Talk:Haredi Judaism/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Dispute over lead sentence

"characterized by a strict adherence to Jewish law and traditional Jewish values as opposed to modern values and practices" — The first part of this is a correct description of how the Haredim see themselves, but we shouldn't use unattributed self-descriptions as our opening definitions. The source given, an anonymous article at myjewishlearning.com, shows no sign of satisfying RS. A more detached source is required. Also, the later mention of the Shulchan Aruch is inadequate, as relying on this summary of Halacha is one of the defining features of modern Haredim. Zero^talk 04:09, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Sources is one issue. The other is content per se; even if an independent source supported "traditional Jewish values", we'd have to contend with the way some sources describe the process of innovation that has led to current understandings of what counts as "traditional". A proper encyclopedic treatment will not be content here with portraying things in line with the self-understanding of this group. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 09:45, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

First of all lets agree on two things: the present version is sourced, while the previous wasn't; the present version gives a correct description, while the previous didn't. The definition of Haredi includes two things: a strict adherence to the letter of the halakha, and a way of life that shuns modern influence.

myjewishlearning.com may not bean academic source, but I find it to be a good website. In any case, it is definitely better than no source.

Also please notice that the previous statement was a rather large claim, and large claims need good sources. The present statement is more balanced.

After all is said and done, I have no problem with minor adjustments to the wording (which is based on the sources using WP:PARAPHRASE), nor do I have a problem with attempts to improve sources. I do have a problem with the previous version, which is unacceptable, for the reasons mentioned above. I for one will definitely welcome any addition of more scholarly sources. Debresser (talk) 12:40, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

We're not going to agree that the previous version was a "correct description"; I've already indicated why. For now I've made a minor adjustment to the wording. I'll bring more scholarly sources to the table soon enough. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 13:04, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

I have to agree with Zero here; even though Haredi Jews see themselves as having ancient/unchanged values/laws/customs, the general academic view is that Haredi values/laws/customs are as modern as any those of any other streams of Judaism. MyJewishLearning is an often helpful resource for people who know almost nothing about the topics it discusses, but would not pass WP:RS. There's little difference between material with no source, and material sourced to a non-WP:RS. This article should really be using sources like Samuel Heilman's Defenders of the Faith: Inside Ultra-Orthodox Jewry, or Jack Wertheimer's The New American Judaism: How Jews Practice Their Religion Today. The latter states that what distinguishes Haredi Jews from other Orthodox Jews "is a self-consciously countercultural sensibility reinforced by living mainly among their own" (p. 71). Jayjg ^(talk) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

I do think there is a place for an attributed self-description of how Haredim view/define themselves. That being said - we should couple this with a description/definition by a detached RS. And both should be sourced.Icewhiz (talk) 13:29, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Here is an interesting journal article on the topic: [1] Sir Joseph ^(talk) 13:32, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Azure (magazine) is a better resource than MyJewishLearning. I don't think it's on the level of books published by University of California Press and Princeton University Press. Jayjg ^(talk) 13:41, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Adding, it's interesting, but an essay by an undergraduate in a College history program probably doesn't meet WP:RS, even if published by Azure. Jayjg ^(talk) 13:46, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

University program - and a prize winning essay. If an undergrad is published in a peer reviewed setting - then it is reliable (by dint of the publisher) - it definitely could be used as a Haredi viewpoint. Icewhiz (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

"peer reviewed" -- how do we know this? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Azure was not peer-reviewed. The Shalem Center's other publication, Hebraic Political Studies, was peer reviewed. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:32, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

It is an interesting essay that does not pass RS. I can't see it as a source for attributed Haredi viewpoint either since the author does not (and probably cannot) claim to be a spokesperson for the Haredim. Zero^talk 05:13, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

The second edition of Encyclopeda Judaica has a long article (pp. 348–351) which could be useful. Here is an extract, but the whole story is more complex than this:

The term “ḥaredim” – once used to simply denote the religious – is today commonly reserved for those most extreme of Orthodox Jews who, although they have changed over time, claim to have made no compromises with contemporary secular culture or essential changes in the way they practice their Judaism from what the tradition and halakhah have sanctified throughout the ages. Yet ḥaredim are not simply pristine Jews who quiescently live a traditional Jewish life but rather culturally combative proponents of tradition who often seek to aggressively assert their connection to the ways of the past in the precincts of modernity, most often contemporary U.S. and Israel. (p.348)

The article goes on to identify dress codes, Yiddish, and separate schools as other characteristic features. Zero^talk 05:22, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I think the sentence as it stands now, reflects the main points of this source as well. Debresser (talk) 15:55, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Kehilla

"Kehilla elections" is an unexplained term. Please explain or delete. Burressd (talk) 03:49, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

You are referring to "In 1924, Agudath Israel obtained 75 percent of the votes in the Kehilla elections.[42]" I also have no idea what is meant here. Either way, I think that sentence is not necessary. Debresser (talk) 09:13, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

The article is referring to Kehilla (modern)#The Warsaw Kehilla during the Second Polish Republic, which, by the way, indicates that in the 1924 Kehilla elections Agudath Israel won 17 out of 50 seats. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:09, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

That seems to indicate that something else is meant, not the Warsaw Kehilla. Debresser (talk) 21:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

It may be something in Palestine, but I'm pressed for time over the next few days. I'll check after that. Zero^talk 05:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

More likely it was an overall summarization of all European kehillot. Debresser (talk) 10:53, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Correct linking

On the wiki page Yeshivish there is a note that says "This article is about sociolect of English. For the group of people who are commonly referred to as "Yeshivish", see Haredi Judaism.". The page for Haredi Judaism doesn't seem to have a thorough breakdown of yeshivish culture as opposed to haredi culture. While the former has a wide range of cultures included in it (e.g. Lakewood yeshivish vs Baltimore yeshivish vs Beis Hatalmud yeshivish) and generally is used in reference to American Jews, the latter generally refers to an Israeli Jew. Now, before anyone attacks me and asks for sources and goes full nuclear on me, I'm just saying that from the culture I've personally been exposed to this is how it seems. If there are other viewpoints, well that is the point I'm trying to make. There are many different cultures, some more nuanced then others (4 inch brim or 3 inch, uses an artscroll by the daf or would never learn the daf), and they all deserve a place. It would seem that Haredi Judaism would be the page for this. Entara Lyon (talk) 20:34, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Just a quick follow up; Haredi Judaism seems to only discuss Israeli ultra orthodox culture, it barely touches on the many cultures and lifestyles of the American counterpart. Entara Lyon (talk) 20:37, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Past rabbinical leaders

The list of past rabbinical leaders is a bit misleading, it implies that it is a comprehensive list of the past leaders of the Haredi works. Perhaps it should state that this is a very incomplete list? Or better yet, this section should be a new page of a list of Jewish rabbinical leaders of each century. Entara Lyon (talk) 21:52, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps adding the word "partial" would solve this problem? Debresser (talk) 02:01, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Indeed it would. Is there a more extensive list on Wikipedia that I can link to? Entara Lyon (talk) 06:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

List of rabbis. Feel free to make the improvements.

By the way, my opinion is that the list of "past rabbinical leaders" should be removed altogether. Any rabbi who has not been mentioned in the course of the article, shouldn't be mentioned just for the sake of mentioning them. Debresser (talk) 08:37, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I removed it. Entara Lyon (talk) 17:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Large haredi communities

What is the definition of "large"in this context? Why were these included as opposed to other ones which were not? Is there criteria for this, or is it simply what people decided to add in their own? For example, Jackson and Canarsieis make the cut, but Kiryat Sefer or Beit Shemesh do not. The list appears to have been written by someone brainstorming every heyday city they could remember, not a methodical documentation of communities and their sizes. Entara Lyon (talk) 21:58, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

I guess "large" means as relative to other communities, in absolute size. I think this is rather easy to understand. Debresser (talk) 02:02, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. This list choose a very random group of cities. If Detroit is large then you can't ignore Beit Shemesh, Ashkelon, Telzstone, Denver, Houston, Passaic, Teaneck...

The list is not in alphabetical order either. I would change it, is that an issue? Am I about to piss off someone? I just want it to look more personal and be a bit more complete. It would be nice to list cities by estimated Jewish population. Is there a resource for that? Entara Lyon (talk) 06:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Making it alphabetical would probably be the right thing to do. I don't think there is any other order to the list, so it should be uncontroversial.

