User talk:La comadreja/Archive 1

Re: Judaism links
To me, it seemed out of place in the external links section. That section has links that deal with the whole community while the Judaism link seems to focus on a very small portion of the community. In a small town article like Hedgesville, it seems more like a significant part of the community. I actually think it is somewhat out of place in the Daly City, CA article, but I feel if there is a section talking about the various cultural/religious groups/facilities in the community and you make mention of the facilities in such a section, then they would probably fit better. If you can come up with a section covering other community cultures/religions as well, that would be great-I don't have that information. It might also be worthwhile to make mention of it and all of the other Jewish facilities in the Karaite Judaism article itself. Vpuliva (talk) 23:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

No, unfortunately, I would like it very much if someone had information about the various cultural/religious group/attractions -especially in my area, as I am curious. I'll let you know if I do find out though. Vpuliva (talk) 06:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

This correspondence was resolved by my creating new sections "Religious life"/"Cultural life" in the articles about the places in question, and organizing the Karaite Judaism article's external links by region.

May 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Talk:Karaite Judaism has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. D rew S mith  What I've done  02:46, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

These edits remained with minor changes after a bit of correspondence with this User.

September 2009
Your recent addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. MLauba (talk) 18:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Abraham Kefeli
While I understand that there is material you want to salvage, please don't revert, extract and readd it manually. You simply are not allowed to restore copyrighted material, even for temporary editing purposes. A pain, I know, but that's the way it works. Unless permission is provided, that material cannot remain on Wikipedia. MLauba (talk) 18:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Why wouldn't it be possible to remove the image but readd the text? To me, the text seems innocuous enough. --AFriedman (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * as discussed on my talk page, the issue is with the text here. Hope this clarifies. MLauba (talk) 18:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I rewrote the text of this article to salvage it.

Thank you
Thank you very much for the barnstar! — Malik Shabazz 04:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Jews and Hollywood
Thanks for the barnstar. I'm not sure it was richly deserved as Noleander had already uncovered some of the same references and the sources didn't make a blind bit of difference to the outcome! I may work on a better replacement in my userspace. Fences &amp;  Windows  15:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Regardless of the outcome, I felt your effort should have counted for much more.  I wrote what I thought on the Controversies page--that you worked so hard to fell the tree in the forest that nobody heard, and IMO it was everyone else's mistake not to make more of what you did.  Information about this important topic of course belongs in Wikipedia, obviously better sourced and more NPOV.  I'm concerned the deletionists are throwing out the baby with the bathwater now, just because the focus and sources of the original article were not appropriate.  Let's use WP to teach people the truth about the issue so no one writes an article like the original one again.  --AFriedman (talk) 02:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
— Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Project tagging
Hey, WikiProject tag or no tag does not mean that article is not important - they are there just for maintenance purposes. I removed the tag because I do not feel that an article about religion is within the scope of Lithuanian WikiProject (ie. it is not "our" responsibility to keep the article nice & clean). Say, Christianity is very important to Lithuania too - something like 80% of population is Christian, but I do not slap WP:LITH banner on Christianity. I am in the process of tagging Lithuania-related articles because I want to get a good list of all articles within the scope. However, after 400+ tags my brains turned into a slushy & feel free to disagree - it's a wiki! :) Renata (talk) 19:39, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Judaism article
Hi, thanks for the note. Sure, I can take a look. However, speaking not as a wiki editor but someone who both lives by halakha and has spent decades in its study, these rules are so complex that they cannot be given true justice in an article. In my opinion, for whatever it is worth, we can work on the basic outlines, but need to recognize that it is beyond the capabilities of wikipedia to give detailed halakhic guidance. -- Avi (talk) 01:28, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Judaism
Your edits to the Nidah section have proven catalitic, and I have made some improvements on them. That seems to be my style of editing. Let's keep up the good work together. Debresser (talk) 15:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) It's a bit harder to find sources about purity and male-female interactions than it was for Kashrut, plus I don't know as much about the subject.  In full disclosure, I was raised Conservative Jewish.  Do you know of any good ones?  --AFriedman (talk) 21:02, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually no. I am a rabbi myself, a haredi one, so I answer questions from the Shulchan Oruch or similar literature. Debresser (talk) 21:10, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Where can I find good rabbinic literature like the Shulchan Oruch online, either in the original or in translation?  That might help.  --AFriedman (talk) 22:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Isn't there a link at the bottom of the Judaism article? Debresser (talk) 10:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There is, and here it comes: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Shulchan_Aruch. Debresser (talk) 10:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! That is going to be helpful. --AFriedman (talk) 16:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Judaism
Hi, I admire your desire to improve the Judaism article and Judaism related pages. I personally have no time to work on them. But I do have some knowledge of the topic and can recommend to you good sources. For Jewish history, the three books I mentioned really are very good - I mean, they meet our standards for reliability and significance. Dimont was a popularizer, and a good one, but still he was not a professional historian and much of what he wrote is dated and limited. I highly recommend you read Leo Schwartz's Great Ages and Ideas of the Jewish People. The contributors were at the time the leading historians for each era about which they write. The book edited by Ben Sasson goes into more detail and also is more up to date. Between the two books you would have a very solid grasp of what professional historians believe about different eras of Jewish history. The Schwartz volume was targetted at a popular audience, and Ben Sasson's book for college students, so both are accessible. Not as entertaining as Dimont, but really, far more accurate and sophisticated. I also highly recommend Barry Holtz's edited volume, Back to the Sources. Also aimed at a general audience, it is a series of essays by leading scholars on the principal sources for anyone studying Judaism: the Bible, the Midrash, Mishnah, Talmud, and so on. The essays provide information about the sources themselves but also about the different ways different scholars use/study these sources. I can recommend more specific books on specific topics or historical periods, but these three books really provide a very strong foundation for improving almost any article on Judaism/Judaism related topics. I hope you do not mind my making recommendations. These books are longer than Dimont but if you enjoy learning more about Jewish history and Judaism you will enjoy these, and if you really want to work on encyclopedia articles I think you will find them invaluable sources/resources. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 20:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your making book recommendations. At present, I am unable to go to the library or buy new books.  I'm mostly limited to what's on the internet.  However, I have access to a major University library and will have more time to look at these and other books this winter.


 * On that note, I would still recommend Dimont as a first Jewish history book for people who don't have a full appreciation of the subject. Dimont's book is what got me interested in Jewish history in the first place.  Jewish apathy and assimilation are major problems and given that it's so important to maintain people's interest in the subject, I think we should direct people who don't know about the subject to the most engaging introduction to Jewish history that is reasonably accurate.  But that's a separate issue from what sources a WP editor should use for articles.  --AFriedman (talk) 20:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, Dimont was one of the first books I read on the topic and I enjoyed it immensely. Cecil Roth has a short one volume history of the Jews which is very good (again, he is a professional historian) but no doubt drier than Dimont.  I think what really bothers me about Dimont is he starts with this queston, what has enabled the Jews to survive so long and the answer necessarily involves a triumphalist narrative that ultimately I found smug and congratulatory.  Now, there is a valid claim about continuity for thousands of years including periods of diversity and Dimont's narrative is not "wrong" (there seldom is a simple right or wrong when dealing with the big questions of history).  But the fact is there are many problems with this narrative, with assumptions about continuity, and triumphalism.  Other historians have made claims that don't make me feel very comfortable, they really rub against the kind of post-Holocaust post-Israel identity I was brought up with.  But I learned to find them far more interesting, just as an intellectual, as a scholar, and while they forced me to rehink what it means to be Jewish in the end i think I was left with a more meaningful sense of my self and my people.  I think it was the Schwartz volume that first really gave me a sense of a more complicated but interesting view of history.  But there is no question, Dimont spins a good yarn, and he put a lot of research into the book, he obviously cared about it. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 21:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. I'll keep it in mind as I edit the article. --AFriedman (talk) 23:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Karaite
Just a general thing, after seeing many of your edits on Judaism. Take care not to give undue weight to Karaite subjects/opinions/etc. in this article. For two reasons: 1. There are many movements inside Judiasm or connected with it, and we can not give details about all of them. 2. Karaism is not mainstream Judaism, just one of the many movements that were derived from Judiasm in the course of history. Note that although consensus seems to be to mention it now and then, it does not even have a separate section but is mentioned instead under Judaism. Debresser (talk) 07:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. In general, I've been trying to mention mainstream opinions as such, accounting for the specific mainstream movement and allowing for a couple of conspicuous dissenting views per issue.  For example, I think the Karaite views of tum'ah are noteworthy given their importance to Karaism, and I'd also like to change "niddah" to describe the Conservative views of this issue.  BTW, I haven't gotten around to changing the "Jewish denominations" part of the article yet, but I don't see a compelling reason to put "alternative Judaism" in a separate section.  When I get there, please let me know what you think of the changes.  Also, do you know if the Gruzinim or other minority groups have any distinctive views or practices worthy of mention in the main Judaism article?  I know traditional Kurdish Jews, for example, allowed women to be high-ranking Rabbis even though most other traditional denominations did not.  --AFriedman (talk) 19:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Controversies related to prevalence of Jews in leadership roles in Hollywood
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you.  Sandstein  15:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Intro on Judaism
Before you edit further on that (as I'd like not to cause an edit war) could you please check out the evidence on Slrubenstein's talk page. You'll find all the evidence you need there.  Blizzard Beast  ''$ODIN' 02:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I actually just posted it on the Judaism talk page, so feel free to discuss there if you have any issues.  Blizzard Beast  ''$ODIN' 02:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand what you are getting at. But what you are talking about is Judaism as an ethnicity, which is a different article. The Judaism article we are editing is about the religion. The evidence is on the Judaism talk page. I'm really not changing a single thing about the article.  Blizzard Beast  ''$ODIN' 02:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi!
Dear AFriedman, I love you!! And I do like many of your edits. But, I thought you are doing your work now? I should be too... Love, CordeliaNaismith (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC).

Talkback thing (feel free to remove it if you hate these things)
Lord Spongefrog, (Talk to me, or I'll eat your liver!)  20:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Margaret Clark
I was wondering if you agreed with my informal conclusion regarding the notability of the Margaret Clark article. Since the two editors involved have had a long standing issue of claiming each other harrasses the other; I tried to be as neutral and fair to both. Given the sources you came up with for the article, WP:PRESERVE, and WP:POLITICIAN the article is most definitely notable per current guidelines. However, I thought it was imperative that it be made clear to Joy that those sources in your post need to be incorporated into the article in a reasonable amount of time to show notability as the article currently looks as if it is a list of non-notable positions the mayor has held. This is the first time I've done any form of informal mediation and hope the outcome ends up being happy to both parties. PS- I'm glad you found those sources to clear up the matter, thank you!Camelbinky (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I like your experiment in mediation, and how you stepped in with authority and humor on that page. BTW, I think that between the two of us, we've made the discussion less hostile.  The discussion seems to be reaching consensus in favor of "keep" and I was very happy to see Skagit River Queen's latest post.  I also think S.R.Q. has a very cool Username because I love the Pacific Northwest and it's hard to make a Username with as much local flavor.


 * If you'd like to see an even more contentious discussion, and one that I'm trying to encourage participation in, see Talk: Ahmad Batebi and User talk:Ahmadbatebi. Ahmad Batebi is a human rights activist and former Iranian political prisoner and if you agree with the side I've taken, you may want to leave a message on Ahmadbatebi's talk page.  I'm trying to spread Wikilove, which I think User:Ahmadbatebi should have received instead of the hostile reception he got.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  06:26, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for being a positive port in the storm and your invaluable contributions. You are much appreciated!! JoyDiamond (talk) 10:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your kind words and the Userbox! I love the idea of the Kindness Campaign, which I didn't know about before, and I've just joined.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  21:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I am fine with the new tag on the Margaret Clark article, however, I think it would have been a good idea for you to make note of the change on the article's talk page - as well as your reasoning behind it. There has been an issue of the tag being removed before the notability of the *article* was established using the references you provided (and any others that can be provided establishing notability within the article) and I have been using the talk page to discuss this issue. It would have been appropriate for you to do the same, don't you think? --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

P.S.....I'm glad you understand and appreciate my user name :-D --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I added the talk page rationale as soon as I changed the template. Did you know that under "Preferences," you can go to the tab called "Gadgets" and request a tool called Friendly, which, among other features, can tag articles with a variety of tag templates?  That's how I did the tagging of the Margaret Clark article.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  21:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

What browser are you using? Not finding "Gadgets". —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoyDiamond (talk • contribs) 00:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm using Firefox. Are you finding "My Preferences"?  It's right near "My Talk."  -- AFriedman   (talk)  16:59, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

NW Washington
I am glad you have had some time to spend in NW Washington - it is, most certainly, one of the most beautiful places on earth, IMO. I've travelled all over the world and have lived away from here for a number of years, but have never found another place (other than Israel) that I would want to spend the rest of my life. The San Juans are fantastic (I lived in Anacortes on Fidalgo Island for a few years). Whenever out-of-town or out-of-state visitors come here in the summer months, taking the ferry from Anacortes through the San Juans to Victoria, B.C. is always a must and something those visitors comment on as being one of the best "boat rides" they have ever taken. Seeing Orcas on the trip is always a plus, of course! The Skagit is the largest US river north of the Columbia River and is a wild and scenic river. I have a wonderful view of it from my front deck (but when it floods, we are thankfully high enough above it to never have to worry about flooding ourselves) and the Bald Eagles, Great Blue Herons, Osprey, and various geese, swans, and ducks that fly over and around it. And yes, the East River is...well - never mind. No comparison, right? (but New York City is quite an amazing place, actually) Take care. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 02:31, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Would like some input
Good morning. If you could take the time, I would like some input on some verbiage that is being discussed at the talk page of the Margaret Clark article. If you are willing to do this, please take the time to review the current back and forth under the section "vocabulary". It is my contention that the verbiage being insisted on is unnecessary and speculative (and really a bit too flowery for an encyclopedia article, actually) whereas the other editor's opinion is that we should "trade" for which words stay. I have tried to explain that Wikipedia is not a speculation newsrag but an encyclopedia that reports facts. IMPO, I think that what's happening here is a need to "win" at all costs rather than looking to the good of the article and Wikipedia in general. I am also sending the same request to User:Equazcion. Thanks. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 16:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Good morning! Ditto on most of above. "Compromise," I thought was a good idea. "flowery" "newsrag", may be a new oxymoron. "Winning" does seem to be a major issue as it has been in the past, by simply "wearing people down," ( not my words). "IMPO" root word imp, has me mystified and prone to fancy, explain please. I believe the "best" word for each sentence construction/meaning should be used. If you want a first class publication, you use first class words as part of the education process. The notion that Wikipedia "reports facts" is an amusing concept....An editor that has actually studied linguistics is not prone to overuse the word "verbiage" and knows that although many words may be used in place, there is usually a "perfect" word that will enhance a sentence or concept without "speculation." For the good of Wikipedia, I will stop here. Succinct is best.JoyDiamond (talk) 17:59, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I've gone over to the Talk page and commented on the wording. -- AFriedman  (talk)  22:36, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Olive branch
While I appreciate that you are attempting to "keep the peace", I have to tell you that the latest message you left on my talk page sounded as if you were talking to a child and was quite offensive to me. I know you didn't mean it that way, however, I'm old enough to be a grandmother and really don't need to be addressed in such a manner - it was, frankly, quite unneccessary. As long as the other editor keeps things civil and continues on the path she is, I don't see any reason why the atmosphere will change from what it is currently. Have a good week. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 19:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Obviously, I didn't mean to be offensive and I apologize that this was how it made you feel. I'll try not to do things this way in the future.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  03:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

As a suggestion
User_talk:Collect Debresser (talk) 08:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Dear AFriedman, Thanks for the pork pie! It was delicious. I miss you too! Love, Cordelia CordeliaNaismith (talk) 00:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks
For your kind words. Collect (talk) 11:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. Also, Happy Holidays!  -- AFriedman   (talk)  16:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Hanukkah
Thanks for making the world a brighter place by editing Wikipedia! Love, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 02:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Reply
I have replied on my talk page, and another one on the talk page. They should be read together. Debresser (talk) 10:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Josue Lajeunesse
A tag has been placed on Josue Lajeunesse requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 04:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

'''I had contested this deletion nomination and responded on Alan Liefting's talk page. The speedy deletion tag was removed by User:Graeme Bartlett.'''

Great job on the article about Josue Lajeunesse!
I'm really glad that you started this article! I thought you would enjoy seeing the following articles that I linked to the Josue Lajeunesse page: Whitman_College,_Princeton_University Two_Dickinson_Street_Co-op List_of_Princeton_University_people Any other pages that you think would be appropriate to link to the article about Josue? Love, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 17:48, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and I like your ideas about linking Josue's page. I've already added him to the page about The Philosopher Kings (film). Thinking about it, I've also added him to the following: Any other thoughts? Can't wait to see what else you add! Love, AFriedman   (talk)  18:24, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Lawrence Township, Mercer County, New Jersey
 * List of people from New Jersey
 * List of Haitians

Donmeh West
I really thank you for helping me on the page donmeh west. Also that is great you also interested in biology and science. I am an actvie member of science club of my university that works on evolution and astonomy and wants to publish a magazine about sccience. I am looking for further information on evolution to share with my friends at club. Again thanks.--Abbatai (talk) 19:16, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Rgardin your post on yalhak's page. Yes he is leader of donmeh west. And John Freely is a professour at my university.:) Take care--Abbatai (talk) 19:34, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much. I'm about to respond to your post on your Talk page.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  19:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure if I'm doing this correctly. I love the pork pie -- not for it's savory ingredients, but for its even-more savory sentiment; and (although touched by that sentiment) I'm afraid I must decline to eat it, not because it's traif, but because I'm a vegetarian. Yalhak [p.s. If you get a chance, let me know if I left you this note correctly, or if there is a better way to do it -- of if you even got it at all.] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yalhak (talk • contribs) 15:13, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!


SkagitRiverQueen (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you so much for your addition to my talk page. You have NO idea how timely it was and how much it helped my mood! While I imagine from your Wikipedia interests that I probably should have sent you a Happy Hanukkah message over a week ago, this is the best I can come up with at the spur of the moment! ;-) Take care. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 19:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for your holiday wishes! I do celebrate Hanukkah, but Christmas is an awesome holiday too.  Nobody argues that better than Dickens, in my opinion.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  19:16, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the Dickens link. I will look at it more closely later on this evening when I have time after the "festivities" have died down.  And, BTW, I did see your note, but it was bad form for me to not reply.  I appreciated it at the time, and still do. Thanks again.  --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
 Abbatai (talk) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Thank you so much for the bubble tea.That really made my day better, and I send this dove by wishing peace for all world.--Abbatai (talk) 20:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks! The dove really made me happy.  I agree that peace is important.  Have you ever had a bubble tea in real life?  It's quite good.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  19:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I havent yet, but I will try.--Abbatai 02:34, 21 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbatai (talk • contribs)

The Holocaust
AFriedman, just to let you know there is a discussion ongoing. Do you care to weigh in with an opinion? Bus stop (talk) 22:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
Seems like only yesterday it was 2009 ...  I do support your edits for Judaism in accord with what I wrote on the talk page, to be sure! Collect (talk) 02:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for going over the changes :). And about your comment on your Talk page, lol.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  03:41, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Great work with Origins of Judaism!
Hi! Thanks for moving the information from the main Judaism article to the more topic-specific article. BTW, did you know that the information in new articles less than a week old, or articles expanded less than a week ago, can be nominated for Did You Know? I think there's a lot of information in this article that would warrant a nomination. -- AFriedman  (talk)  04:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Anne. Yes, I am aware of DYK - User:SilkTork/DYK. It's an attractive and useful project, which does encourage people to create new articles or improve stubs to an acceptable standard. I don't use it as much as I should.
 * I'm not sure about personally nominating it for DYK, as I feel I didn't really write Origins of Judaism, I just moved some material from one place to another in response to the split tag. I have been working on the backlog on Category:Articles to be split - and very often I can see why nobody has engaged with a request, because some of the splits can be quite tricky!
 * If you wish to nominate Origins of Judaism yourself for DYK, that would be fine.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I nominated Origins of Judaism for DYK and responded on SilkTork's talk page. Hi! I've nominated the article for DYK because it seems like an awfully important article to share on the main page. See Template talk:Did you know. What do you think of the hook? -- AFriedman  (talk)  20:56, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * YES! 11:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Interesting hook - I'd click on it!  SilkTork  *YES! 23:18, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :) -- AFriedman   (talk)  04:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much
Thanks so much for the barnstar. I've got to say, you are one of the most consistently nice people I have ever encountered in Wikipedia and are definitely a credit to Wikipedia editors. Thanks for making my day. -SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 21:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Ditto to everything SRQ so eloquently said. I have been out of commission with 3 weeks ( so far) of the swine flu. Get your shot! JoyDiamond (talk) 23:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your lovely notes. Happy editing in the New Year!  Joy, sorry to hear that you were sick, and VERY glad that you are better :).  My brother had swine flu as well and he didn't feel well for a while.  I'm planning on going over to try and get the swine flu shot soon (got the seasonal flu shot some time ago).  See you both on the encyclopedia!  -- AFriedman   (talk)  02:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thanks from me as well. Hope to see you as part of the New York chapter and Meetup/NYC in the future!--Pharos (talk) 02:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Userboxes
I fixed User:L'Aquatique/Userboxes/conservative and User:L'Aquatique/Userboxes/reform for you. Debresser (talk) 11:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

An additional problem is that usercategories must have the word "Wikipedian" in it. So they have to be renamed to something like "Reform Jewish Wikipedians" and "Consevative Jewish Wikipedians", and then added to Category:Jewish Wikipedians by religious denomination. Are these names ok with you? Debresser (talk) 11:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your help, I agree with the edits you made! -- AFriedman   (talk)  03:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

IPCOLL and thoughts on welcome message
Thanks for the welcome.

One thing I suggested and got no further was a tailored welcome message to Wikipedia for people first spotted in the IP area. Going through my history I've spotted the following as impromptu greetings I've given. Are you interested in helping concoct something more thought out (and with fewer spelling mistakes)?


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:YYouhanna&diff=next&oldid=254401306,
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jim_Fitzgerald&diff=prev&oldid=310879329
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MathFacts&diff=prev&oldid=285896813
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cpt.schoener&diff=prev&oldid=257260953

I'm not sure what to make of the falafel message you use. Have you seen what's been going on at Talk:Falafel and Talk:Hummus?--Peter cohen (talk) 19:36, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I see you're getting a taste of the nice friendly goings on at Falafel. Watch out or you'll join me in being denounced as a self-hating Jew.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * My latest: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mzk1&diff=prev&oldid=339558357 --Peter cohen (talk) 17:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words. I see what you're getting at about my suggesting to people to edit mnore broadly. I suppose I am showing the indoctination during my professional training into behavioural social work. In that we were taught that rather than focussing on people's motivations it is more important to concentrate on getting them to behave in a desirable manner. Even if someone is producing featured articles as a cover for their pushing their Kahanist or pro-Ahmadinejab views elsewhere, we still end up with the featured articles. And, in any case, if people dedicate a good part of their time to producing good quality articles they could well but themselves into the Wikipedia project and what it stands for anyway as a way to resolve cognitive dissonance.

