Misplaced Pages

Talk:Ashkenazi Jews: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:39, 19 October 2012 editTritomex (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,467 edits →Scholarly consensus. query← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:01, 26 December 2024 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,667,670 edits Removing expired RFC template. 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{User:WildBot/m04|sect={{User:WildBot/m03|1|Scythia#Scythians in the Bible|Scythians}}|m04}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
{{WikiProject Ethnic groups|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject European history|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Germany| importance = Mid}}
{{WikiProject France| importance = Low}}
{{WikiProject Israel|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Jewish history|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Judaism|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Middle Ages|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Anthropology|importance=High|oral-tradition=yes}}
}}
{{Press |author=Jennifer Senior|title=Are Jews Smarter |org=] |url=http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/culture/features/1478/ |date=October 24, 2005|quote= |accessdate=October 21, 2012}}

{{page views}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K |maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 5 |counter = 15
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(30d)
|minthreadsleft = 3
|algo = old(14d)
|archive = Talk:Ashkenazi Jews/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Ashkenazi Jews/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes
{{WikiProject Judaism|class=B|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Jewish history|class=B|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Ethnic groups|class=B|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Middle Ages|class=B|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Israel|class=B|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Germany|class=B|importance=Low
| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = yes
| b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = yes
| b3 <!--Structure --> = yes
| b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = yes
| b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = yes
}} }}
}}
{| class="messagebox standard-talk"
|-
|align="center"|]
|''This article has been referenced by a media organization.

== Untitled ==

The reference is in: Jennifer Senior (October 24, 2005). " (cover story). '']''.
|}
<!--This is a modification of ], as the publication references this article but doesn't cite it as a source. This template can be seen unmodified at, for example, ].-->
{{archive box|auto = long|bot=MiszaBot|age=30}}

== Edit request on 20 July 2012 ==

{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->
I have issues with the following sentences: "Since the middle of the 20th century, many Ashkenazi Jews have intermarried, both with members of other Jewish communities and with people of other nations and faiths, while some Jews have also adopted children from other ethnic groups or parts of the world and raised them as Jews. Conversion to Judaism, rare for nearly 2,000 years, has become more common." Since the 20th century intermarriage with other peoples has dramatically increased comapared to before, but it still happened before and was not as uncommon as people believe. "Conversion to Judaism, rare for nearly 2,000 years" this is also completely false as is the case with the semi-Mongoloid Khazars about 1000 years ago converting to Judaism as documented in Misplaced Pages, as well as the Edomites also converting to Judaism as covered in Wikpedia - although the Edomites converted shortly before the time of Christ. The paragraph says citation needed - another reason to remove the conversion section and dramatically alter the preceding intermarriage section as per my comments above. The article also says: "Many Ashkenazi Jews later migrated, largely eastward, forming communities in non German-speaking areas" without any citation. It is more likely that the majority of them migrated from the Pale of Settlements in Poland westward and became more Germanized and not the opposite way around.

<!-- End request -->
:{{not done}}. This may need consensus not a simple edit request.--] (]) 06:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

== Blonde and red hair ==

The genetic section claims that the Ashkenazi have mostly Arabic and Mediterranean ancestry. Then, why do they have European features like hair color? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 12:13, 20 August 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Depends whether you're talking matrilines or patrilines. A Jew is defined as having a Jewish mother, and most of the Ashkenazim's matrilineal ancestry (and a fair proportion of the patrilineal) does indeed go back to the Middle East. But there were just enough rapes during pogroms that a significant proportion of patrilines are European. In the same way, if you analyse the genetic origins of Black Americans, quite a high proportion of patrilines are White European, from owners using their slaves as concubines. --] (]) 10:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

::This explanation does not seem to be consistent with what the article states under "Genetic origins". Apparently, both Y-chromosomes (which come on the paternal line) and mitochondrial DNA (which comes on the maternal line) show quite a bit of intermixing with the local population. In fact, there would seem to be quite a bit more of the latter than of the former: compare the sections on paternal and maternal descent, and also see this: "A 2010 study by Bray et al, using SNP microarray techniques and linkage analysis, estimated that 35 to 55 percent of the modern Ashkenazi genome may be of European origin, and that European "admixture is considerably higher than previous estimates by studies that used the Y chromosome"."

::The insistence on "Cossack rapes" as the main or only source of intermixing seems extremely stereotypical, as well as unsupported by what the current version of the article seems to say. ] (]) 11:43, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

(Quite incidentally, I am a bit surprised that the article mentions Koestler but not Renan. There's a new edition of Renan's late works on the matter; it is a very interesting early attempt to counter a traditional narrative of origins by a highly complex and tentative account based on the scientific knowledge available at the time. Koestler simply substitutes one facile narrative for another.) ] (]) 11:55, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

:Fair point. There were probably cases like the storyline of Isaac Bashevis Singer's ''The Slave'', where a Jewish man married a Polish girl from a remote region and smuggled her into his community as Jewish, with or without some form of conversion taking place. This would have had to be highly hush-hush, given that for a Christian to convert to Judaism was generally a severely punishable form of heresy. --] (]) 16:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

== The Khazar study ==


__TOC__
I feel that this is a good addendum to the paragraph on the recent genetic study that found Khazar influence in Ashkenazi Jews. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/08/ashkenazi-jews-are-probably-not-descended-from-the-khazars/ <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2024 ==
Why does the page claim the Khazar heritage is only advocated by racists and antisemites, while in the next paragraph there is a study that is in support of the same theory? I hope you are not implying that arXiv.org are antisemites. ] (]) 11:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


{{edit semi-protected|Ashkenazi Jews|answered=yes}}
:Again it's a matter of degree. It is one thing to claim that many Ashkenazim have SOME Khazar descent. It's another to claim that the Ashkenazim ARE Khazars, i.e. have no Israelite descent at all. None of the studies supports the latter. --] (]) 16:36, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
In section "Notable Ashkenazim", add an "and" in the last sentence, making it "Though Ashkenazi Jews have never exceeded 3% of the American population, Jews account for 37% of the winners of the U.S. National Medal of Science, 25% of the American Nobel Prize winners in literature, and 40% of the American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics." ] (]) 04:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> <p style="color:Orange"><code>]]</code></p> 01:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Because it usually does come from antisemitic (or maybe just anti-Ashkenazi, for whatever reason) sources who want to claim that they are "fake" Jews and thus have no real blood ties to Israel. More often than not, it's used as a political weapon. ] (]) 23:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)evildoer187


== Scholarly consensus. query == == Khazar theory ==
{{hat}}
<s>The sources I cited for the Khazar theory are a genetic testing company https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/jewish-q/about/results and a study that's in the National Library of Medicine https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3595026/. The author of the study, Eran Elhaik, is an associate professor in the Department of Biology at Lund University in Sweden and he also works for Johns Hopkins University Medical School, one of the most prestigious medical schools in the world. Would Johns Hopkins hire some crackpot? '''Hell''' no! The idea that the Khazar theory (as distinct from the Khazar hypothesis) is a fringe theory is patently absurd. The Khazar hypothesis is fringe because it says that the Ashkenazi Jews are '''exclusively '''descended from the Khazars, which all genetic studies have shown to be false. The Khazar theory says the Ashkenazi Jews are only '''partly''' descended from the Khazars. Not only do other studies besides Elhaik's support the theory, the fact that the Ashkenazi and Sephardic haplogroup Q lineages diverged 3,200 to 5,100 years ago (definitely before the Jews left Israel for Europe and quite possibly before Judaism was even established) is consistent with it. ] (]) 03:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)</s><small><comments by ] ] of banned user {{user|Ultrabomb}} removed. Per ], all edits of banned users may be removed and reverted on sight regardless of content.''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 00:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)<!-- Template:Banredac -->></small>


:No. FamilyTreeDNA groups are never a reliable source on Misplaced Pages, certainly not a user-contributed project written by non-experts and vetted not at all, which doesn't even say anything similar to what you want to add. The Elhaik study is widely discredited and ]. It's absolutely a ] study. Elhaik was affiliated as a postdoc with the Department of Mental Health at the School of Public Health, and ''not'' the medical school, genetics or biology department. He may be an associate professor in bioinformatics at Lund University, but that doesn't make his study any more authoritative or worthy of any weight, when contrasted with the extensive body of research that shows the possible Khazar contribution to the Ashkenazi gene pool is negligible, by actual genetics researchers, who generally agree that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are European and Middle Eastern in their genetic heritage. While it is true that some amount of Khazar ancestry might be found in some populations, that doesn't mean the main article on Ashkenazi Jews should give any credence or airtime to what is fundamentally a discredited theory being pushed by dubious sources and often along with antisemitic conspiracy theories. It should be afforded practically no weight and certainly not any more than it already does, which is covered in the ] article and possibly a bit elsewhere such as ] and ]. This is the main article for Ashkenazi Jews. Elhaik shouldn't be cited here. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 04:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
<blockquote>Although the ] is very limited, there is a scholarly consensus of cultural, linguistic, and genetic evidence that the Ashkenazi Jewish population originated in the Middle East.(ref name="Atzmon2010")</blockquote>
{{hab}}


== RFC 26 November 2024<span class="anchor" id="26 November 2024"></span> ==
Yet, Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin at ] 6 October, 2010, writes:-
<blockquote>('''1''')The close genetic resemblance to Italians accords with the historical presumption that Ashkenazi Jews started their migrations across Europe in Italy and with historical evidence that conversion to Judaism was common in ancient Rome. The reasons for the discrepancy between the biparental markers and the uniparental markers are discussed.(Abtract)</blockquote>
<blockquote>('''2''')EEJ are the largest and most investigated Jewish community,yet their history as Franco-German Jewry is known to us only since their appearance in the 9th century,and their subsequent migration a few hundred years later to Eastern Europe . Where did these Jews come from? It seems that they came to Germany and France from Italy . It is also possible that some Jews migrated northward from the Italian colonies on the northern shore of the Black Sea . All these Jews are likely the descendents of proselytes. Conversion to Judaism was common in Rome in the first centuries BC and AD. Judaism gained many followers among all ranks of Roman Society .p.1</blockquote>
<blockquote>('''3''')The autosomal genetic distances (table 1) do not show any particular resemblance between the Jewish populations. EEJ are closer to Italians in particular and to Europeans in general than to the other Jewish populations.p.2</blockquote>
<blockquote>('''4''')X-chromosomal haplogroups demonstrate the same relatedness of EEJ to Italians and other Europeans (table2, figure 3). In contrast, according to the Y-chromosomal haplogroups EEJ are closest to the non-Jewish populations of the Eastern Mediterranean p.</blockquote>
<blockquote>('''5''')In order to compare '''two competing theories regarding the origin of EEJ,''' their geographic
distances were computed as if they originated from Italy or Israel, i.e. the great circle distances for EEJ were calculated not between Warsaw and other capitals, but between Rome or Jerusalem and other capitals. The correlation
between the autosomal genetic distance matrix and geography was slightly higher, 0.804, for Rome but dropped to 0.694 for Jerusalem.p.4</blockquote>
<blockquote>('''6''')The autosomal genetic distance analysis presented here clearly demonstrates that '''the investigated Jewish populations do not share a common origin.''' The resemblance of EEJ to Italians and other European populations portrays them as an autochthonous European population.p.4</blockquote>
<blockquote>('''7''')Some previous studies based on classical autosomal markers concluded that EEJ are a Middle Eastern population with genetic affinities to other Jewish populations. The problems with these studies have been previously discussed in detail analysis , and the genetic distance analysis of Livshits et al. , which includes a single European Mediterranean population, Spain. Despite this when a genetic distance analysis was performed, the greater similarity of EEJ to Russians and to a lesser extent to Germans more than to Non-European Jews was evident . In fact Russians were more similar to EEJ than to any Non-Jewish European population in that analysis.p.8</blockquote>
<blockquote>('''8''')It is not possible at this stage to say what is the source of this resemblance, since we don’t know what is the origin of Sephardic Jews, but considering all the genetic affinities of both groups it likely stems from Sephardic Jews being the descendants of converts in the Mediterranean basin rather than from a common Jewish origin in the Land of Israel. When one compares the autosomal distances of EEJ (current study) or Ashkenazi
Jews (in Atzmon et al. and Behar et al. ) from the Jewish populations that were investigated in the current
study, Iraqi, Iranian, Moroccan, Yemenite and Ethiopian Jews, one finds perfect agreement. EEJ or Ashkenazi Jews are much closer to non-Jewish Europeans than to these Jewish populations in all three studies.p.11</blockquote>
<blockquote>('''9''') EEJ are Europeans probably of Roman descent who converted to Judaism at times, when Judaism was the first monotheistic religion that spread in the ancient world. Any other theory about their origin is not supported by the genetic data. Future studies will have to address their genetic affinities to various Italian populations andexamine the possibility of other components both European and Non-European in their gene pool.p.11 --] (]) 14:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)</blockquote>


<!-- ] 08:01, 31 December 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1735632070}}
:Is there a consensus? I am interested in this from the oddity of saying linguistic evidence can show geographic origins of an ethnic group. Paul Wexler, in his latest work writes:-
Should this article have a lead image? If so, which image should be used? ] (]) 07:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
::<blockquote>'the history and structure of some Jewish languages strongly suggest that the creators of some Jewish languages (an example is Yiddish) were not native Jews but rather non-Jews who had joined Jewish communities in Europe, Asia, and North Africa either through formal conversion to Judaism or through informal association with the community (e.g. through marriage with Jews)'. Paul Wexler, ''Jewish and Non-Jewish Creators of "Jewish" Languages,'' Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 2006 p.xvi.</blockquote>
=== Gallery of suggested images (feel free to suggest others if you think this article should have a lead image) ===
:I don't espouse these views, of course. I just note that several important scholars to my knowledge challenge the assertion in this section of the page. I'd appreciate some review of this.] (]) 15:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
<gallery>
File:Ashkenazim.jpg|'''current image:''' ] image circa 1900-1920 in what appears to be Palestine
File:Maurycy Gottlieb - Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur.jpg|'''image used in the ] and ] versions of the article:''' '']''
File:Juden 1881.JPG|'''another image used in many versions of this article:''' map of the distribution of the Jews in Central Europe from Richard Andree, Ethnography of the Jews (1881)
</gallery>


=== Discussion ===
:Zoossmann-Diskin study findings are '''not supported''' by any of dozens of Y DNA, mtDNA, autosomal DNA findings regarding the origin of Ashkenazi and other Jewish groups, many of whom are not mentioned here. To name some of them: Hammer at al, Gerard Lucotte et al, Kopelman et al 2009, Moorjani et al 2011, Behar et al(2004,2006,2010) Dr. Harry Ostrer studies, Need et al, L. Hao et al, Bray at al, Bauchet et al, Seldin et al, Nebel et al(2004,2006) Karl Skorecki studies, Thomas at al, Shen et al and more recently Christopher L. Campbella and al. There is almost unanimous consensus among genetic scientists regarding the shared Middle Eastern origin of all Jewish population groups,(excluding Indian and Ethiopian Jewish population) including Ashkenazi Jews.
Where is the deadlocked discussion that has made a full-blown thirty-day RfC necessary? See ]. --] &#x1f339; (]) 08:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
There can not be consensus for inclusion of unbalanced claims which are not considered mainstream opinion and are in many cases taken out of context in order to allude to something with political and not scientific meaning.--] (]) 17:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
::Please provide me with the exact passage in Atzmon and co's paper where this generalization is derived from.--] (]) 18:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
:Considering Atzmon, you have it here: "Previous genetic studies of blood group and serum markers suggested that Jewish groups had Middle Eastern origin with greater genetic similarity between paired Jewish populations...Here, genome-wide analysis of seven Jewish groups (Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, Italian, Turkish, Greek, and Ashkenazi) and comparison with non-Jewish groups demonstrated distinctive Jewish population clusters, each with shared Middle Eastern ancestry, proximity to contemporary Middle Eastern populations, and variable degrees of European and North African admixture." I suggest also Dr Hary Ostrer "Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People" It gives great summarizing of all genetic studies in Jewish population carried out in last 20 years.--] (]) 21:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
:::I repeat, on what specific passage in Atzmon is the sentence:'Although the historical record is very limited, '''there is a scholarly consensus of cultural, linguistic, and genetic evidence''' that the Ashkenazi Jewish population originated in the Middle East.(ref name="Atzmon2010")'?
:::If you cannot find support for this formulation from Atzmon with a passage that shows it is a close paraphrase of the cited source, which is quoted for making these three combined claims, then it is inevitable to conclude that the claim is ]. Nothing in what you cited above corresponds to that sentence.--] (]) 22:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
:I did not claimed that Prof Atzmon spoke about this issue, (I was not the editor of that section)although he indeed did. From the same source
:"'''Jews originated as a national and religious group in the Middle East during the second millennium BCE and have maintained continuous genetic, cultural, and religious traditions since that time''', despite a series of Diasporas" I think that the wording of this sentence was intended to avoid WP:COPY --] (]) 23:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
:::''Source''.
:::<blockquote>'''Jews''' originated as a national and religious group in the Middle East during the second millennium BCE and have maintained continuous genetic, cultural, and religious traditions since that time''' (Atzmon2010)</blockquote>


:Yes - please read the info in the link Redrose64 has provided.
:::''Misplaced Pages''.
:Thanks. ] (]) 11:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
'''Comment''' {{sbb}}, despite the label, it does seem odd to have this picture ''(presumably taken in Mandatory Palestine)'', when the article is about a ''(mainly European?)'' diaspora group ] (]) 17:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)


:Indeed. ] (]) 21:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::<blockquote>Although the ] is very limited, '''there is a scholarly consensus''' of cultural, linguistic, and genetic evidence that the '''Ashkenazi Jewish population''' originated in the Middle East.(ref name="Atzmon2010")</blockquote>


'''Comment''' General considerations—In 1920 when this was taken there were some 10,000s of recognizably ethnic Ashkenazim in Mandatory Palestine—far more than there are in all 2024 Europe. The overwhelming majority of modern Ashkenazim (both generally and who wear ethnic clothing) live in Israel and the US, and that's been true since the 1940s.
:::The bolded words are not in the source. ] (]) 07:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Another problem is that the "Ashkenazic" identity only really exists in contrast to "Sephardic"—a picture of 1920s Warsaw wouldn't be normally described as "Ashkenazic" because everyone in it would have thought of themselves as "Polish Jews", prayed using "Polish rite" prayerbooks etc., didn't consider themselves part of a pan-Ashkenazic identity group. The historical exceptions where you found specifically "Ashkenazic" identity are Venice, Amsterdam, London, Mandatory Palestine, where half were Sephardic Jews so the Ashkenazim grouped together. This presents a challenge because until 1945 or so, almost everyone who thought of themselves as specifically "Ashkenazic" necessarily lived far from Ashkenazic cultural centers and was unrepresentative of the median Ashkenazi Jew.
:::*Atzmon et al.deny that there is a scholarly consensus:'Recent studies of Y chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA haplotypes ''have pointed to founder effects of both Middle Eastern '''and local origin''', yet '''the issue''' of how to characterize Jewish people as mere coreligionists or as genetic isolates that may be closely or loosely related '''remains unresolved'''.''
Since the Holocaust, physical displacement and cultural contamination from Israel (which is 50/50 Ashkenazic/Sephardic) has meant the death of all sub-Ashkenazic identities in the US, even though 99% of Jews here are Ashkenazic. ] (]) ] (]) 20:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:::*Their paper providences evidence for one argument about '''all Jews''' in 2010. A few months later, Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin, taking in their paper, advanced a different conclusion specifically about '''Ashkenazi''' Jews. In your initial remarks you cited numerous papers predating both Atzmon and Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin's recent work, in order to assert that the latter's conclusions are not '''supported''' by geneticists who never read Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin's paper. That also is ].
:{{tq|In 1920 when this was taken there were some 10,000s of recognizably ethnic Ashkenazim in Mandatory Palestine—far more than there are in all 2024 Europe.|q=y}} What point are you trying to make in comparing Mandatory Palestine in 1920 with Europe in 2024? Changing the variables of both the time ''and'' place corrupts the comparison.
:::The wiki phrasing is, frankly, stupid. One does not write of 'a '''scholarly consensus of''' cultural, linguistic, and genetic '''evidence''' for the simple reason that evidence does not have a consensus, as the sentence implies. Evidence provides the material basis for which, eventually, a consensus may be formed by the scholars who analyse it. It is the scholars who form the consensus, not the evidence.
:{{tq|Another problem is that the "Ashkenazic" identity only really exists in contrast to "Sephardic"—a picture of 1920s Warsaw wouldn't be normally described as "Ashkenazic"|q=y}} So should the article not discuss Ashkenazi history until the community came into contact with other Jewish groups?
:::Unless someone can justify the use here of 'scholarly consensus' from Atzmon's article, the thesis it maintains must be balanced by the thesis proposed by Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin, as per ]. We must not take sides in what it a lively scholarly debate, but simply report the various positions. --] (]) 08:02, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
::::Since the passage is egregiously ], I'll provide a fix that reflects actual sources, and shows the range of theories. There is a problem in this section, which almost exclusively deals with Rabbinical developments in Babylonia, and hardly at all with the Ashkenazi world. That also needs fixing.--] (]) 14:32, 19 October 2012 (UTC) :{{tq|almost everyone who thought of themselves as specifically "Ashkenazic" necessarily lived far from Ashkenazic cultural centers and was unrepresentative of the median Ashkenazi Jew|q=y}} so is this a disapproval of a lead image to represent all Ashkenazi Jews? ] (]) 22:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
*'''Bad RFC''', no ]. I see no problem with the lead image though. A better one could be proposed, but it hasn't. Filer the image citing the nonexistent WP:ethnicgallery, and the real policy under ] doesn't actually say not to illustrate an ethnic group with an image, it says not to use a ''gallery'', which is very different. Unless someone has an argument why the image is bad based on an actual policy or guideline, it seems fine and certainly better than ''no image''. I'm open to proposals for a higher quality image on the basis that it's a black and white, kinda shadowy photo. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
:As I have said and showed above there are dozens of studies all confirming the shared and common Middle Eastern origin of Ashkenazi Jews and there is scholarly consensus regarding this issue. I can add all 21 genetic studies as references. Zoossmann-Diskin '''single''' study '''can not balance 21 opposite genetic studies carried out by world leading institutions and all showing the same result''' In fact with your proposal we would have a clear POV if something totally out of mainstream consensus would be presented as equal "fact" to the mainstream consensus. Prof Atzmon participated in many recent studies like the studies of Dr. Harry Ostrrer and he has reaffirmed his well known findings, so your assumption is wrong. Atzmon clearly referee in his findings to Ashkenazi and Mizrahi Jews, as the study which was used here relates to Ashkenazi Jews and clearly shows their Middle Eastern genetic origin.--] (]) 14:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
*:Pincrete pointed out the issue with the current image above. It's not representative. There's also no such image of ]. ] (]) 17:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
*::I'm not sure I understand the argument. It's a photo of Ashkenazi Jews. It's not the best picture ever and like I said, a better one could be found, but it is a representation of Ashkenazi Jews, so yes it is representative. I think we could find a better photo like one in color and with better focus and contrast, or other aspects of the photo, but as far as I can tell, unless we have some other reason to suspect the people in the photo aren't Ashkenazi Jews, that would be definitionally, representative of Ashkenazi Jews. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
*'''Bad RFC''' per the arguments by Andre, but I agree that this image is fine and that an image is desirable, not hard preference regarding a specific outcome. ] (]) 23:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
=== Discussion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself ===
For the four editors so far who have chimed in to express their dissatisfaction with the RfC—the objective was to invite a wide community of editors to opine in what is an inherently contentious endeavor: discussing a lead image for an ethnic group. Although I skipped the phase of back-and-forth on this article, there have been robust conversations on lead images for ethnic groups or groups of people elsewhere on Misplaced Pages, as at https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:African_Americans/Archive_23#Should_this_article_have_a_lead_image?, so an RfC felt appropriate.


For the sake of organization, I've started this new section for anyone else who would like to give their opinion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself so as not to clog the discussion of the actual RfC question pertaining to the lead image. ] (]) 17:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:Your recent POV edits Nishidani represents vandalization. You can not edit genetic studies in the place where they do not belong and you can not create POV by inserting one study which is totlay out of mainstream and present it as equal. I will always remove vandalization attempts from this site and I will report you if you continue to do this without consensus.--] (]) 15:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


:An appropriate response to the members of the community all chiming in that this is a bad RFC could be to withdraw the RFC so we can have a proper discussion. You "skipped the phase" that is actually the important part. People are open to compromise, but you jumped right to creating a new RFC, which the guidelines advise against. It's also not typical to create a section to segregate out different types of responses "for the sake of organization" on the appropriateness of the RFC, which don't clog the discussion but in this case ''are'' the discussion, or to claim that a discussion on African Americans could serve as the RFCBEFORE on an article about Ashkenazi Jews. Consistency is not a mandate on Misplaced Pages for good reasons, as different things are importantly different. I note that you also modified the RFC prompt after it was already underway. These are all, relatively soft, violations of the guideline. We don't stand on ceremony in general, but you also have exhibited a pattern of starting RFCs without much discussion, in at least one other instance that I can recall. Not every revert needs to start an RFC, there are other ways around this. I'm open to changing the image. However, that doesn't make the RFC or the rationales above valid. ''']'''<span style="border:2px solid #073642;background:rgb(255,156,0);background:linear-gradient(90deg, rgba(255,156,0,1) 0%, rgba(147,0,255,1) 45%, rgba(4,123,134,1) 87%);">]</span> 22:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
::Please familiarise yourself with the elementary protocols of wikipedia. What you say does not interest me. What sources say is what we write. You are making an assessment about one of several theses. It is indeed a very serious charge to characterize corrective work of an error on an article, after no adequate justification for the anomaly could be provided, as vandalism, and is reportable as uncooperative edit-warring to restore what you have failed to justify.
::*(a) you are engaged in a conspicuous violation of ] by citing 21 genetic studies, the majority of which were published before Zoossman-Diskin and Bray's study, both of which deny your personal conclusions. Bray et al even state that from 35-55% of the Jewish Ashkenazi has a local, non-middle eastern, european "admixture".
::*(b) I have included Atzmon et al's position, which like Oestrer's, represents a scholarly point of view, in a rapidly developing field so complex there is still no "consensus".
::*(c) if you actually read Zoossman-Diskin, he responds to Atzmon's work, appraises it, incorporates some of its results but uses different techniques to tweak some of their data and obtaining different results.
::*(d) since you have failed for over a day to provide any textual justification for the statement in the article I challenged, it has failed ] and therefore must be regarded as ]. By your irrational revert, whose edit summary is purely, wildly subjective, you are defending against policy what appears to be an incorrect, illogical and solecistic generalization without source-support here.
::So could you please provide ''']''' justification for the words ''scholarly consensus'' regarding the ME origin of the Ashkenazi, and (b) please inform us what sources you rely on for holding that Zoossman-Diskin's study and results are unique. They are not. They are supported by Bray, as I noted. You elided both, and therefore are pushing one POV among several on the basis, apparently, of personal beliefs. The sensible thing would be to revert. I do not require your consent to improve a conspicuous error on a page. --] (]) 15:22, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
To begin with and to finish with: There is a section devoted to Genetic study in this article ''and you can not edit whatever you want, wherever you want''. Bray et al is mentioned in this article in proper section.--] (]) 15:38, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:01, 26 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ashkenazi Jews article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 14 days 
This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconEthnic groups High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

