User talk:Shlomke

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Shlomke is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Shlomke, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  and Shalom! IZAK 08:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to The Holocaust. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Superm401 - Talk 11:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

This was apparently the result of an editing malfunction. Shlomke, try clicking show changes for the next couple edits. That should allow you to verify the edit before submitting. If it's still showing changes you didn't make, try going to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Superm401 - Talk 22:06, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jesus

A new editor is making rather bold claims about Judaism's view of Jesus, and also insisting he knows Jesus' Hebrew name. Could you possibly take a look at Talk:Jesus#Hebrew_name_of_Yehoshua_or_Yeshua and Talk:Judaism's view of Jesus? I'd appreciate it. Jayjg (talk) 17:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Burshtin

The "editing" that this chochom b'einov did is ridiculous. Is that what normally goes on here?--Meshulam 15:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Melamed

Not a bad image. JFW | T@lk 15:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Francisco Maldonado da Silva

I noticed you adding entries related to Judaims and begun to wonder if you could know something about Francisco Maldonado da Silva - including how real he was - Skysmith 12:42, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

  • I noticed him couple of years ago in a list of historical physicians (that mainly mentioned that he was executed for not being a Catholic) that included people like Galen and Vesalius. Unfortunately, most of the info about him in the net is in portuguese and I did not want to write anything based on a novel. - Skysmith 13:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shaul Wohl

Agree on redirect. Still sounds like a bubbemeisse. But at least it's a notable bubbemeisse. LOL. Tizku le'mitzvos. See you around. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 23:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I appreciated the news source you gave me. I knew from the news that Dov Hikind and Felder were against the riots, but I knew nothing about the Jewish press response. I always maintain a very critical view of politics and your help was what I needed to confirm my long-standing hunch.

One thing that would really benefit the Boro Park article would be an image of Maimonides Medical Center or 13th Ave. I can't decide which, but if you have a digital camera, I could help you upload any images you have to Wikipedia.

Sincerely, Screwball23 talk 13:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Just another RFA thank you note

Dear Shlomke, I really appreciate your vote and your kind words in my RFA. It has passed with an unexpected 114/2/2 and I feel honored by this show of confidence in me. Cheers! ←Humus sapiens ну? 04:17, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] William Fielding Ogburn

Regarding this edit reverting the changes of an IP user, ummm, huh? What was wrong with the changes that the user made? If there was something I missed, could you explain further on User_talk:216.178.67.150? Thanks. Shenme 19:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but I was checking (I'm still learning how things can go wrong even on the best of days) and came across this. The comment was (Reverted edits by 65.115.204.3 to last version by Drmagic), and yet I can't find any matchups with User:Drmagic's edits. As you'll see, strangely the word 'girl' has been deleted twice from the page. Any ideas what happened? Shenme 20:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
I really like Lupin's antivandal tool, but even with it I end up falling behind, as noted on my user page. By the time I've checked out one definite bit of vandalism, then reverted the article (perhaps back a few edits as the recent N were also vandalism), then given a warning, and _then_ tracked back through that same person's last few edits (and often having to fix them also), another few minutes has gone by. Basically 10 minutes of real time takes at least 30+ minutes of "what went on here" time. Of course, the real joy is finding old vandalism nobody noticed before (e.g. Talk:Tom_Metzger#Mindless_reversion) Anyway, I've given up on "keeping up" - I just try to clean up about 10-15 minutes of Wikipedia history at one time. Shenme 06:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Strashelye Article

Eliezer targeted the Strashelye article for deletion. I think this is Eliezer's way of retaliating after the whole Chabad thing, because I can't think of any other reason why the article would be targeted for deletion. Anyhow, I'd appreciate some help over there.--Meshulam 06:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kapust Article

Same with the Kapust article. PinchasC/Eliezer (I think they're the same person) is pretty ticked apparently, and is targetting articles that I've written or started for deletion. I think his motive is pretty clear. Is there any way to report that? Anyway, your help would be appreciated.--Meshulam 06:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The will

I was able to find the copy. Thank you. --Meshulam 19:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD

My apologies for not having answered your request apropos of how to close an AfD as keep or speedy keep; I addressed the discussion about which you wrote and forgot altogether to write you. In any case, WP:DEL explains the deletion process generally, and the "Deletion discussions, closure, review" section addresses specifically the situations in which an early close is appropriate; WP:SK explains when such early closure may be as speedy keep. Finally, WP:DELPRO enumerates the steps one must take to close an AfD and memorialize the discussion on the talk page of the article/template/image/redirect/category. I'm certainly not particularly conversant with the intricacies of AfD, but please don't hesitate to write should you have further questions; at worst, I'll do my best to answer them. Joe 16:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week

Hi Shlomke, I've created an Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week. I'd love to see your comments, improvements, amendations and nominations, preferably all on the discussion or the actual page there. Many thanks, Nesher 16:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Error?

Was this just some weird edit conflict error, or did you intentionally alter my edit? Thanks. --You Know Who (Dark Mark) 02:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean "my type of messages"? I'm confused. Normally when doing RC patrol, I use {{test}}, {{test2}}, {{test3}}, {{test4}}, and almost never, {{test5}}. Why, are these not what you use? --You Know Who (Dark Mark) 02:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh, it was a popups-type revert. I getcha. I just go directly to the talk page and place those tags. Less chance for error for me. But keep up the good work. See you around. --You Know Who (Dark Mark) 13:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my recently unsuccessful RfA. I plan on working harder in the coming months so that I have a better chance of becoming an admin in the future. I hope that you will consider supporting me if I have another RfA. Thank you for your support. --digital_me(t/c) 15:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] monobook.js

Hello Shlomke, can you test my godmode-light.js of your malfunction? What is the advantage (additional features) of User:VoA/monobook.js? --Olliminatore 16:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok thx for the info (clarifying). I think both, but I'm not sure whether (the additional features are) not necessary/ for the godmode-light. --Olliminatore 13:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CrazyRussian's RfA

Hello Shlomke, and thank you for your support at my request for adminship, which ended with an awe-inspiring 86/1/2 result. I plan to do much with my shiny new tools - but I'll start slow and learn the ropes at first. Please deluge me with assignments and requests - I enjoy helping out. For Mother Russia!! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Deletions/Renamings

Hi Shlomke, Please see:

Many thanks, Nesher 12:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism

Hi Shlomke: Thought you would be interested in the latest adventure that has started at Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism (perhaps you may want to join) and the discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism. Shabbat Shalom. IZAK 12:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted Image

Hi, I just wanted to know why you deleted the image that I contributed to the article on the Rebbe. It doesn't really matter to me so much, but I am just starting to try and figure my way around Wikipedia and if I found out the reason why that particular picture was deleted it can help me to not make the same mistake in the futrue. Thanks.--Sagtkd 21:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)SAGTKD

I'm sorry. I made a mistake. I confused two of the pages together. You can delete this section if you want to.

[edit] Languages

Hi There! Can you translate my name in what language you know please, and then post it Here. I would be very grateful if you do (if you know another language apart from English and the ones on my userpage please feel free to post it on) P.S. all th translations are in alpahbetical order so when you add one please put it in alpahbetical order according to the language. Thanks!!! Abdullah Geelah 21:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Rebbi_Levi_Yitzchak_Schneerson.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rebbi_Levi_Yitzchak_Schneerson.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:20, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Noahide

Hi, please join in the discussion on the Noahide Laws talk page about cleaning it up etc. Thanks! Chavatshimshon 08:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zeira

OK, sorry. It doesn't appear to me that there is any real standard for naming, and Zeria seems as good as Ze'era to me. I will move it back momentarily. Thanks for the tip on proper methodology. (I didn't know.) Dfass 19:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Palestinian rabbis

What does one make of the new Category:Palestinian rabbis and Category:Talmud rabbis in Palestine, should they be renamed to something like Category:Rabbis of ancient Palestine? so that it does not connect, and become confused with, the way the word "Palestinian" is used today (meaning the very unJewish modern Arab Palestinians, who have nothing to do with these rabbis!) Thanks. IZAK 09:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not using "Palestine" or "Palestinian" for Talmud and rabbis to avoid confusion

Note: Many articles about the rabbis of the Talmud and Mishnah are derived from the archaic Jewish Encyclopedia, published between 1901-1906, over one hundred years ago (when the Middle East was still under the thumb of the Ottoman Turks) and which used the archaic expressions "Palestine" when referring to the Land of Israel, and to the Jews living in the areas of the historical Land of Israel as "Palestinians." This is a big mistake that requires constant attention and correction, especially when copying and editing articles from the Jewish Encyclopedia or from similarly archaic sources such as Easton's Bible Dictionary (1897). At this time, no-one uses the term/s "Palestinian/s" (in relation to anything associated with Jews or the land they lived in and which they regarded as their homeland) nor by any type of conventional Jewish scholarship, particularly at the present time when the label "Palestinian" is almost entirely identified with the Palestinian Arabs who are mostly Muslims. Finally, kindly take note that the name Palestinian Talmud is also not used and it redirects to the conventional term Jerusalem Talmud used in Jewish scholarship. Thank you. IZAK 13:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not using "Palestine" or "Palestinian" for Talmud and rabbis

Makes sense, I'll try to remember. However, there was a period when everyone referred to the land of Israel as Palestine. Therefore, to say something like "in 1940 Shlomo Pines emigrated to Israel" would appear to be an anachronism. Don't we have to use the term "Palestine" during a certain period for historical accuracy? What is this period? From Roman conquest until 1948? Thanks. Dfass 15:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Hi Dfass: Note: The term "Land of Israel" is an old one of Biblical origin, whereas the name "Palestine" is considered offensive by many Jews because it was coined by the Romans after they crushed the Jews of Judea-- and needless to say today it refers exclusively to the Arab Palestinians and never to Jews. Note also that the "Land of Israel" article is not the same as the "Israel" article because the latter refers to the modern post-1948 Jewish state. My main concern was about rabbis from the Mishnaic and Talmudic eras, up until about a hundred years ago being called "Palestinians" on Wikipedia as a follow-through from the many articles that have been copied and pasted from the old Jewish Encyclopedia and which collectively create the wrong impression. Such are the hazards of relying on dated information, long-discarded terminology, and unsuitable writing and communication styles. Wikipedia as a modern encyclopedia should not be relying on archaic terms such as "Palestinian rabbis" that could potentially cause grave misunderstanding. I think that from the time of the British Mandate of Palestine, also shortened to "the British Mandate" and sometimes "Palestine," that Jews were associated with those terms from 1923 until 1948 when the modern State of Israel was declared. I hope that you have noted that I am most definitely NOT saying that whenever the Jewish Encyclopedia uses the term "Palestine" that the single word "Israel" should be used -- obviously I do not mean that because when Israel is used alone on Wikipedia it refers to the MODERN State of Israel only. On the other hand, what I am saying is that when the word "Palestine" is used in archaic sources that predate modern Israel, and when writing about Judaic topics that relate to the Middle Ages, Talmudic, or Biblical times, then the better, more accurate, less controversial term for Wikipedia to use is "Land of Israel" which is historically what the Jewish people, and everyone else in academic life, have and do still call it. Hope I have clarified myself, and thanks for caring. IZAK 12:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
    • OK, I think I get the drift. I will pay attention to it in the future. (Don't be so down on the Jewish Encyclopedia though! It's an incredible work, written by some tremendous scholars. I think these articles significantly raise the quality of Wikipedia, whether their English is somewhat archaic or not. If you compare a JE-borrowed Wikipedia article to one written by "the masses," you can't but be struck by the difference in quality and scholarship. The typical Jewish Wikipedian (myself included) is not capable of producing articles of anything like that caliber. Most Wikipedians cannot even be bothered to cite the sources for the couple of factoids they manage to dredge up from their memory of 10th grade.) Thanks again for the clarification. Dfass 15:16, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Hi Dfass: I am not down on the old Jewish Encyclopedia at all, and I fully agree with you that it is a more than masterly work of scholarship. But is was written in the context of the culture of over a hundred years ago as a product of the nineteenth century! My specific concern at this stage was only about how the meaning and application of the word/s "Palestine" and "Palestinian" are getting "lost in the cut-and-paste process" because one hundred years ago, "Palestinian" was used as an academic adjective as for example, together with "rabbis" ("Palestinian rabbi/s") or the Talmud ("Palestinian Talmud"). Up until 1948 the words "Palestine" and "Palestinians" still had application/s to Jews because of the existaence of the British Mandate of Palestine until 1948 in the territories of historically Jewish Land of Israel. Since then, the name "Palestine" and "Palestinians" has shed any connection to Jews and the modern Jewish State of Israel which was set up in contradistinction to an Arab Palestine. Particularly since the rise of the PLO (the Palestine Liberation Organization), following the 1967 Six-Day War, the term and notion of "Palestine" and "Palestinians" has become thoroughly and exclusively connected with the Arab Palestinians to the point that no-one (not in politics, academics, the media, religion, etc) associates the name "Palestine" and "Palestinians" with the Jews or Judaism, so that it can safely be said that the notion of a "Palestinian Jew" is an archaic anachronistic discarded notion. So when cutting and pasting articles from the one hundred year old Jewish Encyclopedia, one should not fall into a "time warp trap" by blindly pasting articles from it without some sensible updates, and not to inadvertantly recreate and foster terminology for Jews and Jewish Israelis that neither they nor the world accepts or recognizes. One needs to be conscious that the term "Land of Israel" is a well-established name that has survived for a long time and is still the preferred term of choice when speaking in modern terms, so that Jews not be confused with Arabs and vice versa. By speaking of the Category:Rabbis of the Land of Israel, meaning rabbis (or any Jews) associated with a historic geographic area, one also avoids problems such as calling pre-1948 rabbis or people "Israelites" -- used only for people in the Biblical era or "Israelis" -- which refers to citizens of the modern State of Israel. Thanks for your input. IZAK 07:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit-warring at Chabad Lubavitch

Thanks for letting me know about that. I generally try to let Avi and Pinchas take care of those articles; is the problem persisting? Jayjg (talk) 00:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 770 Eastern Parkway

I've found your name in the above.

I've mildly contributed to the article. I hope you approve.
For one thing, I've enlarged the Photo/Image.
May I say that's it's a bit like THE Temple (in Jerusalem)? So, appropriately,in view of its importance to the community to which it belongs, I've enlarged the image!!! --Ludvikus 04:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not Spam!

I believe a News Site or a Blog which is entire focus is of that page it is listed on just as relevant as the West Indian-American Day Carnival Association link, the Book for sale on Amazon, and if you really were trying to 'take care' if these pages you would notice that the link to the PDF from Harvard Research Publication isn't a valid link, and hasn't been for over three months.

So why not have something relevant? IzGut 20:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

After reading the guidelines for external links I find that you indeed are violating them by having a link to a book for sale on Amazon, and by linking to a PDF document. In accordance with the guidelines the Blog link you keep removing is that of a realtor that deals with Brooklyn North and South which in my opinion is credible and the other link which is the news site is a hyper focused site which deals with Crown Heights, Brooklyn thereby making me feel its relevant and is in line with the guidelines. IzGut 20:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Im sorry about the editing summaries, im still figuring out the ropes. Its not specific to just Chabad, though its the majority of its reporting and chabad is quite a presents in Crown Heights, Brooklyn. IzGut 19:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Could you review these articles?

Could you have a look at these articles and their talk?

I feel the articles are extremely well sourced and balanced. I'd like somebody else to remove the tags. Please look at my last versions, because I have run up against somebody from the evolution/creation universe who wants to pick a fight. --Metzenberg 03:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I really need your help here. ZayZayEM is engaging in troll-like behavior, such as making edits on the very materials I am editing, removing materials immediately after I add them, and so forth. It is a harassment pattern that extends across multiple articles. The main articles involved are:
* Jewish reactions to intelligent design
* Jewish opposition to evolution
* Natan Slifkin
It is bizarre behavior, because I can see no reason why he is even interested in this material. As you and I both know, it is material you have to really understand well to edit. Over the last week, I have substantially rearranged all the materials on Judaism and evolution in an effort to clean up the main Judaism and Evolution page first of all, so that it can be turned into a page that is not dominated by issues (such as the Slifkin affair) that would have undue weight. ZayZayEM has simply made it impossible for me to work. He has followed me from one article to another, demanding arbitrary changes. many of his edits, and his changes, show that he knows very little about the subject, which as you and I both know, is quite abstruse at times. --Metzenberg 16:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks

for the welcome note! Struway 15:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Your very welcome! Shlomke 16:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/h/l/User_talk%7EShlomke_fc93.html"