Talk:Public menorah

Info removed
Joe407, I noticed in the article lead you removed "bringing Jews closer to Judaism" as one of the reasons for the displays and lightings. Also, under "Chabad campaign" you removed the piece about using the opportunity to further the Noahide laws. Please explain why?

As side note, I wish to thank you for your efforts of fixing up this article, and for bringing in a dose of calm in the heated discussions about this article and Chabad related articles on WP. It is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Shlomke (talk) 13:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Both of the above things you mentioned were not really relavant to the menorah lighting and are WP:OR.
 * It is odd that while my re-ordering of this page may have saved it, I still feel that it should be removed. Oh, well.  I hope that we can all improve it.  Joe407 (talk) 05:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I know you feel that it should be removed. That's why I especially appreciate you being able to be unbiased and give the article a chance at the same time you Afd'ed it. Shlomke (talk) 05:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Joe, of course the motive to influence Jews and non-Jews is relevant; it's the explanation of the intent behind the Lubavitcher Rebbe's initiative of the campaign. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 16:55, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Oliver, As was established in the AFD discussion, this article is about the public lightings and not about the Rebbe's campaign. If the goal was to describe the rebbe's campaign, the article would still look the way it did when the AFD opened and would have been merged to mitzvah campaigns.  This seems to be what will happen to Tefillin, Noahide, and Sefer Torah campaigns.  As such, the influence over Jews and non-jews seems irrelevant and as it only appears in primary sources describing the Rebbe's campaign, is WP:OR.  Joe407 (talk) 05:29, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Joe, the Rebbe initiated the idea, so his intention is surely very relevant. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 00:58, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

name change
Howdy! I'd like to suggesst a name change for this article. Given as there is no such thing as a "Public Menorah". My suggestions are either "Public Menorah Lightings" or "Public Menorah Displays". Thoughts? Joe407 (talk) 05:11, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Since this article deals with both, how about "Public menorah lightings and displays". Shlomke (talk) 05:26, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * All the news reports refer to a "Public menorah". This means that the term is valid, despite anyone's quibbles. So I think that name should stay. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 16:58, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * So is a "Public Menorah" a noun? Joe407 (talk) 05:29, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. But this is how it is usually referred to in the news, sometimes with other words attached to it, like "lighting" "display" etc. See these news search results .Shlomke (talk) 21:25, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked at some of those search results, Shlomke, and came away with the impression that "public menorah" is more of an adjective than a noun. The menorah that we light outside our door is also a public menorah &mdash; if it wasn't public, it wouldn't fulfill the purpose of pirsumei nisa. I think this article should be titled Public menorah lighting. Yoninah (talk) 22:37, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. but how would that name be descriptive of the controversy over menorah displays that went to supreme court? How about just plain "Public menorahs"? Shlomke (talk) 00:50, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You're right. The more we try to explain what it is, the longer the title gets! So I'll agree with sticking to "Public menorah", as the description of both "displays" and "lighting" is mentioned in the lead. Yoninah (talk) 01:07, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The descriptions "lighting" or "display" are sometimes used and sometimes not used, but all the press reports refer to a public menorah, and the meaning is very clear regardless of the concept of pirsumei nissa admittedly applicable to all menorahs (even one not even visible in the street, but only for one's family, which is the custom of many), so I believe that that should be the article's name. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 01:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)