly under the section "Controversial remarks regarding Arabs and Palestinians". By the way he said that his sermon was misquoted, and clarified that he was referring to annihilation of Arab terrorists and not to all Arab people, so this entire controversy apparently was blown out of proportion by the media. As an encyclopedia we should not give undue weight to media controversies since this is not at all reflective of his career or opinions. In fact according to the article "Yosef has long been a distinguished rabbinical authority advocating peace negotiations in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and has done so since the late 1980s."  Marokwitz (talk) 10:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The only reason he is in the international news is because of his 'death to Palestinians' and similar statements. That should be reflected in the lead paragraph or should at least be the primary topic of the second sentence. It strains credulity to think this was a matter of misinterpretation, it was not an isolated event, and such strong pro-Israel publications, people and entities as the Jerusalem Post, Martin Peretz, the ADL, and the U.S. Dept. of State have condemned his remarks (I believe they would've given him the benefit of the doubt, but they still condemned his remarks).Haberstr (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

text: Here's the Jerusalem Post: "While outlining customs during Rosh Hashana dinner – such as dipping an apple in honey – to petition God for a sweet, successful new year, the nonagenarian halachic authority added a personal prayer: 'May our enemies and hate-mongers vanish, Abu Mazen [PA President Mahmoud Abbas] and all those evildoers be lost from the world, may God smite them with the plague, them and the Palestinians, evildoers and Israel-haters.'" Any reasonable person should have a hard time believing the Jerusalem Post bungled the translation, and and should have a hard time believing the rabbi was really speaking about terrorists (rather than, say, Abu Mazen, who he explicitly names).Haberstr (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently it was indeed a mistranslation, BBC translated the sermon as referring to "Palestinians who persecute Israel". Marokwitz (talk) 09:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: However the translation is nuanced, the remarks in any of their varying forms were virtually universally condemned.Haberstr (talk) 15:23, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

text: So? It's already detailed in the article. This is not a reason to detail this controversy in the lead. The lead should summarize the most important aspects of this person's career. For a person highly active since 1924, giving undue importance to this controversy which is entirely based on dubious quotations of a single sentence, and clearly according to him does not represent his views, is clear case of WP:RECENTISM.  I have no objection to having a sentence saying that he made controversial remarks during his career, but emphasizing media controversies and gossip rather than more serious parts of his career only because they are recent is non encyclopedic. By the way, on a personal note I have no special sympathy for Yosef and reject his views on almost every topic. However I believe that in an encyclopedia we need to accurately emphasize the most important aspects his career and properly recognize controversies that the press is blowing out of proportion in order to sell more newspapers. Marokwitz (talk) 16:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there important aspects to his career? Apart from insulting everyone who didn't follow his particular strand of fundamentalism what did he ever do? Make important rulings about how much hair women are allowed to show?--FergusM1970Let's play Freckles 22:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if you pull your eyes away from "controversies" section and read the rest of the article. It notes his efforts for peace, his work on reducing the burden of religious observance, promoting equality in Jewish society and uspport of suppressed Jewish populations. I'm pretty sure there were a few dozen more, but I only read the full article twice. Dovid (talk) 07:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

text: Haaretz's US correspondent reports on the ADL's condemnation of Yosef's remarks in this article.        ←   ZScarpia   20:33, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Written as advertisement for Ovadia Yosef 

