User talk:Eliyak/Archive 2

Biblical patriarchs

The article you created, Biblical patriarchs, had little or no content. Therefore, I nominated it for immediate deletion. Just a heads up. -ENIAC (Talk) (Current Projects) 16:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought I was making a category, actually. I changed it into a perfectly useful redirect. --Eliyak T·C 16:31, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Instant messaging

Do you use AIM or MSN? I'd like to talk to you regarding the Open Mishnah Project on WikiSource. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 18:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew calendar

Great edit. Fancy adding info about Jose ben Halafta there and to some epoch-related articles? I had a hard time tracking him down. --Dweller 10:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Re. Midian reverts with VP

For some reason, two of your three reverts to Midian left several sections missing. While they did revert previous edits, the most recent (blanking) edit was retained. --Eliyak T·C 15:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing and fixing. This probably occurred because the vandal I was reverting made a second edit (removing that content) at the same time I was reverting his first edit (at 23:52). This sometimes causes VP to revert only the first vandalism, while the 2nd one goes unnoticed. Quite a hassle, I'm glad you spotted this. Thank you.--Húsönd 16:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Jewish Holidays and "Hanukkah menorah"

A menorah is specifically a SEVEN-branched candelabrum, like that used in the Beit HaMikdash. Only in the modern US is the chanukkiyah incorrectly called a menorah. (A chanukkiyah has 9 branches, or in alternate, non-traditional forms, eight holders on a level, and one set apart.) --DrGaellon 18:40, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Template:CompactTOC7

I would just like to let you know, your template has the exact same name as a template that was deleted on August 23. They're completely different, but since one of the speedy deletion criteria is the recreation of deleted content, it is possible that an admin could come along and delete the template, thinking it was the one deleted back in August. I'm not strictly saying that the template needs to be renamed, it just may be a wise decision to name it otherwise. If you have any questions or comments regarding this, just come over and comment on my talk page.

"Hooray" came from the Crusaders

Hi Eliyak: Congratulations on your work. You may want to find an alternative for the word "Hooray." See the article on the Aish HaTorah site: ...(Incidentally, the Crusader cry of "Hep! Hep!" originated at this time. It was an acronym for the Latin of "Jerusalem Has Fallen." With time it became "Hip, Hip, Hooray!" -- a cheer that Jews never use.). If you do some simple Googling for information about "Hip hip hooray" the above sems to be known. See just a few examples: [Note: The Crusaders’ cry of "Hep! Hep!" originated at this time. It was an acronym for the Latin of "Jerusalem Has Fallen." Eventually it became know as "Hip, Hip, Hooray!" ― a cheer that Jews never use. (SONGS OF DEATH TO JEWS); [http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0204a&L=ads-l&P=2479 ..."HEP" pronounced "hep", an anti-Semitic slogan or rallying-cry, supposedly = "Hierosolyma est perdita" = "Jerusalem is lost"....]; 'Hip! Hip! Hooray', derives from the initials of the Latin hiersolyma est perdia which means 'Jerusalem is destroyed' (More Weird Phrases.) So please rethink your use of the term "Hooray." Be well, and Chag Sameach. 10:20, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I think there may be a distinction between "hip, hip, etc." and simply "hooray." I'm going to leave it as is. --Eliyak T·C 23:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request

This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I may have found your page based on your contributions or your link repair user box on your user page. If you are not a member, please consider including your name on the project page. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 22:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

History merges of Sukkah etc.

Sorry but I might be confused about the request. What's supposed to be where? Do you want a dablink to Sukkah (talmud) at Sukkot, while having Sukkah redirect to Sukkot? And is Sukkah (tractate) useful as a redirect to something? And the history of Sukkah should be at Sukkah (talmud)? I just want to be sure before merging histories since separating them afterwards is pretty messy. - Bobet 16:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok thanks, it's fixed. - Bobet 17:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Category vote

Hi Eliyak: Please provide your view at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 October 10#Category:Saintly person tombs in Israel. Good Mo'ed. Thank you. IZAK 04:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Vote to delete Medzhibozh (Hasidic dynasty)

I have written the following to the nominator:

Meshulam: You should avoid this kind of move (the hasty nomination to delete Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medzhibozh (Hasidic dynasty)) because it's a slippery slope and could lead to the nomination for and deletion of similar articles about smaller Hasidic dynasties - by people who are not experts and don't care - with unintended consequences. Votes to delete are open to the world and you are inviting people who have no idea what this topic is about at all to cast a vote, which is very unfair and lacking insight. It seems that you may have been better off trying to add a {{merge to}} template or considered MERGING the material at some point perhaps and WAITED (at least a month!) to do so. You should also have first started a discussion at a number of places where people who know something about this topic could have given their intelligent input, such as at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism and Wikipedia talk:Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week. Or you could have contacted other editors who deal with topics like this to solicit their views. This action of your is extreme and I do not condone it. I urge you to withdraw this nomination. Thank you. (I am cross-posting this message on a couple of relevant places, to get people's attention.) IZAK 10:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Delete Medzhibozh? I can't even pronounce it! PiCo 06:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The Seven Worlds, is it Kabbalah?

