Talk:Congregation Kol Ami

Copyright problem removed
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.templeemanuel.org/about/History.php. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 22:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedy deleted because it is a notable synagogue and all of a sudden You are checking articles I create and have been wanting to delete them even after months of when I created them. Tinton5 (talk) 21:15, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you please document the notability through reliable source coverage? I haven't been able to find any. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:20, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I will get on it. Give it a chance and lets get others to help as well. Team work people ! Tinton5 (talk) 21:37, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Claim of being largest Reform synagogue in New Jersey
The only source cited to establish the claim of being the largest Reform synagogue in New Jersey is a self-published media release. It appears to be incorrect according to the Union for Reform Judaism, which lists the membership at 855. On very rough glance I found two others (and there may be more) that have larger memberships and. I am going to delete the claims and the source, which is pretty clearly non-reliable and designed to be self-serving for the status of the article subject. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 22:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That seems reasonable enough. I'm not sure why you need a separate section for the world record, though. Jayjg (talk) 04:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that there is no need for a separate section for the world record. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 20:55, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Inappropriate tagging
ConcernedVancouverite, I've again removed some inappropriate tags, and brought them here for discussion. The first, Template:Self-published, is helpful under certain circumstances, but obviously not here. Material organizations make about themselves can be used so long as they are not, for example, doubtful, or unduly self-serving. Are there any claims made in these sources that you find problematic? Do you doubt, for example, that the rabbi's name is Jerome P. David? That he joined as assistant rabbi in 1974? Please be quite explicit regarding the statements cited to these sources that you do not find credible. In addition, I've removed the tag you inserted after the first sentence of the History section, as it was already cited (citation [3]). One should not repeat citations at the end of each sentence, per the MOS - please don't encourage bad writing. CV, we understand that you tried and failed to get the article deleted; but after the snow keep, conducting a tag campaign against the article is a bit too pointy for my taste. Tags are intended to draw editing assistance to an article for actual issues, not deface it because you wish it was deleted but couldn't achieve that goal. There are sufficient eyes on the article now to solve any issues with the text, and adding tags won't draw any more. Rather than continuing the tagging, please bring up any alleged issues on the Talk: page, so we can discuss them, and, if necessary, fix them. Jayjg (talk) 02:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Jayjg - As noted above the claims that were in the original article and were only attributed to self-released media releases appear not to be true such as being the largest reform synagogue in New Jersey. That was utilized as a claim of notability based upon a single media release.  Digging further as noted above seems to show that the synagogue is at least 3rd largest Reform in NJ, and perhaps even less.  Additionally when I applied the tag the other claim of notability about the dreidel record was from that same questionable self-released podcast media release.  You have gone on to now add some additional references, once of which talks about them planning to break the record (not actually confirming they did), and another that seems to talk about them having broken the record in past tense (which establishes it although weakly because it is not a strong source).  After discovering that the primary claim for notability which was based upon a self-released media release which appears to be false I believe it is natural to question other self-released information which was the reason for the tags.  The tags were placed with the intention of having other sources which are more reliable be discovered and hopefully clarify what the truth is about the congregation.  You have started to do this by finding additional sources.  Finding more reliable sources would complete the task.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 17:04, 11 December 2014 (UTC)