message: Yosef's place of birth has been deleted from the Lead section using MOS:BIO#Opening_paragraph and  MOS:Dates and Numbers as an argument: Places of birth do not belong in the lifespan brackets per MOS:BIO#Opening_paragraph. I think that the argument is invalid. Nothing in the rules prescribes that the place of birth cannot be mentioned in the date brackets or in the Lead. The  MOS:Dates and Numbers is concerned only with how birth and death dates should appear, not with legislating about what information can appear. Under Context, MOS:BIO#Opening_paragraph says that, in most modern-day cases, specifying the location, nationality, or ethnicity of the subject will mean listing the country of which the person is a citizen or national. Note that it says most, not all. Presumably, most people are nationals of the country where they were born, so mentioning the place of birth is superfluous. Since the Manual of Style does go on to say, birth and death places should be mentioned in the body if known, and in the lead if they are relevant to the person's notability, you could argue that Yosef's place of birth shouldn't be mentioned in the Lead because it has nothing to do with his notabilitiy, but, presumably, other editors could use the counter-argument that Yosef's status as an immigrant is important enough to keep it there. I suspect that you'll find that the articles on many notable people who have immigrated to the U.S., say, will mention in the Lead that they are immigrants.         ←   ZScarpia   09:39, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have really any problem mentioning his place of birth in the lead (although I don't particularly find much value in doing so), but I don't see why it's being mentioned in the lifespan brackets instead of as part of the prose. It used to be the case that the MOS had prescriptions against it at WP:DATE, but those were removed over a year ago. Based on the discussion, my understanding is that it was not removed based on consensus against it, but on the fact that it shouldn't be a part of WP:DATE. WP:MOSBIO, however, still links to the place where it used to be, and none of the examples include a POB or POD within the brackets. It may be a discussion worth bringing up on the talk page to clarify/create consensus, however, unless you know of somewhere where this has already been discussed? Canadian Paul 06:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved mention of Yosef's place of birth into the prose.       ←   ZScarpia   14:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[MOS:BIO#Opening_paragraph]] -- Place of Birth 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:21, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: According to the official Rabbanut website: http://www.rabanut.gov.il/show_item.asp?itemId=105&levelId=61624&itemType=0
Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef was born in תרע"ח) 1918) not in 1920.
I have also seen his date listed as תרע"ח in the book שמן ששון מחברך by Rabbi Shalom Dov Wolpo.
Can this be updated?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Levikleh (talk • contribs) 21:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yoninah (talk) 22:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I just found this interview] with Ovadia Yosef in 1972 in which he states explicitly that he was born in 1920. I'm inclined to look at the Rabbanut website year as a typo. Yoninah (talk) 21:19, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth date 

message: Except for one paragraph on a 2005 assassination attempt, and then an undated section on his 'later years', the biography stops at 1973. Before the rise of the Shas party, which he founded, his and the party's movement to the right, and so on.Haberstr (talk) 15:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, I added a small section about the Shas partyHavradim (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 10:54, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The biography basically stops at 1973 

message: Incredible. The Shas Party -- its power in the Knesset, his king-making and the concessions he gained -- was the vehicle through which he had such a profound impact on Israeli society.Haberstr (talk) 11:44, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nothing on his founding of Shas as a national party 

message: In my humble opinion, Yosef as a phenomenon could be summarized as a third or more religious, a third political, and a third (or less) 'controversial statements'. Remembering that 'controversial statements' sections are bad Wikipedia form, it would be nice to reorganize this article with that sensibility. I suggest organizing basically by decades, but modified by making his decade as chief rabbi one section, and the very significant 1984 founding of Shas another section. The controversial statements should be subsections of the decades that they were a part of. His major religious law rulings should also be subsections of decades. Major elections where he (and Shas) played a 'kingmaking' role should be subsections. Well, that's my dream, people. I will take action on it when I get out from underneath RL obligations. However, if someone else wants to beat me to it, go right ahead! This is very challenging, and has to be a team effort. The article in fact needs more detail on his religious importance and most important rulings, for example, and I am not familiar with best sources for that but some talk page readers are.Haberstr (talk) 06:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: What you are really proposing is an outline. My suggestion would be to format it as such, get some agreement to that, and start chopping up the article content to fit into the headings. While that's in progress, it probably needs to be tagged as undergoing major rework, so other editors are aware they may lose their edits. FYI, I wasn't comfortable with your lede reversion. If you like, we can discuss separately. Dovid (talk) 15:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The lead section is becoming more balanced, now let's move on to article 

message: Your explanation for your two recent edits does not adequately explain them. You gave reasons that material was not sourced, and that it seemed like an editor was taking sides. I don't see how that is borne out. In one case, there was a short introductory paragraph for material that was adequately sources. The introduction did not introduce any material that was not in the text that followed, so it is sourced by that material. Article openers are not supposed to be sourced, so long as they are supported by the article itself (which must be adequately sourced). The same applies here, where the introduction is to a section. If you believe otherwise, fix it by referring to the same sources instead of just deleting material.
The other claim was that we should "stick with the quotes," i.e., literally quote the sources. That goes well beyond the requirements of Wikipedia. So long as the text is supported by the article, it isn't original research.
Finally, you mention "taking sides." I believe you were referring to the statement about "clarification." I don't see how that can be construed as violating WP:NPOV. The statement was a clarification, whether you believe it to be a contrived clarification or a legitimate one.
Dovid (talk) 19:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent reverts 