WikiProject iconEuropean history Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconGermany Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconFrance Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIsrael High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconJewish history High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconJudaism High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMiddle Ages Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconAnthropology: Oral tradition High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.
Media mentionThis article has been mentioned by a media organization:



Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In section "Notable Ashkenazim", add an "and" in the last sentence, making it "Though Ashkenazi Jews have never exceeded 3% of the American population, Jews account for 37% of the winners of the U.S. National Medal of Science, 25% of the American Nobel Prize winners in literature, and 40% of the American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics." Maxyyywaxyyy (talk) 04:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done

🍗TheNuggeteer🍗

01:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Khazar theory

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

The sources I cited for the Khazar theory are a genetic testing company https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/jewish-q/about/results and a study that's in the National Library of Medicine https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3595026/. The author of the study, Eran Elhaik, is an associate professor in the Department of Biology at Lund University in Sweden and he also works for Johns Hopkins University Medical School, one of the most prestigious medical schools in the world. Would Johns Hopkins hire some crackpot? Hell no! The idea that the Khazar theory (as distinct from the Khazar hypothesis) is a fringe theory is patently absurd. The Khazar hypothesis is fringe because it says that the Ashkenazi Jews are exclusively descended from the Khazars, which all genetic studies have shown to be false. The Khazar theory says the Ashkenazi Jews are only partly descended from the Khazars. Not only do other studies besides Elhaik's support the theory, the fact that the Ashkenazi and Sephardic haplogroup Q lineages diverged 3,200 to 5,100 years ago (definitely before the Jews left Israel for Europe and quite possibly before Judaism was even established) is consistent with it. अल्ट्राबॉम्ब (talk) 03:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)<comments by suspected sockpuppet of banned user Ultrabomb (talk · contribs) removed. Per WP:BAN, all edits of banned users may be removed and reverted on sight regardless of content.Andre🚐 00:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)>

No. FamilyTreeDNA groups are never a reliable source on Misplaced Pages, certainly not a user-contributed project written by non-experts and vetted not at all, which doesn't even say anything similar to what you want to add. The Elhaik study is widely discredited and criticized in the literature. It's absolutely a WP:FRINGE study. Elhaik was affiliated as a postdoc with the Department of Mental Health at the School of Public Health, and not the medical school, genetics or biology department. He may be an associate professor in bioinformatics at Lund University, but that doesn't make his study any more authoritative or worthy of any weight, when contrasted with the extensive body of research that shows the possible Khazar contribution to the Ashkenazi gene pool is negligible, by actual genetics researchers, who generally agree that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are European and Middle Eastern in their genetic heritage. While it is true that some amount of Khazar ancestry might be found in some populations, that doesn't mean the main article on Ashkenazi Jews should give any credence or airtime to what is fundamentally a discredited theory being pushed by dubious sources and often along with antisemitic conspiracy theories. It should be afforded practically no weight and certainly not any more than it already does, which is covered in the Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry article and possibly a bit elsewhere such as Khazars and Genetic studies of Jews. This is the main article for Ashkenazi Jews. Elhaik shouldn't be cited here. Andre🚐 04:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

RFC 26 November 2024

Should this article have a lead image? If so, which image should be used? إيان (talk) 07:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Gallery of suggested images (feel free to suggest others if you think this article should have a lead image)

Discussion

Where is the deadlocked discussion that has made a full-blown thirty-day RfC necessary? See WP:RFCBEFORE. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes - please read the info in the link Redrose64 has provided.
Thanks. Lukewarmbeer (talk) 11:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment (Summoned by bot), despite the label, it does seem odd to have this picture (presumably taken in Mandatory Palestine), when the article is about a (mainly European?) diaspora group Pincrete (talk) 17:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Indeed. إيان (talk) 21:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Comment General considerations—In 1920 when this was taken there were some 10,000s of recognizably ethnic Ashkenazim in Mandatory Palestine—far more than there are in all 2024 Europe. The overwhelming majority of modern Ashkenazim (both generally and who wear ethnic clothing) live in Israel and the US, and that's been true since the 1940s. Another problem is that the "Ashkenazic" identity only really exists in contrast to "Sephardic"—a picture of 1920s Warsaw wouldn't be normally described as "Ashkenazic" because everyone in it would have thought of themselves as "Polish Jews", prayed using "Polish rite" prayerbooks etc., didn't consider themselves part of a pan-Ashkenazic identity group. The historical exceptions where you found specifically "Ashkenazic" identity are Venice, Amsterdam, London, Mandatory Palestine, where half were Sephardic Jews so the Ashkenazim grouped together. This presents a challenge because until 1945 or so, almost everyone who thought of themselves as specifically "Ashkenazic" necessarily lived far from Ashkenazic cultural centers and was unrepresentative of the median Ashkenazi Jew. Since the Holocaust, physical displacement and cultural contamination from Israel (which is 50/50 Ashkenazic/Sephardic) has meant the death of all sub-Ashkenazic identities in the US, even though 99% of Jews here are Ashkenazic. GordonGlottal (talk) GordonGlottal (talk) 20:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

