Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mormonism and Judaism/archive2

Mormonism and Judaism
'''Article Created 7 Aug 2004. As of 16 Apr 2006, there have been 136 Contributers, 60 are IP addresses, 76 are registered Users''' Total 7 Aug 2004 to 16 Apr 2006, 924 Edits Stats from (VChapman 16 APR 2006) Previous submission archive Featured article candidates/Mormonism and Judaism/archive 1

There has been a huge effort to bring this page upto wikipedia standards, and the activity has settled down. With many individuals and a complex issue, the spirit of wikipedia came alive to correct this article and allow it to meet wikipedia standards. (14 April 2006)


 * Strong object:
 * No explicit listing of references. In addition, much of the material (particularly as regards Judaism itelf) is simply unreferenced.
 * The existence of article borders on original research; certainly there is no reputable source provided to demonstrate that a comparison between Mormonism and Judaism is particularly meaningful (versus, say, Mormonism and Shinto or Mormonism and Zoroastrianism), or that the article's choice of topics for comparison is appropriate. Kirill Lok s  h in 01:47, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * RESPONSE Included it a list of other book on same issue, discrediting the original research, and reputable source complaint
 * Covenant and Chosenness in Judaism and Mormonism, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, November 2001, ISBN 0838639275
 * Spiritual Vision: Hebrew Cryptograms -- The Key to Unlocking Parallels Between Mormonism and Judaism, David B. Cohen and Irving Cohen, Deseret Books, SKU: 4702961
 * Mormons and Jews: Early Mormon Theologies of Israel,Signature Books, January 1993, ISBN 156085006X
 * MY BURNING BUSH, THE SPIRITUAL JOURNEY OF NANCY GOLDBERG HILTON, AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY By Nancy Goldberg Hilton PhD, ISBN 0-9776403-0-2, Library of Congress Registration Number TX 6-288-494
 * Nancy tells about her spiritual journey from Judaism to joining The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It also explains the points of LDS doctrine which Nancy found fulfills her ancient Judaism.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.104.145.145 (talk • contribs)
 * Huh? None of these are even mentioned in the article, and they don't seem particularly representative of mainstream theological literature, either. Kirill Lok s  h in 20:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm dealing with over 12 76 to 136 different contributers, on the topic of religion.  The Origianl research issue was raised in the first archive and shot down, I'm simply demonstarting that the issue has more merit than the other topics you suggested.  Mormons claims Israelite decent is a well founded and well established belief.  All you have to do is hit the web to uncover that issue.  I wish this article had ISBN numbers also, but it isn't the work of any ONE individual.  I am going to try to compile a list.  And these have actually been added to the articel under a heading of Similar Works.  Anyone got the ISBN # for the Torah? VChapman 16APR06
 * My First source cited is going to be The Book of Mormon, Church of Jesus Christ of, July 1981, ISBN 0967686563
 * 2nd Source Pearl of Great Price, January 2003, ISBN 0766136531
 * 3rd The Holy Bible, King James Version, National Publishing Company, January 2000, ISBN 0834003465
 * Now I'll start on the other references, I'd hate for this article to not make it based on this issue. Any help locating published sourced for cited information would be appreciated, I'm going to try to locate said sources based on the 25+ reference links in the article.  VCHAPMAN 16APR06
 * I can see where that would make sense for a Mormon views of Judaism aricle; but this article attempts to do a rather broader comparison. I'm asking for some evidence that such a comparison is considered meaningful by anyone other than the LDS; or, if it isn't, suggesting that the article be renamed and trimmed accordingly. Kirill Lok s  h in 21:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Name Change is out, please refer to Talk:Mormonism and Judaism, VCHAPMAN 16APR06
 * In that case, it may be appropriate (as was mentioned by several people in that discussion) to edit the contents to be something more than a side-by-side listing of several arbitrary points from the two religions. Kirill Lok s h in 22:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Not easy, there are many Mormon and Jewish Contributers, after that discussion on dec 2005, this is the reworked article, and the LDS contributers had little to say on the issue. It happened very fast and effecently.  Also addressed in the talk session.  When dealing with a religious comparision, you have to not offend either party, and successfully maintain a NPOV.  Not easy, I'm ready to move on from this topic, unless someone else weighs in, but I feel all of this is adressed on the talk page, about 3x the size of the article page plus the archived page mentioned above. Best Regards, I guess its upto the community to decided.  I'm getting too much into this, and I feel like even though the entire page has been completely restructered, by the Jewish Community of Wikipedia, its still the same complaint.  VCHAPMAN 16 APR 06


 * Object. Although I don't agree with Kirill Lokshin about the original research claim, I must object that the lead section is completely unacceotable in its current state. RyanG e rbil10 03:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have expanded on lead section. Probally the last part to be adressed, I had to but great thought into a NPOV approach to the beginning of the article.  Something I have been struggling with for over a year now.  (VCHAPMAN 15 Apr 06)

*Object - Almost no references whatsoever, and the first paragraph is a grammar train wreck. "Mormons just as Jews, consider themselves to be full and entitled members of The House of Israel, and God's covenant with Israel. A claim not well accepted in the Jewish Community." is a terribly written sentence. Dee man45 22:11, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * My concerns have been rectified, so I now support. Dee man45 01:57, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Help on the grammer if possible, I think I cleaned the sentence up. (VChapman 15 APR 06)


 * Object imbedded external links should be converted to WP:FOOTNOTEs (I'll do the conversion, but WP:CITE (see also WP:CITE/ES) information will be needed- consider Cite web). My main objection is that the article does not have a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents . At 64kb, this article is too large, and needs to implement Summary style. Please use a proper system of subpages to shortern down the length of the article. AndyZ t 14:30, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Weak Support. The article is definitely too large. My personal concerns are with things that are not so much documentation of beliefs as much as "proofs" or apologetics (the date correllations between events in Mormonism and the Jewish calender comes first to mind, mostly because, if you consider the day before the day before the new moon to be a Jewish holiday, than there are about 150 of them). I'm also concerned about references that are not primary sources for this article, but instead were sources for a referenced article. You could be compounding and passing on a mistaken understanding. As for grammar, I've fixed some in the past, and can find time this week to take another look. FiveRings 20:04, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The writing in the lead section is particularly bad. When I read the first sentence - "Mormonism and Judaism have significant differences and some similarities." - I cringed. This definitely needs improvement. Raul654 13:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Object This article is not titled properly. When I saw the title, I thought that it was an article on both mormanism and judaism, and for some reason they were combined.  Only after reading a while did I descover that it was a comparison article.  How about something like: Compasrison between mMrmonism and Judaism.  The title of this article creates imidiate confusion.  How could we possibly have a featured article which is not even titled correctly?
 * Object I am not sure that there is even a reason for this article, it seems to me that any similarities are probably not meaningful, and they are definitely not meaningful to *both* religions. Some sections also seem quite superficial.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 09:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Object In my opinion, this is original research. PDXblazers 00:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)