![]() | This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Andrevan/Archives/60. |
![]() |
Andre🚐's Talk ☎️ Page Archive 📇 Index |
☕ Threads archived by ClueBot III after 72h ☕ |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start or revisit a discussion, please do so here. |
🌳 🍀 🌳 🌿 🌳 🌱 🌳 🗄️ClueBot Detailed Index Archive #60🗄️ 🌳 🌱 🌳 🌿 🌳 🍀 🌳
| ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Moving a page subject of an RM | 2023-09-16 22:13 | 2023-09-16 22:14 | 2 | 692 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
2 | Apology | 2023-09-17 08:26 | 2023-09-17 18:09 | 2 | 860 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
3 | Onus | 2023-09-22 01:00 | 2023-09-22 01:56 | 5 | 3143 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
4 | DYK | 2023-09-23 14:17 | 2023-09-23 14:45 | 5 | 2607 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
5 | Sun Oct 1: NYC Hispanic/Latinx Heritage Month 2023 | 2023-09-23 19:03 | 2023-09-23 19:03 | 1 | 2459 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
6 | Thanks | 2023-10-02 17:02 | 2023-10-04 17:12 | 16 | 10231 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
7 | Administrators' newsletter – September 2023 | 2023-10-04 14:41 | 2023-10-04 14:41 | 1 | 4988 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
8 | Doorpost amulet etc. | 2023-10-04 18:18 | 2023-10-04 20:12 | 3 | 1661 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
9 | I was mistaken | 2023-10-11 05:50 | 2023-10-12 01:29 | 2 | 1315 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
10 | Wiki.NYC Pavilion for Open House New York (Oct 21–22) and Wikidata Day (Oct 29) | 2023-10-14 21:59 | 2023-10-14 21:59 | 1 | 3111 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
11 | Gérard Nissim Amzallag | 2023-10-19 04:16 | 2023-10-19 04:17 | 2 | 871 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
12 | Engagement | 2023-10-21 18:11 | 2023-10-21 18:12 | 2 | 759 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
13 | Hi | 2023-10-23 00:39 | 2023-10-23 03:02 | 16 | 26555 | User talk:Andrevan/Archives/60 |
It is bad practice to move an article page while an RM is open, kindly do not do that again. Particularly since there was a pending request from another editor to myself. There is absolutely no need to rush such things. Selfstudier (talk) 22:13, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
By the way, taking Tryptofish's remark on board, I should apologize for writing 'incompetent'. I see why you could have been misled in all good faith by the Goldstein illustrative quote to make that edit. And I appreciate the rapid revert you made in response to my talk page notification. (My compliments on your gracing your page with Hopper's masterpiece, by the way. An extraordinary powerful statement.) Nishidani (talk) 08:26, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Ugh! What a time sink. I tend to agree with you. My experiences at the dossier article have repeatedly shown examples of tendentious Trump supporting editors trying to delete stuff without any good reason, just their own OR, ignorance, opinions, and massive wikilawyering. One, who shall not be named because she no longer edits the article, even tried to delete the article. That's how far they really want to go. That shows an attitude completely at odds with WP:GNG and our mandate to document the sum of all human knowledge as it is found in RS. Some of these people are not acting in good faith, and it's such a waste of time dealing with them. Onus should be balance by PRESERVE, with a bit more weight on the side of keeping and adding good content. We are here to build, not tear down, an encyclopedia that is not limited by the size constraints of paper. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 01:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
Your comment at the DYK appears to be intentionally unhelpful. Was it intended that way?
Alternative routes would either be to:
The hook should be likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest.
Onceinawhile (talk) 14:17, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
all major publications of Jewish history have been influenced by the political climates of their respective timesisn't that true of all histories ever? And why would you write it like that? Do you think it's appropriate to make such sweeping claims about Jewish history on the main page for everyone to see? I don't agree with this, as I said. Andre🚐 14:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
October 1: Hispanic/Latinx Heritage Month 2023: Edit-a-thon! | |
---|---|
![]() You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our Hispanic/Latinx Heritage Month 2023: Edit-a-thon!, with in-person at Prime Produce Guild Hall in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. It is being held in the middle of National Hispanic Heritage Month (Sep 15–Oct 15). Some past local edit-a-thons touching on this area have included the two editions of Wikipedia:Meetup/WikiArte at MoMA in 2015-16, and the CUNY LaGuardia translat-a-thons held annually since 2018. Meeting info:
All attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct. In addition, to participate in person, you should be vaccinated and also be sure to respect others' personal space, and we may limit overall attendance size if appropriate. |
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:03, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
I really appreciate your support at the MfDs. It's really stressful and depressing. I don't know what to do. I don't want to leave my wife alone, but life is just too painful at times. You're the only one showing any mercy. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:02, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
</revision> <revision> <id>1139188764</id> <parentid>1139184482</parentid> <timestamp>2023-02-13T21:25:59Z</timestamp> <contributor> <username>Valjean</username> <id>700244</id> </contributor> <comment>/* The factors that influenced the decision */ .</comment> <model>wikitext</model> <format>text/x-wiki</format> <text bytes="11114" xml:space="preserve">This page has been removed from search engines' indexes. Why the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was openedAndre🚐 03:14, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).
Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.
I utterly lack energy at the moment, so do as you please. You're free to insert foreign mambo jambo (It's not an English word) rather than linking as above, and claiming that the 1st century Palestinian Jews used the Syriac alphabet. AddMore-III (talk) 18:18, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
Groan !!. Now pushing the same paranoid conspiracy theories as in that article they wrote. They keep attacking our RS policy. That should only be done at WP:RSN to change policy, whereafter that failed attempt should result in a ban for providing evidence of their extreme CIR problems. They should go to Conservapedia or Fringeopedia. We don't need this fringe advocacy here. For every one CIA person paid to edit here there are 500,000 ordinary people who edit and revert their shit edits. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 05:50, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
October 21–22: Wiki.NYC Pavilion for Open House New York @ Prime Produce | |
---|---|
![]() You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our Wiki.NYC Pavilion for Open House New York at Prime Produce in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan. The event will feature several interactive exhibits highlighting the "wiki way" for New York City
| |
October 29: Wikidata Day in New York City | |
![]() Additionally, you are invited to Wikidata Day in New York City at Butler Library, Columbia University, in celebration of Wikidata's 11th birthday. This coincides with the online/global WikidataCon 2023 and is a sequel to Wikidata Day 2022. The event will feature a Harlem Arts & Culture edit-a-thon, spotlight sessions, lightning talks, and cake!
At both events, all attendees are subject to Wikimedia NYC's Code of Conduct. In addition, to participate in person, you should be vaccinated and also be sure to respect others' personal space, and we may limit overall attendance size if appropriate. |
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello my friend, I hope you are fine. I do not believe this article meets wikipedia notability criteria for either writers or academics, and I may formally make a nomination for the article's deletion. But I wanted forst to extend to you a fair opportunity to strengthen it. Very best wishes, BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 04:16, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Following your most recent responses, and as I am anxious not to further disrupt the RM, I have decided not to engage further with you at the Zionism, race and genetics article. Bfn. Selfstudier (talk) 18:11, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
Andre, let me preface everything that follows with this: I think you have very obvious POVs on some topics, the ones that come to mind are the CT topics of AP2 and PIA. But I also think you generally have whxat you think to be Wikipedia's best interests at heart, that you are not a bad faith actor, that you have a sincere goal of improving our articles. And I also understand that emotions have gotten to a boiling temperature in the PIA area in the last couple of weeks and I understand why. But I would like you to reconsider several things that you do, chief among them attempting to disqualify sources. I dont understand how you reconcile "all significant views" with the attempts to carve out significant views from our articles wholesale. Second, the idea that you can excise an academic writing in an area where she has been academically published because you think her political views make her biases has absolutely zero basis in any policy on this website. And further, repeatedly harping on her ethnicity, and yes it was just her ethnicity because she is an American citizen, is something that would never fly for basically any other person besides a Palestinian. If somebody said this Black anthropologist is a BLM supporter, he cannot write about white supremacy, or this Jewish anthropologist is a Zionist, she cannot write about Palestinian identity. The person who said that would be blocked or topic banned within five minutes. This method of ruling out sources based on ideology is insidious to what is supposed to be the foundation of this entire place. And it just makes the people who disagree with you feel like you're attempting to run-around the sources by artificially restricting what may be used as a source. nableezy - 00:39, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Some 20 single gene mutations alone have been detected that affect the Ashkenazi, among them illnesses such as Tay–Sachs disease, Canavan disease, Gaucher's disease, Riley-Day syndrome, Niemann–Pick disease and Huntington's chorea and many other often fatal conditions, some associated particularly with, but not exclusively to, Jews. Institutions such as Dor Yeshorim have created a DNA database so that one can check for genetically incompatible matches among prospective couples.from the article, which is clearly medical info. I also quoted, but I won't repeat, text of policy and an essay that Levivich had linked which says basically anything potentially medical is also part of MEDRS.
The professor, Nadia Abu El-Haj, who is of Palestinian descent... Critics of Dr. Abu El-Haj’s book, however, said her aim was to undermine Israel’s right to exist, and challenged her methodology and findings... “I am horrified,” Ms. Stern said in an interview, “that Barnard would even consider tenure for a professor who is so clearly unqualified.”[6]
In El-Haj's narrative, Israeli archaeologists turn into nationalist robots, wielding bulldozers in a desperate effort to 'create' evidence of a historic Jewish presence in the Land of Israel.[7]
Abu El Haj is not merely saying that there is a colonial dimension to Israel; she is arguing that the colonial is all there is, for any claim that there is a genuine Jewish nationhood that is expressed through Zionism and through the state of Israel is false...Those critics who saw in Facts on the Ground a work intrinsically hostile to Israel were, in my judgement, correct. That does not justify all the accusations that were made against its author, nor all the tactics that were used by those seeking to damage her, even to silence her; but it can be argued that the high-profile controversy over Nadia Abu El Haj has brought the partisan and politicized state of academic middle east studies in the United States to the attention of the wider community. Nadia Abu El Haj has been granted tenure, which – regardless of her individual merits – is a good outcome for anyone who believes that professorship by plebiscite is a bad idea and that academic independence is a vital principle whether you agree with all the results or not. But such decisions tend to confirm the impression that Middle East Studies in the U.S. can simply be equated to anti-Israel studies, and this can only lead to a loss of credibility for the field and for academia as a whole.[8]
I might add I don't like the word 'Jewish' in any title.I don't believe, despite what some sources say, that it is healthy to essentialize anything 'Jews' or 'Jewishness' or 'Jewish thinking'
Almost all major Zionist histories have been produced by scholars working from within a Zionist framework
Just for the record, Behar et als., own data on the localization of Ashkenazim 's ancient admixture proportions compared to neighboring populations places them not quite in the classic 'Middle East' but on both sides of the Bosphorus and environs. They refuse to share the data base on which their conclusions were based
(often dating back to Hammer et al 2000, way outdated). Paleogenetics leads to historical implications, historical knowledge (of things like conversion, a very important factor) sits uneasily with what molecular biologists claim about history (Ostrer and Behar are particular poor in this regard: Ostrer even cites the Tanakh for the population of Israel in the 9th and 8th centuries BCE).
No doubt a polemicist from these quarters would say what counts is some direct inkling now of recent partial Jewish descent, so that 11 of my 16 nephews don't qualify and only 5, unbeknown to them and their parents and grandparents, had an ancestral address in Isaiah St.,Shechem etc., 3,000 years ago. You'd need one of the Keystone cops to track it down, but(responding to a view of Ostrer)
This is a strawman argument, consisting of a list of papers that, probably unread, have been clipped from the relevant wiki pages, regardless of the numerous differences and figures that can be elicited regarding hypothetical admixture percentages in research over 2 decades (Nebel 2001) to Kopelman (2020). No one is contesting that there is a ME component among the Ashkenazi, as your assumption above suggests. If you are familiar with the literature, that component has been estimated to range from 3% upwards. What was noted is that (a) wiki genetic articles are slapdash piles of reports whose details conflict, often as with Yemeni Jews, where our article asserts two contradictory theories, each appealing to DNA studies i.e., (I) that there were almost no conversions (pure descent) and (ii)there were large-scale conversions (something historically known to be the case) (b) that Middle East is an empty term abusively used to hint at a Levantine or Israeli founding origin whereas (c) as with Behar 2013, it appears to point to northern Turkish origins. One could add dozens of other incoherences, such as (d) the ignorance of history illustrated by many of these papers (e) and its replacement by a religious narrative so that (e) miraculously, per Behar et al., the suggested foundation dates are made to coincide with the mythical dates of a putative expulsion or imposed exile; (f) that the whole literature is marked by a philosophical ineptitude full of unargued assumptions or ignored difficulties, (not least the incongruency between the modern Jewish religious definition of Jewishness as grounded in descent from a Jewish mother, and the Old Testamental belief that legitimacy as a Jew comes through the paternal line). Namely, in any lineage both maternal and paternal origins have equal weight. If I have mixed parentage ethnically, it is wholly arbitrary to privilege just one line to the exclusion of the other. Harping on 4 founding fathersmothers of apparent ME origin (while studiously avoiding any precision about where in the vast ME they may have hailed from) as defining one's ethnicity as an Middle-Eastern descended Ashkenazi, sits unhappily beside a feasible estimate that 80% of the female line descends from a European genomic heritage going back to the Neolithic. The massive obfuscation is POV-driven, and, if the critique of PCA is correct, the results of these various papers throughout those decades has, wittingly or unwittingly, reflect the historical preconceptions (the myth of return/the idea that identity is biological) of their authors, rather than the extremely complex realities of the past. It is quite pointless my stating this. The ideological commitments are too deeply enseamed into our public and scientific discourse, so that commonsense has no traction, and passages like the following are, if read, quickly forgotten, because their exposure of the absurd assumptions underwriting the literature on genetic identity would put a lot of people out of work. How far back must we go to find the most recent shared ancestor for – say – all Welsh people or all Japanese? And how much further is it to the last person from whom everyone alive today- Welsh, Japanese, Nigerian, or Papuan-can trace descent. . . Speculative as they are, the results are a surprise. In a population of around a thousand people everyone is likely to share the same ancestor about ten generations. Some three hundred years- ago. The figure goes up at a regular rate for larger groups, which means that almost all native Britons can trace descent from a single anonymous individual on these islands who lived in about the thirteenth century. On the global scale, universal common ancestry emerges no more than a hundred generations ago-well into the Old Testament era, perhaps, around the destruction of the First Temple in about 600 B.C.Steve Jones, Serpent's Promise: The Bible Retold as Science Hachette 2013 p.27. That means, analytically, that attempts to define Jewishness by selective manipulation of haplotypes is nonsensical, since all one is doing is repressing everything else in the genome that points to cross-ethnic affinities.Nishidani (talk) 8:16 am, 5 December 2022, Monday (10 months, 18 days ago) (UTC−5)
Next, no, he does not do that in any of those quotes. He criticizes some of their methods and arguments, he does not use being Jewish as any type of disqualifier in any way. That seems almost purposely tendentious in your reading of each of these quotes. The first is about the title of the Wikipedia article, the next is a fact, and doesnt have anything to do with Judaism or Jews or Jewishness, the next doesnt say anything of the sort, the next is attacking your argument. Im not really sure what you think youre proving here, but to me its just you cant see straight when it comes to Nishidani and imagine all sorts of things about what he writes. We went through similar before, if you recall. nableezy - 01:55, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Whatever though, I thought I might be able to reason with you, but I can admit failure. nableezy - 01:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Nishidani, and others, have excluded many pro-Israeli sources for being political. Do you agree? Because I can definitely provide diffs of Nishidani doing this.And he's clearly stating he doubts the conclusions by Behar and Ostrer in the above, and he believes certain sources are iredeemably Zionist.
much of the 'science' over the past 15 years has been questioned as questionable. It is a part of Zionist doctrine to speak of a 'return' to one's putative territorial roots - but Zionism is an ideology, not a science...
Y-DNA , further, defines patrilineal descent, which is excluded as a criterion for Jewishness by rabbinical consensus. If the rabbis are right, Behar et al., are wrong. If Behar and co are right, then the relevant halakha must be rewritten. See? The conceptual paradigm is messyCategory_talk:People_of_Jewish_descent/Archive_1
The 23 sources or 80 books and articles you keep citing cover nuanced, often reciprocally challenging material in a debate that is new, and far too early to establish a consensus, particularly since many of the historical inferences made by those papers are by geneticists who appear to have a frail grasp of the ongoing historical and linguistic debatesTalk:Genetic_studies_on_Jews/Archive_6
this page is largely crap, because it is held under lock and key by POV pushers, who are illiterate in the topic, and steadfastly wedded to 'proving' modern Israelis descend from ancient Israelites living in Palestine. Second point, is that, unlike the impression given on this page, Elhaik's northern Turkey hypothesis, successively modified, for the Middle Eastern component, rather than the Levantine thesis, is not a minority view. Behar and others basically same the same thingTalk:Genetic_studies_on_Jews/Archive_6
The genetic section (which Stampfer's study should not be mentioned, but it is) has undergone a major expansion, with separate sections on papers that are now almost 2 decades old, as if nothing had o occurred since Behar and Atzmon's studies. Elhaik et al., have substantially finetuned their hypothesis to meet criticisms, and there is no mention of this. Instead we have a large section on criticisms of what he first proposed. Highly unbalanced.Nishidani
with a skeptical eye on the incongruencies in the ideas proposed by all parties, Behar's team included 2017 pp.103-104 That is how I view the matter: the methodologies yield different results, and there is no consensus from which one can then brand any one theory 'fringe'.Nishidani (talk)Talk:Khazar_hypothesis_of_Ashkenazi_ancestry/Archive_2 Andre🚐 02:43, 23 October 2023 (UTC)