Talk:Shituf

Two uses of Hebrew term shituf in English WP:RS
The noun shituf is a term for a partnership meal.
 * 1) Jacob Neusner Judaism's story of creation: scripture, halakhah, aggadah 2000 p149 THE SHITTUF AND THE ALLEYWAY M. 7:6 How do they make a partnership [through a fusion meal, or a shittuf] in an alleyway? ... T. 6:3 Wine [used for a shittuf must be] enough for drinking along with two meals. Oil [used for a shittuf must ...
 * 2) The Mishnah, Seder Moed Hersh Goldwurm, Y. Danziger, A. Gold - 1986 "The Gemara adds that this is so only if the food added to the shituf differs from that used originally. ... Since no change is made in the composition of the shituf, this is regarded as a mere extension of the original shituf, ..."
 * 3) Seder Moʻed Yosef Rottenberg, Hersh Goldwurm, Yisroel P. Gornish - 1994 "The two meal requirement is met by two-thirds of such a loaf or five and one- third eggs. The disagreement in the mishnah refers only to the minimum as it applies to bread. As seen above (3:1), an eruvei techumim, like a shituf ..."

Lisa, This (both the deletion of WP:RS sourced content [above], and the edit summary) was uncalled for: Firstly edit summaries aren't the correct place to make this sort of comment. Secondly WP:AGF, WP:NPA. Thirdly, whatever your personal understanding of the Hebrew term shituf may be, checking Google Books and Google Scholar shows that around half of references in in English WP:RS, which you've deleted from article, are to the shituf meal. At the very least some kind of disambiguation hat note is needed to the other usage. If you know where in Wikipedia that is discussed. It would really help if you contribute on Talk pages and provide WP:RS for your edits and deletions. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:25, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * 23:54, 26 November 2011 (diff | hist) Shituf ‎ (Undid revision 462367610 by In ictu oculi (talk) You're being disuptive. Stop, or I'll report you.) (top)


 * The article is about a concept in Jewish law. It is not about every use of the word.  A "shituf meal" has something to do with partnerships between people.  It has absolutely not the first thing to do with the topic of this article.  You are being disruptive.  Stop it.  - Lisa (talk - contribs) 15:28, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Dear Lisa Please, everyone should WP:AGF. I'm not doing anything evil or morally wrong to add a source in an article to other uses of a term that has several uses. But rest assured if you don't want any other use of shituf mentioned or linked in the article, then I won't be the one to go against you. Happy? However, here on Talk, you should be aware that Google Scholar shows not just one meaning, but a broader range of uses as well, e.g. J. Perlmann Dissent and Discipline in Ben Gurion's Labor Party: 1930–32 Economics Working Paper Archive, 2006 "There is no common ground (shituf) between these members and the party, and the appearance of pamphlets like these cannot ..." - whether this is handled by a hatnote, an etymology paragraph, or whatever, it's evident that there are other WP:RS on shituf out there that fall outside the information in the article. I note it for other users here in case anyone comes to the article later. Best wishes. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * None of which are relevant to the topic of this article. You refuse to understand what's been explained to you by numerous people here.  There is a halakhic concept called shituf.  An article was created about it.  That doesn't mean that the article is about everything called shituf.  If you want to create an article about civil and business partnerships in Judaism, feel free.  - Lisa (talk - contribs) 15:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I didn't want to join this debate, but I now feel I must. Please, Lisa, try to WP:AGF and stop both taking offence and giving it. The subject of an article is defined by its title. Where a title is ambiguous, and separate subjects could reasonably be meant by it, the proper approach is to add qualifications to the titles of the articles as appropriate. So this article could be moved to Shituf (halakhic law) with a hatnote to point to articles about other uses of the word, or if it is decided that this is the wp:primary topic, other articles could get the qualification, but there would still need to be a hatnote here. As I understand it that's all In ictu oculi is saying, and I see no cause for insults or threats. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 17:35, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * With all due respect, Samuel, there is a context here. In Ictu is going after just about every article on a concept in Jewish law in the same way.  Please check out the ongoing discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism for details.


 * In Ictu is not trying to have a hatnote. An article on Shituf, the halakhic concept that relates to forms of idolatry, has to be called that, because there's no simple English translation of the subject.  Partnership in the sense of business or civil partnerships differs.  Nor was there any interest in an article on civil/business partnerships in halakha.  In Ictu is on a campaign.  Check his contribs.


 * Lastly, I'd like to ask that you withdraw the accusation that I threatened him. I did not.  - Lisa (talk - contribs) 22:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, "Stop, or I'll report you" sounds like a threat to me. I don't think any further comments from me are going to help the aims of wikipedia. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 23:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Based on In Ictu's poor presentation (cherry picking?) of sources supporting his attempted move of Talk:B'rov am hadrat melech (see the move request on the discussion page), I recommend that his presentation of sources here be taken with a grain of salt until someone else has had the time to check the sources independently with Google Book Search. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 17:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Lisa, Pasting this (by all means see page) on a dozen talk pages doesn't justify deleting WP:RS on a dozen articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)