Talk:Persecution of Jews during the Black Death

Contradiction with Antisemitic canard
There is a possible contradiction about the massacres that happened after the Black Death, between the History of persecutions section of this article, and section Well poisoning in article Antisemitic canard. This is being discussed on the Talk page there; please contribute your thoughts at Talk:Antisemitic canard. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 03:53, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Archived here. Mathglot (talk) 08:25, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

"Ordinary folk hated the Jews because they had served the merchants and aristocrats, and with their loans and with their capital, helped establish urban economy and the city's governing political and territorial independence. Further, the Jews had exploited artisans 'with loans at usurious rates'."[22]

This is obviously an anti-semitic trope shoehorned in with a phony attribution. The hatred of the "ordinary folk" toward Jews because "they had served the merchants and aristocrats, and with their loans and with their capital" and that "the Jews had exploited artisans 'with loans at usurious rates'" are stated as facts and referenced to the title of a book whose publisher is not given. In my opinion, this quote and/or attribution are false and have been put there maliciously. They are not a serious exploration and should be stricken from this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StuartC1958 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

The unfortunate name of this article
Folks, "Jewish persecutions" doesn't mean "persecution of Jews". It means "persecution by Jews". Obviously that isn't the intention. Can we change the name to "Persecution of Jews during the Black Death"? It would be consistent with Persecution of Jews too. Zerotalk 02:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC) :You are right. "Jewish persecutions is confusing". It should say "Anti-Jewish persecutions" but I'll change the title according to your suggestion.--Aroma Stylish (talk) 21:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

"False accusations"
That's conjecture based on the presupposition that the accusations must have been false. To establish this one would have to look at any given case and establish that they were false. Whether they were correct or not, we simply don't know. And deciding it after the fact, based on consensus is not a good way to do that. At least mention that it is a consensus position and not something that has been established in every single case. 105.0.5.189 (talk) 19:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)