Jump to content

Talk:Congregation Beth Jacob Ohev Sholom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good articleCongregation Beth Jacob Ohev Sholom has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 1, 2010Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 10, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Congregation Beth Jacob Ohev Sholom, the oldest Orthodox Jewish congregation on Long Island, once fired its rabbi after he was alleged to have been caught eating ham in a saloon?

A comment from the reviewer

[edit]

I agreed to review this article a day or so back [1], and would like to say that while I still intend to review it, I do not intend to do so while you two are having a fight involving this page at ANI. I also think that as the reviewer, it is proper for me to recuse myself from your personal conflicts, so I won't be actively following the incident or the arguments above. If one or preferably both of you would notify me that you believe the dispute is resolved, I'll be happy to take a look at that point.

I will say one thing now though, which is that this page would greatly benefit from images, both of the destroyed synagogue (which would likely be fair use as a no longer extant building) and where they presently meet (which would be free). --erachima talk 07:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate your taking this on in the first place. I have a feeling this conflict will be settled quite quickly, now that more eyes are on it. I'll let you know as soon as things quiet down, which should be quite soon. Jayjg (talk) 07:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. Tx. But for the issue of MOS re refs/quotes, IMHO the article is GA-ready, though of course I'll be happy to try to address any other issues that you have. Agree on the images. I don't know if I'll be able to make it down there in the short run to take a photo, but will check flickr when I have a moment, for the synagogues/rabbi/Marty N.--Epeefleche (talk) 09:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did find a Rabbi Fishman, but this isn't the correct one.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As requested, just a note to let you know that the AN/I has been closed ... so you should feel free per the above to move forward with the GA review. Tx. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. We've worked everything out, and the article should be stable going forward. Jayjg (talk) 04:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Congregation Beth Jacob Ohev Sholom/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Aiken ♫ 16:27, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other than some minor points, this looks ready to become a good article.

Early history
  • "The synagogue employed a rabbi, sexton/beadle..." Why is there a choice here? Why not just link to gabbai?
  • "trampled upon" needs a ref.
  • Ham or pork? Or both? I'm confused.
Images
  • I see there's an old picture, but what about a modern-day one? There must be a picture out there somewhere - or perhaps you could take one if you live close enough?

Placing on hold. Aiken Drum 18:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for reviewing this! I'll respond below:

  • "The synagogue employed a rabbi, sexton/beadle..." Why is there a choice here? Why not just link to gabbai?
  • "trampled upon" needs a ref.
    • The reference was at the end of the paragraph. I didn't include it at the end of that sentence because FA reviewers have tended to frown on duplicated references in consecutive sentences. I've now added it to that sentence too. Jayjg (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ham or pork? Or both? I'm confused.
    • I used the two interchangeably, mostly because the sources did. One of the references referred to it as "ham", others as "a piece of pork". I've changed it all to "pork", since that covers ham too. Jayjg (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see there's an old picture, but what about a modern-day one? There must be a picture out there somewhere - or perhaps you could take one if you live close enough?
    • Yeah, even though GAs don't require pictures, I was also hoping to get a modern-day picture of it. I'm not really much of a photographer myself, and actually don't currently own a working camera (mine are all broken). I couldn't find any open source ones on flickr, etc., but a Wikipedian I know offered to take a couple, and possibly one of the rabbi too. Unfortunately, he hasn't had a chance to do so yet. I've e-mailed him again as a reminder, and am hoping to have them in the next month or so. Jayjg (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's a shame, and yes they don't require pictures, but it would have been nice. Oh well, I expect at some point one will crop up.

Passed. Aiken Drum 18:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Jayjg (talk) 18:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this picture relevant, or does it have to do with another congregaton? Jim.henderson (talk) 18:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 01:02, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Congregation Beth Jacob Ohev Sholom. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 03:53, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Congregation_Beth_Jacob_Ohev_Sholom&oldid=1231457115"