User talk:Contributor613/Archive 1

Shimon Garidi
I don't understand the relevance of the website to Shimon Garidi. Could you explain on the article talk page. Thanks, Number   5  7  16:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure. But in the future please start the discussion on the article talk page. Contributor613 (talk) 17:03, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

"Orthodox" section on Kabbalah
Hello,

I tried to get around some of the objections about references with minor re-writes, but may have gotten carried away as more interesting things came up. Please feel free to re-do. I was trying to get some excessive requests for references out. All the Best,

Ayeletshacar (talk) 09:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

WP article "Festival-day"
User:Contributor613, As of yesterday, there was no specific article on Wikipedia dealing with the specific Jewish festivals known as a "Festival-day" (Yom-Tov). That means 15-years of Wikipedia without an article on the Jewish "Festival-day." This prompted me to write an article yesterday on the subject, which you can read here: Festival-day, but now a person has wrongly suggested that it be deleted. See: Articles for deletion/Festival-day. Can you please interject here and voice your opinion whether or not the article should be deleted, as your view is important here, I would think. It's urgent.Davidbena (talk) 16:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Avoiding Misunderstanding
User:Contributor613, Rambam, when he prohibits "listening" to musical instruments played (Hil. Taanith, chapter 5), he refers there, I would think, to when a person goes willfully there to listen to such music, but not when he hears music played at random, or while passing a certain place where music is being played. R. Qafih would have understood it this way. The general rule with us states: אנוס רחמנא פטריה. Therefore, writing on the page, "it is forbidden to listen to music," leaves room for error and misunderstanding. Some may think that if he inadvertently heard a musical instrument he would have to shut his ears.Davidbena (talk) 05:10, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You're coping stuff from the talk page. Let's not split the discussion. Contributor613 (talk) 05:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * My friend User:Davidbena, I really have to go now, so forgive me but if you want to continue it's going to have to wait a bit. Contributor613 (talk) 05:24, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, we'll continue the discussion there.Davidbena (talk) 05:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Position of נודע ביהודה on זוהר
Hi, I think writing that he "opposed" the Zohar is taking things a bit far - he seems to have been uncertain as to its authenticity, and was disturbed by the outsized influence it wielded, but that is not "opposition". High Leader (talk) 04:17, 23 April 2018 (UTC) High Leader (talk) 04:17, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I just wrote "opposition" owing to his practical opposition to things like saying לשם יחוד, and though he doesn't go as far as Rabbi Yiḥye Qafiḥ to argue that the very root of the Zohar is problematic, he comes to a similar conclusion–for practical purposes. After all, reading Landau's words on p. 355 of https://www.academia.edu/18006793/_Deists_Sabbatians_and_Kabbalists_in_Prague_A_Censored_Sermon_of_R._Ezekiel_Landau_1770_in_Hebrew_Kabbalah_21_2010_349-384 he basically says it's unreliable. But you do have a good point, and before I made the edit I had considered writing "canonicity of the Zohar" instead of opposition to, but decided against that because lack of "canonicity" implies that the content/text as we have it would not be problematic so long as we had a מסורה, but Landau goes beyond that in positing that the text as we have it is problematic in and of itself. BTW I remember looking at the article several months ago and I'm happy to see that since then you've done a great job in moving it forward with the Notable views section. Just one question: the article states "He believed that many kabbalistic concepts were being understood in a heretical fashion" --- can you refer me to a source for this, that is, that they were being understood in a heretical fashion as opposed to stating that they themselves are actually heretical? Contributor613 (talk) 04:52, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

"Cite fix"
I don't understand your revert at Zohar. It is a completely different citation, to a Hebrew-language article by the same author. Doesn't seem productive to discuss this in edit summaries, so: Please self-revert. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:11, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi and thanks for writing me to clarify. The citation that I deleted was not to a Hebrew-language article, but to https://seforimblog.com/2012/08/concerning-zohar-and-other-matters/. I'm guessing that the reference you had meant to make was to Marc Shapiro's Hebrew language article published in Milin Havivin. However, that article doesn't mention Kanievsky's view. You are correct that the article mentions Yosef's view, and I will go now to add that reference. Contributor613 (talk) 18:23, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what you're talking about. The only tag I intentionally replaced was the one you placed after Gaster/Soleveichik/Mazuz, all of whose positions are discussed in that article. I replaced the tag with a citation to that article, not "meant to" -- I did. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:26, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * And I think your completely spurious accusations of bad faith -- when in fact you did not bother to look at what citations I added -- were deeply inappropriate. This is not how you build an encyclopedia. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:28, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't accuse you of bad faith. If I'd thought you were a bad-faith editor I wouldn't have written you on your talk page to begin with. Contributor613 (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * "Your "cite fix" revision is not a fix, but effectively a revert of my requests for citation. The citation you restored here was the one which I'd deleted from multiple statements it was attached to because it did not actually support [or even discuss] those statements. A different citation, which supports the various claims, is needed." Absolutely none of this was true. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:31, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You had made reference there to "ref name=":2" /". That reference was not to the PDF we're discussing. Contributor613 (talk) 18:33, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Completely false. The edit history clearly shows that I added a a source to " " and then another cite to the same source. Please self-revert if this was a misunderstanding. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC) GordonGlottal (talk) 18:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * BTW Kanievsky's position is quoted on page 2 of that article. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:32, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You are right and wrong. Right that he's referenced on page 2 of that article. However, the article reference I'd deleted was not to that PDF article but to a webpage under "ref name=":2" /". So I think you owe me an apology for claiming that I'm going about deleting reference to that PDF when, to begin with, the link was not to Shapiro's PDF Hebrew article.
 * I didn't edit anything to do with Kanievsky! This is crazy. I added two cites where you had tags, after Soleveitchik/Gaster and after Mazuz. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:41, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Anyone interested can refer to the Revision history and decide between the two of us. However (save for Gaster), it appears that we agree on the sources so I don't see the benefit in rehashing the past right now. Can you take a look at the article's latest revision and tell me whether, aside from Gaster, it's to your satisfaction? If not, what needs fixing (besides Gaster)? If yes, then do you want to discuss Gaster? Contributor613 (talk) 18:47, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Happy to assume this was a misunderstanding, though to be honest I still have no idea what you're claiming to have been confused by. I added a completely different citation and you reverted with a false edit summary accusing me of lying to putting the same one back in. I have replaced the content. GordonGlottal (talk) 18:56, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I reject your representation of me as having accused you of lying. That's your interpretation of my statements but not what I actually said. Like I wrote before, I didn't take you to be a bad-faith editor, so I don't know why you're insisting on this characterization if indeed you're "happy to assume this was a misunderstanding." Contributor613 (talk) 19:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)