Talk:Foreleg, cheeks and maw

reference request
it appears this topic does not have many "third party" references available (in fact probably none, aside for the article written by y. epstien which has been quoted) -most references are from "shulchan aruch" or responsa to parts thereof.

i will add in some more references (if applicable) and remove the reference request (i actually place it further down the page, pending research into the "mitzvah detail").--Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 16:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth, There will be (and are) 100s of English language secondary references available on a subject which is part of the Mosaic Law. Perhaps the reason you are not finding them has to do with using your own coined translations from Hebrew Bible "foreleg, cheeks and abomasum" - there will be little hits under those terms in English language sources, but if you use an English language version of Deuteronomy/Mishnah to find the English, then try "shoulder, cheeks and maw" you will find 430 hits. "the shoulder, the two cheeks and the maw" 2,510. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:35, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Recent revert
Hi In ictu oculi; In addition to i feel compeled to a whole revert of the recent edits to this article;
 * Insertion of bible translation where the sacrifice is item of article -this negates the entire article theme and a result of hurried and unrehearsed changes (מאת זבחי הזבח is entirely a mundane slaughtering and has nothing to do with the Korban area)
 * Change of general Gaonic view to that of the lone Rav Hai Gaon (assumption he is the only Gaon of this view?)
 * Translating Shochet as butcher lacks consideration of this article content's scope (it was edited by "Editor2020" -but was okay before your edits in question)

As stated in prior revert I am in agreement with EN usage (and will return to this article to do such -if you aren't able to first) -but i oppose editing to the point where focal article content is distorted--Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 20:55, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The edits you have made are entirely substitution of English words with Hebrew words. Reverted. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:46, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * So, In ictu oculi, how does it work, I logicize my revert with a triplicate of reasons and you revert w/ barely one?--Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 21:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Please read and apply Wikipedia policies on sourcing and language. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:04, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Move to correct English terms
Please see Google Scholar. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Is this still practised in modern Judaism/ modern Israel?
Regarding this edit the edit may be true, but sources given are WP:Primary sources and do not demonstrate that the practice of giving meat from meals (which meals) is still practised in modern Judaism. Please supply a WP:RS. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:02, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * As the article was
 * The gift of the shoulder, cheeks and maw of a sacrificed animal to the priest (זְּרועַ לְּחָיַיִם וְקֵּיבָה) was a practice in Ancient Israel:
 * Re this change:
 * 1. The giving of the foreleg, cheeks and maw - why has "the gift of" been changed to "giving" - this is bad English
 * 2. Why has "shoulder" been changed to "foreleg"? WP:RS have "shoulder"
 * 3. is a positive commandment ( Mitzvah) -- where is the WP:RS that this is practised today? Why has reference to Ancient Israel been deleted?
 * 4. "requiring a Shochet (jewish ritual-slaughterer)" - can you say this in better English please?
 * 5. to give the aforementioned parts of a kosher-slaughtered animal to a jewish priest ([Kohein]]).
 * 6. REF Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 61:1 - what year/edition/publishing house, what language is this source in?
 * 7. "This giving is required to be free of both monetary and servicial compensation." - can you please rewrite into standard English.
 * 8. REF Talmud-Bavli Bechoros p. 27a, and Rashi thereof. - See WP:IRS. The correct was of expressing this would be "according to Rashi's commentary (on B.Bechoros 27a). REF page no edition year, place of publication, language of publication.
 * In sum,
 * Can you please make an effort to follow WP:EN and WP:IRS In ictu oculi (talk) 22:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I see now that you simply cut and pasted and duplicated the badly written paragraph from lower down (and left it there as well) well, I've now rewritten it in English. Non-native speakers are welcome on en.wikipedia, but please ... show some consideration for grammar, style and English usage. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:03, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Undiscussed Page Move to "foreleg, cheeks and maw" reverted
Sorry, but no matter what any individual editor thinks "should be" the correct English word, Google Books and Google Scholar indicate that the "shoulder, cheeks and maw" (430 uses) is standard English usage vs "foreleg, cheeks and maw." (9 uses). Reverted per WP:RS In ictu oculi (talk) 15:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Same again, one month later...
 * Marecheth - I'm wondering, since there you have a religious sensitivity against the terms used in the English versions of the Tanakh and Mishnah that you can present here using English language sources? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move Mike Cline (talk) 00:28, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Foreleg, cheeks and maw → Shoulder, cheeks and maw – (back to where page was) or alternative shoulder, the two cheeks and the maw (per Deuteronomy). I'm guessing, since these page moves haven't been explained or sourced, but the issue may be that the editor who moved this considers that the standard English translations found in English Deuteronomy, English Talmud, and English Jewish Reform/Academic sources is not a literal translation of the same cut of the meat זרוע "shoulder/foreleg" to be given to the priest? Nevertheless in English a more standard translation in Jewish academic sources is "shoulder, cheeks and maw" approx 430 Google Book hits, or per Deuteronomy in English "the shoulder, the two cheeks and the maw" 2,510. Rationale common usage: NB* I would ask for non-partisan general readers who might otherwise give a wide berth to a religious subject to take a look at this RM, as the issue is not religion but whether or not WP:Article titles policy should or should not follow common usage in mainstream MOS:COMMONALITY sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment This article creation started off as Giving of the foreleg, cheeks and abomasum = zero hits. For comparison note that where the page now been moved to "foreleg cheeks and maw" = only 9 hits. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:04, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Against. The translation for "זרוע" is arm.--Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 17:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Leave as is. wanting to translate zroah as shoulder is like saying foreleg of ox should be swiped with shoulder of ox.--חודר לעומר (talk) 22:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Marecheth and חודר לעומר and because this has also become one huge one man show by In ictu in violation of WP:DONOTDISRUPT as is being made very clear with the growing tide of users opposing him at all the pages he has nominated for changes thus far and at the growing complaints at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism and User talk:Lisa that lay out many of the problems with In ictu's current spate of hostile anti-WP:CONSENSUS editing style. IZAK (talk) 05:06, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Apologies for interupting the flow of RM with this reply but seems needed to calm things down.
 * IZAK, we all need to bear in mind above. Please notice also that Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth himself requested sources on 23 April in the first section of the Talk page above. And also please note that I am aware that there are 5 or 6 editors have come who are very strongly opposed to conforming the title of Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth's article creations to the subjects as discussed in English sources. In such cases the result of an appeal to the wider community will almost certainly be an experienced and capable admin coming along and closing this RM as "no consensus", and the page will be left with a title and article wording not found in English sources, probably for many years. So please take it easy. The RM process is not intended to be "hostile" (much less so than a ping-pong of reverts), it is simply a mechanism that invites other non-involved Wikipedia Users to review article titles, should they wish to, that's all. Best regards and take care. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * IZAK, we all need to bear in mind above. Please notice also that Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth himself requested sources on 23 April in the first section of the Talk page above. And also please note that I am aware that there are 5 or 6 editors have come who are very strongly opposed to conforming the title of Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth's article creations to the subjects as discussed in English sources. In such cases the result of an appeal to the wider community will almost certainly be an experienced and capable admin coming along and closing this RM as "no consensus", and the page will be left with a title and article wording not found in English sources, probably for many years. So please take it easy. The RM process is not intended to be "hostile" (much less so than a ping-pong of reverts), it is simply a mechanism that invites other non-involved Wikipedia Users to review article titles, should they wish to, that's all. Best regards and take care. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:15, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"nothing to do with sacrifice"
How does this deletion and the edit summary "nothing to do with sacrifice" fit with:

Is Deuteronomy 18:13 going to be the next thing deleted? In ictu oculi (talk) 12:26, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * בקר טוב In ictu oculi, let our record show this as a classic example of Lisa mile long list of complaints against you. You are supposing that your translation source is the first, middle and final word on all and every article on Wikipedia.  I've grown frustrated at this and will join the call for you to take it easy on myself and the long list of editors that waste their time trying to reason with you.--Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 17:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

זְּרועַ לְּחָיַיִם וְקֵּיבָה Maw vs. Abomasum
What, if any, are the technical differences between maw and abomasum? which one is the torah law intent?--Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 18:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd stick with abomasum since maw has multiple meanings and abomasum has but one and that one is the one specified by rabbinical authorities.--חודר לעומר (talk) 22:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * hic, baaaah--חודר לעומר (talk) 22:19, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * correct, maw (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/maw) could mean the whole digestive system or the wide opening of a mouth..abomasum (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abomasum) does make more sense for this page and is in line with article.--Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 00:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * correct, maw (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/maw) could mean the whole digestive system or the wide opening of a mouth..abomasum (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abomasum) does make more sense for this page and is in line with article.--Marecheth Ho&#39;eElohuth (talk) 00:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

bah hic