message: This link:
Oster, Marcy (18 October 2010). "Sephardi leader Yosef: Non-Jews exist to serve Jews". Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
http://jta.org/news/article/2010/10/18/2741341/rabbi-yosef-non-jews-exist-to-serve-jews
...is dead. 98.247.126.245 (talk) 20:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference Link Dead 

message: Seriously, can i remove or at least edit this? It's biased, a bunch of it isn't relevant, and there's not supposed to be controversy sections on people, i was told.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.54.17.147 (talk) 19:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ovadia Yosef. 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:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nrg.co.il/online/11/ART1/624/630.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ovadia Yosef. 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/20160201115438/http://www.yctorah.org/content/view/211/10/ to http://www.yctorah.org/content/view/211/10/
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) 02:15, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on Ovadia Yosef. 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/20110713124441/http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1239710806422&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1239710806422&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130501130740/http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/10/18/2741341/rabbi-yosef-non-jews-exist-to-serve-jews to http://jta.org/news/article/2010/10/18/2741341/rabbi-yosef-non-jews-exist-to-serve-jews
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130216050042/http://www.hamodia.com/inthepaper.cfm?ArticleID=103 to http://www.hamodia.com/inthepaper.cfm?ArticleID=103
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040830235835/http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=90197&displayTypeCd=1&sideCd=1&contrassID=2 to http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=90197&displayTypeCd=1&sideCd=1&contrassID=2
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091225052332/http://www.jafi.org.il/education/actual/conflict/disengagement/5.html to http://www.jafi.org.il/education/actual/conflict/disengagement/5.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080807173718/http://www.fmep.org/analysis/articles/planning_for_jerusalem_in_a_changing_political_world.html to http://www.fmep.org/analysis/articles/planning_for_jerusalem_in_a_changing_political_world.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927200045/http://www.fmep.org/reports/vol13/no3/05-settlement_timeline.html to http://www.fmep.org/reports/vol13/no3/05-settlement_timeline.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130501130740/http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/10/18/2741341/rabbi-yosef-non-jews-exist-to-serve-jews to http://jta.org/news/article/2010/10/18/2741341/rabbi-yosef-non-jews-exist-to-serve-jews
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150225064205/http://www.isefer.com/SearchAction.asp?extra=mrn&SearchType=Author&term=Ovadia to http://www.isefer.com/SearchAction.asp?extra=mrn&SearchType=Author&term=Ovadia
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304001239/http://www.yctorah.org/component/option%2Ccom_docman/task%2Cdoc_download/gid%2C303/ to http://www.yctorah.org/component/option%2Ccom_docman/task%2Cdoc_download/gid%2C303/
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) 00:00, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a problem with listing the birth name for Ovadia Yosef as "Abdullah Youssef", as we do in the infobox, because "Youssef" (or "Yosef") was not his name at birth. The family surname was "Ovadia" - presumably in Arabic "Abdullah". Unfortunately, changing the birth name to "Abdullah Abdullah" also doesn't make sense, as we point out in the early life section that the family only adopted the surname in Palestine, when Yosef was at least 4 years old.
So the question is, what was his surname at birth? On the Hebrew wikipedia, this reference points out that that most Iraq Jews used their father's name as a surname (e.g. Ovadia Yosef's father would have been Yaakov Ovadia).https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%91%D7%93%D7%99%D7%94_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A3#cite_note-3 It seems to me that the only coherent option to have as a birth name would be Ovadia Yosef Yaakov, or Ovadia Yaakov ("Abdullah Ya'aqub"). But given we don't actually have a source that ever refers to him that way, that seems like WP:OR. So what I'd like to do is remove the name from the infobox, unless there's a source that specifically addresses his name at birth. Samuelshraga (talk) 08:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth name