Talk:History of antisemitism/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Formation of the ADL

Hello Ashurbanippal, and thanks for your recent contributions to History of antisemitism. I haven't been able to read the specific reference you added, but I have (I believe) the definitive answer to the question we have recently been debating. It is from Abraham H. Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League. He states "No, the Leo Frank case was not the impetus for the founding of the Anti-Defamation League." You can find his article here: http://www.adl.org/press-center/c/a-century-later-leo-frank-tragedy-still-resonates.html So, I will revert your recent edit, unless you have something more authoritative. Thanks Gulbenk (talk) 21:20, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello again Ashurbanippal. I am concerned that you are engaging in edit warring, and adding erroneous information to this article. I have already directed you to an authoritative source which contradicts the information you added. I would rank the National Director of the ADL as a better, more reliable, source for information regarding the foundation of his organization than an author.

I know that you are new here, and may not be familiar with the interactions that (hopefully) lead to better articles. I will not revert your edit. Rather, I ask you to reconsider your actions. I will only enter a request for administrative involvement if you refuse to reconsider. Feel free to respond here, if you still feel that your position is correct. If we can not settle this matter on our own, I will ask an administrator to consider the merits of each position. Gulbenk (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

ADL's website is a primary source, I brought three different secondary sources (which are better). Please ask for an impartial administrator's opinion. I'll comply with his decision. It wasn't my intention to disturb you or start an edit-war, I simply think the Leo Frank affair was important for the foundation of ADL. Perhaps you could write something like "some sources state that Leo Frank's conviction led to the foundation of the Anti-Defamation League, although the organization denies this".--Ashurbanippal (talk) 22:09, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Ashurbanippal, I think that your suggestion is a reasonable one. In years past, the factors which contributed to the formation of the ADL were open to debate. It doesn't seem that there was a widely accepted, definitive, statement on the matter. So some observers, I believe, went with "correlation equals causation". Others, it appears, used ambiguous language, such as "stimulus" or "catalyst". The sources you quote are all, it seems, good faith efforts to interpret the events. I believe that they all, also, pre-date Mr. Foxman's unambiguous statement. So it remains to be seen if historian's fall in line with Mr. Foxman's bright line statement, or if they maintain a contrary view. The language you suggest will serve as an interim statement until (and if) historians reach a consensus. Best regards. Gulbenk (talk) 19:48, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned references in History of antisemitism

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of History of antisemitism's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Arafat":

From Banu Qurayza: Arafat, "New Light on the Story of Banu Qurayza and the Jews of Medina", p. 100-107. Arafat relates the testimony of Ibn Hajar, who denounced this and other accounts as "odd tales" and quoted Malik ibn Anas, a contemporary of Ibn Ishaq, whom he rejected as a "liar", an "impostor" and for seeking out the Jewish descendants for gathering information about Muhammad's campaign with their forefathers.
From Muhammad: Arafat, "New Light on the Story of Banu Qurayza and the Jews of Medina", Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1976, p. 100–107.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:06, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on History of antisemitism. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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) 09:46, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on History of antisemitism. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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) 01:10, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on History of antisemitism. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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) 23:09, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

The article is super USA-centric

I removed some of the USA crap like dwelling on one person's (Buchanan) comments and expanded on the USSR and Communist Poland (especially since it falsely blamed March 1968 on Jewish human sacrifice rumorswhile it was all political and complicated). But then noticed there's just NOTHING about the Muslim world in the 20th century! "Twenty-first century" mentions nothing about the Muslim attitudes in the newly partially-Muslim Western Europe, too. Another thing not mentioned is Italian fascism under German control after 1943, and the various other countries where the Germans influenced or set up governments, in addition to just France. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 12:18, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits

I restored this, as the content is sourced and is relevant to this article. I did replaced JVL (which is a usable source and is available online, though not of a high quality) with higher quality sources. Icewhiz (talk) 07:13, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the updates to the direct sources. We should generally not be using a library as a source. 2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk) 08:06, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Despite the name, it is not a library. Jewish Virtual Library is an online encyclopedia. It is not an open wiki encyclopedia, has editorial controls, but probably ranks below Encyclopædia Britannica (which we do use) in terms of reliability. It is a usable WP:TERTIARY source, all be it not of the greatest quality. What JVL does have going for it is that it is English language, fairly comprehensive (for Jewish history), and fully open/accessible on-line. As such - it is a useful source for Jewish history, particularly for non-controversial subject matter. Icewhiz (talk) 08:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

In regards to diff - please don't call improved sourcing vandalism. I did however reintroduce the 1033 Fez massacre with proper sourcing - in the aforementioned diff it was introduced with an AuthorHouse book as a source. We generally consider AuthorHouse a WP:SPS and we avoid it. For the content in question - there was no lack of good published sources covering it. Icewhiz (talk) 09:14, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Not my edit. As far as JVL, they are essentially a library with some opinion-based articles for Israeli - US lobbying groups. Better sources are available. 2600:1700:1111:5940:D9F6:63D1:857A:104 (talk) 17:26, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Haman/Purim

There should be a paragraph at the top about the first account of attempted genocide against the Jews for purposes unrelated to conquest. I think the Biblical account of Haman, immortalized in Purim and the Book of Esther is notable to this article as is how it backfired in his situation. J390 (talk) 04:59, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

"First Crusade" image

The image "Killing of Jews during the First Crusade" is discussed here. I don't have a contribution to make to that discussion, but unless there is further discussion somewhere else it is clear that the meaning of the image is uncertain and unsourced. Because of this it can't be used until a proper source is located. Zero^talk 15:06, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it needs to be correctly sourced before being used. - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Per original source in commons: Exécution des Hébreux par les païens. Illustration de la Bible moralisée, 1250. Voir la page de discussion où un contributeur, Adam Bishop, fournit le lien externe vers le manuscrit en latin sur le site de la BNF (gallica.fr). Le texte à gauche de l'image commence par une citation des Psaumes 16, et se poursuit par une prière contre les Juifs déicides. Il est impossible sans source secondaire de mettre en relation cette illustration avec l'actualité de 1250 (unsigned by IP)

(In addition, there are curses against Jews in Latin) (unsigned by same IP)

Did you actually read the French that you copy-pasted? "Il est impossible sans source secondaire" means "It is impossible without a secondary source". That's right, without a secondary source it is impossible to say what the image shows. Zero^talk 12:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I ordered a book by interlibrary loan that is about the images in this bible and I'll put the image back with a proper description if the book shows it to be appropriate. Zero^talk 15:06, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

See here. Zero^talk 05:46, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

It's already pretty clear from that discussion that the image doesn't show, or even refer to, anything to do with the First Crusade (and was made over 50 years later), so it isn't a suitable illustration here. Johnbod (talk) 13:54, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MichaelDavid123.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Article structure

I find this article to be very weirdly structured. It should either be completely classified by country or chronologically. Currently it is chronologically structured and then some countries get a special mention (seems random which ones, I guess according to whoever wrote the chapters). Any suggestions for how to tidy it up? LGLou (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree. The long section on "Antisemitism in the English-speaking world" seems like a mix of an undue explication of a single source and some original research, and its most important content should be folded into the chronological history. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:33, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Might be worth looking at reviews to see how strong the Rubenstein book is before going to the trouble of re-incorporating the content. I'm looking one that begins, "Rubinstein begins with an interesting premise." This is not a good omen for an academic review, and the rest spares the work little. However, I am unfamiliar with Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, the outlet publishing this review. The more familiar American Historical Review had a more positive review from Frederick M. Schweitzer, though he describes the book as both uneven and revisionist, bucking against the prevailing narrative of Jewish history. This means it is probably not at the center of today's scholarship.

Bottom line: might be worth decreasing use of this work significantly. Freelance-frank (talk) 22:39, 28 April 2023 (UTC)