In 1920 when this was taken there were some 10,000s of recognizably ethnic Ashkenazim in Mandatory Palestine—far more than there are in all 2024 Europe. What point are you trying to make in comparing Mandatory Palestine in 1920 with Europe in 2024? Changing the variables of both the time and place corrupts the comparison.
Another problem is that the "Ashkenazic" identity only really exists in contrast to "Sephardic"—a picture of 1920s Warsaw wouldn't be normally described as "Ashkenazic" So should the article not discuss Ashkenazi history until the community came into contact with other Jewish groups?
almost everyone who thought of themselves as specifically "Ashkenazic" necessarily lived far from Ashkenazic cultural centers and was unrepresentative of the median Ashkenazi Jew so is this a disapproval of a lead image to represent all Ashkenazi Jews? إيان (talk) 22:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Bad RFC, no WP:RFCBEFORE. I see no problem with the lead image though. A better one could be proposed, but it hasn't. Filer removed the image citing the nonexistent WP:ethnicgallery, and the real policy under WP:GALLERY doesn't actually say not to illustrate an ethnic group with an image, it says not to use a gallery, which is very different. Unless someone has an argument why the image is bad based on an actual policy or guideline, it seems fine and certainly better than no image. I'm open to proposals for a higher quality image on the basis that it's a black and white, kinda shadowy photo. Andre🚐 22:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
    Pincrete pointed out the issue with the current image above. It's not representative. There's also no such image of Mizrahi Jews. إيان (talk) 17:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
    I'm not sure I understand the argument. It's a photo of Ashkenazi Jews. It's not the best picture ever and like I said, a better one could be found, but it is a representation of Ashkenazi Jews, so yes it is representative. I think we could find a better photo like one in color and with better focus and contrast, or other aspects of the photo, but as far as I can tell, unless we have some other reason to suspect the people in the photo aren't Ashkenazi Jews, that would be definitionally, representative of Ashkenazi Jews. Andre🚐 22:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Bad RFC per the arguments by Andre, but I agree that this image is fine and that an image is desirable, not hard preference regarding a specific outcome. FortunateSons (talk) 23:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Discussion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself

For the four editors so far who have chimed in to express their dissatisfaction with the RfC—the objective was to invite a wide community of editors to opine in what is an inherently contentious endeavor: discussing a lead image for an ethnic group. Although I skipped the phase of back-and-forth on this article, there have been robust conversations on lead images for ethnic groups or groups of people elsewhere on Misplaced Pages, as at https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:African_Americans/Archive_23#Should_this_article_have_a_lead_image?, so an RfC felt appropriate.

For the sake of organization, I've started this new section for anyone else who would like to give their opinion of the appropriateness of the RfC itself so as not to clog the discussion of the actual RfC question pertaining to the lead image. إيان (talk) 17:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

An appropriate response to the members of the community all chiming in that this is a bad RFC could be to withdraw the RFC so we can have a proper discussion. You "skipped the phase" that is actually the important part. People are open to compromise, but you jumped right to creating a new RFC, which the guidelines advise against. It's also not typical to create a section to segregate out different types of responses "for the sake of organization" on the appropriateness of the RFC, which don't clog the discussion but in this case are the discussion, or to claim that a discussion on African Americans could serve as the RFCBEFORE on an article about Ashkenazi Jews. Consistency is not a mandate on Misplaced Pages for good reasons, as different things are importantly different. I note that you also modified the RFC prompt after it was already underway. These are all, relatively soft, violations of the guideline. We don't stand on ceremony in general, but you also have exhibited a pattern of starting RFCs without much discussion, in at least one other instance that I can recall. Not every revert needs to start an RFC, there are other ways around this. I'm open to changing the image. However, that doesn't make the RFC or the rationales above valid. Andre🚐 22:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: