This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
article anon
As much as I disaprove of Iran (or any country on earth) developing and using nuclear weapons, it's interesting that Iran is the country which today is most fear-mongered and deamonised as a threat to Israel and Jews (where all types of faux news are disseminated to disparage it), yet, besides Israel, it is the country with the largest Jewish population in the Middle East; a country whose laws require Iranian Jews participate and be represented in the country's parliament; a country whose Islamic leaders hold friendly enounters with its Jewish leaders; a country which holds cultural exchange programmes sending Iranian Jewish groups abroad representing Iran; a country which has requested its dispora Jewish Iranian population return to help develop their country; a country whose Jewish population supports their governments persuit of nuclear enrichment for peacful purposes (ie. to generate nuclear power); a country whose Ayatolla during WWII argued to German Nazis that Iranian Jews were IRANIANS above all else and that the Iranian Jews in European countries for studies or business be spared (and then even provided fake passports to even save some non-Iranian Jews).
Unlike they did to other Mizrahim, the sabotaging European Zionists didn't get the chance to throw bombs at Iranian Jews and create the frenzy of emigration as done to Iraqi Jews. Most emigration from Iran came after the Islamic Revolution of Iran (which like all forms of Islamism I attribute as an unfortunate cause and effect to European Zionism and the creation of Israel), yet even after this, still Jews remain in Iran.
And as much as we all dislike the current Iranian president (I personally don't like him either, a bit too radical for me), neither he nor Iran can honestly be labelled anti-semitic, even after calling for Israel to be "wiped off the map". He did not say Jews should be wiped out, but the unethical morally-bankrupt political entity that is the modern State of Israel. That the modern State of Israel believes itself to be the political representative of world Jewry is another thing, but this is a problem to be dealt with by those who cannot distinguish between Israel and Jews, or who cannot distinguish (or worse, those who deliberately blur) the distinction that should be made between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. Al-Andalus 14:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
hi ALL JUST WENT ON A SITE #REDIRECT WWW.JEWWATCH.COM WHAT DO POEPLE MAKE OF THIS SITE
Vote They are attempting to close the +cat AGAIN, please vote to KEEP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SirIsaacBrock (talk • contribs)
This needs to stop. It is abusive and racist. Why must people abuse others because of who they are? It is wrong. Jewish people are no different than anyone else. No person, culture, religion deserves to be treated this way. SilentWind 19:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)SilentWind
Maybe they should try and work on the Nazi pages. (Removed personal attack as per WP:NPA.) 66.229.182.113 09:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Jews [i]are[/i] different.. they're better :D Dan 08:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Sign your comments, dammit! By the way if you were asking me, no I'm not Jewish. I am a native american.SilentWind 23:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)SilentWind
The Nazi film "the wandering jew" is a nice film. you can find it by searching yahoo video under "jew" Its clearly a propoganda film, but its definitly worht watching.
Anyone who participates in the vandalism of this page and racist remarks towards the jews is acting ignorantly and not considering many points of their argument. Some people cannot accept other people living in a different peaceful manner to them and (rm personal attack as per WP:NPA). And before you ask, no, i am not jewish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.73.20 (talk • contribs) 19:40, October 21, 2006
Please refrain from feeding the trolls. Anti-semitism is a terrible thing, but boasting merely incites further anger and frustration. 24.254.82.121 00:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
I would like to define anti semetism. You become an anti semite rather easily these are a few ways: if u criticise any aspect of any jewish persons beliefs or actions, if u criticise any of the Israeli governments policies or actions, if u question the motive begind a jewish persons actions or beliefs, if u write something like this on wikipedia, if you even think of questioning the number of jews who died in the holocaust or compare any other genocide or human suffering to that of the holocaust, if you feel that the palestinians have the right to their own state and finally if u say that the Jewish lobby in the U.S influences U.S policies you are automatically labelled an anti semite. Hellenicwarrior 06:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
There is a very small segment of people who sincerely believe that jewish people are genetically inferior and inherently loathsome, the same people who tend to believe in having eugenic programs to terminate anyone with a physical disability or minority sexual preference. Those bigoted, blood-thirsty people are used as a figurehead and an excuse to cast a racist light over all legitimate and civilized opposition to jewish/zionist lobbying, activism, and militance. Israel is a fascist state, back room lobbying for zionist interests is undemocratic, and opposition to zionism is generally fueled by nothing more than basic pro-democratic pro-freedom pro-peace beliefs. Opposition to israel is as natural as opposition to the occupation of Tibet, and is generally no more fueled by an inherent hatred of jews (rather than the actions of zionists) than defense of Tibet is fueled by racial hatred of the chinese. I've given up a long time ago on having a clear, coherent political opposition to zionism documented on wikipedia for any period of time, but I figured I'd throw my two cents in here, while it lasts. - anonymous coward (70.69.42.228 17:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC))
The Jewish population in Brazil is 150,000 people and 300,000 people in Argentina.
in section State of Israel, the following is particularly problematic "In the past decade nearly a million immigrants went to Israel from the former Soviet Union. Many Jews who emigrated to Israel have moved elsewhere, known as yerida ("descent" [from the Holy Land]), due to its economic problems or due to disillusionment with political conditions and the continuing Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
I'm not sure of the intented meaning, but suggest something along the lines of "In the past decade nearly a million Jews immigrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union." Maybe the emphasis should further evolve to "Nearly a million Jews emigrated from the Soviet Union to Israel in the 1990s." assuming that the past decade isn't 1996-2006.
And for the second sentence "Many Jews, known as yerida ("descent" [from the Holy Land]), have emigrated from Israel due to its economic problems or due to disillusionment with political conditions and the continuing Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
Also, the world-wide population totals in the two sections that give them are significantly in disagreement. If the requirement is to preclude original work, perhaps the disagreement can't be eliminated, but perhaps the reasons for the disagreement can be explained. Surely one of the sources of data explains the problem - different methodologies, governments keeping the information a state secret, ethnic vs religious basis for inclusion in the class. Mulp 03:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Forgive me for not reading fifteen archived discussions, but how did we come to settle for the menorah as one of two icons of Judaism? The Star of David seems to be universally accepted as a symbol of Judaism. Hannukkah is a minor holiday. Should the Christianity pages have a picture of a Christmas tree next to the Cross? It's about as logical.
Leopard Gecko 01:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)User: Leopard Gecko
why there is no mention of terrorists attacks on jews. even on other articles like jews in India, it mentions about persecution of jews and hindus in India by Islamic organisations like Lashkar-e-Toiba, who claim hindus and jews to be enemies of islam.
i m looking for any criticism on this proposal and it must mention about terrorism in Indian subcontinent too. nids 10:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
well, israel palestine conflicts basically targets the terrorism against a nation which has majority of jews. i would love to have a article here which also states that jews are one of the worst communities affected by terrorism along with Hindus in this contemporary world. the persecution of jews just highlights the past histories. i think it is relevant if i or u add a section here for the worst islamic terrorist affected communities. this section should go beyond israel and mention about say india, or any other muslim majority area where they still face terrorism.nids 18:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
You might want to take a look at some of the following articles: Persecution of Jews, Anti-Semitism, History of anti-Semitism, New anti-Semitism, Terrorism, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Arab-Israeli conflict, Religious terrorism, and State-sponsored terrorism. MarkBuckles 01:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
all these articles are fine and most of them are history. what i want in this article is that just mention that jews are one of the two most terrorist affected communities. and as for the Ztrawhcs view, i must like to point out that they grew in patronage of US and Britain only. its only recently that they have said that everyone is there enemy. as for Jews and Hindus, they are the enemies of Islam since the birth of latter. nids 18:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Where is this enemies of Islam and random insertion of hindus coming from? It really has NOTHING to do with the Jewish people. You wouldn't find information of the Chechnya crisis in the 'muslim' page. Same way it shouldn't be mentioned over here --204.92.192.254 14:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
jews are not an ethnic group. anyone who believes otherwise is deluded by biblical mythology. - a rational atheist.
many older Jewish people consider the term "Jew" to be derogatory, much like "black" would be used to refer to Black people or African American people. i recommend changing the lead in to "Jew, which is vernacular for a member of the Jewish People, is an abbreviation of Jewish person, and is sometimes considered derogatory if used maliciously" --- or something like that. I also agree with this user, it is rather offensive, and it should be removed immediatly. Thanks, bobsmith319.
anyways, it offends me unless it has that disclaimer —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.38.207.112 (talk • contribs) 8 August 2006. Oemb1905 16:06, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I am proud to be a Jewish person, or a Jew, or whatever else. I find it odd that you have no pre-holocaust fmaily members who agree with this? Have you ever asked? It is perhaps old-fashioned, but should be mentioned. "Jew" is slang for Jewish person. Analagously to how "black" is slang for a black person. In academic writing, such as this, it would not be considered appropriate to use "Jew" or "Jews" as the subject or agent of action. Jewish people would be much more appropriate. Oemb1905 16:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
The word Jew as it is used on this page is to refer to, "Generally, in modern secular usage, Jews include three groups: people who practice Judaism and have a Jewish ethnic background (sometimes including those who do not have strictly matrilineal descent), people without Jewish parents who have converted to Judaism; and those Jews who, while not practicing Judaism as a religion, still identify themselves as Jewish by virtue of their family's Jewish descent and their own cultural and historical identification with the Jewish people." I guess my problem is that there is an unintentional POV in here. First of all, yehudim is the Hebrew word to refer to the tribe of Judah, which unlike Israel (the Northern alliance), did not survive the onslaught of the Assyrians in approximately 730 BC. Judah, which survived until approximately 585 BC, and then was allowed to return by the 'enlightened' Persian government on or around the 530s. The period of the Great Assembly follows which is about 300 years long from 535 BC to 235 BC. At this point, Greek culture had taken over for Persians and others. First Alexander the Great, then the Seleucid dynasty (one of his descendant dynasties). The Jews were largely centered around Jerusalem until approximately 135 AD, after Jonathan the Maccabbee (also, Alexander Janneus), succeeded in expanding Judaea (the Roman word for the land of the tribe of Judah), to Solomon and David proportions. That is, he conquered Idumaea and parts of modern day Lebanon and Jordan. The Maccabees lasted from about 165 BC to either 65 BC, or 135 CE, depending who you ask. The difficulty lay in the fact that the traditional Maccabee line lost a civil war to Herod the Great (a Jewish convert from Idumaea), on or around the turn of the century. Nevertheless, the Agrippa's, as they have been so called by historians, are descendants of Herod and a Maccabee princess, so for that reason some claim the line remained until 135 CE. Now, of course the Romans were obsessed with keeping control in their empire so they crushed two rebellions by Jews who no longer favoured Herod and Josephus lines of compromise, which involved basically being a Roman vassal. They revolted because being a Roman vassal involved compromising certain rituals, and this was not unlike what had happened six or seven generations before, when Matthais Hasmon started the Maccabee revolt. Unfortunately for the Jewish people, where the Seleucids were in steady decline by the time of Matthais Hasmon, the Romans were not, and as a result both revolts were relatively easily conquered by the Roman legions. The exception being Mossad (? brain fart here), which lasted from 132-135 under siege. Point being, the term Jew is a modern term used by historians from Josephus to the present to refer to the tribe of Judah which survived the exile, the Greeks, and the Romans, and many later oppressors such as Hitler. The term "Yiddish" is cognate with Judaea, the term "Juden" is cognate with Judaea, the term "Jew" is cognate with "Judaea," the term "Yid," is cognate with Judaea. That is, the term predominately refers to the people of the land of Judaea, or in Hebrew, the bene Israel, the tribe of Judah. Jew = the tribe of Judah. The rabbinical authorities, however, who practise what is referred to in historical treatises, as "rabbinical judaism," is an "-ism" of the "Jew," or an "ism" of the Jewish people, as it were. That is, it is the religion commonly associated with the Jewish people. But not exclusively ...., that is why there is the Samaritan, Karaite, and more recently, attempts at making there a Ethiopian and Chinese heresy, by denying entry to these people. Nevertheless, the rabbinical Jews have not won in the heresies of old, nor have they won in the so-called heresies of today, since any Jewish person is allowed to migrate to Israel. Thus, we see that Israel also, favors the definition of a Jew, as a Jewish person, or a person from the tribe of Judah. That is the base line for being Jewish.
With that said, a note on converts. Because the rabbinical Jews were more succesful at surviving the holocaust (notably, the yeshiva that was transported to Ney York ____?), they have in many ways, reinterpreted the pre-holocaust terms in their own, religously biased fashion, using the term Jew to mean a Chasidic, most likely Germanic influenced, ashkenazi Jewish person's religion. Not Samaritanism, not Karaitism, nor any of the other phenotypes of Juda-isms that exist, but merely their own. Because of their notable presence on rabbincal alliances and such (the closest we have to modern day Talmud Torah or a functioning Bet Din), they have hi-jacked the term to mean only rabbinical Jews instead of Jewish people. Because of this use, which is now unfortunately accepted in some circles, converts can be both called non-Jews or Jews depending on our definition of the term. In my opinion, because the terms are both represented by the same word, at least in vernacular, the converts have as much right as anyone else to call themseleves Jews. On the other hand, in such forums as this, in academia, we should be clear as to how the term evolved, what it means, and why we use it the way we do.
Another point. German is a hand picked word from the Bismark era which was chosen particularly because it lacked Prussian and other biases, that many nationalistic terms of the day had. Thus, it is unlikely that it would offend any except the most post-modern types (joke). But the real point is this, it is a term for the people of Germany, a land. If the term Jew, had exclusively meant a person from the tribe of Israel, throughout history (which I would have preferred), then it would not be odd to say Jew for any Jewish person. But precisely because it refers to the land and the religion (which are sometimes exclusive), and since it has been used as a term of abuse for rabbinical Jews, it cannot be used so simply. First of all, a Jew (the religion) is not necessarily a Jew (the people), and a Jew (the people) is not necessarily a Jew (the religion). Secondly, a Jewish person passes by some gentiles on the way to synagogue, and some of the gentiles (in this hypothetical case, they are prejudiced), say "oh, it is another one of those Jews, you know the Jesus killers," or some other such nonsense. That is, in this context (a context I have personally experienced), the term takes on the meaning of slander. That is, it became a bad word. Similarly, "Jew em down," for lowering the price. Or, "Jew-Boy," for Jewish people who assimilate and then are later found to be different, to be a Jewish person, or a Jew. Thus, the term has been abused to the point that is sometimes a slanderous term. In my opinion, it never offends me. However, if you call my grandmother a Jew, she will slap you, and I won't defend you (and please don't try to say she is not proud, believe me, she is ...). (ok, this grandmother part, though true, is a JOKE).
I guess I just think there should be less POV as far as rabbinical Jews are concerned, more emphasis on the cultural sensitivities of holocaust generation people and survivors themselves, and at the very least some type of mention of this whole issue as I have framed it, because I think the Who Is a Jew section is week, and not formal. It should be called, for formal reasons, Who Is a Jewish Person? That is, it is both insensitive to use the term Jew to some Jewish people and it is also, grammatically speaking, the less formal use, or an abbreviation, which is not appropriate in this context. IMHO ...
Jonathan Matthew Haack
Oh, source texts. The Talmud, The Essential Talmud (Steinsaltz), The History of the Jews (Paul Johnson), Ancient Israel (Michael Grant), Jewish Customs ? (Michael Asheri), The Tanak, Reconstrucionist Judaism (Aryeh Kaplan), numerous prayer book introductions both orthodox, English consevative, and others.
Oemb1905 15:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
1. Ok, try to breathe. Ashkenazi means Eastern European Jewish people. Yes, they were ashkenazi. No, they were not chasidic. 2. I said nothing of the sort. Advice: try to keep the history lesson separate from the present. 3. Really? Even before it existed? Recall the Holy Roman Empire, the Prussian Empire, and the Austro-Hungarian Empires. Also, in the last part you say that Germany refers to a region and people well defined or ill defined as Jews. (Gasp) Um, were you thinking of the pale of settlement?, because I don't think anyone claims that the terms Germany and German refer to Jews and the areas of the Jews ... 4. You only quoted it one way. The other way exposes a pov in the article. Namely, the article is biased towards rabbinical Jews. Take the third type of Jew in the article. First Jewish phenotype in the article = rabbinical Jewish person. Second Jewish phenotype in the article = a convert to rabbinical Juda-ism. Third Jewish phenotype in the article = someone who DESPITE not practicing RABBINICAL JUDAISM can STILL call themselves a Jew because they DESCEND from Jewish people and because of THEIR OWN historical and cultural identification with the Jewish people. ------- I am not a rabbinical Jewish person and do not thereby practice the forms of the religion handed down from the chasidics, mishnagdim, Lubovich or any other of those German / Polish based sects. I am not a convert, and I have a Jewish mother, so number two doesn't apply. Also, I am in no way "still" calling myself a Jew "despite" not practicing rabbinical Juda-ism, nor am I pulling my own sense of being Jewish out of the air, or defining my own cultural or historical relationship - period. I am Jew because I am born into the tribe of Judah. We are a race of people from that land! The people from the land and tribe of Judah. Where is that in the article? Huh? (gasp and sarcasm) Secondly, like i would ever need to "still" feel Jewish "despite" not doing something the "rabbinical" jewish people do. PLEASE! This bias largely stems from the accidental canonization of the Talmud through the printing press. The concept of Talmud Torah, however, is that the explanation of the Torah never stops, never ends. The rabbinical authorities, or wikipedia for that matter, cannot decide that all Jewish people who are not rabbincal or converts are thereby touchy feely philosopher Jews who define their own cultural and historical relationship. SO we would deem me "still" Jewish "despite" my not agreeing with their dogma. No way. I am a non-rabbincal Jewish person, who is not a convert, and am plenty practicing and religious according to our shared history, interpreted equally well, but differently from the rabbincal Jewish people that dominate the scene post-holocaust. And yet I still go to shul as a form of compromise and as a forum to argue this in, and to make changes with. Read the "Triumph of Survival" to get a picture of how living the debate was between different sects of Jewish people before the Holocaust. Lastly, we are not semites. Semites are who we, and the Arabs, descend from. Anti-Jewish is preferred in many academic circles as the term semite was coined arbitrarily by a historian in Germany to designate a pre-modern day people. This argument, however, is only beginning. 5. The point is that it is a slang or informal term. (The old generation's misgivings, however, should also be addressed).
My statements are very clear, if a little casual and rushed. If you are looking for an easy answer, get the same history book you used to help on the article.
Yonatan ben Yisrael - STILL a JEW DESPITE not practicing JUDAISM. (laugh). phenotype 3.
Note that in general a word's being offensive is no reason not to use it, but it might be a good idea to document how it came to be offensive, which people commonly consider it offensive, and so on.
Population data - 18 million, 12 million 13-14.6 million - sources? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.105.80.92 (talk • contribs) 11 August 2006.
(Removed personal attack, as per WP:NPA) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.135.229.7 (talk • contribs) .
Is it legal for us to encourage skinheads? Wouldn't that make us condoners or abetters of those who violate the civil rights of some of our wiki community members? Isn't that a federal crime since 1964? Or do those laws not apply here? Just curious, really. ((subst:unsigned|Oemb1905|24 August 2006}
Is this the right article to dicsuss Marxism and Russian Revolution in which Jewish Marxists were the main driving force and exterminated tens of millions of ethnic Russians. Or is this subject a taboo? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.247.44.253 (talk • contribs) 15 August 2006.
The Soviet government, or "Council of People's Commissars' (also known as the "Sovnarkom") was made up of the following:
Chairman V.I. Ulyanov (Lenin) - Russian
Foreign Affairs G.V. Chicherin - Russian
Nationalities J. Dzhugashvili [Stalin] Georgian
Agriculture Protian Armenian
Economic Council Lourie (Larin) - Jew
Food Supply A.G. Schlikhter - Jew
Army and Navy [Military] L.D. Bronstein (Trotski) - Jew
State Control K.I. Lander - Jew
State Lands Kaufmann - Jew
Works [Labor] V. Schmidt - Jew
Social Relief E. Lilina (Knigissen) - Jew
Education A. Lunacharsky - Russian
Religion Spitzberg - Jew
Interior Apfelbaum [Radomyslski] (Zinoviev) - Jew
.Hygiene Anvelt - Jew
Finance I. E. Gukovs [and G. Sokolnikov] - Jew
Press Voldarski [Goldstein] - Jew
Elections M.S. Uritsky - Jew
Justice I.Z. Shteinberg - Jew
Refugees Fenigstein - Jew
Refugees Savitch (Assistant) - Jew
Refugees Zaslovski (Assistant) - Jew
Out of these 22 "Sovnarkom" members, there were three Russians, one Georgian, one Armenian, and 17 - Jews.
The Central Executive Committee, was made up of the following members:
Y. M. Sverdlov [Solomon] (Chairman) - Jew
Avanesov (Secretary) Armenian
Bruno - Latvian
Breslau - Latvian [?]
Babtchinski - Jew
N. I. Bukharin - Russian
Weinberg - Jew
Gailiss - Jew
Ganzberg [Ganzburg ] - Jew
Danichevski - Jew
Starck German
Sachs - Jew
Scheinmann - Jew
Erdling - Jew
Landauer - Jew
Linder - Jew
Wolach Czech
S. Dimanshtein - Jew
Encukidze Georgian
Ermann - Jew
A. A. Ioffe - Jew
Karkhline - Jew
Knigissen - Jew
Rosenfeld (Kamenev) - Jew
Apfelbaum (Zinoviev) - Jew
N. Krylenko - Russian
Krassikov - Jew
Kaprik - Jew
Kaoul - Latvian
Ulyanov (Lenin) - Russian
Latsis - Jew
Lander - Jew
Lunacharsky - Russian
Peterson - Latvian
Peters - Latvian
Roudzoutas - Jew
Rosine - Jew
Smidovitch - Jew
Stoutchka - Latvian
Nakhamkes (Steklov) - Jew
Sosnovski - Jew
Skrytnik - Jew
L. Bronstein (Trotsky) - Jew
Teodorovitch - Jew [?]
Terian - Armenian
Uritsky - Jew
Telechkine - Russian
Feldmann - Jew
Fromkin - Jew
Souriupa - Ukrainian
Tchavtchevadze - Georgian
Scheikmann - Jew
Rosental - Jew
Achkinazi - Imeretian [?]
Karakhane - Karaim [Karaite]
Rose - Jew
Sobelson (Radek) - Jew
Schlichter - Jew
Schikolini - Jew
Chklianski - Jew
Levine-(Pravdine) - Jew
Thus, out of 61 members, five were Russians, six were Latvians, one was a German, two were Armenians, one was a Czech, one was an Imeretian, two were Georgians, one was a Karaim, one. was a Ukrainian, and 41 were - Jews.
The Extraordinary Commission of Moscow (Cheka) 'the Soviet secret police and predecessor of the GPU, the NKVD and the KGB was made up of the following:
F. Dzerzhinsky (Chairman) - Pole
Y. Peters (Deputy Chairman) - Latvian
Chklovski - Jew
Kheifiss - Jew
Zeistine - Jew
Razmirovitch - Jew
Kronberg - Jew
Khaikina - Jew
Karlson - Latvian
Schaumann - Latvian
Leontovitch - Jew
Jacob Goldine - Jew
Galperstein - Jew
Kniggisen - Jew
Katzis - Latvian
Schillenkuss - Jew
Janson - Latvian
Rivkine - Jew
Antonof - Russian
Delafabre - Jew
Tsitkine - Jew
Roskirovitch - Jew
G. Sverdlov (Brother of president of the Central Executive Committee) - Jew
Biesenski - Jew
J. Blumkin (Count Mirbach's assassin) - Jew
Alexandrovitch (Blumkin's accomplice) - Russian
I. Model - Jew
Routenberg - Jew
Pines - Jew
Sachs - Jew
Daybol - Latvian
Saissoune - Armenian
Deylkenen - Latvian
Liebert - Jew
Vogel - German
Zakiss - Latvian
Of these 36 Cheka officials, one was a Pole, one a German, one an Armenian, two were Russians, eight were Latvians, and 23 were - Jews. --Jparu 19:19, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
They have not been able to edit this article since July 1st -- over 1 month. Is this really the "encyclopedia anyone can edit?" Liu Bei 04:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
The Jews were eventually banned as a distinct party shortly after the forming of the Soviet Republic because of the concerns you bring up. Many Jews voluntarily stopped identifying with that part of their ancestry in order to shape a new communist country. Many of the old timers, such as Trotsky, were shot and killed later on for they favored, arguably, a more sincere form of Marxism. Nevertheless, it is precesiley because the Jewish Party was banned in the 30s, that this argument (that the Jews "exterminated millions of ethnic Russians") holds no weight.
Secondly, directing newcomers to an article on how to discuss this matter is of no help. It would be much better to provide a link to wherever I can discuss this further.
Oemb1905 21:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
The above is probably similarly to the Armenian genocide spam generator. EamonnPKeane 21:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
For the same reasons this site should not be anti any religion, it should not be pro any religion either, listing this page as a Good Article only encites anti semitism and while it's a site that has good structure and rich content, it is clearly not encyclopedic and has a lot of content that's historically been written in very different manners across history and the world, this content borders on propaganda. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sentinel28 (talk • contribs) .
This is a disappointing and petty response, to ask to "fix" rather than simply delist this as a Good Article, is similar to saying to Hussein, Iran, Hezbollah, or Al-Qaeda, "Your information is sending the wrong message, please change it," and their reply being "OK, go ahead and fix it." Are you asking that I completely rewrite this page? Obviously that's very petty and kniving. I don't think cultural, ethnic, or religious pride pages are wrong, but they don't belong to this project, I strongly encourage this page delisted as a good article, it falls well short of those standards and only encites typical behavior.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sentinel28 (talk • contribs) .
I understand what you are saying, thank you for the note on the tildes, but I think you've drifted from the original intent of the post. I think too much work has been put in to this page to "fix" it without radically changing almost every piece of it. That is why I suggest that it simply be not listed as a Good Article. I am trying to appeal to the intelligence of those who have helped author this article, enjoy it, continue to build it, but recognize that it does not adhere to GA standards (please don't ask why, if you can't recognize it you've been blinded by ethnocentrism or other foolhardy humanities), and let's not corrupt or dilute the GA quality of this project with this article. Sentinel28 21:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
NEW: On Wikiversity there is now a "Jewish Studies School." Will it become a "duplication" of many things on Wikipedia? What should it's goals and functions be? Please add your learned views. Thank you. IZAK 09:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Dear all,
I love Wikipedia because there is no systematic copy editing to prevent the intellectually boastful from expressing themselves ungrammatically: "The Jewish people have by far the largest concentration of Nobel prize winners… than any other ethnic or religious group."
Of course, someone else is welcome to fix this. - Jmabel | Talk 04:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
The correct transliteration of the Yiddish word ייִדן is yidn, without "e". There is no vowel in the original Yiddish spelling, and the pronounciation is also yidn. As a new user, I cannot edit this article, so I'll appreciate someone fixing this problem. Beit Or 18:34, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
The number of Jews in modern Israel has surpassed the number of Jews in the United States for the first time, according to the US Central Bureau of Statistics.
On the eve of Independence Day last month, the CBS reported that there are 5.4 million Jews living in Israel, compared to 5.2 million in the U.S., according to the latest United Jewish Appeal Federation survey reported Tuesday in Ha'aretz.
The data indicates the closure of an historical circle: For the first time in nearly 2000 years since the destruction of the Second Temple, Israel has once again become the largest concentration of Jews in the world.
this should be entered into the article and also the chart shouldbe updatede
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rebavi (talk • contribs) 3 October 2006.
That's correct, official figures released by Israel counts everyone eligible under the law of return as Jewish. The number of those Israelis classified as Jewish by the state but who do not comply with halakhic requirements of Jewishness are estimated by at anywhere up to and exceeding half a million people.
Then there is the issue of those Israelis who are classified as Jewish by the state, again for migratory purposes, but then the state itself will not issue identity cards stating "Jewish".
Then there is the fact that the American census does not ask people if they are Jewish, and only has info on those who volunteer the information to it. Many Jewish Americans go unnacounted for.
Also, Israel does not deduct people who have made yerida. They are included in the total Jewish Israeli population for up to ten years, and I can say that in the past 5 years alone, there has been an enourmous number of Israelis that have left the country. Incidentally, I can't wait for the figures of the latest Australian census conducted this year to be released, so as to compare the Jewish population of 1996 with that of 2006. All i can say is that there is an imense number of young Israelis living in Sydney now. There everywhere :) It's now common for me to pass by at least one stranger a day on the streets of Sydney who is speaking hebrew. And I know from my last time in new york, late last year, there were many newly arrived Israelis there too, and many others still arriving. Al-Andalus 08:34, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi Gwernol. You need to provide a guideline for your removal of [4]. --WikiCats 03:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough Gwernol. So maybe the Controversy should go into its own section within the article. The Controversy being that it is opposed by most Jewish groups and is criticised by numerous mainstream media. --WikiCats 04:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
If you have no objection I will create a Controversy section. --WikiCats 04:24, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
The two main controversies that I can think of are this one and Mel Gibsons outburst. Unless anyone can think of anything else. --WikiCats 04:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
If nobody has any objection I will create the Section. --WikiCats 05:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh great. So what are the others. --WikiCats 12:54, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm aware that the term "Jew" can describe an adherent to the Jewish faith and/or a member of the Jewish people or ethnic group. For that reason, I hesitate to add the page to Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups using the ((ethnic groups|class=GA)) template. This category may be considering too limiting...
I'll be watching this page for a week or so. Please let me know if you think it's OK to add this article to Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups. Thanks --Ling.Nut 19:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
This still does not seem to have been answered. I would say that if the word is used in both senses, and there is some debate as to which sense, if any, is the more appropriate, the article should be included in categories and lists representing both senses, and just explain the debate in the main article.Sjeng 19:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm wondering if anyone has come across any serious scholarly research that has examined the fact that Jews tend to be quite overrepresented amongst the gay and lesbian populations in the modern World, particularly in the USA and Western Europe. I have read about this on certain Jewish websites and in a couple Jewish newsletters/newspapers, but have yet to find any academic research on this matter. I know that the worldwide Jewish community is generally very gay/lesbian friendly, but I am looking for information/statistics that have has confirmed the noticeably higher incidence of homosexuality/lesbianism in the (mostly secular) Jewish population. Thank you for any information that you can provide. --152.163.100.72 15:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I think this is just a use of homophobia as another weapon in anti-semitism. Funnily enough, the people that hate one of these groups tend to hate both. It's natural that victims of persecution try to help each other out. Saying that you read it from "Jewish newsletters" is not very substantial in my opinion. It's like how "arab world" is use don CNN, vaguely, and used to reinforce stereotypes. 68.193.94.214 00:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
WikiProject Ethnic groups has added new assessment criteria for Ethnic Groups articles.
Revisions of assessment ratings can be made by assigning an appropriate value via the class parameter in the WikiProject Ethnic groups project banner ((Ethnic groups)) that is currently placed at the top of Ethnic groups articles' talk pages. Quality assessment guidelines are at the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team's assessment system page. After rating the article, please provide a short summary to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses. To add the summary, please edit this article's ratings summary page. A link to this page can be found in the ((Ethnic groups)) template on the article's talk page.
Please see the Project's article rating and assessment scheme for more information and the details and criteria for each rating value. A brief version can be found at Template talk:Ethnic groups. You can also enquire at the Ethnic groups Project's main discussion board for assistance.
Another way to help out that could be an enjoyable pastime is to visit Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles, find an interesting-looking article to read, and carefully assess it following those guidelines.
Thanks!
--Ling.Nut 21:50, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
The following sentence appeared in the "Middle Ages: Islamic Europe, North Africa and Asia " section:
I removed this sentence because it directly contradicts the remainder of the paragraph, which speaks of the tolerance the Jews met in Islamic lands. However, I do welcome discussion if anyone feels I am in error. Justin Eiler 00:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
The phrase "This, however, is a war of disproportionate strength" is wonderfully ironic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.226.158 (talk • contribs)
Actually, that was my point. Thanks for removing it.
I think this article is looking pretty good right now.
Type "cheap" into search, redirected to Jew article. Shouldn't this be fixed?
I stumbled upon this page Jewish Supremacy, it looks quite poorly written and it contains alot in-factual information and possibly a good deal of POV. i wasn't sure where exactly i should bring this up, since the discussin page for that article is quite dead, so i brought it up here. maybe someone could take a look at it.
194.80.193.160 November 2006
Please vote 64.229.208.244 22:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Why is it that a section of the article discussing the perjorative use of the word "Jew" has been made into a footnote? Check footnote number one... --Elipongo 18:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
ok i dont know where to put this or if its already been said so w/e. maybe the Stereotypes part could be redone. Its kind of, well, idk like not professional (no comments about my crappy grammer). --n1n3-d1c3