Please review the The Seven Worlds article. What is fact and waht is fiction? Anyone know? IZAK 11:46, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Temple Mount - recent events

Could you just give the reason why it was deleted? Thanks! Chesdovi 11:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/The Seven Worlds

Hi Eliyak: What do you make of this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Seven Worlds 2? Thanks. IZAK 09:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Stop! RE: Categories of Jewish history

Hi Eliyak: You are moving too quickly with all your moves to reorganize categories and therefore you are making errors. For example, you moved all the articles about "Jewish history of______" into Category:Jewish history when they should have been left in in Category:Jewish history by country because both sub-categories and articles about Jewish history in countries go into the sub-category of Category:Jewish history by country --> which then becomes a sub-category of Category:Jewish history. Therefore please take out those articles that deal with the Jewish history of those countries from Category:Jewish history that you moved there and put them back into Category:Jewish history by country. Thanks. I am also reviewing some of your other moves. Again, I urge you to slow down and to think carefully before making your changes. Many of these categories have had years of planning and editing put into them and you must not act hastily! I await your response. Thanks. IZAK 10:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

LoPbN Entry

Looking at yr recent List of people by name: Hen work, i continue to like what you've been doing with {{LoPbN Entry}}; not sure if the optional piping is new or if i just was too cursory in looking before. You might like to look at {{List of people sequence Oh}} (What lks there); i can imagine integrating the {{Inv-prfx}} functionality into {{LoPbN Entry}}, tho it's low-priority for me compared to LoPbN tasks like getting rid of the few remaining non-bio lks, completing the addition of the "Access to rest of list" sections, maintaining stylistic consistency, and perhaps aggressively participating in adding entries from Category:Living people (and probably fixing unpiped names first). Hope you'll not be too discouraged by my distraction from your good work/ideas.
--Jerzy•t 04:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Simchat Torah

Hello, Vayikrah simply means proclaim or declare. Adding "for merit" is really an interpretation, not a translation. Why slip in an interpretation that's completely peripheral to the article. In any event, interpretations need a source, parenthetical interpretations "slipped in" without sourcing aren't consistent with WP:RS. Best, --Shirahadasha 02:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. I'll take it out. I only put it in because I was trying for a more exact translation, and I though it would sound odd without the explanation. --Eliyak T·C 03:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Cadet Branch of the Tribe of Judah

The technical term in this sense would probably be a cadet tribe of the Tribe of Judah, but that term is both awkward and inappropriate. In a sense, no term really works for this concept, but the House of David is a part of the Tribe of Judah traditionally, and the family always claimed such a descent in the various books in which kings were mentioned. If you have a better method of noting the master branch of any tribe, I'd love to hear it and consider it for revision. I was following protocol with the cadet branch title, but it may not be appropriate as well.
–Whaleyland ( Talk • Contributions ) 19:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

daf yomi stub

Hello Eliyak - I noticed that you replaced the stub tag on the daf yomi tag. I don't mind that, and if you look at the hebrew version you'll see that there is definitely a lot more to be said, but I was wondering if there is a wiki guideline on what constitutes a "stub" versus "an article which is fairly complete, but could use more info." Thanks - Eykanal 15:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Page

Hi Eliyak, I appreciate your message informing me about the possible deletion. I've read through the discussion. It seems both sides want more information about his research, including practicality. I'll work on adding some information this next week. Please let me know if there is anything particular that you would like me to do. Thanks. Oravec 15:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC) P.S. If you get a chance to read any of his articles, I think you'll be impressed.

Oravec- In the past, individuals have abused Wikipedia by creating autobiographies in order to puff themselves up ... --Eliyak T·C 01:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Eliyak- Thank you for your concern. I can understand where you are coming from.

