Talk:Expulsion of Jews from Spain

The first wave of violence against the jews on the Iberian peninsula...
occured with the "Shepherds' Crusade". This is wrong, of course. Waves of violence against Jews occurred already in Cordoba in 1013 and Granada in 1066 under Muslim rule. Each had several thousand victims. The Cordoba massacre was the first of its kind on European soil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1205:5059:9020:7171:85E9:4E70:2DAF (talk) 16:19, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Merge discussion
The article Alhambra decree should be merged into Expulsion of Jews from Spain as they are nearly identical topics. Such content of Alhambra decree that isn't already part of Expulsion of the Jews should be included in a new body section entitled "Alhambra decree" (which doesn't currently exist).

I do see one possible argument in favor of keeping them separate, but it would require a major change in scope for Alhambra decree, and would still require some merging of content, probably in both directions. This approach would place the two articles into a summary style relationship with each other, with Expulsion of Jews from Spain being the parent article, and Alhambra decree the child article, the latter dealing strictly with the document itself. This would severely limit the scope of Alhambra decree to the "decree metadata", i.e., the drafting of it, who wrote it, who transcribed it, what room it is was written in, what language it was in, what happened to the document, where it is now, and so on. Everything else would be out of scope for the child, and belong to the parent. I'm not in favor of this approach, as I think they would start converging over time and duplicating the parent again, but I thought I'd mention it. If there were a way to strictly maintain the limited scope of the child, I might be persuaded. Please discuss below. Mathglot (talk) 00:33, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note that EoJfS is a translation from Expulsión de los judíos de España by one editor, and remains 93% of its content to this day. Mathglot (talk) 01:34, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Survey

 * Merge – as nom. Mathglot (talk) 00:33, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmmm! Some sort of rearrangement is needed, but perhaps not a full merge. This article (EJS) is nearly all by one guy in 2017, with a somewhat essayish approach, & a limited number of good sources (though what is "Valdeón Baruque (2007)", with many cites but not a full biblio ref?) The other (AD) is perhaps the more polished product, and gets over twice as many views, probably because of old links. I'd like to see this one given a read-over by an editor with stature in the area. Johnbod (talk) 01:15, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Forgot to mention that the article was a translation straight from es-wiki; see next section. Added a note about it above. Not sure if that changes anything. Mathglot (talk) 01:27, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Nice work done by Mathglot so far. I agree with Johnbod's suggestion that the translated article should be revised first, before any merging work is done. All redirects should be only to the Alhambra Decree article in the meantime. Once the revision is finished here, a merge could be pursued. I've just got here for the first time a few minutes ago, but I will start looking more in depth into the two articles with a view to the revision, and then to a possible merge. Thank you both for the great work you guys do here! warshy (¥¥) 16:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge Alhambra Decree into Expulsion of Jews from Spain per nominator. Debresser (talk) 16:21, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Have you read the rest of this page? This is a pile of machine-translated crap. It certainly isn't ready to be merged with the other, reasonably ok, article. Johnbod (talk) 12:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep both as is because they each contain different and detailed content. Like saying let's just merge it all into the History of the Jews in Spain which would be obviously absurd as is this very weak "proposal". IZAK (talk) 20:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment The Alhambra Degree section as currently written, erroneously I might add, deals only with Jewish history. Therefore, the existing material should be merged under "Expulsion of the Jews from Spain" as it deals specifically with the Jews only. However, the history of the Alhambra Degree involves the Muslim population as well and needs to include this aspect, namely by incorporating how the degree affected BOTH populations.  For instance, the degree originally allowed the "Mudejars" or Muslims to continue living in Granada and practicing their faith while the Jews were expelled.  The Muslims were to be left alone.  Of course, the Spanish crown eventually reneged on this agreement and the Alhambra Degree was rescinded, forcing the Muslims to also either convert or face expulsion.  In other words, the topic of the Alhambra Degree is NOT just a Jewish history topic, but also a Muslim and Catholic/European topic as well.  Merge the existing material about Jews with the "Expulsion of the Jews from Spain" section and rewrite the entire Alhambra Degree section so it does NOT have a skewed, one-sided perspective — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burnsmelinda (talk • contribs)
 * Keep Although this is part of the larger Expulsion of Jews from Spain, it is a utterly unbelievably important historic event in History and really is far to important to justify a merge. It has extreme importance because this was the official start of un-offical persecution and marks the start of the official start of the Inquisition. Would anyone argue for the Nuremberg Laws, The Commissar Order, or The Einsatzgruppen reports to be merged into simply the Holocaust, well they all individually led to hundreds of thousands of deaths and no they shouldn't because they are far to important and detailed to be merged. Vallee01 (talk) 14:58, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Translation issues affecting a merge
"When in 1474 she acceded to the throne, married to the heir of the Crown of Aragon, the future Ferdinand II of Aragon, crypto-Judaism was not punished, "not, of course, by tolerance Or indifference, but because they lacked appropriate legal instruments to characterize this type of crime. "Thus, when they decide to confront the "converso problem", especially after the prior of the Dominicans of Seville, Fray Alonso de Ojeda, in 1475 sent them an alarming report on the number of converts who in that city judaízan, even in an open way, are addressed to Pope Sixtus IV to authorize them to appoint inquisitors in their kingdoms, which the pontiff grants them by the Bull "Exigit sincerae devotionis" of November 1, 1478. "With the creation of the tribunal of the Inquisition, the authorities will have the instrument and the means of in "According to Joseph Perez, Ferdinand and Isabella" were convinced that the Inquisition would compel the converts to integrate definitively: the day when all new Christians renounced Judaism nothing would distinguish them from the other members of the social body."
 * Yes, some of it is very rough, especially lower down. There are lots of links needed, & the tone is often questionable. This para seems near-incomprehensible:

− as I said, it needs a good going-over by an editor with stature in the area. I think that should be done before any merger. Johnbod (talk) 01:38, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Could be a translation issue. I can look at that paragraph in the original, and replace the translation if needed. Bbiab... Mathglot (talk) 01:50, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm sure it is - I'd question how well the editor doing it speaks Spanish. Johnbod (talk) 02:21, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Either speaks none or hardly any; that was atrociously bad. It's fixed now, have a look. Btw, I wouldn't want to do tons more translation fixing, especially if a merge is in the offing which might wipe some of it out. Do you feel there's enough there to figure out the gist of it, sufficiently to work out the judgments about whether a merge should or shouldn't be carried out, and in what manner?  That type of translation I don't mind doing; quick little fixes here and there.  I just don't want to spend a ton of time, and see it wiped out, if I could be spending the time profitably elsewhere. Let me know if you need specific help, though. Mathglot (talk) 03:09, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't want to do any spadework on it either - not my area, & I don't speak Spanish at all adequately. Let's hope someone suitable comes along! Johnbod (talk) 13:34, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I've tagged it a rough translation, and added an entry for it to WP:PNT, and also linked this discussion, so the translation folks that hang out there will see it.  Mathglot (talk) 03:46, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * part of the problem is that Spanish treats pronouns differently. Article keeps calling the monarchs "it". Also some word order problems. I will hit some low-hanging fruit. But this has a lot of unfamiliar vocabulary, bah. And a bunch of really long, badly-translated quotes Elinruby (talk) 13:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Confusing redirect
This probably shouldn't affect the merge discussion, but just throwing it out there, just in case: a confusing redirect exists, in Expulsion of the Jews from Spain (note the the), which redirects to Alhambra decree, not to Expulsion of Jews from Spain. Mathglot (talk) 03:59, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I have changed the redirects to make them more logical, which should direct more traffic here, which is not so good given the quality of the article. This article should contain information on the expulsion of Jews from Navarre (it doesn't), which was not affected by the Alhambra decree. Srnec (talk) 17:36, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Unacknowledged translation
This article appears to be in large part an unacknowledged translation of es:Expulsión de los judíos de España. The "Ibero-America 2017" banner is a clue, but the governing principle is WP:CWW and Wikipedia licensing requirements. I've added an RIA statement to the article's page history, so that's taken care of. This talk page needs a translated page attribution at the bottom of the Talk header. Pinging. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:25, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * See User_talk:Suvray. I wonder what the prize was? Johnbod (talk) 01:42, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hm, from other entries on that page, I can see that English isn't their native language, either (probably Bengali is), and they *definitely* should stay away from translating things into English with their level of fluency in it. Mathglot (talk) 03:27, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I've added the translated page box, so that's taken care of now. Mathglot (talk) 03:42, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I've tried to clean up a lot of this article, but it definitely still needs work, particularly in the quotes taken directly from medieval decrees. Someone with more expertise in the Spanish of that era will need to take a look and advise. Zarxos (talk) 04:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Purpose
I think the following is flat-out wrong as it stands:
 * The primary purpose was to eliminate their influence on Spain's large converso population and ensure they did not revert to Judaism.

