Too many bulleted lists[edit]

All the bullet pointed lists to books most Wikipedia users have never heard of seem quite unnecessary. I'm not an expert on halacha, so I don't really know how this could be rewritten, but at the very least, I'd suggest that the list of the six orders of the Mishnah and the list of the order of the Tur be removed. --GHcool (talk) 23:35, 12 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the purpose of an encyclopedia is to present information that was not know to its readers. That is why people come here. So I find your argument to remove these lists, that most Wikipedia readers haven't heard of them, confusing, to say the least, as the same could be said for most of the information in almost any article on Wikipedia. Debresser (talk) 17:19, 13 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How about if we make a new article called List of codes of Jewish law. I just feel like the average user wants an overview, not a bibliography. --GHcool (talk) 22:09, 13 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Then we are going to have arguments, what is a "code of Jewish law" and what is simply a "work of Jewish law". :) Debresser (talk) 20:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good point. Perhaps the article could be called Bibliography of Jewish law. --GHcool (talk) 23:42, 14 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alternatively, an editor willing to put some effort into it could convert this semi-list into a narrative text. The 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia has an an article on the history of codification. The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion has a more up-to-date and concise take on the subject. I can share a copy privately with someone who would like to work on that. Eperoton (talk) 01:42, 15 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That sounds alright with me. I don't feel comfortable spearheading that since I only have a novice understanding of halacha. --GHcool (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gentiles and Jewish law section[edit]

Does anybody think that the one-sentence "Gentiles and Jewish law" section is necessary and important to the article? I think it isn't. If nobody comes up with a compelling reason to keep it, I will remove the section within the next couple of days. --GHcool (talk) 21:06, 2 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like Editor2020 did it. checkY --GHcool (talk) 01:07, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think this is important. The fact that halakha might pertain not only to Jews is not obvious and noteworthy. Debresser (talk) 09:18, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So add a sentence somewhere in the body of the article. Don't make a section with a heading for one random fact. --GHcool (talk) 22:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:GHcool, please do not hand out commands. It is only a sub-section, and it is not a "random" fact, as you call it, but a relevant fact.
I saw an editor removed this, without even participating in this discussion. Which was opened just recently. User:Editor2020, making edits while there is ongoing discussion, is something that you should avoid on Wikipedia. Debresser (talk) 23:05, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It wasn't a command. It was a suggestion. --GHcool (talk) 23:09, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, sorry. I can agree to adding it to some other relevant section, but removing it altogether (which is basically what you did, even though you added a See also link), is removing information which IMHO is very relevant (as I stated above). 23:22, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Debresser (talk)
I have reverted. You can do as you wish. Editor2020 (talk) 23:30, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Categories