User talk:IZAK/Archive 42

Please help
One man (and his collaborators) trying to delete these category:
 * Category:People of Jewish descent by nationality
 * Category:Jamaican people of Jewish descent
 * Jews and Judaism are both ethnicity and religion. Please help deletion. And help (collaborate) to recovery (resurrection) Category:People of Jewish descent. BevisMarks (talk) 05:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for contacting me. I will remain neutral since there are many voices that seem to want to "Keep" during this CfD, because I have long outlined my own position on and opposition to these types of over-extended categories, see User:IZAK/Deleting lists and categories of Jews. Best wishes, 04:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Rabbi Bar-Ilan (Berlin) Israel stamp.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Rabbi Bar-Ilan (Berlin) Israel stamp.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.— Moe ε  07:55, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

== Best regards + kind translation request: into Hebrew and Yiddish for Ludmilla Radchenko. and also request of future cooperation of us and other articles, thank you an advance--Lodewijk Vadacchino (talk) 19:36, 24 November 2011 (UTC) ==

Good evening and greetings from Calabria,

I am writing first to say hello and wish you a happy weekend, which is prosperous and generous. In addition to this you wonder if you could kindly translated into Hebrew and Yiddish, the article on this person. Is a Russian actress, model and painter, well known in Italy and in Anglophone countries, but is starting to do art exhibitions around the world.

When she arrived in Italy at the time I was a kid, but that girl's face struck me much sun, and I thought ... this girl will go far, then got lost for a few years (even though virtually), I started to write something in Italian on her (by an anonymous user, at the time), then took part in other projects.

After some time, in my usual browsing the internet, I found the article in Italian and in English in very bad condition, so I decided to improve it by contacting the same Radchenko, after the necessary improvements, I started to translate it into multiple languages ​​and to ask for help other friends who very kindly Didero a helping hand.

While I write I can not hold the emotion in narrating this. hoping not to have you bored with my presentation and with the request.

Please if you can help me in my little mission today, and I would like to ask you if you want to collaborate with me in exchange translation. face with Hebrew and Yiddish, and I with the Italian and other languages ​​related. I can introduce a friend who speaks the native American languages​​, and my longtime friend. this Marrovi, Mexican from Jewish origins. sure your answer and some help thank you in advance from the heart, and if you need some article in particular, ask quietly.

a bright greeting and sorry my bad english

your Luigi--Lodewijk Vadacchino (talk) 19:36, 24 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. Thank you for contacting me. I cannot be of help to you at this time due to other demands upon my time. I would suggest you place this message at WP:TALKJUDAISM to see who can be of help to you in this regard. Best wishes, IZAK (talk) 17:13, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Google Books as source for WP:Article Titles etc.
Hi IZAK, I greatly appreciate your offer of help. But what is wrong with following Google Books and Google Scholar? as in: Btw, I saw your comment on the Halakha template, and just so you know, I also agree with you about legal Latin, but it should be replaced with English per WP:UE. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "defilement by the dead" 3,480 hits - most of them relevant
 * "defilement to the dead" 3 hits, - only 1 relevant.


 * Hi In ictu: Thanks for getting back to me. Here is my response and some points to ponder:


 * 1) The most important thing in all of this is common sense and flexibility and of course to avoid confrontation that leads to uncalled for WP:WAR.
 * 2) To "Anglicize" every last word and phrase into English would destroy the purpose of an encyclopedia that wishes to describe and explain phenomena, notions, ideas and words from the source.
 * 3) Sometimes the best way to do is to state the word, even in its rare usage, but then to build from that and translate it since translating it it first is in itself an act that is a few steps removed from the concept and notion itself.
 * 4) As an obvious example, the word Jihad has a very rich message in Arabic whereas the English words "Holy War" is already a watered-down version. Similarly, it would be stupid to re-name the "Mazel tov" article as "Good luck words in Judaism" or "Good fortune greeting among Jews" or that Shabbat should now be called Seventh day of rest in Judaism or Sabbath day of the Jewish Bible, etc etc etc.
 * 5) In addition, as is well-known, the English language itself is a construct of many other languages made up of Germanic, Latin and French words with many words from many cultures constantly being added.
 * 6) In fact one of the hallmarks of English as that it is a language that constantly absorbs words from other languages and cultures and adopts, absorbs and then uses them for itself.
 * 7) By narrowly clutching on to one WP policy you are missing both the larger picture and doing a great disservice to the function of a high class encyclopedia.
 * 8) WP has been accused of "dumbing down" information, and perhaps that's part of living in times when people learn things from "XYX for Dummies" or "ABC for Itiots" type books.
 * 9) But that is not the way the Jewish Encyclopedia or Encyclopedia Judaica or the Talmudic Encyclopedia or other scholarly encyclopedias function.
 * 10) Also, WP has WP:REDIRECTS so that if any term that has alternates is typed into the search the result is the same.

Let's keep up the dialogue. Thanks a lot. IZAK (talk) 13:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Izak
 * Thank you for your views above, however these are all areas where WP guidelines exist. Perhaps I should rephrase the question: In relation to WP policies and guidelines such as WP:PSTS, WP:Article titles and MOS:COMMONALITY etc., what is wrong with following Google Books and Google Scholar? as in:


 * "defilement by the dead" 3,480 hits - most of them relevant
 * "defilement to the dead" 3 hits, - only 1 relevant.
 * Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * PS You say "9.But that is not the way the Jewish Encyclopedia or Encyclopedia Judaica or the Talmudic Encyclopedia or other scholarly encyclopedias function." - Don't they? The emotionalized and personalized charges you are making against Jewish Encyclopedia or Encyclopedia Judaica are exactly how these Encyclopedias handle these articles. As for the אנציקלופדיה תלמודית it doesn't have foreign language article titles either. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi In ictu: here are some of my thoughts, in no particular order, but addressed to your concerns:


 * 1) We are all going to have to find a balance and a middle ground in this ongoing debate.
 * 2) Everyone can spout WP policies to suit themselves but that does not mean that logic and reason must be tossed out. You would be well-advised to brush up on the WP essays about WP:LAWYER and the one I like WP:SPIDERMAN!
 * 3) Building an encyclopedia is a complex undertaking and is always a product of its times, so while older encyclopedias had their day in the sun, they are now defunct albeit with good INFORMATION that is accurately termed, and we must now look to the future here on WP as we are the future, even though it's also an unknown.
 * 4) We live in the age of Multiculturalism, Globalization, Minority rights, Freedom of religion and Affirmative action that respects all cultures, minorities, languages and religions and all of us on WP must find a way of getting along and finding common ground without any one side seeking to wipe out the other or impose its dominance that can only lead to resistance, which is to be expected when any type of Hegemony, Cultural hegemony and Cultural imperialism of the powerful English language and culture is invoked.
 * 5) So take my advice and back off and seek the path of the broader more important pillars of WP policies especially WP:CONSENSUS and please avoid WP:EDITWARRING as it's so wasteful and silly.
 * 6) Technology today allows for the creation of a totally new type of encyclopedia which is what WP is and which you do not seem grasp.
 * 7) For example, with WP:REDIRECTS all the problems that bother you can be solved!!!
 * 8) Also note that WP:NOTPAPER and it allows for vast amounts of information, including the way foreign languages correctly name subjects in their own true contexts not possible in past paper encyclopedias, that is something that people would benefit from as well!
 * 9) Not every last term on WP can be cut off and denuded from it's linguistic, cultural and in the case of Hebrew its religious and spiritual sources.
 * 10) Hence, that is why WP has always allowed and will always welcome the vast array of Category:Words and phrases by language because it seeks to become an all-inclusive encyclopedia not even limited by new-fangled Google fads but of every bit of knowledge that has possibly ever existed including terms and phrases in their original linguistic contexts for the global village to learn about.
 * 11) Modern times have also seen a growth in the popularity and usage of Transliteration.
 * 12) At the same time, as you imply, WP cannot and should not become a huge mumbo-jumbo Tower of Babel babble where the rational and orderly use of one unified language is disregarded.
 * 13) Thus, you needn't worry, the English WP will be predominantly in the English language but as it's part of a new cyber world of digital inclusiveness it will make room for foreign languages' words and terminology as much as the English vernacular makes allowances for Technical terminology even though the average person has no clue what the "language" of medicine or science or what have you is all about.
 * So, to keep the peace, you will have to back off, just as the "purists" will have to back off, and everyone will need to make peace with the complexity of the WP phenomenon that's more than just about ramming English or one language done everyone's throat whether they like it or not, as much as the language "purists" want to "preserve" the pristine purity and correct language that they guard so zealously for their good reasons and will have to curtail as best and as humanly as they can.

Best wishes, Shabbat Shalom, and stay in touch. IZAK (talk) 00:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

In ictu oculi
I'm making a last ditch attempt to reason with User:In ictu oculi before dispute resolution becomes necessary. Would you mind going to his talk page and contributing to the discussion? Thanks. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 00:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi IZAK
 * I wasn't notified of this canvas, but don't have an enormous issue with it.


 * 01:00, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Zad68 ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:55, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:PiMaster3 ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:54, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Kauffner ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:53, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:StAnselm ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:53, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:IZAK ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:52, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Marecheth Ho'eElohuth ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:52, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Debresser ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section)
 * 00:52, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Jayjg ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section)
 * 00:51, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Musashiaharon ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:50, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Mzk1 ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * However like other editors I decide what goes on my Talk page, so with all respect I have moved it back to Lisa's. 03:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Your vote
Hi IZAK;

Your vote on the RM on Talk:The status quo Kohen has not been placed in its proper place and may not be counted, w--חודר לעומר (talk) 23:06, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time and contacting me and letting me know. I have now made the technical correction. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 04:37, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy Chanukah IZAK!

 * Thank you for your good wishes. IZAK (talk) 09:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The word "any" in Ritual washing in Judaism
Hi IZAK. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In a 2004 edit of yours, you wrote that Jews must ritually wash their hands after touching anything considered tamei—even an insect or animal. I've added a Citation needed-span to there. Do you remember where you learned that we must wash our hands after touching an insect or animal? I've never read such a thing outside of Wikipedia—neither in the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch nor elsewhere. Please move this conversation to my talk page when you reply. Thanks in advance. All the best, Unforgettableid (talk) 11:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there Unforgettable, thanks for contacting me. Amazing what one can accomplish with a simple Google search. I Googled touching of insect animal in Jewish law and right off the bat I clicked on The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion - Google Books Result (p. 174) and got the answer you need: ""The Shulkhan Arukh (Orach Haim 4.18, 158-165 lists occasions when hands should be washed; upon arising each morning, after urination and defecation, after taking off one's shoes, or touching any part of the body customarily covered, after visiting a cemetery,after undressing, before and after meals, after marital relations, and after coming into contact with lice" and one does not have to be a great genius or halachist to understand that if for the lowly louse one must wash one's hands, so certainly likewise if one touches all manner of insects and animals, if one wishes to then proceed to study Torah, pray or make a blessing. By the way, one would do so first for hygiene with soap and water, then dry your hands, and then to also wash the hands ritually. The codes of Jewish law won't tell you to use soap either but common sense requires it and so would Judaism that requires one to take care of one's physical health (to prevent contagion from germs or vermin) and to wash off the invisible impurity/tuma by means of ritual washing or even taking a dip in a mikva. And by the way, there is a wonderful analogy used by the Talmudic sages tovel vesheretz beyado (immerses in the mikvah with an impure insect in his hand) so one sees that the very essence of a bug, ANY bug, is the OPPOSITE of the purity/tahara that is within the waters of the mikva, and if a bug is impure so would holding a rat, pig, snake, dog or cat be impure in the mikva!!!! You know, some things in Yiddishkeit are learned by applied logic. I do not have the time to see if Rav Moshe Feinstein or the Chazon Ish address your questionable question in their responsa but I think I have made my point. Take care, IZAK (talk) 20:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, "tovel vesheretz beyado" can be explained to mean the shmona (eight) shratzim that are specifically mentioned in the Torah as tamei. So from there you can not prove that all unclean animals convey tumah. Debresser (talk) 00:28, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, that was just for the sake of the argument. But now I have looked it up. The expression "tovel vesheretz beyado" was used first by medieval sages, and as no more than an expression, much the same way it is used nowadays. It has no origin and intrinsic meaning in halakha, and therefore nothing can be learned from it.
 * And the halakha about "hanoge'a bekhina" also can be traced back no further than Yitzchak Abuhav. And nowhere in these halakhot do we find a clear statement that the same is true for other animals or insects.
 * Possible reasons why the Abuhav would be stringent specifically for lice could be 1. because lice are created from sweat. This would be analogously to the words of the Rosh brought in the Beit Yosef on chapter 7 of Orach Chayim: "harei hi halikhlukh hayotzei migufo" ("for it is filth coming out of the body"). Or 2. because they are especially abhorrent. These possible reasons are chidushim of my own, inspired by the bi'ur halakha on chapter 316, "mutar". Debresser (talk) 01:27, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Bottom line, an "ehrliche yerei shomayim Yid" would not dream of davening, making brochas or learning Torah after having just touched any insect or animal creature, be it out of a desire to follow the teachings of the Torah and the guidelines of halacha and the sages of all generations until our days. I cannot imagine the Lubavitcher Rebbe patting a dog or having an ant crawl on his hands and not wash them ritually before he would deliver a maamar chasidus etc. IZAK (talk) 00:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * But Wikipedia is not about being an erliche yid. So unless you could find a source, we shall have to change that sentence. On a personal note, I may add that I would be very interested if you were to find such a source. Debresser (talk) 01:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I saw an important rabbi today, and asked him about this issue. He answered two things. First, that he remembers seeing the question somewhere, but doesn't remember where, and that I should call him in another week. Second, that if for example a donkey - an unclean animal - were a reason to wash hands, then it is more than likely that the gemorre, which after all was written in times when donkeys were a commonly used form of transport, would have mentioned something about this. And that it is likely that lice are a special case because they are especially abhorrent. To be continued. Debresser (talk) 10:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I have copied this entire discussion to Talk:Ritual washing in Judaism and replied there. All the best, &mdash;Unforgettableid (talk) 02:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Washing hands after touching tamei objects
I have been watching developments at surrounding that particular passage in Ritual washing in Judaism for a long time now. I have one question and one suggestion. Lice are indeed mentioned there, if memory serves me, but that is far from the general statement that the same would be true if one were to touch any tamei animal, like insects, or cats and dogs. Do you have some clearer source for that? In addition, I'd suggest to replace "tamei (ritually impure) objects" by "certain objects", because the word tamei is usually used in connection with animals, meaning those species that are not allowed for consumption. Of course it is true that any object, e.g. shoes, that conveys tumah is also tamei, but not in the same sense. To avoid confusion, I'd remove the word tamei from this sentence at all. Alternatively, one could say "objects that convey tumah". Debresser (talk) 20:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Debresser, see the response I have just posted above . Thanks, IZAK (talk) 20:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The phrase "objects that convey tumah" is perfect. IZAK (talk) 20:43, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Did so. And added the word "ritually unclean" to "animals and insects", because I doubt the same would be true for clean animals. Debresser (talk) 21:02, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have copied this entire discussion to Talk:Ritual washing in Judaism. If anyone would like to reply further, please do so there. All the best, &mdash;Unforgettableid (talk) 02:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year
Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Please explain
Please explain the reason for his edit, removing Category:Jews and Judaism from Who is a Jew?. Debresser (talk) 18:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Debresser: Simple: It's because Category:Jews and Judaism is a super main category and has had on its page the notification from Container category i.e.