I don't do many Jewish-related edits. I did edit Louis Jacobs, the guy who barmitzvahed me, and a couple of other places to do with his fall out with the United Synagogue owing to his challenging their fundamentalist beliefs over the Torah as divine word. I also got involved a bit in some of the Messainic Judaism articles tryign to get things more NPOV, but I haven't touched those for ages. I'm reconstructing my user page in preparation for an RFA and am going through all my edits to article and article talk space. Once I've finished classifying those, then I should be able to recollect what I've done a lot more easilly.--Peter cohen (talk) 12:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks and good luck on RFA. Rather than encouraging people to edit more broadly, perhaps we could encourage proper behavior on the articles they're already editing.  For example, IMO we need to treat our opponents in wiki-disputes with respect and wikilove.  Users who lose their temper at their opponents in IPCOLL, for example, may only serve to reinforce false stereotypes and invalid concerns like the ones User:Ani medjool expressed on his Userpage.  Our opponents losing their temper isn't an excuse for us to lose ours, either.  We can talk to them calmly and rationally and try to explain to them what is really going on in WP.  IMO that's the approach I would favor in trying to resolving cognitive dissonance, since it would confront the problem more directly.  You may want to see the latest posts on Talk:Falafel.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  08:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll have a think about this before I pick up my next new user. I'm sure I have seen others (admins?) encouraging editors in conflict areas to edit more broadly. I could cut out the "it helps you look good" but and focus on the "it's less frustrating" aspect.
 * One of the advantages of non-battleground editing is that you get the chance to see some editors in more positive contexts. I and User:Jayjg have supported each other in articles to do with anti-Semitism (recently in David Irving and previously at Houston Stewart Chamberlain) while I don't think we ever agreed on Middle East stuff. I know that User:IronDuke and User:Nableezy have co-operated on some articles, though I think it was still Middle Eastern. So that is obviously another route.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:37, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Interesting point, that non-battleground editing encourages editors to see one another in a more positive light. However, given Wikipedia's size I think it's unlikely that opponents in IPCOLL will run into another on other areas of the encyclopedia while they're still getting an impression about the other editor. One possibility is to invite IPCOLL users to edit in specific non-controversial areas. Perhaps we could stake out non-controversial "training" territory about other subjects where IPCOLL users can cool down? For example, I wonder if some articles in WikiProject Ottoman Empire might fit the bill.

Also, I think that leaving a pretty IPCOLL-related image on people's talk pages when they join IPCOLL might make them more excited about the project. -- AFriedman  (talk)  05:47, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure there is stuff in the IPCOLL talk history related to cooperating on some material. The article on which Nableezy, IronDuke and others co-operated on for a DYK was Al-Azhar Mosque. If it's not clear from IPCOLL how this arose, it may be worth asking them how it did and moving continuing discusion to the project. Of course, you need to be able to find people with shared interests. I wouldn't have been at all interested in that subject.--Peter cohen (talk) 12:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Aside from IPCOLL, I guess most of the editors involved have very different interests. Also, I've noticed that the most contentious editors aren't usually in IPCOLL anyway. I still think it might be good to add a list of "neutral" articles to IPCOLL for the IPCOLL people to invite contentious editors to work on. Al-Azhar Mosque sounds like an interesting article, but I'm not sure what I would be able to contribute at this time. Ottoman Empire articles came to my mind because my own interest in WP Judaism extends into this area. I've been involved with editing some articles which are in both WikiProjects--recently, for example, we had to deal with a vandal and POV pusher on Donmeh, a group of people in the Ottoman Empire who outwardly converted to Islam but secretly practiced a form of Judaism. I've also been editing the article about Shabbatai Zvi, an extremely brilliant and creative 17th-century Jewish thinker who lived in the Ottoman Empire and pioneered the idea of the "holy sinner." His contemporaries' expectations of him were unrealistic--they thought he would be the Messiah and would bring about an apocalypse in 1666--and IMO, his failure to live up to these expectations gave him a negative image in Jewish history that he does not deserve. I think about him a lot because IMO Progressive Judaism would be able to gain historical depth, intellectual weight and a sense of purpose by borrowing more ideas from Sabbateanism and other historical Jewish movements that the Orthodox chose to dismiss as heresies. But I digress from IPCOLL. What are your thoughts? -- AFriedman  (talk)  05:47, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You can try ttracting attention at IPCOLL. I must admit it isn't a subject I would want to edit myself.--Peter cohen (talk) 16:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

What "neutral" subjects would interest you? That's what I'm trying to get at. The list wouldn't just be about my favorite subjects. -- AFriedman  (talk)  16:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * There isn't much I can think of. I've already got several projects lined up. If there was interest in getting West-Eastern Divan (orchestra) to GA, I would get involved. Of course, the article on one of its founders (Edward Said) has been subject to edit warring but things calmed down enough for it to reach GA. Its other founder Daniel Barenboim would also be deserving of a GA.--Peter cohen (talk) 16:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Those sound like nice, interesting topics. Hard to believe that the article about the orchestra would be controversial--but then again, hard to believe that the article about falafel would be controversial. Anyway, some pointers to our favorite articles and our favorite subjects in WP:IPCOLL might help introduce us as individuals, rather than as stereotypes. -- AFriedman  (talk)  06:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Just noticed this. I'm having a bit of trouble with my laptop. So shall not be available until a couple of weeks' time. But feel free to start a thread at IPCOLL.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Policy RFC
If you have a moment, I'd appreciate your thoughts on Talk:Contemporary_Jewish_religious_music. The question is how to define who is an important musical influence. Thanks, Joe407 (talk) 17:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC) Thanks so much for the barnstar! Love, AFriedman   (talk)  21:29, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Dear AFriedman, thanks for the dove! It was very tasty, although I like your favorite food better. PS why are you on wikipdia instead of asleep?  I guess you could say the same thing to me...I am about to go to sleep (and plan to be good and not spend too much time on wikipedia this week, I have so much work to do)! But, I just discovered Friendly...It makes it so much easier to welcome new users :-) love, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 06:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I am not asleep because you know who I am. We work night and day. And this is the time when I'm most active. Not because I'm in Hawaii or Japan, but because like the rest of my kind I'm nocturnal. -- AFriedman  (talk)  07:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello! Thanks for tagging the article I just made. How is your assignment? Love, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 05:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Any comments on draft outline for Criticism of Judaism?
AFriedman: thanks for suggesting some outline ideas for Criticism of Judaism. Do you have a moment to look at Talk:Criticism of Judaism and add any insight? Also, you mentioned incorporating a "History of criticism of Judaism" section. Can you recommend any sources for that specific topic? Thanks. --Noleander (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm about to comment on Talk:Criticism of Judaism. -- AFriedman   (talk)  19:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Happy Purim!


CordeliaNaismith (talk) is wishing you a Happy Purim! This greeting promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy Purim, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.

Love, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 22:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The category “Wikipedians for Israel” can be deleted!
Recently I created the category Wikipedians for Israel and to my surprise I found a notice of "This category is being considered for deletion”. It would be very important to have you join the category and simultaneously talk on the page for the discussion for delete of your opposition to the argument that the category be deleted. Jgarpal (talk) 07:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I actually think deletion is justified for this Category, and have commented on this at the deletion discussion.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  09:38, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi, AFriedman! I would first like to apologize for having taken so long to respond to your invitation, but I've been pretty busy. I want to thank you for your offer of help, the truth is that I need a lot, because do not know much about how you work in Wikipedia, but anyway I do not know how long I can devote to editing Wikipedia, because the truth is that I'm very busy, but if I need your help, I'll ask. Thank you also for your words in my defense. For my part I think I was wrong in to use the word "antisemitism", and I apologized to BrownHairedGirl for it. A big greeting and again: Thank you. Jgarpal (talk) 03:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I am busy too--although I've definitely got less work over the next week or so.  I think you're being too hard on yourself for speculating that the Category deletion proposal was motivated by antisemitism.  I was speculating the same thing, actually.  Even though I think it's probably not, that is why I decided to look up what else Brown Haired Girl was editing.


 * Also, I'm curious what you want to edit about. In my experience, the greatest reward of editing Wikipedia is to realize how much you have in common with someone, often from a very different part of the world, that you would have no other way of knowing about.  The people who edit articles tend to be people who are quite knowledgeable about a particular subject (world experts more often than one might expect, but also enthusiasts who are just starting to learn about a field), and care enough to bring in their distinctive angle as editors.  So, this is quite a unique opportunity to find a little part of the world you wish you could belong to, and add yourself to it.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  05:48, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Israeli wine
Please don't accuse editors of vandalism unless you're sure they have committed it. In particular, avoid using the word in edit summaries (such as "reverting vandalism"), and be very careful about posting vandalism warning templates on user's talkpages. Review the vandalism policy thoroughly before you do that, and see especially the section "What vandalism is not". Note that content disputes are not vandalism, and that good-faith edits of any kind, even if you think them misguided, are not to be considered vandalism. Vandalism accusations without any basis in policy are bad for the climate on the wiki and make constructive discussion more difficult. See also Avoid the word "vandal". Ani medjool (talk) 22:07, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Much as I object to your general pattern of removing information from articles in violation of NPOV, I think you're right that the particular edit I reverted (which I still consider problematic, on the grounds of it being POV pushing) was not the same as vandalism. I'll be more careful about clicking the red "Rollback VANDAL" button in the future.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  04:35, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you ...
for the very kind words and gesture. I have seen some of your comments on talk pages around town and have wanted to tell you how impressed I am by your ability to rise above the conflict raging all around. Its a pleasure to encounter such an evenly tempered individual around here who has insightful comments to add to add discussions. I hope we get a chance to edit together more in the future. Thank you for allowing me to touch and be touched by you.  T i a m u t talk 20:09, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Feast of Tabernacles (Christian holiday)
A tag has been placed on Feast of Tabernacles (Christian holiday), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Equazcion ( talk ) 02:37, 13 Mar 2010 (UTC) 02:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion
Before you make another 50 edits to only one section of Judaism, perhaps make a draft in your userspace. Debresser (talk) 13:24, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I'd been thinking about that, but I'm concerned that the contributions would appear as "userspace" contributions instead of "article" contributions in "edit count."  There are ramifications to this, in terms of how "editing experience" is evaluated.  I've recently realized that I've been spending more time talking about articles than editing them, with not very much getting done on the "Judaism" front.  Maybe I'll click on "Preview" or make fewer edits at a time, if you really mind how I'm editing.


 * I have another question. I'm having a bit of trouble finding good sources about the history of Maimonides' 13 principles of faith, the criticism of it and other people's formulations of the basic Jewish principles of faith.  See the "citation needed" tags I've added to the "Religious doctrine and principles of faith" section.  Do you know of any sources I could use?  Thanks.  Also FYI, the articles about Hasdai Crescas, Joseph Albo and the Raavad still don't have inline citations.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  02:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * If I may chime in, an interesting point about Maimonidies' principles themselves is that if is hard to find them exactly, unless you know Arabic. The famous Ani Ma'amin is just a paraphrase, like the poem Yigdal. Rav Kapach, the famous Yemenite Rabbinical judge and translator from Arabic, points out that the version in the back of the standard Talmud contains things he never said, and skips things he did. I think Rav Kapach's own translation of Maimonidies's commentary on the Mishna is the only way to get it. An alternative is the Laws or Repentance in the Mishnah Torah (in Hebrew, and there should be translations), where there is a similar list, with a slightly different purpose.Mzk1 (talk) 20:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * If you want to mention them in the general Judaism article you could just link to Jewish principles of faith. Debresser (talk) 05:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Suprise


DocOfSoc (talk) has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the awesomeness of bubble teas by adding to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Thank you so much!!! I LOVE bubble tea. -- AFriedman  (talk)  04:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry
I am sorry if your feelings.

By the way, my favorite actual Purim joke this year was the fake El Al Personal Mechitza ad.

Once again, I am sorry if my sarcasm hurt your feelings. 173.52.134.191 (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the apology. I had been feeling very badly about the attempt to discredit me.  Also, thank you for sharing the Purim joke.  BTW, Happy Passover!  Wishing you as good a Passover as these guys to the right had.  There's nothing like crossing the boundaries between heaven and earth to redeem the whole world from sin, or watching your friend do said thing :).  May you have a nice Seder as well.  I also hope you set up a Wikipedia account soon, so that my alter ego AFriedman can welcome you here.  -- Jacob Frank  purification through transgression 05:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Syria
Marhaba (Hello) AFriedman. I noticed you added your name to our list of participants at WP:Syria. My name is Yazan, and I wanted to welcome you at the project. Any contribution will be welcome, as we are a bit short on active keyboards. I'm looking forward to working together, and welcome again. Happy Editing. Yazan (talk) 02:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the warm welcome. I saw your DYK about Forests of Syria when it was being evaluated, and congratulations about getting it to the front page.  I've given it a template and some links to articles about forests in neighboring countries.  In general, Wikipedia doesn't seem to have very thorough or organized coverage of forests in the Middle East.  For example, I couldn't get a good general picture of what forests were in Turkey or Iraq, and coverage of specific forests was decent to good in places but didn't seem very well coordinated.  Have you thought of joining WikiProject Forestry?  I just did.  Also, how is Japan?  What is it like?  I'm sure it's very different from Syria, although I haven't been to either.  BTW, I'm a computer science student too!  I used to study Biology and so I know a fair amount about forests.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  06:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind words and your tweaks on Forests of Syria. There is a serious lack of coverage on middle eastern forests (and environment in general). To be honest, I have very little expertise on the subject, but will try to contribute however I can. I grew up in a place that was renowned for its beautiful forests and have seen them burning little by little, it's horrible. It'll be somewhat difficult to find RS on forests in the middle east, the only one I found for Syria dates back to 1947.
 * Japan is fantastic, exhausting and utterly extreme. It's not an easy place to live in, and yes, sleep deprivation may become a lifestyle, but the experience is certainly fulfilling. Although, I'll have to admit, there might better places that I could've chosen (from a strictly academic point of view) to study computer science, Japan does offer an overall brilliant experience. You did catch me on a high though, I just came back from Hanami ;) Yazan (talk) 07:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I also saw you joined WikiProject Forestry and very nice.  Welcome to the WikiProject.  It was very sad to hear about those forests--I know some of the same is happening in places like the U.S. state of New Jersey which is being chopped up by suburban development.  I agree that there's a lack of coverage about the Middle Eastern environment.  User:Abbatai has also written a few articles about the environment and environmentalism in Turkey, BTW.  Also, I don't know if you're interested in joining WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, but we're trying to compile a list of successful article collaborations and get a drive for collaborations going over there.  For a long time, I'd been thinking that articles about Middle Eastern nature would be obvious candidates since they tend to be freer from political partisanship than articles about human history or culture, and reflect a common concern for the land.  Plus, many of the editors in IPCOLL (Israel Palestine Collaboration) speak the languages that the sources are likely to be in.


 * Also, congratulations about getting 2 more DYKs practically in the blink of an eye. That takes skill, man.  Well, sleep deprivation is my lifestyle too, here in the USA.  I'm a bit surprised that Japan is less than optimal for studying computer science, given how technologically oriented the culture is over there.  Why do you think that is?  Also, have you ever been to the USA?  That's perhaps the best country for computer science, and it has a growing community of Syrians and other immigrants.  Oddly enough, the U.S. culture has a side of itself that applauds conformity and looks down on people who are too technologically inclined, but the universities are still some of the best in the world because they can get so many foreigners to come.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  18:11, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I will try my best to see what contributions I can make to the project. Being so very far away, tracking sources and official documentation will be hell. But, alas. I will regretfully decline your other invitation per different reasons. I doubt there is much I can contribute on the issue. Wikipedia is my happy little place where I learn about, and enjoy the things that I write, IP issues will not provide that luxury, and my off-Wikipedia life provides me with just the right dose of cynicism, politics and debating that I'm more than happy to pass on any opportunity that comes up here.
 * The culture is technologically oriented, and it is somewhat innovative in certain areas, but not on the whole. I have considered the US, but never really seriously for both cultural and personal reasons. Japan is a temporary lapse of reason, really. Because I feel strongly attached to the sea where I grew up (not geographically, but rather culturally) so I'd feel more at home somewhere in Europe or even South America, than I ever could in the US. I also have great doubts about Computer Science becoming my lifelong career, and have plans already to switch to something different for my masters degree. Let's keep our fingers crossed. What's your main field of research in CS, if you don't mind me asking? Yazan (talk) 10:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you for the falafel, it was delicious :) I am hoping that we can take ipcoll into use, I would like to explore the term Israeli-occupied territory and I think that ipcoll would be ideal in hashing it out and seeing what the major points of disagreement,if any, are. I have the start of a discussion on my talk page but it is probably better to have it 'out in the open' so to speak rather than having it repeatedly. I look forwards to your thoughts on this, Unomi (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Unomi, I think you're right about bringing the "occupied" issue to IPCOLL. It seems to be the right place.  I'll tell you what I personally think about the term "occupied," which I suspect many people will disagree with.  As I define it, occupied means that a country captured and is controlling land, but never incorporating it into their country.  For example, the U.S. has occupied Iraq (Iraq is not part of the U.S. by any stretch of the imagination) and Britain occupied Palestine, India and many other places (these lands, not considered British, became subject colonies rather than equal provinces).  However, expanding the borders of one's own country is not occupation--in Spain, the Reconquista conquered Moorish Spain, but I would not use the word "occupation" for what they did, nor for what the Moors did when they were the conquerors.  Incorporating land into a multinational empire is also not occupation--the Roman Empire and the Ottoman Empire may have conquered Israel-Palestine against the will of many of their inhabitants, but they still considered the land part of their empire rather than a subject colony.  The Holy Roman Empire, which was at times unable to control the land under its nominal jurisdiction, was also not an occupying country.  Now for Israel.  IMO, the Israel-Palestine conflict has developed a special vocabulary of its own.  For example, places that are called "settlements" would be called "towns" or "villages" anywhere else--towns and villages can be settled by new groups of inhabitants, and the words "town" and "village" don't imply anything about their age.  I think the word "occupied" may be another word that has been co-opted by some parties in the conflict, and given a new use.  These groups are significant, but do not represent everyone.  Nominally, the West Bank and Gaza Strip are part of Israel--Israel claims so, and is certainly the country that is asked to relinquish them in the name of peace.  Until relatively recently, they were represented on the maps I used to see as being part of Israel.  Nowadays, they're often drawn with some type of asterisk or something.  While Wikipedia is supposed to use standard English in its articles, standard English is not free from POV pushing, and many words that relate to the conflict seem to be examples of this.  Or perhaps whether land is "occupied" or not really is in the eye of the beholder?  -- AFriedman   (talk)  16:56, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have opened a discussion here. While I agree that prior to the explicit rejection of the legality of acquiring land by conquest it was a fairly common occurrence, yet international law prohibits it currently and a multitude of Courts and countries have rejected that Israel constitutes a special case in this matter. As a serious encyclopaedia we should strive to reflect such consensus. Unomi (talk) 11:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Unomi, where are sources for the international prohibition against acquiring land by conquest? It seems like a difficult prohibition to create, since there are so many unjust governments whose people would benefit from conquest by certain foreign powers.  Furthermore, how would international law distinguish between a conqueror of unwilling foreign subjects, a country that uses its military to annex territory with the consent of the people in that territory but against the will of their government, an imperfect outcome of a war over a disputed border, and the resolution of a violent struggle against a national separatist movement?  In some of these situations, acquiring land by conquest would be the just course of action.  Besides, I'm not convinced that international law changes whether land would be "occupied" or not if it is conquered by another country.  Mostly, I think "occupation" is defined by what area the conqueror and the conquered (but especially the conqueror because history is written by the winners), consider the land to be part of.  Also, re: the historical examples I gave as well as other historical examples you can think of: where would you draw the line between occupation and non-occupation?  -- AFriedman   (talk)  03:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * AFriedman. I am trying as much as possible to avoid IP topics, but I couldn't not chime in here. Israel's dilemma is more than just the legal one (which is well documented, even on Wikipedia). Israel claims the territory to itself, but it wants its people out. It's almost worse than a typical occupation. If it's not occupation then the residents of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria, whatever you want to call it) should be offered Israeli citizenship, I would think. No? Yazan (talk) 10:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec)Please see Right of Conquest. My personal opinions are not the deciding factor, all I can tell you is that from my reading of sources the consensus opinion of the world and its courts are that Israel is occupying a number of territories and are engaging in activities that are contrary to its obligations as an occupying power.
 * "'U.S. Policy toward the establishment of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories is unequivocal and has long been a matter of public record. We consider it to be contrary to international law and an impediment to the successful conclusion of the Middle East peace process, Article 49, paragraph 6, of the Fourth Geneva Convention is, in my judgment, and has been in judgment of each of the legal advisors of the State Department for many, many years, to be. . .that [settlements] are illegal and that [the Convention] applies to the territories.”" Secretary of State Cyrus Vance before House Committee. on Foreign Affairs
 * "78. The territories situated between the Green Line (see paragraph 72 above) and the former eastern boundary of Palestine under the Mandate were occupied by Israel in 1967 during the armed conflict between Israel and Jordan. Under customary international law, these were therefore occupied territories in which Israel had the status of occupying Power. Subsequent events in these territories, as described in paragraphs 75 to 77 above, have done nothing to alter this situation. All these territories (including East Jerusalem) remain occupied territories and Israel has continued to have the status of occupying Power."- International Court of Justice
 * "The assertion made by the Israeli authorities that products manufactured in the occupied territories qualify for the preferential treatment granted for Israeli goods is not binding upon the customs authorities of the European Union" - European Court of Justice
 * Kind Regards, Unomi (talk) 10:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Source
Hi! Did you introduce this to the judaism article? Can you tell me what your source is for the Jewish view that Jews today are impure? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 22:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Your Kind Assistance Requested
Dera AFriendman, I hope this finds you well. I am sorry to bother you but it appear someone is attempting to start an edit war on the "Margaret Clark" page and I would like your always gracious and objective help. Please see notes on article talk page. Thank you for all your help in the past. I have asked Seaphoto also. Sincerely, DocOfSoc (talk) 07:23, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Just popped over to say hello and TY again for all your help during the hard times. I am finally getting true enjoyment out of editing! Shalom! DocOfSoc (talk) 10:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Improving Technical Wiki Educational Materials
Hi AFriedman,

I have recently posted some thoughts on ways that I believe we can (and MUST!) improve the technical educational materials on WikiVersity. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Improving_Technical_Topics_At_Wikiversity

I heard that you may have given a short talk on similar ideas. Do you know if there is a video available of that talk? Do you have any thoughts/comments about these things? daviddoria (talk) 14:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Wiki-Conference NYC (2nd annual)
Our 2nd annual Wiki-Conference NYC has been confirmed for the weekend of August 28-29 at New York University.

There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session. Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up here for on-wiki notification. All are invited! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

For YOU
 Remembering all your kind assistance. I know you are busy! Miss you! DocOfSoc (talk) 02:35, 26 July 2010 (UTC) has asked you to join him for a nice cup of tea and sit down.


 * I LOVE your new userpage! Surely you have more awards than shown tho! Yes, the SoCal cities are keeping me hopping with all the scandals and misinformation, and I just was interesting in the history LOL Oh well. Soon to be Rosh Hashana, Happy Happy to you.  DocOfSoc (talk) 03:31, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

HI Sweetie, I need your expertise on the Laura Schlessinger page. Read the posts, it is self explanatory but it needs a Jewish Princess' eye ;-) It seems very clear to me, but I bow to your knowledge. I miss our chats, how ya doing busy girl? Fondly, Your Joy DocOfSoc (talk) 12:10, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Never mind, amicably settled. Interesting reading tho' ;-) DocOfSoc (talk) 13:03, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Campus Ambassador
Hi La comadreja: this is Annie Lin, the Campus Team Coordinator at the Wikimedia Foundation. Thanks for adding your name to the Wikipedia Campus Ambassador interest list! Are you currently a student, staff, or instructor at Columbia University? Or a local resident? (Just curious.) Annie Lin (Campus Team Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 00:04, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Annie, I'm about to respond in email. -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  02:01, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Official
Your user page is now officially outlandishly awesome! I know you are a student,but I didn't realize you were a professional one! :-) My Babushka would be so proud! xoxoxo Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 08:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for the barnstar! You are very sweet.  -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  13:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

National parks of Israel
Please open the discussion about your proposed merge or remove the templates. It's not about fire and forget. YOu also might want to draw more attention to it by posting on the Israel wikiproject. --Shuki (talk) 06:54, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Seven Presidents Park
-- Cirt (talk) 18:02, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks For the Welcome Back
Hi! Thanks for the welcome-back. I do like your nick, "purification through transgression" (why wouldn't I?), except that you've cleaned up the traditional wording ("redemption through sin") to make it politically correct and inoffensive to post-modern ears. :-)

Anyway, are you on FB? If so, friend me there as "Yakov-Leib HaKohain" and you can fill me in on what you've been up to since we last corresponded. Yalhak (talk) 17:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Discussion involving your user IDs
Hi: Due to some posts you recently made at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism under two conflicting and confusing user names, i.e.


 * 1) " La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH 
 * 2) " Jacob Frank  purification through transgression",
 * 3) And several others at other locations on WP and Wikiversity.

I have been trying to unravel the obvious confusion surrounding your user names and their histories that are also connected to a blocked puppeteer. Before taking this case to WP:ANI or WP:SPI I have requested input and comments from two admins familiar with WP:JUDAISM and one with your past history. Please see the discussion at User talk:IZAK. Please contribute and hopefully you can clarify what is going on before this matter takes a more drastic turn. Thank you for your cooperation and looking forward to your participation. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 03:12, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Am responding by email. -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  22:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia NYC Meetup Sat Oct 16
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wiki-Conference NYC 2010, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia Ambassador Program and Wikipedia Academy, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the May meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:10, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Note
Hello! I undid this edit, which I assume was accidental. —David Levy 02:54, 11 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I was actually trying to illustrate an example of "ignore all rules." If it's confusing or if you'd like the page to look more minimalist and serious, no problem.  It was a fairly audacious edit on my part.  -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  02:59, 11 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay, I thought that you'd intended to post that on a user's talk page and accidentally placed it there instead. The relevance is unclear to me, and I'm fairly certain that an addition of that nature would be rejected, but feel free to initiate a discussion on the policy's talk page.  —David Levy 03:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I actually copied and pasted a barnstar I had previously placed on the talk page of this article. It is not customary to use Barnstars for that purpose. However, the article is a biography, and an earlier Talk page comment had mentioned that "This article seems to use various adjectives which allows no room for anything but an extremely negative point of view. Not that he deserves any respect, but it does seem that this article takes every chance it has to deride Zevi, which may decrease its scholarly value." The purpose of my Barnstar was to present a more positive view of the person and give other editors food for thought. -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH  (talk)  03:13, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikibreak
Dearest La comadreja, I really need to stop looking at the wiki entirely...even editing just a little bit is too addictive. So...I've asked User:Beeblebrox to block me. (He's one of the admins that blocks people by request). Therefore... I pledge my honor that this is my very last edit until the end of the semester. Do you want to pledge the same? Love, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 03:00, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Bacon !
Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 08:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Bacon has been created, and you are cordially invited to join, and list yourself as a participant at WikiProject_Bacon!
 * You may also feel free to add the userbox - User Bacon - to your userpage, to indicate your participation in the WikiProject.
 * The Bacon WikiCup is also ongoing, more info about that at User:SuperHamster/Bacon Challenge 2011, and User:SuperHamster/Bacon WikiCup 2011.

DYK for Genuine Negro Jig (album)
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 12:04, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Margot Leverett


A tag has been placed on Margot Leverett requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. GILO ACCIDENT & EMERGENCY  23:42, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Category:Frankism
Hi: I have created, added and populated Category:Frankism based on your article. Please add to the category if you find or know of any other articles that can be put into it. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 13:14, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. You did a very good job.  Can't think of any articles at the moment, but some more articles might need to be created.  -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  18:41, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK credits for Harris Lenowitz
Materialscientist (talk) 12:13, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

You are wrong
You are totally wrong about "most places except large cities have the country/district name in the title". With the exception of American and Australian settlement populated places generally are singular on wikipedia unless they have multiple places under that name which makes it necessary to dab them according to area. Please do not move articles which do not have any others under that name again like you did with Tanzania.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess you're right. I'm in the U.S.A. and was mostly looking at U.S. cities for precedent.  Looking over the cities, I also see Canadian cities and towns as being listed by province BTW, even ones that seem to have more unusual names like Tofield, Alberta.  -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  17:07, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Frankism
Hello! Your submission of Frankism at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Pgallert (talk) 20:05, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Margot Leverett
Orlady (talk) 06:03, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Frankism
-- Cirt (talk) 12:03, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Kinan Azmeh
Orlady (talk) 00:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Israelite Worship
Thank you for chiming in on the Israelite discussion page. Please don't take this the wrong way, but it seems to me that you are very new to this subject. This is a complicated page and it has taken years for it to get to this point. It still has a long way to go. However, pursuing the path you propose I think will kill this article altogether and render it completely confusing. Before getting to specifics, I am wondering--are you intending to edit this page, or are you just making a suggestion on the talk page? Either way, I would be happy to engage you on the specifics of what you are suggesting. The beauty of Wikipedia is the collision of perspectives such as this. If you are serious about seeing your idea through and want to put the research together for it, perhaps we can figure out what page it would work best on. I don't think the Israelites page is the right one. I look forward to hearing from you. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 01:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm very busy and had been thinking about sticking to the Talk page re: this issue. Most of my work in WP Judaism and WP Jewish history is on articles about the practice of Judaism from the Middle Ages onward, and especially on improving the NPOV coverage of so-called Jewish heresies.  As a modern Jew, I'm interested in drawing more broadly and deeply from our history to make the case that Judaism is valuable and compelling, and some of our so-called heretics were quite colorful people with many interesting ideas.  I got involved with ancient Israelite idolatry because of the problems I had with the new article Religion of Moses and Israel, now deleted.  But NPOV materials on Israelite idolatry are a very interesting subject.  Perhaps these materials could be spun off into their own article, for now?  I don't really know where to look because this is not the topic I know the most about, but would be interested in seeing some online sources.  Anyway, if a particular god is being worshiped by Israelites I'm not sure where to draw the line between calling it an "Israelite" god and calling it a foreign god worshiped by the Israelites, even if it originated elsewhere.  I'm not convinced the Tanakh is a reliable, NPOV source--because it was promotional material for the YHWH-alone facet of ancient Israelite religious practice, it may have set the bar lower than most ancient Israelites for what it considered a "foreign" practice of worship.  Many cultures have foreign influences but at some point, these elements are considered shared rather than borrowed.  Take American cuisine and Israeli cuisine, for example.  Anyway, I'm curious what you have to say.  -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  02:13, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to let you know that I'm not ignoring you, but I initially didn't see this response and now I'm just waiting for a few free moments to give a thoughtful response. Talk to you then. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 20:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'm back. First I'd like to give you a warm hello, tell you that I love what you have set out to do, and that I am thrilled to have met you. Whatever you do, don't take any of my challenges personally, and know that I understand that we are partners in bringing down knowledge and understanding.

So anyway--between what you've written here, what's on your personal page, and what you've contributed to the Israelites' discussion page, my first reaction is--eye caramba! Wow. It seems we have very similar goals, but are coming from different hemispheres. In any case, there is a huge opportunity here, because if I can get on the same page with you, there is hope for us all.

You're probably wondering what the heck I'm talking about. From what I'm guessing, I think I'm taking an internal approach to Judaic research while you are taking an external approach. If I'm correct, this is a gap that desperately needs to be bridged. Let me give you an example. On the discussion page, you stated that "Israelite exclusivist monotheism evolved over time." To me, this sounds like a conclusion that a non-Jewish researcher would reach, all the while disregarding what is written in authentic Jewish texts over the last 2500 years. I see a lot of this going on.

This isn't what Judaism says, however. According to Judaism, monotheism started with Adam and Eve and continued with many of their descendants. The Jewish monotheistic view continues at least from the time of Abraham completely untouched, which means that Jacob's descendants, i.e. the original Israelites, had what you could call "Israelite exclusivist monotheism." It did not evolve over time. In Egypt, people that were not the blood descendants of Jacob's family did join the people, not to mention the fact that family members undoubtably took up the Egyptian religions. However, the core of Israel kept this original monotheism close and untouched, and it is what we have today.

What I've said here is backed up by at least 100,000 pages of writings stretching back 2500+ years, and is in line with the teachings of every single Jewish sage. Writing about Judaism from a "historical perspective" without consulting the source is why we have a blurry haze in regards to the public perception of Judaism. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if 90% of JEWS don't even know what Jews believe. Hopefully we can find a way out of this. Thoughts. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 12:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Accipio. I think you make some good points.  I am definitely approaching the writing of this section from a secularist angle, based on what I've read about the archaeological findings.  For most ancient civilizations, that is how the history of their religion would be written in this kind of encyclopedia.  However, the ancient Israelites are relatively unique in that their perspective has been continually preserved and accepted into the present day (and I am an heir to their views).  What perspectives, then, should educational materials about subjects they thought about have?  In my country, some states have a debate about whether creationism and intelligent design should be taught in science classes alongside evolution.  I think the evidence supports the prevailing scientific views about how life and humans originated, rather than the Biblical views.  In a class that is supposed to be about science, I do not think it is appropriate to teach creationism, which is not science because the arguments in favor of such a view are not based on the same set of fundamental assumptions on which science is based.  Here, we have another instance in which modern scientific scholarship seems to tell a different story from the Tanakh and the inherited tradition.  Since the article is about the ancient Israelite beliefs, of course the viewpoints of the modern traditions that inherited from the ancient Israelite tradition (Jewish, Samaritan, and possibly even Christian and Islamic) should be described.  The findings from the archaeological scholarship about ancient Israel also belongs in the article.  Because of NPOV, I think it's important to scrupulously mention which tradition says what, and why, so that the reader of the article can come to his or her own conclusions.


 * Back to ancient Israelite idolatry. This seems to have been quite prevalent, and was at the very least the practice of a significant minority if not the majority.  A description of the religion of a country's inhabitants should not only mention the majority, prevailing view, but should account for significant minorities--and information about the majority culture's views of these minorities (up to and including whether the minorities were outlawed).  For example, 16th-century Spain was a Catholic country that forbade the observance of Judaism and Islam, but a substantial number of people continued to practice these religions and the Marranos and Moriscos (crypto-Jews and crypto-Muslims) are probably worth mentioning in an article about the religion of Spain.  If the readers of the article would not be expected to know about the fundamental principles of Judaism and Islam, a brief description of these religions would belong in that article as well.  As with Judaism and Islam in Spain, paganism in ancient Israel seems to have been significant enough to be promoted by rulers such as Jeroboam and Ahab before the Yahweh-alone form of worship won out.  I think readers would be interested in knowing what other religions were around, besides the one that survived, and how these religions were known to the ancient Israelites.  We are more dependant on the archaeologists to reconstruct the pagan perspectives, so a section about paganism might give more weight to the archaeology.  Just some thoughts.  BTW, your username intrigues me--what does it mean?  -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  18:55, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the prompt response. Let's back up a second here.  For the time being, I'd like to see if we can get on the same page in terms of how Judaism and Jewish beliefs are being represented on Wikipedia and educational mediums, and then perhaps get back to the Israelites discussion.  It's too much ground to cover to tackle both issues, and the deeper point I'm trying to surface needs to be addressed first.  So for the time being, I'd like to concentrate on the first paragraph you've written here, and once we've reached some common ground (which may take a while) we'll tackle the second one.  I hope that's okay.
 * In regards to your point about Creationism/Evolution, I am an American and I know all about that issue. I'd also like to mention that I come from a Reform Jewish and extremely secular academic background, and everything I am going to bring up here comes from research I've done as an independent, open-minded adult.  In short, I've been down the strictly secular path before, understand the perspective, and unfortunately (or fortunately) have discovered many completely obvious things that this community has looked past.  As a result, we have a chasm between secular and religious thought pertaining to Judaism.
 * The first and foremost thing to clarify is that Judaism is NOT Christianity. This is a mistake that virtually all secular Jews make.  In America, we have outspoken right-wing Christians dominating the religious debate.  However, the Christian view of "Creationism" seems to be completely different than the Jewish view of what's written in the Torah.  Jews essentially believe in modern science when it does not contradict Torah.  In regards to the evolutionary theories, Judaism does allow for evolution.  I still have a long ways to go in understanding the relationship, but as far as I can tell, where the Torah differs from Darwinism is in regards to a common ancestor.  Judaism does not believe that humans came out of the animal realm.
 * In any case, I understand why you can't go by religion alone, which again, Judaism is not looking for you to do. But let's at least first understand what Judaism has to say before writing about it.  Taking a purely archeological perspective on Judaism without being thoroughly familiar with the Judaic texts creates a mess.  It can also expose the researcher, because many people are familiar with the texts.
 * I'd like to get into some specific examples here, as well as some of the reasons as to why this chasm exists, although for now I do have to get going. Looking forward to hearing your response.
 * Also, in regards to my Wiki name--it's actually tongue-and-cheek, although I suppose it's meant to intrigue. It's a latin phrase that I came up with that rolls off the tongue, but doesn't really have any deep meaning.  Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 19:53, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Accipio. I'm aware that there are differences between the Christian and Jewish views of creationism--but as I mentioned, Christianity also claims to be descended from the ancient Israelite religion. That claim, and its validity, is a separate discussion topic. Re: creationism, I think we agree that the mainstream religious Jewish view is not the same as the mainstream Darwinist view, even if it may also be different from the Christian perspective. BTW, some Jewish groups such as Aish HaTorah actually do join the right-wing Christians in their support for the teaching of intelligent design. I don't claim to completely understand the Jewish view of Judaism's origins, and how it may differ from the view of other religions and of archaeologists. But it is certainly worth mentioning in the article, alongside the other perspectives. -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH  (talk)  20:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Jewish American military history
Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

You added important info
Hi there: I was very moved to see that you added this that about 550,000 Jewish Americans served in the US military during World War II (the most Jews serving in any military in the war), something that is not known by many. Only one country, the Soviet Union had a similar number, about 500,000 Jews serving in the Red Army against Hitler, that shows there was a strong fighting spirit among Jews who lived in countries that welcomed them as fighters and that Jews did not go like "lambs to the slaughter" but where they were able they fought and WON! The Jewish historian Solomon Grayzel also notes this in his A History of the Jews: From the Babylonian Exile to the Present. I was truly moved and happy by this particular edit of yours! Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 07:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the compliment :). Very nice work yourself, it's an important article and most of the text and images were your doing.  I've nominated the article for the main page.  My grandfather was a Jewish American officer in WWII, BTW, and I'm very proud of him and his service.  He was eager to fight against the Axis and tried hard at every possible opportunity.  Even after the war, he spent his life as a U.S. army engineer.  Of course the Jews were going to resist the Axis in every way they felt they could, including the Warsaw ghetto uprising--but even groups that had more of the right resources in place could not succeed.  The nation of Poland had a standing army of its own and more people in it than there were Jews in the entire world, but that did not prevent the Nazis from overwhelming the Polish resistance fighters and instituting a regime that would have killed or enslaved nearly all the Polish people in only a few more years.  The real "lambs" were the people in Axis-occupied countries who allowed the atrocities to go on, and the people in other countries who tried to deal with the Axis by appeasement.  Sadly, governments that commit human rights violations within their own borders are usually pretty much ignored by the rest of the world, even when they pose a threat elsewhere.  -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  01:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You are AWESOME! I miss you! Happy Thanksgiving! xoxo DocOfSoc (talk) 01:38, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi again: Thanks for the good feedback. I wanted to let you know that I was again very impressed with this edit of yours whereby you managed to notice and pick out and magnify the information on that sad Star of David tombstone from Normandy. I missed that detail, but I picked out the image because I thought it was more impressive than the previous one. The truth is Wikipedia's articles are so well researched but one has to spend time looking over them to find the right parts that will fit into this new important topic. I have just concluded adding new stuff relating to the key Jewish role in developing the Manhattan Project. There are still some more things I would like to add, but the article is now getting full, with its own category as well, and I changed it's name to fit with its mission and purpose. Your heart is in the right place with this! I sense your idealism and pride and it's encouraging me believe it or not. Take care, IZAK (talk) 09:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC) Such a beautiful article! xoxoDocOfSoc (talk) 12:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, both of you. -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH   (talk)  02:01, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Happy La comadreja's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day... Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 05:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The above was given on behalf of User:Rlevse. -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 05:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! A well-deserved honor! Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 06:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Responded on Neutralhomer's page. -- La comadreja  formerly AFriedman  RESEARCH  (talk)  02:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)