This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 4meter4 (talk | contribs) at 11:23, 15 November 2024 (→Judeo-Ge'ez). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 11:23, 15 November 2024 by 4meter4 (talk | contribs) (→Judeo-Ge'ez)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Judeo-Ge'ez
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- Judeo-Ge'ez (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Term does simply not exist.--Hellenyck (talk) 16:55, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 18:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- Don't delete There's clear proof that this language is different to Ge'ez and can be classified as a dialect, in a lot of aspect for example as they have different words compared to guess just for example as "Nisan", "Ab", "Lul" and "T'heshvan" and other words such as Hell, idol, Easter, purification, and alms, are of Hebrew origin . which clearly derives from a Herbraic source and isn't present for other Ge'ez speakers but just for the beta Israel, now in recent years the influence of Judeo Ge'ez hasn't been the same as it once was due to conflicts, etc. Also for the argument that this should be rented in "Agaw" languages also doesn't make sense as there as the language derives from a South Semitic language, and not a Cushitic language. The Hebrew in the Ge'ez of the Beta Israel is clear and the deletation of this page only furthers Wikipedias Eurocentric and Race biased perogrative. Sources supporting this point.
- A. H. M. Jones and Elizabeth Monroe, A History of Ethiopia (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1935), p. 40.
- Kaplan, Steven (2009). ""The Literature of the Beta Israel (Falasha): A Survey of a Biblical-Hebraic Tradition"".
- Gottheil, Richard (2022). "ELDAD BEN MAHLI HA-DANI".
- https://er.ceres.rub.de/index.php/ER/article/view/865
- Ezra Ben Yosef (talk) 11:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Don't delete There's clear proof that this language is different to Ge'ez and can be classified as a dialect, in a lot of aspect for example as they have different words compared to guess just for example as "Nisan", "Ab", "Lul" and "T'heshvan" and other words such as Hell, idol, Easter, purification, and alms, are of Hebrew origin . which clearly derives from a Herbraic source and isn't present for other Ge'ez speakers but just for the beta Israel, now in recent years the influence of Judeo Ge'ez hasn't been the same as it once was due to conflicts, etc. Also for the argument that this should be rented in "Agaw" languages also doesn't make sense as there as the language derives from a South Semitic language, and not a Cushitic language. The Hebrew in the Ge'ez of the Beta Israel is clear and the deletation of this page only furthers Wikipedias Eurocentric and Race biased perogrative. Sources supporting this point.
- Yes, we read those. They don’t support what you are saying. Kaplan for example use the term Agaw dialect. None of them use the term “Judeo-Ge'ez“.4meter4 (talk) 11:20, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as WP:Original research. I wouldn't call it "fake" so much as an original framing. Beta Israel is a real people group and they did speak Ge'ez with their own dialect. The first source is pretty clear to call it the "Agaw dialect" and doesn't use the term "Judeo-Ge'ez". It’s looks like this article is re-naming the Agaw dialect "Judeo-Ge'ez" without any supporting sources for that re-naming. But, it isn't all that odd of a re-naming considering the Agaw people were Ethiopian Jews who had their own dialect of Ethiopian speech.4meter4 (talk) 21:56, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- I didnt say sources are fake. I say refs are fake, because sources cited do not support article text. --Altenmann >talk 22:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- Agaw: not exactly so: our Agaw people article says that "have practiced what some described as a “Hebraic religion”, though some also practiced Ethiopian Orthodoxy, and many were Beta Israel Jews", i.e., they should not be conflated. --Altenmann >talk 22:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Altenmann That could be, I'm not a subject matter expert in this area. I'm just pointing out that the source in question was describing the Beta Israel people as speaking the "Agaw dialect" which impacted the Ge'ez language writings extant to that culture. The article in question seems to be re-naming this dialect Judeo-Ge'ez rather than calling it the Agaw dialect as in the cited source. Hence why I am calling it WP:OR. The ins and outs of language within the Ethiopian Jewish culture may be more complex than what that single source presented, and I'm sure the Agaw people may have been more religiously diverse and that is fine. FYI refs = sources. You meant citations. Hence my confusion. 4meter4 (talk) 22:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Ezra_Ben_Yosef for expert's opinion (as much as wikipedians are experts :-)) on the issue. --Altenmann >talk 01:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
You meant citations
- Well, Misplaced Pages thinks refs = citations :-) and technically speaking sources are referents, i.e., things you are referring to. --Altenmann >talk 02:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)- True. We tend to use terms somewhat interchangeably on wikipedia. :-) Technically references are works listed at the end of an article outside of a footnote format (see https://www.cwauthors.com/article/key-differences-between-a-citation-and-a-reference ). Misplaced Pages's somewhat unusual referencing style makes it possible to blend the two by putting the entire reference inside an embedded footnote. This is different than the standard referencing format in academic publishing, which is why I prefer Template:Sfn citations as they mirror academic publication styles more closely. In my mind I think of "references" as the "complete source information" (such as a bibliography or works cited list) and the citation as stating where certain content came from within that source. When I hear "false reference" it makes me think the entire source is made up, where as if I hear "false citation" I would think someone is not being truthful about where the content came from by misrepresenting the cited source. But that's just me. Best.4meter4 (talk) 02:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Your explanation makes sense, thanks. --Altenmann >talk 02:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- You are overlooking the essential point: Judaeo-Ge'ez (a language that the user believes to be descended from Hebrew) does not exist and has never existed. The term was simply invented by the user (WP:NOR).--Hellenyck (talk) 07:09, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Um… that is exactly what I said, but in different words.4meter4 (talk) 10:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- You are a Eurocentric Ezra Ben Yosef (talk) 11:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- True. We tend to use terms somewhat interchangeably on wikipedia. :-) Technically references are works listed at the end of an article outside of a footnote format (see https://www.cwauthors.com/article/key-differences-between-a-citation-and-a-reference ). Misplaced Pages's somewhat unusual referencing style makes it possible to blend the two by putting the entire reference inside an embedded footnote. This is different than the standard referencing format in academic publishing, which is why I prefer Template:Sfn citations as they mirror academic publication styles more closely. In my mind I think of "references" as the "complete source information" (such as a bibliography or works cited list) and the citation as stating where certain content came from within that source. When I hear "false reference" it makes me think the entire source is made up, where as if I hear "false citation" I would think someone is not being truthful about where the content came from by misrepresenting the cited source. But that's just me. Best.4meter4 (talk) 02:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Altenmann That could be, I'm not a subject matter expert in this area. I'm just pointing out that the source in question was describing the Beta Israel people as speaking the "Agaw dialect" which impacted the Ge'ez language writings extant to that culture. The article in question seems to be re-naming this dialect Judeo-Ge'ez rather than calling it the Agaw dialect as in the cited source. Hence why I am calling it WP:OR. The ins and outs of language within the Ethiopian Jewish culture may be more complex than what that single source presented, and I'm sure the Agaw people may have been more religiously diverse and that is fine. FYI refs = sources. You meant citations. Hence my confusion. 4meter4 (talk) 22:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)