 * Thus the "Who is a Jew?" article does not belong there, it is not more special than any other articles that are not there either. In fact years ago, when the original Jew (now renamed Jews) article got too bulky, a number of Judaic editors created it in 2004, and it naturally belongs in discussions about Jews because it's not about What is Judaism? either. It is also about a very political issue could easily part of Category:Politics of Israel. IZAK (talk) 03:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, Category:Jews is also tagged with such a banner. Actually, I think that is incorrect. The intent was that articles about individual Jews shouldn't be there. That is better expressed with text. Especially since that category has about 15 articles. Good thing Who is a Jew? is in Category:Jews already. Debresser (talk) 10:16, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As parent categories grow and the more they fill up with more specifically-named sub- and sub-sub-categories, then over the years articles are moved from the previous parent-categories that become Container category into the sub- and sub-sub and even sub-sub-sub-categories. This does not happen overnight. The art and discipline of managing and understanding the way *categories* function in contradistinction to the way *articles* evolve is usually not clear to less experienced users, who frequently randomly slap the parent categories, sub-categories and even sub--sub-categories and even the *Container category* onto the same article/s. Over time the growing Container category/parent categories need cleaning up because of mistaken, inexperienced and over-zealous misapplication and placement of categories on articles into the Container category, and particularly when the large Container category/parent categories start filling up so that when they then become homes to sub-categories only it becomes necessary to do some clean up work and move the articles under the Container category to the sub- and sub-sub-categories. It's all part of a long process. IZAK (talk) 13:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, very true. Thank you. Debresser (talk) 16:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Need Hebrew-language translator
I need someone to translate my English proposal into Hebrew to delist File:Taylor, Elizabeth posed.jpg as a Featured Picture of Hebrew Wikipedia. This issue. --George Ho (talk) 08:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi George. Thanks for contacting me. I am sorry I cannot be of help to you at this time due to time constraints. I suggest you contact any one of Users:, , , , who could be of help as some of them are also on the Israeli Hebrew WP. IZAK (talk) 08:44, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I got the translation. Now I must find the delisting page in Hebrew. I wonder if you can find it in he:ויקיפדיה:תמונה מומלצת. --George Ho (talk) 06:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Possible greater cooperation across religion and philosophy projects
Please feel free to make any comments you might wish at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion regarding possible more closely coordinated activity between the various religion, philosophy, and mythology WikiProjects. John Carter (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi John, thanks for letting me know. I have responded over there. IZAK (talk) 08:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Seven Point Counter Proposal
(Posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion):

'''Too many Wikipedia articles about religion contain too much information from a secular non-religious and even anti-religious perspective that stands in the way of anyone seeking information about a religion or religious subject to learn and understand what the religion or religious subject itself is about in the first place. In effect, over the years, by misappplying Wikipedia's editorial policies, an almost arrogant self-assured secular point of view now predominates at the expense of a religious point of view. The proposal now made, based on many years of editing such articles, is that a SEVEN POINT PROCEDURE be followed by all editors when any article about religion or a religious subject is written, of course all the while in compliance with all Wikipedia editorial, citation, NPOV and style policies:
 * 1) That the article open by describing and explaining (as is empirically correct and required in objective scholarship -- BEFORE making any latter-day judgments) what the religion itself says about itself and/or the religious subject in question and/or the way that religion's views about the subject.
 * 2) That all the known religious and classical sources be cited and stated for further reference. (Many of those sources already exist as articles on Wikipedia.)
 * 3) Differences among various schools of thought in that religion then be cited and described and explained.
 * 4) The history and practices of the religion and the subject in question.
 * 5) What the various other schools of thought and other religions say about this religion or subject.
 * 6) What modern secular and academic scholarship has to say about the religion or subject. (Unfortunately, far too often, this part comes to early and even gets the lion's share of the article, in the process obscuring, blocking and just plain in efect "deleting" the first original meaning of the religion or the religious susbject of the article.)
 * 7) Add criticism of the subject and rebuttal of the criticism as found in known and accepted sources and schools of thought. (This part too gets overly-emphasized far too often in articles at the expense of what the religion itself has to say about itself and/or the religous subjects related to it.)

Thank you, IZAK (talk) 08:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I commented on this over on the talk page. The problem is certainly solvable, but editors have to coordinate. I would love to help with such an effort. The problem is currently caused by coordination on one side (usually the secular one) and lack of coordination on the other. If you have a chance, please drop by the talk page on the exodus] as I am having the exact problem you describe. The responses (especially by PiCo) are demonstrative of how this problem works and why it is the way it is.Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 03:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The Exodus
Hi, If you think this is bad, see Moses. All these articles need tons of work. I don't know if I have the time right now before Pesach, but I'll keep it in mind. Best, Yoninah (talk) 11:31, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

changes
Your changes to the exodus were reverted, so I changed them back. This is how it usually works. As you can see in the talk page, several editors are not persuadable, so we should work together to correct the article. So far, it has been me against 2 or 3 editors, but with your help we can actually correct this article.Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * My restoration of your edits was reverted. I corrected the issue but can't do much more unless you step in and assist on the issue. This is usually what happens, and coordination is the only way to overcome this.Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 15:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Quarkgluonsoup: Thanks for contacting me. The article is now "padlocked". So I have left the following messages at:
 * 1) User talk:Guerillero: "Hi Guerillero: Isn't this making a mountain out of molehill? Why all the talk of going to ANI and this heavy-handed "padlock"? when a few editors with rival views are having a good faith disagreement. How about making a little room for editors who do not share just a secular POV about a key topic important to three faiths: Judaism, Christianity and Islam (with billions of followers) and who wish to contribute more from the ORIGINAL classic sources in a NPOV manner. Any fool can see that The Exodus article has lost it's way and now reads like an article that should rightly be called Exodus denial (see Holocaust denial as an example of how this works -- here are some links to the way "Exodus denial" and Holocaust denial" are linked up:, , , , ) as if it's sole real aim is to demolish the original ideas and events and replace them with cockamamie prejudiced and jaundiced anti-religious "theories" (at best) and outright canards and Quackery cloaked in academic jargon that's being cooked up as we sit here. Please unblock the article, and let the debate and editing continue. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 16:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)"
 * 2) User talk:Dominus Vobisdu: "Hi Dominus and welcome to Wikipedia. Couldn't help but notice your baseless "revert" at The Exodus article with your misplaced comment that "When discusssing history, we use academic viewpoint" since this topic is important to three RELIGIONS: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The main record has always been and remains the Hebrew Bible particularly the Pentateuch. Not sure how much you are familiar with these religions, their beliefs and the religious texts that have recorded the events of the Exodus from the time it happened over 3,300 years ago until the present. Sure the category of "history" includes everything, but then again so does the category of "religion" and as long as articles are written from a NPOV with relevant sources, you cannot dismiss a so-called religious POV because it clashes with a secular POV since WP includes ALL POVs. Thanks for your understanding and feel free to ask anything you like about Judaism at WP:JUDAISM and someone will try to help you. Thanks again, IZAK (talk) 15:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)"

Hi IZAK and welcome to Wikipedia. Couldn't help but notice your ridiculous "message" at my talk page. Please stop calling me "Dominus" and stop sending me these ridiculous "messages". If you continue to do that, you will be reported. Thanks again.-- В и к и  T   17:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * So far I sent you only *one* good faith message. The message was also sent to "Dominus" and you, I should have added your name of "Wikiwind" which is hidden under your logo of "Buxu T". Try talking things out instead of running "report" things, it works a lot better and enhances WP:CONSENSUS. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 17:11, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Guerillero &#124;  My Talk  21:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Sandbox draft of the exodus
I created a sandbox version of the exodus page at User:Quarkgluonsoup/The Exodus/Draft. Please come over and make what edits you think would improve the page.Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 19:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Quarkgluonsoup: Thanks for contacting me. I reviewed your draft and it is EXCELLENT and makes much more sense than the present "article". I would love to give it more time, but like many of the other Judaism editors at this time of year I am pressurized by my own personal pre-Passover preparations (Passover commences on the night of April 6 and there is still too much to do to get the household in order for that deadline) and I just cannot do the kind of justice to it that it deserves. If you need to contact me sooner please Email me and I will be notified and try to respond. Be well and everything of the best, IZAK (talk) 08:25, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have now added some important points of the practical significance of the Exodus to practicing Rabbinic Judaism to this day for over 2000 years, see Talk:The Exodus. IZAK (talk) 10:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The sandbox version of the exodus article has been moved to Talk:The_Exodus/Draft.Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 15:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Potato pancakes


Lionelt has given you some Potato pancakes! Potato pancakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else some Potato pancakes, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Hanukkah!

To spread the goodness of Potato pancake, you can add to someone's talk page with a friendly message!


 * Thank you User ! I happen to love latkes so they are welcome! IZAK (talk) 10:19, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:15, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Passover
I hope you have a good passover. -- Guerillero &#124;  My Talk  17:23, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you and Happy Holiday to you and yours! IZAK (talk) 03:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The Exodus
Hi Izak.

I trust Passaover was a memorable and pleasurable time for you and your family.

Perhaps you might like to take up the question of the revision of the exodus again? I'd like us to address the "cultural meaning' section (or whatever it's to be called). I think you might be the best person to produce a basic draft for us. I do suggest, however, that (a) you use generally accessible sources (helps verification), and (b) keep it short as possible.

Personally I don't want to spend too much time on this, but I'll have a look at anything you do. PiCo (talk) 05:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi PiCo, still crawling out from under the effects of Passover. As for being "the best person to produce a basic draft for us" I thank you genuinely for the mighty compliment, but I honestly think it needs to be a group effort, and should be referred to more experts at WP:JUDAISM. One point I differ with you about is that "keep it short as possible" because, it violates WP:NOTPAPER and if a section is important it can eventually become an article in its own right. Thanks again and please stay in touch. IZAK (talk) 10:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Izak, the Judaism experts should also take a look at PiCo's recent defacement of Isaiah_7:14. In addition to dubious edits, he deleted most of the material in the article.Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 14:25, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Quark: Thanks for the comments. It is pretty obvious that the serious Judaic editors have long abandoned these kind of efforts to Christian-leaning editors. there is NO serious Torah scholar in the world who would regard what Wikipedia has to say about the Bible as accurate because everything is now an ecumenical mish-mash at best and a total intellectual shambles and utter joke at worst. After all, it is impossible in the real world to teach Jewish and Christain interpretations as if they were "co-equals" when each side has no clue and totally rejects what the others says and how they derive it. The ONLY way to get out this morass is to create articles that would allow each religious heritage to state the way it studies and teaches such passages, thus there would have to be a need for Isaiah 7:14 according to Judaism as well as Isaiah 7:14 according to Christianity --it should at least be presented that way in the one article, but as it stands it's a near senseless hodge-podge. Keep me posted and keep the editors at WP:TALKJUDAISM posted. Thanks a lot! IZAK (talk) 08:02, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:13, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Israeli people by ethnic or national origin
Hi. You participated in a CfD on Category:Israeli people by ethnic or national origin two years ago. This CfD is currently being revisited so I'm hoping you can participate in the debate. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 14:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

History of the Jews in Puerto Rico
Hi IZAK. It looks like another administrator has already made the page move. All the best, — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 17:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you! IZAK (talk) 07:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Recent Discussions on Elazar Shach Discussion Page
Hi,

There have been some recent discussions on the Elazar Shach discussion page:(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Elazar_Shach)

"Links to Speeches and Letters of Shach"

"Continued - Quote from R' Moshe Grylak"

"Adin Steinsaltz"

"Relationship with R' Chaim Ozer Grodzinski" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yonoson3 (talk • contribs) 06:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd appreciate your input, if possible,

Thanks,

Yonoson3 (talk) 05:53, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

History of the Jews in Azerbaijan
Hi IZAK. As you requested, Azerbaijani Jews has been moved to History of the Jews in Azerbaijan. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 16:42, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you Malik, mush appreciated. IZAK (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Jewish film and theatre
Hi IZAK, I have nominated Category:Jewish film and theatre for deletion. As you created the category you may wish to comment. – Fayenatic  L ondon 09:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi again. I'm really not doing anything of the kind of the demolition that you have read into the nomination, and am surprised at the opposition. My proposal is like taking out an intermediate grouping of, say, . You suggested that a better alternative would have been proposing the most logical, fair and rational solution of an even 50-50 SPLIT straight down the line between equal theatre and film, that would require lots more work and cooperation with other editors -- but that split is already there in and, and I do not want to disturb those at all.


 * Please let me know if I been insensitive and caused offence in some way. – Fayenatic  L ondon 17:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Fayenatic: Thanks for contacting me. I like to debate vigorously, so don't get worried, just make your case, and it allows me to respond as necessary and if need be. The fact that there are the two categories is in fact yet another reason for the combination of these two categories into a legitimate parent category of their own. IZAK (talk) 22:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)