Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism/Archive1 (from when it was 'WikiProject Chareidi Judaism')

Introduction

I have reworded and touched up the introduction so that there will not be complaints that this WikiProject is keeping anyone out, because theoretically, since Wikipedia is a secular encyclopedia, anyone can join any WikiProject just as anyone is free to edit any article at any time regardless of their faith etc. This should be a self-evident truth on Wikipedia and should not require further elaboration. IZAK 08:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what does this project do that WikiProject Judaism doesn't do? Jon513 17:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In some ways, while sympathising with the needs of this Wikiproject, I agree with the need for User:Jon513 question. IZAK 09:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It focuses on Orthodox Judaism. Previously the Project was called Chareidi Judaism, I changed it to Orthodox to include the modern-orthodox also. A few reasons for this project:

The number of chareidi/orthodox editors is very small.
It is a very specific area.
It is basically, from my point of view, intended to be a huge talk page for the entire section of articles on Orthodox Judaism. --Daniel575 17:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that's nice, now how about a word from our sponsor? Tomer ^talk 07:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi darlin': Get your facts straight: I am neither "the sponsor" (a job best left for Hakadosh Baruch Hu) nor the original nor latter creator of this Wikiproject. It was started in August 2005 by User:Ezra Wax (we don't see much of him around lately) as "Wikipedia:WikiProject Chareidi Judaism" and at that time I did not join it (neither did anyone else because it was too limiting, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism/Archive 7#Charedi Judaism Wikiproject where both User:Jfdwolff and myself felt it was premature: "What are you trying to achieve that cannot be done as part of this project? JFW | T@lk 18:04, 23 August 2005 (UTC). I agree with JFW's sentiments at this stage. What's up Ezra? Don't just shoo-in and shoo-out, say something please. OK? IZAK 06:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)"), and now recently some new(ish) editors, primarily User:Nesher [1] User:Daniel575 [2] and User:Crzrussian [3] have brought fresh energy and impetus all around and have sought to revive it under the more generic name of "Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism" after which I then spruced up the project's page [4] [5] [6] and joined it as you too are free to do because I think it has its value and can play an important role in terms of how Orthodox Judaism and (editors dealing with it) functions and is perceived on Wikipedia. Best, IZAK 09:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
IZAK, give up the terms of endearment--you don't do South Carolina very convincingly. :-p I referred to you as the sponsor because from what I can see you've done the most to make the project what it is presently. Anyways, I see no diminishment of the glory of Haqadhosh barukh-Hu in my remark. TIA Tomer ^talk 00:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Right-O Tomer: You are right, I don't do South or North Carolina imitations well (but you should see my talents with multiple varieties of Yiddish accents... but that is another story.) Ok, then, if you think I am deserving of some sort of compliments, fine, but so far this formal project is in its infancy... but if you are referring to laying the groundwork over the years then fine, that I will agree with, but as they say in Nu Yawk: "That and a token will get you on the subway." Best, IZAK 10:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You did fine, right up until the last sentence. Tomer ^talk 06:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just for that you will have to wash your mouth out with some hot super-mehadrin-glatt-kosher cholent. IZAK 08:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

meh. can I at least demand that you take out the sugar and add some spices? :-p Tomer ^talk 08:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You honestly think I would put sugar into cholent and desecrate it? In fact I don't know of anyone who does, it's just lashon hara against Ashkenazim (I have heard rumors that some put a few pitted prunes into their cholent to sweeten it, but I haven't seen it in a mighty long time.) By now, with Israeli culture and Israeli cuisine being so all-pervasive in the Jewish world (religious and secular) everyone I know, even the most Hasidic of Hasidim, love pepper, cumin, garlic, and as much salt as the doctor allows (usually way more) in thick spicy cholents. Anyhow, my family members have forbidden me to make my kind of cholent with lot's of pepper and a bay leaf or two on top (never eat bay leaves -- they cause stomach upset, so never crush them and remove them before serving). Gotta go, dreamin' of cholent. IZAK 10:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh. I got this awful récipé for "chunt" from a friend of mine, replete with chocolate and sugar and it was the worst shabath meal I'd ever had. B"H it rotted by the time shabath was over so I didn't feel bad about throwing it out. I'll stick with jamín anyday. :-) Tomer ^talk 05:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leftists trying to put POV tag on 'Israel'

An attempt by anti-Israeli leftists to put a POV tag to 'Israel'. Please vote (against). --Daniel575 18:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, this sort of entreaty is completely inappropriate, even here. Inviting comment or participation is fine, but telling people how to vote is completely unacceptable. Please review this again. Cheers, Tomer ^talk 07:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm sorry, how could I forget to keep in mind all of those frumme yidden who would vote in support of the POV tags. I think you're exaggerating the rules slightly. --Daniel575 07:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look, lose the chip on your shoulder. If you're so sure of how people here will vote, there's no need to tell us how you want us to vote. Telling people how to vote is incredibly bod foam. Tomer ^talk 08:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would any of us here vote in support of those POV tags? Sigh. I do not understand what your problem is, with this. --Daniel575 08:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't be any clearer about "[my] problem with this". If you want to elicit input from editors, fine. If you even want to tell them to vote, fine. Telling editors how to vote, however, is completely out of line, even if your desired vote and their assumed vote are completely clear. To bash a hole through the density you're portraying, just in case it's real and not feigned, what I'm referring to specifically is your "(against)". I have no problem with anything else you wrote in that post [although I'm having an increasingly annoyed reaction to your "I'm right, so just shut up" attitude in subsequent posts...], just the absolute direction of exactly how the reader is supposed to vote. Tomer ^talk 08:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could also find something more useful to get so worked up about. --Daniel575 08:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about instead of lecturing me about how to spend my time, you learn how WP works. Thanks. Tomer ^talk 23:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about we let this rest and focus on more useful things. --Daniel575 12:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please let's. Tomer ^talk 06:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling names

It's pretty inconsistent now. Puppa (Hasidic dynasty) uses transliteration, while Spinka (Hasidic dynasty) uses English translations of the names. I say we should modify them all to the Hebrew versions. Then we get the question on how to write a A/O... Avraham or Avrohom, Yitzchak, Yitzchok? I vote for the latter. --Daniel575 12:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My constructive reaction to your vote is *gag* *hack* *splutter*, whereupon I turn blue in the face and go looking for a bubbler. Tomer ^talk 18:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My somewhat more constructive recommendation is to direct you here and here. I found them both on my way to the bubbler. I'm feeling much better now too, in case you were wondering... Tomer ^talk 18:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Easy on the WP:NPA. The proposed policy was absolutely not accepted. I, for one, oppose several points contained therein. Besides, there is a very strong argument that "Loshon Ashkenazis" be used for all ~~things Hasidic~~ Chassidische zachen. - CrazyRussian talk/email 18:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, being a descriptive encyclopedia, surely we're not going to impose Tiberian diacritics on an article about "Puppa", for which it would be foreign? - CrazyRussian talk/email 18:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. Tomer, I don't want to insult you, but you are a Conservative Jew. That does not disqualify you from participating in anything here. Please do not see this as an insult. However, it is simply a fact that a non-orthodox and even a modern-orthodox person will not easily understand the issues involved here. These people have never been called 'Avraham' - they have always been called 'Avrohom'. We are not talking about Israeli soldiers here. We are talking about Yiddish-speaking chassidishe Rebbes from Eastern Europe. Many of whom belong to movements which are in many cases fiercely anti-Zionist and fiercely opposed to 'Modern Hebrew', aka 'Ivrit'. Israelifying their names is a big insult. Why should 'Ivrit' be the standard, retroactively even? These are not Sefardim, not Israelis, not Ivrit-speakers. Then why do you want to posthumously alter the pronunciation of their names? --Daniel575 20:06, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, with all due respect, you don't know thing one about me besides what you can read on my user page. Nowhere on that page do I ever identify myself as Conservative, so lay off the condescension. Regarding Hebrew, I don't speak "Ivrit" any more than I speak "Ivris", rather, I speak `Ivriþ. I have not proposed anywhere that any spelling should be preferred, nor that anyone's names should be altered posthumously. I gagged because I personally find Ashkenazi Hebrew, especially some forms of Litvish, to be really unpleasant on the ear (to say nothing of unintelligible). That, btw, CR, is not a personal attack. It's not particularly constructive, but there's no attack in it anywhere. As for the links I provided, they were not meant to serve as a guideline for what "should" be done, but rather to point out that there has been a great deal of [sometimes] constructive [sometimes frivolous bickering] discussion on the issue. I vehemently opposed IZAK's recommendations when he first made them on the attempt at standardization page, as you can read there. I have no argument with having the article for the Besht at Yisroil ben Eliezer, but I would caution against the assumption that everyone coming along is going to look under Yisroil instead of either Israel or Yisrael [or Yisra'el in my case], so I recommend two scoops of redirects. Tomer ^talk 23:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oy vey... I took you as gagging at Dan's opinion. And as a proud speaker of Litvish, phooey on you! - CrazyRussian talk/email 23:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have never seen the spelling 'Yisroil' anywhere. That's Arabic. Well, 'Israil'. Not quite the same as Yiddish. I agree about the redirects: we need a lot of redirects for most pages. --Daniel575 07:39, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling of Bobover/Sanzer Rebbes Names

The Bobover names make no sense now. These are in English:

These are Hebrew:

For clarity, I am moving the first three to respectively Shmuel and Shlomo. If anyone objects, please discuss. --Daniel575 10:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Shleimi, please. Tomer ^talk 23:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is this supposed to mean? --Daniel575 23:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Shleimi" is one [of many] Eastern Yiddish pronunciations of שלומו. How to make that any clearer is beyond my ken. Tomer ^talk 06:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what value that remark has in this discussion. Are you trying to make constructive edits or are you just trolling me? That's what it seemed like. --Daniel575 07:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was meant purely in jest. TIA. Tomer ^talk 07:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two Shlomos are the only Bobover Rebbes on this list. Ruv Tzvi Elimelech and Ruv Shmuel Duvid are current day Sanz Klausenberger Rebbes. Yechezkel Shraga and Yekusiel yehudoh were from the 19th and 20th centuries, respectivlly. They were also Sanzer and Sanz Klausenberger rebbes. Shaul avrom 01:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chassidishe stubs

All of the following articles need work. I propose changing all English names into the original Hebrew ones (Isaac -> Yitzch[a/o]k, etc). Whether to write Avrohom or Avraham is up to the editor's choice, as far as I'm concerned.

Many articles need wikification, some work on wikilinks has to be done, and alternative names have to be added for every chassidus (so that search engines will find the Kretshnif article if someone googles for Kretchniv, etc). In every article, the word 'sect' should be changed to 'movement', preferably.

For content, please add any stories you know about rebbes of that chassidus. Such stories would be a great improvement. --Daniel575, 25 July 2006

To the above anon: While you are 100% correct that the information inside the articles below need to be standardized and Wikified please note the following: (1) You did not sign your name here with the four tildes ~~~~ so that you can be taken more seriously. Avoid anonymous comments on Wikipedia. (2) If you "propose" to do something to so many articles, you probably need to set up some kind of vote. (3) You cannot make up your own policy about naming conventions. Discussions and views about Hebrew naming conventions is a very sensitive and controversial subject because different people have different views and are following different traditions (mesoras) so be VERY careful. (4) Please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew) and add your views, it relates to what you are "proposing" here and you need to try to avoid an inevitable conflict with those editors who approach the study of Hebrew from an academic perspective and who do not appreciate the "Yeshivish" POV. (For example: See what's been said so far and the "mindset" of others in articles such as Hebrew alphabet, Niqqud, Study of the Hebrew language, and more in Category:Hebrew language.) (5) The correct term on Wikipedia is NOT "Chassidishe" nor "chassidus" but rather it is Hasidic Judaism (Note that Hasidism, Hasidic, and Hasid all redirect to Hasidic Judaism).) (6) Try to remember that while there is some leeway and room for individuality for everyone, Wikipedia is ultimately a secular encylopedia written in the English language written in a NPOV style (it's very much like being in an open cyber-university) which can be quite difficult to grasp and practice especially if one is trying to adhere to Torah Judaism at the same time. Thank you for taking the time to think about these points. IZAK 12:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- (1) You did not sign your name here with the four tildes ~~~~ so that you can be taken more seriously. Avoid anonymous comments on Wikipedia. (edit by Daniel575: it was me
- 2. You may be right about the vote. But the other points still stand, I think, without needing a vote.
- 3. We should follow the mesora of the rov/movement in question. Just like I don't want Sefardi Hebrew / Ivrit applied to the Satmar Rov, I don't want to apply Yiddish to the Ben Ish Chai.
- 4. I will, later.
- 5. I know. In articles I use 'Hasidic' (sometimes 'Chassidic' slips through), but on the talk page of this project we should be free to use insider-speak, so to say. It's the project OJ - there is no need to avoid Yeshivish here. Oy!
- 6. Certainly. It is a difficult balance. --Daniel575 12:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- - Hi Daniel: Thank you for your feedback. Firstly, do not change other people's comments, it is a big no-no on Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:Five pillars. The mere fact that this project has been set up does not mean that it has become a "license" to run rough-shod over all previous articles and policies that have existed until now because to do so would be courting disaster and inviting a major rebuke from the wider Wikipedian community of which we are part, never lose sight of that. Using yeshivish or any other kind of mama-loshen here is ok, but at the same time we are a community of encyclopedists writing an online encyclopedia and not a coffee clutch hanging out and feifing on the velt (i.e. to "cock a snoot" and "the heck with everyone else" -- not a good attitude.) Finally, there cannot be two hundred ways of saying the same thing! It's one of two ways, either mainly Israeli Hebrew which you will note redirects to the main article which is Hebrew language (Ivrit) -- which is basically like Sephardi Hebrew language on Wikipedia -- or Ashkenazi Hebrew since most of the world's Jews are Ashkenazim and it's still widely used in Yiddish language-speaking homes, in Torah study and in Jewish services. But there CANNOT be twenty versions of Ashkenazi Hebrew on Wikipedia (it's enough that pronounciations can be written into the concerned articles) or ten versions of Sephardi Hebrew. The fact of the matter is, that Israeli Hebrew is dominant and that should be reflected on Wikipedia. The funny thing is that I have had similar debates with non-Jewish Hebraists on Wikipedia and I have told them the same thing when they insist on sticking to archaic and pedantic styles of old academic Hebrew that no-one knows. Do the math: There are about 13 million Jews in the world. More than six million live in Israel and speak modern Israeli Hebrew, and most Jews who live outside of Israel study Israeli/Sephardi Hebrew even though they pray in Ashkenazi Hebrew. So while I agree with you that English names can be moved to Hebrew names, after all Moshe Dayan is not "Moses Dayan" and Yitzhak Rabin is not "Isaac Rabin" and the names of rabbis are no less Hebrew than secular Israelis, yet there must also be a standard that does not become chaotic with thirty versions of what is after all only one Hebrew language. IZAK 13:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why are all the names of the Chassiduyos so small??????? ~shaul Avrom

To keep things easy to read. Btw, you should sign with four times ~. Then you get the automatic signature -> --Daniel575 02:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was having issues loging in when I posted that comment. Shaul avrom 19:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason it was so small is because the small tag wasn't closed. Firefox renders a small within a small as very small; Internet explorer doesn't. In Firefox the list gets smaller every line until after 10 lines it is impossible to read. I have closed all of the small tag so it is now regualar small size. Jon513 02:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right, I didn't know that. Thanks, will keep it in mind. And, stupid as it may sounds, just switch to IE! *me being a fervent Microsoftist* --Daniel575 | (talk) 02:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Internet Explorer. Once you switch to Firefox you do not go back. Jon513 19:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Omein to that. --Shaul avrom 01:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of my chaverim gave me some eitzah to use Firefox and I mamash love it. I second the Amen. ~Jonny

Have an easy fast

Everybody. I just got back from Maariv+kinnos and learning 1,5 hours of Midrash Rabba Eichah with the Rov (Rav Avraham Yitzchak Ulman). Looking forward to a good night's sleep (considering that I slept 4 hours the past nights due to stress resulting from my engagement), davening in the morning and sleeping my way through the rest of the fast until shekiah. Now let's get back to 'work'. I think it's time we get to do some work on the Tisha b'Av article, as well as on those of other significant days. I am particularly thinking about adding sections on plain halacha regarding these days. I recently wrote two whole articles on Kiddush and on Havdala on the Dutch Wikipedia, basically slightly adapted modifications of a small book which I wrote in Dutch, summarizing 'The Radiance of Shabbos' in Dutch. Any proposals? --Daniel575 21:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Modern attempts to revive the Sanhedrin

Please take a look at Modern attempts to revive the Sanhedrin and the discussion page there and participate. --Daniel575 21:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zalman Nechemia Goldberg

Newly created page. Please add anything you know. --Daniel575 10:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Categories of Jews

I recently removed Benjamin Disraeli, who only had a Jewish father (not a Jewish mother), had been baptized and was an active practicing Christian, from the Category:English Jews. This seems to be a controversial thing, strangely. I would like to hear the thoughts of others on the subject of people with only a Jewish father who also identify with another faith as being included in a category of Jewish people. Discuss. --Daniel575 17:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this is very common. see Category:Black Jews. Most of them have only a Jewish father. Jon513 18:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it's a POV from left wing Judaism saying that People that have just a Jewish Father are Yidden. I vote that we should make it so that on the lists of Yidden, it is only Yidden, and not people with just a Jewish Father are Jewish. ~shaul Avrom

I think it would be reasonable to at least say that people without a Jewish mother are not regarded as Jewish by halachah or by traditional branches of Judaism, and that practicing Christians are not regarded as religiously Jewish by most Jews. Would it be possible to have to have subcategories, i.e. Halachic Jews and Persons with Jewish Ancestry? (There must be better terminology out there). --Shirahadasha 04:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. See the talk page of the ORBCOTW also, where there is a response by the British editor involved here concerning Disraeli. He claims that his mother (Maria) was Jewish. Well, I don't know many Jewish mothers who are named Maria and agree to have their children baptized. Anyway, in general indeed, 'Jew' should mean 'Jew', not 'born Christian with a Jewish father who converted to Christianity before the birth of the person in question'. --Daniel575 | (talk) 11:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Messianic Jewish POVs

Hi, noticed that a number of Messianic Judaism folks have become involved in a bunch of articles including Messianism, The Third Temple, and Shekhinah, and Korbanot (although the korbanot edit, which was essentially a proslytizing essay, had been reverted at last look) and are presenting POVs similar to ones we saw in the edit controversy over Passover. in which Jewish and Christian concepts are treated as identical and a claim that in Christianity the concept the article described had been superceded by Jesus led to a discourse on Christian concpets whose relevance appears to me to be questionable. Perhaps some of the existing articles should be looked at periodically to ensure that the POV presented as a traditional Jewish one is in fact a traditional Jewish one. Best, --Shirahadasha 04:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll take a look also. --Daniel575 | (talk) 11:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transliteration conventions for Hebrew

I understand there is an official policy for how Hebrew terms should be transliterated, Wikipedia: Naming conventions (Hebrew), which requires modern Sephardic Hebrew as well as apostrophes in certain places. A number of articles -- Chanuyos comes to mind -- are titled in Ashkenazic Hebrew and would need to be renamed, and vast numbers of articles have various words in variant transliterations. There had been a previous discussion about carving out an exception, e.g. for Ashkenazic individual and place names, but this exception doesn't seem to have made its way into the policy. --Shirahadasha 16:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never been accepted, never will be, I for one enthusiastically oppose. - CrazyRussian talk/email 16:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I get this is a draft not a final policy, edited and added a clarifying sentence to the intro with the word 'DRAFT' in it. Best, --Shirahadasha 02:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Crazy Russian --Shaul avrom 00:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI a recent edit on Wikipedia Talk: Naming conventions (Hebrew)#Official Policy suggests theres's been an impression that everyone's been heard and nobody's objected, might be useful to reply and offer an opinion if there are concerns that haven't been met. --Shirahadasha 01:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - posted there. - CrazyRussian talk/email 02:40, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:_( A tear for Chanuyos. - CrazyRussian talk/email 02:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to merge into WP:Hebrew

Hello. It turns out there have been two parallel attempts to devise a standard method of transliterating Hebrew, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew) and WP:Hebrew. It has been proposed to merge them. The WP:Hebrew approach seems considerably more academic than the other, with a strong emphasis on scholarly phoneticism including a proposed requirement to use the International Phonetic Alphabetic and to mention Tiberian Hebrew pronunciation, and what appears to be a rule against the use of standard English transliterations. Mercy on us poor ignoramuses, who merely want to know how to look up a Hebrew/Jewish subject in an English-language encyclopedia. Feel free to weigh in. Best, --Shirahadasha 19:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know how to create templates?

I've created a timeline which shows Zugot>Tanaim>etc>acharonim. Now I need help turning it into a template. I want to be able to insert a name, year of birth and year of death into the template and come out with a bit of perspective (or whatever). If anyone can give me a hand, PLEASE let me know. Ayin Yud 09:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goodbye everybody

I am soon going to be banned for the rest of my life. I am leaving with a clean heart, knowing that I fought the Zionists as much as I could, until my last minute on Wikipedia. (This may make people smile and wonder whether I'm on drugs, but no, I am completely serious.) See my talk page. The issues involved took place recently on Neturei Karta and HaEdah HaCharedis. See you later, and shana tova. --Daniel575 | (talk) 23:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, guess what, I'm still here. My next project is to turn 'Peace be upon him' into an accurate article also representing the Jewish view. In fact, since Hebrew and Judaism are older than Arabic and Islam, alav hasholom should be placed before the Arabic version, and the Judaism template before the Islam template. If anybody else would like to join in, please do. --Daniel575 | (talk) 09:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rabbi Pasternak

is up for deletion. FYI, ebverybody. - CrazyRussian talk/email 18:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]