The primary purpose was to have a Jew-free Spain. Preventing backsliding was secondary. deisenbe (talk) 17:53, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I know that Steven Nadler, for example, accepts the widespread contrary argument in recent Jewish scholarship. That is because since 1391 Spain did have a very large converso population, and a large part of it was not due to forced conversions. The presence of practicing Jews in Spain in 1492 did function not only as a force pushing for Judaizing practices among the New Christians. The religious purpose therefore, was wider, in my view. It was rather to have a more purely Catholic Spain, a Spain that was actually free of Judaism altogether at last, not only free of Jews. This wider religious purpose is also in line with the establishment of the Inquisition in Spain in the 1530's, to continue the process of purification of Catholic Spain from any remaining vestiges of Judaism altogether. warshy (¥¥) 18:16, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * A Jew - free Spain: what a noble cause! As we can now see how the Jews treat their Gazan neighbors, who would ever want Jews in their midst? Jews: wherever they go they cause problems, corruption, nepotism, and inevitable conflict with all non-Jews. 193.179.60.73 (talk) 08:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

crypto-Jews
Just thought I would mention that at leaSt some of the conquistadors were Jewish and left Spain because of the Inquisition. I don't have a source but I know they exist, since I own a book about this, although I don't have it here. If anyone wants to follow up on this, it was definitely published by the University of New Mexico. I don't remember the title. Elinruby (talk) 08:15, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Turns out there is an artcle about this: Crypto-Judaism Elinruby (talk) 08:18, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

removed text
"He states that communities of Christians, Jews and Muslims had never lived in the Christian kingdoms. "

I suspect this should say "together". As written, obviously untrue. From about the third paragraph down in the medieval section Elinruby (talk)

Removal of article from Antisemitism category
user:Mathglot I did this based on Categorization i.e. 'In addition, each categorized page should be placed in all of the most specific categories to which it logically belongs. This means that if a page belongs to a subcategory of C (or a subcategory of a subcategory of C, and so on) then it is not normally placed directly into C.'. The page is in the category Expulsion of Jews, which is a subcategory of Persecution of Jews, which is a subcategory of Antisemitism. Jontel (talk) 07:36, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , I'm well aware of how categorization works; but if you leave a vague edit summary, with the rapid branching of subcats it makes it very hard to follow the path if you're not explicit. I just reverted your cat removal at another article. You don't need to add another Talk page section there; just indicate what the cat relationship is in the edit summary, and we're done. And please always do that. We're wasting time on reverts and explanations. Mathglot (talk) 07:41, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Untitled, January 2024
Why is my edit linking the Spanish golden age being removed ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:E144:6F01:1469:CED3:D0B8:95 (talk) 05:39, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Because it's a personal opinion with no academic support whatsoever. --Jotamar (talk) 22:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)