Misplaced Pages

Talk:Elazar Shach: 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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:33, 3 May 2013 editMiszaBot I (talk | contribs)234,552 editsm Robot: Archiving 2 threads (older than 30d) to Talk:Elazar Shach/Archive 2.← Previous edit Revision as of 21:05, 24 July 2013 edit undoCsteffen13 (talk | contribs)161 edits →Edits and restoring previous version.: new sectionNext edit →
Line 99: Line 99:


Assuming no valid objections are raised, I will be restoring the quote shortly. Thanks. ] (]) 01:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC) Assuming no valid objections are raised, I will be restoring the quote shortly. Thanks. ] (]) 01:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

== Edits and restoring previous version. ==

I've restored some information and undone a few of IZAK's edits of March 2013 which make no sense and had no consensus. If anybody wants to make major changes to the structure of a controversial article they should seek consensus first and that way we can avoid a lot of the wars that went on here in the past.--C Steffen 21:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:05, 24 July 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elazar Shach 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, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconLithuania Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania 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.LithuaniaWikipedia:WikiProject LithuaniaTemplate:WikiProject LithuaniaLithuania
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconJudaism Mid‑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
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIsrael Mid‑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
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconBiography: Politics and Government / Science and Academia
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).
Note icon
An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.
Note icon
An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elazar Shach 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, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days 

Info from another book "In Their Shadow"

In addition to "Path to Greatness", I would like to add info from the following book:

In Their Shadow: Wisdom and Guidance of the Gedolim Volume One: Chazon Ish, Brisker Rav, Rav Shach - By Rabbi Shlomo Lorincz - Published by Feldheim Publishers, 2008. 453 pages. - ISBN 978-1-59826-207-0

As I said regarding "Path to Greatness", Lorincz's book is also well-researched and has pertinent info. Again, if someone has problems with the book (as a whole) as being reliable for Misplaced Pages standards, please bring it up at WP:RS/N. And just as a reminder, please no insults or uncivil behavior, let's just stick to the point.

Assuming no complaints are filed, I will be adding info shortly. If there's a specific piece of info which you believe to be unreliable, please bring up the issue here. Thanks, Yonoson3 (talk) 02:16, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Might I draw attention to the recent discussion on WP:RSN regarding edits on this page, http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_145#Quote_from_Mishpacha_Magazine_regarding_Rabbi_Elazar_Shach and caution against edit-warring in support of edits which fail policy.--Winchester2313 (talk) 16:14, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

All

Recently, IZAK changed and added a few things, and was reverted son after by an IP editor. I don't think most of IZAK's edit was wrong. With the notable exception of "All the leaders of the Haredi world united behind this stand". Even if this were sourced somehow, and I doubt the same source can support two different statements, this is such a ridiculously large claim, that it can not be. First of all, large claims need impeccable sources. But let's be honest, has anybody ever heard of all haredi rabbis agreeing about anything?? Debresser (talk) 08:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I am the ip editor I think you are talking about. The reason for my revert of those edits is very simple. Noach Orlowek is only good enough as a source for what he said and NOT for what he claims he heard Rav Schach said. Read wp:rs and wp:secondary and that is VERY clear. Rav Schach's letters and opinions on this kind of idea are all printed and he never said or wrote anything like this. If somebody really believes he did then you should be able to find a DIRECT quote or letter from Rav Schach that can be verified. The se3ntence that all haredi leaders agreed with his ideas against serving in the army are also not beleivable and as someone already said here fall under wp:exceptional and need MANY GOOD SOURCES.--72.38.87.230 (talk) 16:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

  • I agree with Debresser. If one sentence is a problem then remove that, fine no problem. But the issue here is that we have not one a but several anonymous IP "editors" (they are actually Misplaced Pages:POVWARRIOR) who remove entire chunks of material that is obviously based on their simple OPPOSDITION to Shach and an obvious hatred of him that is the hallmark of such pro-Chabd editors, and that is not acceptable. Attacking Shach and freely allowing denigrating reports while fighting tooth and nail against a more neutral and positive description of this important and historical Haredi leader is very unfortunate and has turned this article into a prime example of WP:BATTLEGROUND where one set of pro-Chabad editors stand guard to fight anything they seem to hate. Debresser is a more experienced and balanced editor and his edits are reasonable. But the attitude and style of the others is wild and unacceptable they often throw out the baby with the bathwater and it must stop. IZAK (talk) 22:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Not sure what your problem is IZAK. I definitely don't hate Rav Schach or any rabbi but if you have important data with good sources - put it in. Im NOT pro or anti chabad either so not sure what your problem is!? Sounds like you want a fake and rosy picture of someone who really made a habit of attacking other rabbis and groups and you just want the article to read like Santa Claus?! I only edit the way I do and never registered or anything but STILL not sure what your problem really is and I'm not qualified to help you.If you want a ridiculous and unbeleivable hagiography without good sources that probably wont sit well with most contributors then that is NOT my problem and sorry if it is yours. Chill out pal. Shalom!--72.38.87.230 (talk) 23:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

  • Um hi there 72.38.87.230 (or whoever you are) please stop going to extremes with comments like: "Sounds like you want a fake and rosy picture of someone who really made a habit of attacking other rabbis and groups and you just want the article to read like Santa Claus?!" Because:
  1. Nobody wants either a "fake" or "rosy" picture, but neither does anybody want an attack article from one POV, yours.
  2. A rabbi who lived over 100 years and led a major part of Haredi Jewry in Israel was not just "someone" who "only" made a habit of attacking other rabbis. He surely did lots of good as well, isn't that what rabbis do, perform good deeds because they are good people, otherwise what kind of rabbis are they? Napoleon also attacked a lot of people, so did every leader in history and that does not make them all bad, but here in this Shach article editors like you only want to emphasize the NEGATIVE, and that is no mitzva.
  3. This article, as it stands is obviously hemmed in by editors such as yourself who do not allow a full and objective picture of the subject to emerge, since you are so determined to focus on some critical public statements this rabbi made. You cite all sorts of WP policies but they are all just grand excuses to stifle this article from becoming a better one.
  4. No one wants this or any article to read like it was about Santa Claus, itself a terrible thing to compare a major Jewish religious leader to a symbol of Christianity, and no, no one should want to paint a picture of the 7th and last Lubavitcher Rebbe as if he were better than Jesus Christ (just to follow in the kind of religio-historical analogies you make here) so please stop it with the wise-cracks.
  5. Shach was a major figure, as a rabbi, and yes, as a key figure in Israel. He also was very outspoken and he was very politically active in Israel. He broke away from his own political party (Aguda) created a new Sefardi party (Shas) and then created a new party (Degel HaTorah) so this is not a minor figure.
  6. Given that rabbis, especially many prominent rabbis in Israel are given to hyperbole, Shach's outspokennes and penchant for speaking his mind made headlines -- that the secular media blew out of proportion, but Shach was merely speaking about and verbalized the notions current in the kind of Haredi circles he led, the Lithunain yeshiva people. He was a very STRONG leader and with that came consequences.
  7. But unfortunately, to the Chabad movement he has become something of an "anti-Christ" figure because he dared to directly criticize the 7th and last Lubavitcher Rebbe, which is the ONLY reason so many pro-Chabad editors come to this page and perennially squat on it in the hope of slinging mud at Shach, make him seem like an irrational person and try every avenue of the very attacks they try to pin on Shach. All a very sad state of affairs and WP suffers because of this kind of violation of WP:NOTCENSORED. IZAK (talk) 07:09, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
3. The full picture includes the fact that he was a controversial person, as you can see from this talkpage alone. And Shach was rather extreme in this regard. IZAK should not try to diminish that fact.
7. After saying in point 4 that you don't want Shach compared to "Santa Claus" and adding an insulting comparison, you yourself call Shach an "anti-Christ". :) And no, you need not reply to this. Debresser (talk) 07:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
IZAK's edit appears to be well-sourced and reasonable. Diverging opinions cited to reliable sources should also be included, if these exist. hgilbert (talk) 11:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Quote from book "Raising Roses Among the Thorns"

Please see Fladrif's comments here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_146#Quote_from_book_.22Raising_Roses_Among_the_Thorns.22_regarding_Rabbi_Elazar_Shach

Assuming no valid objections are raised, I will be restoring the information shortly. Thanks

Yonoson3 (talk) 02:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem here. An interesting quote. Although not sure how important. Debresser (talk) 07:17, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

In agreement with Yonoson, and it is very important particularly since the question of drafting Haredi yeshiva students is now even more a key topic of public discussion in Israel, after the latest Israeli elections with the Haredi leaders now in opposition it has become one of the biggest and most divisive hot potatoe political and religious issues in Israel. IZAK (talk) 10:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Agree. If that what it is about, then that is important and actual. Debresser (talk) 13:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

NOTE: Per WP:RSN: "Resolved: Clearly a reliable source. Underlying disputes should be raised at another DR board. Fladrif (talk) 14:03, 22 April 2013 (UTC) " Thank you, IZAK (talk) 21:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi IZAK, thanks for the input.
Just want to clarify something, though. The quote from the book "Raising Roses Among the Thorns" (1) is not about the Haredi draft. That is from a different book, "Israel and the Politics of Jewish Identity: The Secular-Religious Impasse" (2).
But either way, Fladrif agreed that the quotes from both books are reliable. Yonoson3 (talk) 22:25, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Quote from book "Israel and the Politics of Jewish Identity: The Secular-Religious Impasse"

This was discussed at length here. Fladriff's conclusion: "Resolved: Clearly a reliable source. Underlying disputes should be raised at another DR board."

Assuming no valid objections are raised, I will be restoring the quote shortly. Thanks. Yonoson3 (talk) 01:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Edits and restoring previous version.

I've restored some information and undone a few of IZAK's edits of March 2013 which make no sense and had no consensus. If anybody wants to make major changes to the structure of a controversial article they should seek consensus first and that way we can avoid a lot of the wars that went on here in the past.--C Steffen 21:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Categories: