Talk:Shemini Atzeret

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleShemini Atzeret was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 12, 2013Good article nomineeListed
November 17, 2013Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 13, 2006, October 3, 2007, October 20, 2008, October 9, 2009, September 29, 2010, October 19, 2011, September 25, 2013, October 15, 2014, October 4, 2015, October 23, 2016, October 12, 2017, October 1, 2018, October 21, 2019, October 10, 2020, September 28, 2021, and October 17, 2022.
Current status: Delisted good article

Assessment[edit]

I have bumped its scale up to a C article. With some work, this article has the potential to reach at the very least a B. Magister Scientatalk (Editor Review) 03:15, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Further bumped scale up to B by Magister Scientatalk on 2 Dec. StevenJ81talk 16:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aiming for GA[edit]

Began discussion on Debresser's talk page. Entirety of the exchange is copied here:

I was thinking of putting this up for GA. Do you think it is missing any important content?

  • It has Ashkenazic pronunciation, but not Sephardic/common Israeli.
  • "In Israel, as well as in Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism" I wouldn't mention Reform etc. in the lead, or at least Israel and they should be mentioned separately, somehow.
  • "This dual nature" should be sourced, or removed as original research.
  • "Observances and Custom" should be "Observances and custom", as wp:mos doesn't allow a second capital in headers.
  • I'd remove the commentary of the Vilna Gaon.

Will look further after 9 Av. Debresser (talk) 16:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks on both matters. Have an meaningful, but not-too-difficult, fast. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and you too. Debresser (talk) 16:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(end copy) StevenJ81 (talk) 16:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC) [reply]

checkY Fixed capitalization of headers per MoS: there was more than one incorrect. Beyond that:

  • Didn't explicitly add Sephardic/Israeli because that is reflected in the article title. That isn't obvious? (That's a real question, not a rhetorical one.)
  • Let's discuss the Reform stuff after 9 Av. I know this is a hot button for you. From a WP:NPOV perspective it can't be omitted, and I thought the current approach was nice and compact. But I'll welcome your ideas on how to handle it differently, as long as it appears somewhere.
  • Let's discuss "dual nature" after 9 Av, too. I could rewrite that sentence without the phrase—along the lines of "The idea that Shemini Atzeret is part of Sukkot in some ways and apart from it in others is reflected in the observances and customs of the day(s)"—and it wouldn't be WP:OR. It would clearly be a summary of the preceding, plus a transition to the next session. Possibly the phrase "dual nature" suggests OR, but I see it simply as a neater package for the idea.
  • I included the Vilna Gaon because I thought the preceding quote from the Gemara (about akh sameakh) needed elucidation. Does it work better put together into a single paragraph?

StevenJ81 (talk) 17:09, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • To me it isn't obvious, no.
     Done Now off to dinner and kinot. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, this is something I disagree with. I consider reform to be a modern denomination of Judaism, and do not think that reform customs should be mentioned in the lead of any article about specific things in Judaism more than let's say Chabad customs, to which I myself adhere. But in addition, Israel and reform are entities of a different category, and the reasons are different, and therefore they should be mentioned separately, if reform is to be mentioned at all.
    I am fine with removing it from lead. I think we would have a problem removing it "at all". So I'm thinking (a) remove from lead; (b) separate them conceptually in the last paragraph of the section "Simchat Torah", and (c) change first sentence of "Carryover" section to something like "Where Shemini Atzeret is a one-day holiday, such as in Israel, ..." StevenJ81 (talk) 19:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
     Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:59, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree with you here, and hold that this sentence, even without the catchy "dual nature" is still superfluous and original research. When saying that it is clearly a summary of the preceding, you basically admit that.
    Both of the concepts (part of Sukkot, different from Sukkot) can be found at Sukkah 48a. Per se, that makes the sentence summary, not synthesis, and therefore acceptable (see WP:SYNNOT). If you want to tell me that it is reading too much into the juxtaposition of these two concepts to say that this represents a "dual nature"—perhaps that this is simply Shemini Atzeret's nature—I think you are splitting hashkafik hairs beyond the simple meaning of this sentence. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done Chose to retain, per above. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:59, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the idea is clear without the proof from the gemara. In any case, the Vilna Goan's idea is too detailed, and does not add anything. Debresser (talk) 21:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    OK. I will remove that. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
     Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:59, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing left, I think, is to fix the Kol Torah link, which I can do later today. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:59, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I want to sleep on this over Shabbat. Then I think I will call in an uninterested party like Magister Scienta (see above) and get his opinion. Thanks for your help, and gut Shabbos. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finally did some cleanup[edit]

@IZAK and Yoninah, you may recall we had a big to-do about this article and a GA-listing a while back. I was so upset and disturbed by the process that (a) I stayed away from this article for a long while, and (b) will probably never try to take an article to GA again on this wiki—certainly not one on a fairly technical Jewish subject requiring halachic sources. BUT ... do you guys think we could put this back at B-class, instead of C-class? I think it's pretty complete for a lay audience. Thanks for your input. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article was delisted from Good Article to C-class on 17 November 2013. Even at the time of the delisting, C-class was a rather low assessment, IMHO. Since then the article has been steadily improved, see this diff. Even though these are not major improvements, IMHO the present overall status of the article warrants a B-class. So done. Debresser (talk) 18:56, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Shemini Atzeret. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:20, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Checked. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:03, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Shemini Atzeret. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:04, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Checked, and link updated to most current version. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:46, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Updating[edit]

Could you please update the dates section on the chart to the right of the page by deleting the dates for 2015, 2016 and 2017, and adding the dates for 2018, 2019 and 2020? Please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:5D4E:5CA9:29A0:CE68:7E77:8C07 (talk) 22:41, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done StevenJ81 (talk) 22:37, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links in prose[edit]

What is the rare exception that allows external links to be put into prose in this article (see WP:ELPOINTS and WP:LINKDD)? Not sure how it makes things more difficult to treat these the same as other references.AIRcorn (talk) 06:33, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Aircorn: If nothing else, because the way you did it looks awkward: footnote to reveal nothing more than the text it's footnoting, except with a link. Personally, I find this to be a situation where some people (you, in this case) get anal about the MOS. But I'll tell you what: sometime today I'll rework the whole thing so as to (a) remove the inline external links and (b) do so in a productive way. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well you are a charming chap[1]. Anyway the article is better, which in the end is all that matters. Enjoy you editing and try not to take disagreements too personally. AIRcorn (talk) 22:05, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Date question[edit]

I recently added the template {{Moveable date}} and I'm confused what date this holiday occurs. According to Hebcal.com it is 1 October 2018 and this is what their developer API returns also. However, the article previously said it begins on 30 September 2018 at sunset. So I am assuming this is like other holidays, that begins at sunset on one day, and ends at nightfall the next. If this is wrong please ping me with the correct info, thanks. -- GreenC 17:50, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thank you for creating all that infrastructure. It's enormously helpful.
Second, that's exactly right; like other Jewish holidays, it starts on the previous Gregorian day at sundown. The only Jewish observances that does not apply to are the minor fasts (fasts other than Yom Kippur and Tisha B'Av) and Pesach Sheni. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The Land"?[edit]

Is it correct to refer to Israel as "The Land" in the lead? סשס Grimmchild 11:00, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shemini_Atzeret&oldid=1194938081"