Talk:Emanu-El

NRHP
I am not sure I understand the new changes in the list. Several synagogues listed on the NRHP are being identitied separately. However, only 2 of those synagogues have a link to the actual synagogue. Why are they listed at the top of the US entry giving them "special" status - especially given the 2 column format that has been added to the page (for clarity). Why aren't those synagogues listed by denomination? If the group feels the NRHP is so vital on the Emanu-El page, it now compels us to check other Emanu-Els for such designation and turn this from a disambiguation page on a synagogue name into a mini-NRHP listing. Shouldn't that be a separate page of synagogues which such status? I'm sure many non-US synagogues have similar types of designations. IMHO, the synagogues should be divided by Country and then by Denomination. "Other" is a perfectly good denomination. I do not feel "NRHP" is sub-section that makes sense for this page or for the existing headings we have. Thanks. JerseyRabbi (talk) 14:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that they don't need their own section. For that matter, I don't think Conservative and Reform need their own sections. It should be alphabetical, for the most part, by state and city. Jayjg (talk) 07:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I added the NRHP ones. I do not know whether they are Conservative or Reform so i could't put them into either of those categories.  Putting all the U.S. ones into order by state and then alphabetically would make sense to me. doncram (talk) 18:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

NRHP redirects to National Register of Historic Places. Please forgive me for not already knowing what it meant.

Temple Emanu-El (Houston, Texas)
This was added to the (dab) article, but NOT as a link (because it would have been a "RED" link). However, I read somewhere that adding an external link (such as "Temple Emanu-El (Houston, Texas)") is allowed on the "Talk:" page for a (dab) article [here!], while deprecated (or NOT allowed) on the article page -- the page of the (dab) article itself.

"Therefore", I am providing this external link here: http://www.emanuelhouston.org/ ([for] Congregation Emanu El - Houston, Texas). (right?) --Mike Schwartz (talk) 09:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Update -- as of March 8, 2019
The editor who made THIS (22 September 2013) change: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emanu-El&diff=next&oldid=556134636 apparently did NOT first read the explanation given here [the one that is time-and-date-stamped "09:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)"] in this section of this "Talk:" page.

IMHO, that might well be [at least part of] the reason why the entire entry (having been turned into a RED LINK, which apparently is deprecated on any disambiguation [“dab”] page) was later deleted.

The situation was not helped -- maybe it was made worse? -- by this (13 December 2013) edit:


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emanu-El&diff=next&oldid=577788367

... in which the state name was moved to outside the (already red) hyperlink, probably by some well-intentioned editor. That probably made it even more likely that some (future) editor would be tempted to (and would not know the reasons [shown here] NOT to) delete the entire entry for Temple “Emanu El” in Houston, TX.

I think that the entry should be reinstated, WITHOUT being a hyperlink at all -- (neither red nor any other color) -- (and perhaps with a helpful comment, right on the disambiguation page [maybe in a footnote! Would that be OK?] even though some kinds of links are deprecated ... since it is a “dab” page) in article space, to mention
 * this useful explanation

of ... the reasons WHY that [Houston, TX] entry should NOT be converted into a RED hyperlink [nor deleted]).
 * ((which can be found at the URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Emanu-El#Temple%20Emanu-El%20(Houston,%20Texas) ... that is, in this section of this "Talk:" page))

If someone does start an article ... so that the hyperlink could be a non-RED one ... then, that would be a whole new ball game. But until then, IMHO it should not be (/"have") a hyperlink at all (on the disambiguation [“dab”] page).

Any comments? --Mike Schwartz (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Proposed name change
Wouldn't it be better if the article was called something like Emanu-El (Jewish temple), making Emanu-El a redirect to it? --uKER (talk) 06:02, 19 March 2019 (UTC)