I've been a reader of wikipedia for quite some time. The reason why I created an account was because I was amazed that no one had created the topics yet. Earlier, I thought by creating Larmore's site and links to the research topics that they would be filled in magically. Since your post, I've realized I needed to take a more active approach. I've actively work on updating information today. I am sure if you read through the information, that you'll find good content there. If you have any suggestions on how I can improve the content, I would greatly appreciate it. Oravec 03:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia works best when users sharing a common interest work together to flesh out topics. I see you've joined the Computer Science WikiProject. If this is an important topic, you might want to bring it up at that WikiProject's talk page as an area/article that needs work. Also, many WikiProjects have an "article of the week" or similar activities for under-attended articles. WikiProject Computer Science may have something along those lines. --Eliyak T·C 04:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll see what I can do :) Oravec 05:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Use Sprotect for vandalism

You could use this to protect the page against anonymous edits, if the vandalism is a problem: {{sprotect}}, and then remove it when it calms down. You might have to keep it on for some time. Ali Sina has the same problem.--Matt57 05:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Eliyak T·C 05:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Sabbatai Zevi

_ _ I'm reversing your addition on LoPbN of "controversial" re Sabbatai Zevi for three reasons:

1. Lo-res trmnlgy: "controversial" does not aid navigation to bios
2. NPoV: "controversial", on LoPbN where there's no room for nuancing its use, has the effect of WP:weasel words
3. Ambiguity. All relgious leaders are controversial, since at least 66% of the world considers them misguided in devoting themselves so heavily to ideas that the 66% or more don't find anywhere near that compelling. Yeah, i get it that you mean "within Judaism", but again, there's no room on LoPbN for clarification.

_ _ As to Lo-res, i actually would think "religious leader -- Messiah claimant" or something close would be good, if and when another Sabbatai Zevi shows up. (Well, assuming the other is Jewish; if it were a hypothetical cleric Sabbatai Zevi (Ba'hai), then "religious leader -- Jewish" for this one would be in order instead.)
_ _ As to NPoV, you might be seen as trying to disown or discredit him, and have that effect. The view you describe in your summary is obviously an important one, needing description (probably including at least one word beginning "controvers...") in the bio and surely elsewhere, but not on LoPbN.
_ _ (I do have to confess to using "fringe religious leader" occasionally on LoPbN, and i've been implicitly criticized for it at least once. I think i'd be unfair not to clarify my distinction. IMO, some religious leaders are notable bcz of the significance of their respective roles in religions that are notable, usually for size and longevity. (IMO Judaism is instead notable for longevity and a myriad of kinds of outside influence; Zoroastrianism, Shakers, Quakers, and Anabaptists are lesser examples of that phenomenon. But Shaitan (diety) (not evil, but worshipped in darkness, apparently for millenia in the Middle East) will probably stay red, despite a probable role in the naming of Satan and Shaitan.) Others, whom i call "fringe ..." are notable, despite their followers not having been numerous for multiple generations, bcz of factors sometimes associated with stigmatization as cultic: criminal acts (beyond offenses created to suppress them) -- Aum Shinrikyo and Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints are examples) -- or attracting celebrities and chronic "seekers" -- G. I. Gurdjieff and Scientology are probably examples. Obviously this also has some tendancy to stigmatize, but i haven't figured out how to make the distinction without that tendancy. Of course, the distinction i'm trying to make may in fact not be worth that effect.)
--Jerzy•t 19:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

SEVEN

Hello, my name is Celia.

I´d like to invite you to see number seven´s features in this page, brazilian Wiki: lots of things you would be delighted to find out.

Best Celia, São Paulo, Brasil

Link: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocorr%C3%AAncias_do_N%C3%BAmero_Sete

Help with new Halakha subject article

Hi Eliyak Shavua Tov: I have been asked by a new user "...what are your thoughts on heter iska? i would like to wikify it, what are the guidlines on halochos!? are they in the correct categories etc? thanks Chavatshimshon 04:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)" Could you please look at the Heter iska article and see how it can be improved. Thanks a lot. IZAK 07:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Noahide

Hi, please join in the discussion on the Noahide Laws talk page about cleaning it up etc. Thanks! Chavatshimshon 08:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Palestinian rabbis

What does one make of the new Category:Palestinian rabbis and Category:Talmud rabbis in Palestine, should they be renamed to something like Category:Rabbis of ancient Palestine? so that it does not connect, and become confused with, the way the word "Palestinian" is used today (meaning the very unJewish modern Arab Palestinians, who have nothing to do with these rabbis!) Thanks. IZAK 09:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

• Hi: I have created a solution: See Category:Rabbis of the Land of Israel and Category:Talmud rabbis of the Land of Israel. Thank you. IZAK 13:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Not using "Palestine" or "Palestinian" for Talmud and rabbis to avoid confusion

Note: Many articles about the rabbis of the Talmud and Mishnah are derived from the archaic Jewish Encyclopedia, published between 1901-1906, over one hundred years ago (when the Middle East was still under the thumb of the Ottoman Turks) and which used the archaic expressions "Palestine" when referring to the Land of Israel, and to the Jews living in the areas of the historical Land of Israel as "Palestinians." This is a big mistake that requires constant attention and correction, especially when copying and editing articles from the Jewish Encyclopedia or from similarly archaic sources such as Easton's Bible Dictionary (1897). At this time, no-one uses the term/s "Palestinian/s" (in relation to anything associated with Jews or the land they lived in and which they regarded as their homeland) nor by any type of conventional Jewish scholarship, particularly at the present time when the label "Palestinian" is almost entirely identified with the Palestinian Arabs who are mostly Muslims. Finally, kindly take note that the name Palestinian Talmud is also not used and it redirects to the conventional term Jerusalem Talmud used in Jewish scholarship. Thank you. IZAK 13:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Not using "Palestine" or "Palestinian" for Talmud and rabbis

Makes sense, I'll try to remember. However, there was a period when everyone referred to the land of Israel as Palestine. Therefore, to say something like "in 1940 Shlomo Pines emigrated to Israel" would appear to be an anachronism. Don't we have to use the term "Palestine" during a certain period for historical accuracy? What is this period? From Roman conquest until 1948? Thanks. Dfass 15:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Dfass: Note: The term "Land of Israel" is an old one of Biblical origin, whereas the name "Palestine" is considered offensive by many Jews because it was coined by the Romans after they crushed the Jews of Judea-- and needless to say today it refers exclusively to the Arab Palestinians and never to Jews. Note also that the "Land of Israel" article is not the same as the "Israel" article because the latter refers to the modern post-1948 Jewish state. My main concern was about rabbis from the Mishnaic and Talmudic eras, up until about a hundred years ago being called "Palestinians" on Wikipedia as a follow-through from the many articles that have been copied and pasted from the old Jewish Encyclopedia and which collectively create the wrong impression. Such are the hazards of relying on dated information, long-discarded terminology, and unsuitable writing and communication styles. Wikipedia as a modern encyclopedia should not be relying on archaic terms such as "Palestinian rabbis" that could potentially cause grave misunderstanding. I think that from the time of the British Mandate of Palestine, also shortened to "the British Mandate" and sometimes "Palestine," that Jews were associated with those terms from 1923 until 1948 when the modern State of Israel was declared. I hope that you have noted that I am most definitely NOT saying that whenever the Jewish Encyclopedia uses the term "Palestine" that the single word "Israel" should be used -- obviously I do not mean that because when Israel is used alone on Wikipedia it refers to the MODERN State of Israel only. On the other hand, what I am saying is that when the word "Palestine" is used in archaic sources that predate modern Israel, and when writing about Judaic topics that relate to the Middle Ages, Talmudic, or Biblical times, then the better, more accurate, less controversial term for Wikipedia to use is "Land of Israel" which is historically what the Jewish people, and everyone else in academic life, have and do still call it. Hope I have clarified myself, and thanks for caring. IZAK 12:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  • OK, I think I get the drift. I will pay attention to it in the future. (Don't be so down on the Jewish Encyclopedia though! It's an incredible work, written by some tremendous scholars. I think these articles significantly raise the quality of Wikipedia, whether their English is somewhat archaic or not. If you compare a JE-borrowed Wikipedia article to one written by "the masses," you can't but be struck by the difference in quality and scholarship. The typical Jewish Wikipedian (myself included) is not capable of producing articles of anything like that caliber. Most Wikipedians cannot even be bothered to cite the sources for the couple of factoids they manage to dredge up from their memory of 10th grade.) Thanks again for the clarification. Dfass 15:16, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Hi Dfass: I am not down on the old Jewish Encyclopedia at all, and I fully agree with you that it is a more than masterly work of scholarship. But is was written in the context of the culture of over a hundred years ago as a product of the nineteenth century! My specific concern at this stage was only about how the meaning and application of the word/s "Palestine" and "Palestinian" are getting "lost in the cut-and-paste process" because one hundred years ago, "Palestinian" was used as an academic adjective as for example, together with "rabbis" ("Palestinian rabbi/s") or the Talmud ("Palestinian Talmud"). Up until 1948 the words "Palestine" and "Palestinians" still had application/s to Jews because of the existaence of the British Mandate of Palestine until 1948 in the territories of historically Jewish Land of Israel. Since then, the name "Palestine" and "Palestinians" has shed any connection to Jews and the modern Jewish State of Israel which was set up in contradistinction to an Arab Palestine. Particularly since the rise of the PLO (the Palestine Liberation Organization), following the 1967 Six-Day War, the term and notion of "Palestine" and "Palestinians" has become thoroughly and exclusively connected with the Arab Palestinians to the point that no-one (not in politics, academics, the media, religion, etc) associates the name "Palestine" and "Palestinians" with the Jews or Judaism, so that it can safely be said that the notion of a "Palestinian Jew" is an archaic anachronistic discarded notion. So when cutting and pasting articles from the one hundred year old Jewish Encyclopedia, one should not fall into a "time warp trap" by blindly pasting articles from it without some sensible updates, and not to inadvertantly recreate and foster terminology for Jews and Jewish Israelis that neither they nor the world accepts or recognizes. One needs to be conscious that the term "Land of Israel" is a well-established name that has survived for a long time and is still the preferred term of choice when speaking in modern terms, so that Jews not be confused with Arabs and vice versa. By speaking of the Category:Rabbis of the Land of Israel, meaning rabbis (or any Jews) associated with a historic geographic area, one also avoids problems such as calling pre-1948 rabbis or people "Israelites" -- used only for people in the Biblical era or "Israelis" -- which refers to citizens of the modern State of Israel. Thanks for your input. IZAK 07:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion

Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion FYI: Hi Tomer! A Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion has asserted itself in the Korban article. The project indicates that it is an umbrella project for all of religion and that the current religion projects are subprojects of it, yet its member directory lists only six members. Where is the project coming from? Is it a broadbased project, a very small group with a very big reach, or what? If you know some background or some of its people, would be much appreciated. Best, --Shirahadasha 03:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Shira: I noticed this comment. Their assertion is outrageous and false and should be rejected and disputed to the full. There is no "supreme council of religion" on Wikipedia and there never will be. Each religion has its experts and contributors on Wikipedia and none of them will ever tolerate interference from outside busy-bodies. Judging by their user pages, the members of this "religion" project are obviously coming from a Christian POV and seems they now wish to "double dip," pretty funny actually. See my notice on that page, below. Thanks, and may the Lights of Chanukah dispel all ignorance and darkness. IZAK 10:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

NOTICE and OBJECTIONS to WikiProject Religion vs. Judaism

Hi: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Judaism. Thanks, IZAK 10:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

NOTICE and OBJECTIONS:

1. No-one has the right to take upon themselves to be the controlling "project" for every religion on Earth!
2. Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism has been, and shall remain an independent project and will not accept interference in its work based on the assertion that editors not familiar with Judaism's traditions have a self-appointed "right" to interfere with Judaism-related articles by mere dint of being members of a "religion" project.
3. So far, as of 12/21/06 the mere six members of this project, are mostly Christian, (as self-described on their user pages) and raises the question, why don't they do their work in Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity (81 members as of 12/21/06)? How can a project with six members "pass judgment" on other projects with one hundred and twenty four members?
4. What will members of other projects, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam (64 members as of 12/21/06) think and react when "religion project" editors will advise what's best for Islam-related articles or not?
5. Note: Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism adheres to WP:NPOV and is one of the oldest Wikipedia projects with over one hundred and twenty members (as of 12/21/06), a number of whom are respected sysops as well, highly knowledgeable about many matters relating to Category:Jews and Judaism.
6. It would not be advisable for anyone to interfere with Judaism-related articles or Hebrew Bible-related topics that ignores the broad based consensus and general agreement that exists between Jewishly-oriented editors of Judaic articles, many of which touch upon Jews because being Jewish includes being both a part of Judaism as well as being part of an ethnicity, and a project on "religion" alone cannot and does not have the scope to touch upon issues that effects not just Jews and Judaism, but also Israel and Jewish history, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history (with 33 members as of 12/21/06) and a broad range of related issues and projects, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish culture (19 members as of 12/21/06) and Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel (23 members as of 12/21/06).
7. Finally, Wikipedia is not the forum to create a de facto neo-"ecumenical project" which is only bound to cause confusion and resentment and will result in confusion and chaos and inevitabley violate Wikipedia:No original research; Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought; and Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms.

Thank you for taking this matter seriously. IZAK 09:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Response to NOTICE and OBJECTIONS to WikiProject Religion vs. Judaism

Hi Eliyak: It is very important that you see the points and the response from User:Badbilltucker about his aims at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#NOTICE and OBJECTIONS to WikiProject Religion vs. Judaism ASAP. Have a Happy Chanukah! IZAK 15:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

New AfD on LoPbN

Your work on {{LoPbN Entry}} suggests you'd support retention of the LoPbN tree. At this moment, vote is 10D to 7K on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people by name (2nd nomination). I would appreciate your weighing in. Thanks in any case, and happy holidays
--Jerzy•t 16:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Rabbis are religious leaders

Hi Eliyak: Thanks for contacting me. See my response at User talk:IZAK#Rabbis/Clergy. IZAK 21:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

This month vs. "Iyar"

The addition of "This Month in Jewish History" is something that I started for the months of Tishrei to Nissan and started Iyar and working on finishing for all the months of the year as you can see on the page that I'm using to keep track. I think that having it as "This Month in Jewish History" is a title and assumed that the reader knows that it is for Iyar as it says right below it 1 Iyar etc. etc. So I don't think that change needs to be done, in my opinion.

Any suggestions on how I can do a better job would be greatly appreciated. Also, if there is any other place that I can be of assistance, please let me know. Bachur 03:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

What to truly call rabbis

Hi Eliyak: See my latest response at User talk:IZAK#Rabbis/Clergy. Thanks, IZAK 04:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Jewish-American businesspeople

I noticed that the Category you helped develop, "Jewish-American businesspeople", is likely headed for deletion. I understand that categories like this take quite some time to develop and flesh out, yet this particular one appears to be unwelcome at Wikipedia, unless I'm misunderstanding the argument. I hope that you will continue your work here at Wikipedia. However, just so you know, there are also other wikis out there that might very well welcome such a Category project as yours. You might start by looking at Wikia.com, Centiare.com, or PBwiki.com. If you feel that this message is too spammy, you are welcome to delete it from your discussion page. --JossBuckle Swami 13:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

You might want to vote and try to save a category that you created

A creation of yours, Category:Jewish businesspeople (a subcategory of Category:Jews by occupation), has been nominated for deletion (i.e., 'flagged by the censors'), and it looks like it is soon headed for the trash bin unless more than a few votes are gained. Just thought that you might want to vote on it since you are the person that originally created the category. --Wassermann 08:47, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. --Eliyak T·C 01:44, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Category additions

Hi Eliyak, if you could double check before adding cities to the settlement category, that would be great. I noticed that you added B'nei Brak and another city that are not settlements by any definition. Please be careful on those additions.

Also, you might be interested in a project that I am working on now. I noticed your userboxes, and figured you might help with http://www.WikiTalmud.com, a new website I created with a goal of building up a Jewish text base online with the ability to discuss issues on the talk pages. --יהושועEric 00:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Eliyak was 100% correct. Towns and cities are most certainly examples of settlements, in the English definition of the word. However, to avoid possible confusion, I have broken up the Category:Religious settlements in Israel into cities, towns and villages.--Redaktor 06:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Tanakh templates

Shavua Tov. Why did you "black out" the links? Now there is no link when the template is transcluded, and it looked just fine before. Please revert? Dovi 18:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

"Jewish descent" versus Jew

See the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism#"Jewish descent" versus Jew concerning the problems of using the term "Jewish descent" versus "Jew" as well as the related proposal. Thank you, IZAK 10:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Erotic or not?

Please see my comment on your edit at Category:Pederastic art. Haiduc 03:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

People denoted solely by the title of rabbi

Eliyak -- Greetings. I really like the material you've put together on this article and think you/others could add more and other related findings. Still, I guess I'm a mergist [1] and I'd like to ask if you would just put this as a section in the article on rabbis? This would make it easier, too, for items that are related put don't quite fit (e.g., rabbis known solely by their first name, like Reb Moshe). Kol tuv, HG 20:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

fixed category. why are we being British?

Eliyak, what did you mean by that question?--Redaktor 21:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Megillah disambiguation page

Hi. I saw that you redirected megillah to the Book of Esther. You are quite right of course in making that the primary meaning (and it was rather dumb of me not to realize it, sorry).

What do you think, however, of setting up a disambiguation page (towards which the various spelling of "megillah" would point) and which would point to all the meanings:

• Book of Esther
• "Scroll" in general
• Tractate Megillah
• Five megillot

Any more meanings can be added. Dovi 10:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Butting in, this looks like an excellent idea. --Dweller 10:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

It seems like it could be useful, so since WP:NOTPAPER, I'll go ahead and do it. --Eliyak T·C 19:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I would think that the various spellings of megillah should point to Scroll of Esther, and that Megillah (disambiguation) would be accessed only through a link at the top of that page and possibly at the top of Five megillot. --Eliyak T·C 19:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Israelis--Jewish, etc.

Hi. I noticed in a recent change that you made you pointed out that most Israelis are Jewish, which is of course accurate. But it reminded me of an issue that I ran into, so I thought I would mention the issue here, for your thoughts and those of others.

I at one point sought to refer to an Israeli as Jewish as well. Cannot recall whether this was in his bio or, more likely now that I think of it, a category of Jewish Israelis (parallel to existing categories of Jews hailing from other countries.

I ran into a staunch Israeli deletionist whose only argument was, "most Israelis are Jewish (your point), and here in Israel we don't mention that someone is Jewish since that is the norm. But only of they are non-Jewish.

My general reaction is that a) what's the harm, and b) doesn't it assist people, and c) isn't it consistent to allow such a category.

But I would be happy to hear others' views. Epeefleche 22:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

To tell the truth, I agree with that person you ran into. I hope I'm not espousing contradictory viewpoints... I think that since Israelis are (more or less) a subset of Jews, categorizing someone as "Israeli" automatically implies that they are Jewish (unless we're talking about Israeli Imams or something...). By the same token, the Israeli categories can be placed in the appropriate Jewish ones. The situation seems similar to, say, Iraq, where 75-80% of the population is Arab. A Category:Iraqi Arabs would be redundant, but Category:Iraqi Kurds could be useful. And, of course, Category:Iraqi people can be found in Category:Arab people.

These type of subcategories are only useful for minority group in a country- otherwise, they provide a level of categorization which is unnecessary, and just makes things more annoying for people browsing through the categories. A Category:Israeli Jews does not make the articles easier to find, since Category:Israelis could and should be placed in the categories which Category:Israeli Jews would be. --Eliyak T·C 23:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

interesting. I wonder if your views differ based upon the percentage. So, perhaps if we have only 51% match, you would not feel the same way, even though it is a majority. Or perhaps you would. And perhaps it depends on the use. If I am looking for Jewish American sportspeople, I can access a cat list. But if am looking for Jewish Israeli sportspeople, I have to access the list, and then open up each athlete's bio to get the same knowledge--other than guessing based on name, I don't know if Amir Hadad is a Jewish Israeli sportsperson. Just that there is a more than likely chance that he is.and what's the harm? Would be interested in yours and others thoughts. Epeefleche 23:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Schudrich

Why did you change my edition? Rabbi Schudrich is a Polish Jews. Born in a Polish Jewish family, now a citizen of Poland, a Polish rabbi. Kowalmistrz 18:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. yes, of course- Polish rabbis are Polish Jews ;-). Kowalmistrz 18:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Shwarts

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Shwarts, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Shwarts fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

Housekeeping - cleanup per WP:SU

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Shwarts, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 21:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Your contribution to Category:Pederasty

Did you mean to categorize a millennial cultural practice under the rubric of a psychiatric disorder? Do you have references to back that up? Haiduc 22:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me that sexual interaction between a man and a child is practically the definition of pedophilia. Pedophilia is not, strictly speaking, a disease. It is the "[sexual] love of children." Why would there be adult-child sexual interaction (i.e. pederasty) if there is no attraction? The one is a result of the other. That is why I categorized it the way I did. --Eliyak T·C 13:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Eruv article

Eliyak: a shekoyach for your work on the eruv article. What we need now is a policy that romanized Hebrew words (not in common use in English) should be italicised in lower case throughout WP.--Redaktor 22:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

re:christian palestinian

Help to this wikification-challenged user from wikipedia, fix my contributions to article. Anglican and orthodox had new patriarchs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs)

Thank you very much,And by the way cease to use "Christian Orthodox", when you tries to say simply greek orthodox, because no every orthodox stripe recognize to greek orthodox patriarch. tioeliecer.

Thanks

thanks for the clean-up for Antonio Imbert Barrera; as you can tell, I did it in a hurry last night to save it from speedy--I hope you've looked back at the hilarious version I was working from. There are about 20 more Presidents of that country without articles, if you're interested. I'm not, just was passing by. DGG 03:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

re:christian palestinian article need re-formatting

help me with formatting christian palestinian edits

hello rjwilmsi, I am tioeliecer, I had info. to add to article, but because I access through cybercafe, I hadn´t enough time to edit my contributions. Help me with this: A Gaza Baptist Church Seized: link: http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=781

Palestine: Palestinian gunmen burn Qalqiliya YMCA http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=768

Palestine: Bible Society library bombed in Gaza : link:http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=796 And on a reported dead link: change this: 17^ Five churches bombed and attacked AP via Yahoo! News 16 September 2006 (Link dead as of 15 January 2007) for this http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=769

You can add these: http://www.religioustolerance.org/ata01.htm http://healtheland.wordpress.com/2007/02/11/palestinian-christians-being-persecuted-versus-real-christian-persecution/

My personal background is: I`m evangelical, no zionist, Venezuelan. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tioeliecer (talk • contribs).

{{surname}}

Hi. You recently added a nocat feature to {{surname}}, which I think was a great idea, but it didn't really work the way it was supposed to. Since my template programming abilities are still somewhat limited, would you please have a look at Template talk:Surname and maybe help out (if you can/want to)? – sgeureka ^t•c 12:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

HI

Can you speak Hebrew?--Gilisa 13:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

אני יכול, אבל לא כל כך טוב. אני יכול לקרוא יותר טוב משאני יכול לדבר או לכתוב. --Eliyak T·C 15:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Deletions

Hi. Why the deletions on the Jewish sports list page? Tx.--Epeefleche 12:58, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the two sports club categories, since the list is of sports players, and is not related to sports clubs. ("Hakoah" does not even appear anywhere on the page, and "Maccabi" appears 7 times on that long list.) --Eliyak T·C 15:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest a RV, though it is not a clear case. If you look at the list of New York Yankees people, for example, it will link to a cat of New York Yankees. This is a list of Jewish sportspeople. Why not list to a cat of Jewish teams. Admittedly, it is not a perfectly parallel situation, but it is close enough that IMHO it militates in favor of keeping them in. Unless you can point me to support for their deletion. Can you reconsider? Tx.--Epeefleche 21:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I just don't think those categories fit. If you want to revert, though, go ahead. I won't stop you. --Eliyak T·C 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

OK. Tx.--Epeefleche 19:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

First of all

I couldn't move Pinhas to a new page because that page name already existed as a disambiguation page, only without the disambiguation title. secondly, I didn't know about the king James bible thing. agreed. thirdly, the idiot who revised my version now made the Pinhas son of Eleazar version unaccessible. I personally think that every individual should have he's own article, no matter how short it is. That the reason I'm doing all of this.--ArnoldPettybone 22:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

no problem. As I understand the only problem is the English name legality, in whom I wasn't aware of.

--ArnoldPettybone 22:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Phinehas

I have moved Phinehas, son of Eleazar to Phinehas, and corrected some redirects and a disambiguation notice at Phinehas. Hope that everything is fine now. - Mike Rosoft 07:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

RfA

What the heck is going on here? Someone registers to Wikipedia and the first thing he does is nominate me for adminship? I am flattered, though. --Eliyak T·C 09:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Will you accept? Ominor 09:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm considering it. --Eliyak T·C 09:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Edits of Java7837

Look at my recent edits i have removed articles such as Jesus' name in the bible or something like that from Tanakh my recent edits have been to put stuff under Hebrew Bible categories apparently from a vote all ot and tanakh categories must be merged and i have been putting apocrypha stuff on their respective categories--Java7837 17:52, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

That is very pov if they get away with that then i demand Category:Old Testament be renamed to category:New Testament because it is the newest covenant out there--Java7837 18:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The old in old testament (testament means covenant) refers to dead for example ancient rome, ancient egypt etc. the new refers to current so the newest covenant with god is obviously judaism so tanakh should be called new testament and the christian supposed new testament should be called false testament it is only fair if they are going to say our connection with god is dead--Java7837 18:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The thing is all tanakh categories are to be deleted and instead the term Hebrew Bible if it refers to our text it should at least use the correct term for example Allah doesn't redirect to G-d but if the muslims weren't so active in wikipedia it probably would to the section on the islamic view of G-d --Java7837 18:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was about also renaming old testament categories otherwise i would of have put it in the talk page of WikiProject Judaism and contacted some people on wikipedia i knew --Java7837 18:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know we aren't allowed to contact people concerning a vote interesting thanks for telling me--Java7837 18:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Also have u ever heard of the category below Category:Biblical characters in rabbinic literature--Java7837 18:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

rabbinic literature

Have you ever heard of Category:Biblical_characters_in_rabbinic_literature  ? --Java7837 18:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I know that i created all the entries in the category i thought maybe you hadn't heard of it the article Moses in rabbinic literature takes up more space than the Moses article--Java7837 18:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Deuterocanonical

Many thanks for catching my wrong advice to Java7837 re deuterocanonical/apocryphal. I'm still learning! - Fayenatic london (talk) 19:59, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Dayenu

Hi.. Eliyak.. I like what you did with Dayenu. If you noticed, the punctuation in the Hebrew is at the wrong end of the words (e.g. the colons are before each hebrew "dayenu" rather than after. Have you got any idea how to fix this? Zargulon 19:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I take my hat off to you. Zargulon 20:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)