Talk:Disabilities (Jewish)

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Srnec in topic Requested move 23 October 2021

24.47.182.229's changes

edit

In his recent additions, 24.47.182.229 covered three topics:

  1. The Jews Relief Act 1858 (the Encyclopedia Britannica apparently gets the date wrong, compare here). We already mention that act in connection with the lifting of Jewish disabilities all over Europe, and the details given about Disraeli, for example, are irrelevant to the disabilities themselves. Furthermore, that paragraph's last sentence about Jews having to "start from square one" is both unencyclopedic in tone and dubious in content. It is also not supported by the given sources (though 24.47. is of course correct that the rest of the article does not have any sources either).
  2. The exploits of Asser Levy in New Amsterdam/New York. While interesting, relevant and sourced, it's overly detailed, especially compared with our coverage of Germany or the rest of Central Europe. The butcher license episode does not say anything about disabilities at all; rather a Jew is granted a religious privilege (and that's Levy himself, not his brother, by the way). The claim about the US, Australia and New Zealand being "among the few Christian countries" without anti-Jewish legislation is dubious in various ways. Firstly the US is not a Christian nation (see Treaty of Tripoli). Secondly, "among the few" is vague and not really helpful. How many is "few"? Thirdly, this article is about Jewish disabilities, not about countries without disabilities.
  3. A rather rambling text ranging from Agobard via Bernardo Gui to Torquemada and back to Agobard. I am not sure what that is supposed to be about, but it does not mention disabilities and seems to be about other kinds of anti-Jewish discrimination and antisemitism.

I have reworded and shortened the New Amsterdam paragraph, mentioned Goldsmid where he is relevant, and removed the Agobard-Torquemada paragraph. Huon (talk) 12:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Awkward title

edit

I don't know the history (if any) about why the current title was chosen, when clearly it fails COMMONNAME since virtually all sources call it "Jewish disabilities". But I can guess: I think it's very likely that it was chosen in order to avoid confusion with physical (or mental) disability in the modern sense. If that was the genesis of it, the motivation was good, but the solution is a poor one: for one thing, it doesn't really resolve the ambiguity, and secondly, it doesn't correspond to what reliable sources say. I'm not sure what the best solution would be, perhaps a different kind of parenthetical disambiguation, like Jewish disabilities (Middle Ages), or Jewish disabilities (medieval law), or some such. Any suggestions? Mathglot (talk) 20:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Added Jewish disabilities (medieval law) as a redirect, but I'm thinking that should be the new title. Mathglot (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 23 October 2021

edit
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved per clear consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) Srnec (talk) 02:11, 30 October 2021 (UTC)Reply


Disabilities (Jewish) → ? – Cleanup of Template:Disputed title, which is currently at WP:TfD. Two alternative titles have been suggested: Jewish disabilities (medieval law) and Jewish disabilities (Middle Ages). TompaDompa (talk) 12:29, 23 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.