By the way, my opinion is that this table should be removed completely, since it contains almost no information. If only to mention the fact that there exists a large community, then that is stated in most cases in the article itself. As the article explains, there is not much statistics about Haredi population, so I sincerely doubt a list with population figures can be found. But you could do at least a cursory Google search. Debresser (talk) 08:44, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

What do you think about replacing the current table with this? Although I'm not certain that this table is referring only to haredi Jews, so it may not be relevant. I think removing this table entirely is a smart idea. Entara Lyon (talk) 17:59, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

That table is only for the United States, so if used, should be in the United States subsection. But I agree with you (and myself) that removing this altogether would probably be the best course of action. Debresser (talk) 19:58, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Removed. --Entara Lyon (talk) 21:38, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Outreach error

I believe the following sentence in the article contains a serious error: "Furthermore, some Haredi sects, like Chabad-Lubavitch, encourage outreach to less-observant and unaffiliated Jews, as well as to non-Jews." In fact, while some Jews and rabbis may indeed reach out to non-Jews, I do not believe that any Haredi or Orthodox Jewish rabbis do so. Some Haredi do indeed reach out to less-observant and unaffiliated Jews. It is contrary to Haredi and Orthodox Jewish teaching to engage in "outreach" towards non-Jews, although it's ok in general for many such Jews to do business with or even socialize sometimes with non-Jews. Please correct this error. "Orthodox Jewish outreach, often referred to as Kiruv (Hebrew: קירוב‎ "bringing close"), is the collective work or movement of Orthodox Judaism that reaches out to non-Orthodox Jews to encourage belief in God and living according to Orthodox Jewish law," as we learn from the "Orthodox Judaism outreach" article in wikipedia. What I think the author of this article on Haredi Judiasm need to say is that when non-Jews contact Chabad, the Chabad rabbis encourage them to become Noahides. That's not outreach, as when you go out and try to find non-religious Jews to make them more religious--an activity that many Chabad rabbis engage in.184.180.87.188 (talk) 21:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC) 184.180.87.188 (talk) 21:23, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

You are wrong. At least some Chabad rabbis/activists actively engage non-Jews in trying to make them Noachides. Debresser (talk) 19:36, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Let's discuss Chabad, specifically. Can you give any NAMES (and city locations) of Chabad rabbis in good standing with the Chabad organization who engage in "outreach" (as explained in the "Orthodox Judaism outreach"(Kiruv קירוב‎) article in wikipedia) toward non-Jews? I'd be very surprised if there were any because I know Chabad pretty well and I've spoken to more than one Chabad rabbi about this exact issue. A neutral party might like to raise this precise question with a Chabad rabbinical Torah expert through [2] and then report back here on the reply.184.180.87.188 (talk) 11:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

One of my classmates from the Chabad yeshiva in Tzfat engages in such outreach to Noachides in Argentina. Boaz Kali was a Chabad rabbi who did this in Israel, including in Arabic. Debresser (talk) 20:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Debresser, I think that sentence could be rewritten to clarify the distinction between outreach and proselytizing. I also think this sentence, "In contrast to Modern Orthodox Judaism, followers of Haredi Judaism are usually uncompromising in their adherence to Jewish Law and custom, and, as a result, they segregate themselves from other parts of society to an extent. " needs to be rewritten because it's written with a POV. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 00:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Proselytizing is "the action of attempting to convert someone from one religion, belief, or opinion to another." https://www.google.com/search?q=proselytizing&rlz=1C1FGUR_enUS823US823&oq=proselytizing&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l7.1302j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 . Thus, Chabad-Lubavitch outreach to less-observant and unaffiliated Jews, as well as Boaz Kali's preaching to non-Jews, are both examples of proselytizing. Still, Orthodox Jewish outreach, i.e. Kiruv, as defined in wikipedia, is only directed toward Jews. An Orthodox Jew, including a Chabad Jew, could be deeply involved in persuading non-Jews to do any number of things, such as to vote for candidate X for President of the US, etc., but Kiruv (outreach) has a very specific meaning within Judaism, just as "beef that Jews can eat without violating G-d's law" has a very specific meaning--such meat has to be kosher. An Orthodox Jew could in theory advertise and sell non-kosher meat to non-Jews. To follow the Noahide laws, of course, or to vote for a particular political candidate, are actions that are consistent with the complete Torah teaching required of Jews (according to Orthodox Judaism). The point is that outreach doesn't include teaching non-Jews the Noahide laws any more than it includes urging them to vote for Mr. X.184.180.87.188 (talk) 06:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

First of all a technical issue: please stop adding those dots .............. to indicate new paragraphs. Please use colons for that.

"Proselytizing" is not the right word, not for Jews and not for non-Jews. Not for Jews, since they are already Jewish, and not for non-Jews, since the Noachide outreach does not seek to make them anything else then non-Jews, just instill in them certain core values. Debresser (talk) 12:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

According to wikipedia's "Proselytism" article, "Though the word "proselytism" originally referred to converting to Judaism[4] (and earlier related to Gentiles such as God-fearers), it now implies an attempt of any religion or religious individuals to convert people to their beliefs, or any attempt to convert people to a different point of view, religious or not." See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism.184.180.87.188 (talk) 15:01, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

So when I am trying to convince you that you are wrong, I am proselyting you? Cut out the nonsense, please. Debresser (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2020 (UTC)::::::

If someone feels that the wikipedia Proselytism article is "nonsense," perhaps he/she should consider revising it. That might not be a bad idea, actually. That article appears to imply that trying to turn an MIT astronomy professor into a flat-Earther, for example, constitutes "proselytism," which strikes my ear as incorrect.66.76.254.159 (talk) 11:59, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done Debresser (talk) 13:33, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

History section

At the end of the first paragraph it said that most historians of orthodoxy say that haredi Judaism started no earlier than the beginning of the 20th century, I changed this to some. However, this claim as a whole is dubious and can point to no specific event that would spawn such a change/movement, there is only one source cited and it its credibility is questionable, I recommend this part of the paragraph be removed pending review by someone who knows more than I do. The Theory of Knowledge (talk) 08:53, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Actually upon reviewing the source more closely, it is clearly an opinion piece written by a non-professional and is labeled as such, so I have elected to remove the passage entirely, as the information provided lacked a credible source and was not necessarily needed for the page to be complete, feel free to reverse this if you disagree The Theory of Knowledge (talk) 09:02, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by "opinion piece" -- it's a book published by Columbia University Press... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 09:43, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I agree that the claim as though Orthodoxy originated in the beginning of the 20th century is very dubious. Nobody in the Haredi world seems to be aware of any earth-shifting changes that took place around that time. Rather to the contrary, both Hassidic and non-Hassidic Judaism went through that period in time without any upheaval. Debresser (talk) 15:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

The publication company is irrelevant, the author is not a professional nor has any qualifications to establish this as fact on their say-so, the first part of the paragraph is opinion that’s why it could stay, but the second part is a stated fact without verification so is thereby unverified, Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia for random unverified facts. Additionally, the passage says “most” yet only one source is cited, this is improper terminology, I do not wish to get into an editing war, so I hope that what I have said rings true to you, and that you change it yourself, or if you don’t than maybe someone else would, but I’ve said my piece so, ✌️ The Theory of Knowledge (talk) 05:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The library of Congress classification is under fiction too btw The Theory of Knowledge (talk) 05:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Leaders list is misleading

Putting David Lau and Chaim Kanievsky in the same list of leaders of the Heredi community is misleading. It is like putting Prince Charles and Vladimir Putin on the same footing. As Chief Rabbi, Rabbi Lau is a respected figurehead with minimal real influence. He also happens to be Haredi. Whereas Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky's word is law for many Haredim. If leadership is a function of how many people follow, there would be many many names before David Lau. There are also many many Haredim that take their guidance from their own selected Rabbinical figure or follow no leader at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.118.35.111 (talk) 04:45, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I had the same thought a few days ago (although the comparison to Prince Charles and Vladimir Putin didn't cross my mind). On the other hand, Prince Charles is notable, and so is rabbi Lau, especially since the difference is indicated in the subsection headers. Debresser (talk) 10:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Actually rabbi Lau has a tremendous amount of influence in the haredi community and the Jewish community at large, yes there are many leaders but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t belong at the top, he certainly does and his word is just as credible in Jewish rulings as rabbi Kanievsky’s and are quite often regarded as law just the same. I don’t know where you came up with that idea that he is a figurehead, it’s simply wrong. The Theory of Knowledge (talk) 08:46, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps you confuse David Lau and his father, Yisroel Meir Lau? Debresser (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Any chief rabbi is extremely influential in rulings whether or not you are familiar with how these positions function, and no I don’t mean his father as his father was arguably more influential than even rabbi kanievsky as a holocaust survivor with widely distributed published works The Theory of Knowledge (talk) 19:43, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

I am familiar, and you are exaggerating. A chief rabbi is influential in ruling of the rabbinical courts of the state of Israel. Those courts, however, are not as influential as you seem to think, in the grand scheme of things. Especially not in the Haredi world, more so in the secular or national-religious. Debresser (talk) 20:19, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

The umbrella-term "Haredi": Distinguishing between Hasidic and non-Hasidic

This is simply to note the significant absence, from one of the lead paragraphs, of sufficient information on the distinction between Hasidic and non-Hasidic Haredi groups. One would expect such basic information to be noted in one of the lead paragraphs, yet even scrolling down a bit I didn't see this addressed even in the "Terminology" section; one would need to scroll all the way down to the "Practices and beliefs" section for this basic information.

I didn't read through this whole article but I think it's worth adding that when someone refers to Haredi without at least specifying Hasidic or non-Hasidic, the first thing that needs to be asked is what specific group is being referred to. There is much commonality between the groups but the differences are too great to be glossed over. Contributor613 (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Any proposal on how to begin to properly spread apart the two circles of this article's Venn diagram and explain to readers the basic commonalities and differences between the non-Hasidic and Hasidic Hareidim? As is, those previously unfamiliar with a Haredi community would be left after reading this wiki with an unfocused conception of Haredisim as being–to a much larger extent than is reality–a fairly monolithic blur. Contributor613 (talk) 05:03, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I would beg to differ. The differences between Hasidic or non-Hasidic are very clear to insiders, i.e. to Haredi people, but compared to non-Haredi people, and especially to non-Jews, the fact that they are Haredi means they have more in common than sets them apart. Debresser (talk) 15:05, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I too would beg to differ. The differences between Catholics or Protestants are very clear to insiders, i.e. to Christian people, but compared to non-Christian people, and especially to Jews, the fact that they are Christian means they have more in common than sets them apart. Likewise, Wikipedia goes into much detail on major branches of Protestantism and other denominations. Instead of applying a different standard to Haredim, it would be helpful to interested readers if they could read about those main differences that are very clear to insiders. I'm not personally interested in going through all that work, but I've noted the lacuna on the Talk page here so that interested editors are made aware of the need for serious improvement. Contributor613 (talk) 00:48, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Excess refs in third lead paragraph

Expressing my intent to halve the 8 refs in the aforementioned two sentences. Am open to suggestions on how to go about doing so, however. El_C 20:24, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Divorce section

I could not find more recent nationwide data than 2016. From 2016, The IDI gave Haredi divorce rate as 5% with general population 14%.

If anyone can find more recent nationwide data, that should be in the article. The other sources just mentioned data in isolated cities and are not appropriate for a broader discussion of Haredi divorce rates.155.246.151.38 (talk) 23:02, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Some sources:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-divorces-in-israel-up-5-in-2018-with-86-increase-in-one-central-town/

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/245397

https://www.timesofisrael.com/amid-virus-crisis-lockdowns-jewish-israelis-saw-drop-in-divorce-rate-in-2020/

https://www.israelhayom.com/2021/01/11/despite-predictions-israel-sees-3-fewer-divorces-in-pandemic-year/

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/for-the-first-time-in-years-divorce-rates-drop-during-covid-19-655052

The issue with these sources is they just tell us general Israeli statistics or very specific cities, not specifically Haredim. The only recent nationwide data that distinguishes Haredim is the IDI in 2016.155.246.151.38 (talk) 23:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

I think your figures can be added, but there are reliable sources in the article that appear to demonstrate that there is an upwards trend in Haredi divorce rates. We don't have to remove the existing well sourced content to include yours. What's there could probably do with a bit of a rewrite to more closely match the sources.Pipsally (talk) 04:06, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

However, this later reliable source in 2018 claims Haredi divorce rates are down (https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-divorces-in-israel-up-5-in-2018-with-86-increase-in-one-central-town/). So I don't know what the current situation is because of lack of recent data. But previous data should be removed because later reliable data disputes it. Thanks for your comments Pipsally!155.246.151.38 (talk) 15:06, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Well to your earlier point is a single source for a single town, I don't think it constitutes enough to remove the rest. Also these are percentages without any absolute numbers in many cases so massive settings can be caused by relatively few real instances.

I've no particular issue with that info going into the section, but if it's removing the other content then at best it's WP:CHERRY PICKING if not outright WP:WHITEWASHING

Pipsally (talk) 15:15, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Agreed! What you pointed out was my previous problem with the previous data that is currently in the article. It was also cherry picked from a few cities. I think this is mentioning of trend of Haredi divorce is indecisive at best, disinformation at worst and should therefore be removed.155.246.151.38 (talk) 15:29, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

But those article make clear and explicit statements that divorce rates are rising. There are multiple sources in agreement with each other. It's reasonable to include data that makes a contradicting argument. It is not reasonable to remove all together, especially based on a single contrary source Pipsally (talk) 16:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Am looking over those sources.

number 1. is: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-divorce-becoming-new-norm-among-ultra-orthodox-in-israel-1.5630001. This source gets its data from https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-poll-14-of-all-israelis-are-divorced-jews-divorce-more-than-muslims-1.5399020. As well as it claims it gets its information from IDI. Presumably the data comes from https://en.idi.org.il/media/4240/shnaton-e_8-9-16_web.pdf. However, when I checked the IDI, it did not mention anything about Haredi divorce increasing. I don't know where haaretz is getting its statistics from. I think Haaretz should be removed until verified by a reliable source.155.246.151.38 (talk) 18:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Number 2 is https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/245397, which claims that in 2017 certain mainly Haredi cities had an increase in divorce. Yet a year later in 2018 this equally reliable source claimed divorce rates in Haredi cities dropping: https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-divorces-in-israel-up-5-in-2018-with-86-increase-in-one-central-town/155.246.151.38 (talk) 18:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

What you are doing is WP:SYNTH and cherry-picking. If there a contradicting source add it. Do not blank. You are whitewashing. Pipsally (talk) 01:34, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

First I want to extend my appreciation that you don't indiscriminately revert and actually look at the individual edits!

Second, I am claiming that those two sources are dated in accordance with WP:MEDDATE. Third, I am claiming that one of the sources (Haaretz) is seemingly unreliable in this instance and it is unclear where it gets its claims from even though its sources were looked for. I of course would welcome it if you found the source data for the Haaretz article.155.246.151.38 (talk)

WP:MEDDATE does not really apply on a source in 2018 vs 2016 or 2017 for this sort of thing, especially based on a single data point.

Haaretz is a generally reliable source - there's no reason to deprecate it this time other than the fact that you don't like what it says.

I believe MEDDATE does apply in this instance because the claim is that divorces are increasing, whereas more recent data shows the opposite to be true, that divorces in predominantly Haredi cities are dropping. (An interesting point to consider is that there has been no new national studies of Haredi divorce since 2016, which makes the issue very unclear. To say in wiki voice that haredi divorce rates are increasing is misleading at best.

In regards to Haaretz, I have looked at its claimed source: Which is apparently the IDI. The IDI makes no claim that Haredi divorce rates are increasing. I am not (yet) saying that Haaretz in general is an unreliable source, but this article in particular needs investigation into its reliability.

I believe Pipsally that you are an educated individual who does not hesitate to look at the sources and you have the ability to determine how truthful and accurate a given source is.155.246.151.38 (talk) 15:41, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

If no response from Pipsally in next 48 hours, assuming agreement with above because Pipsally looked it over and found source to be in this case unreliable.155.246.151.38 (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

no I think the source is reliable and that you are engaging in OR. I’ve no issue with a balanced account of this in the article but you continue to cherry pick. You do not know that that IDI paper is the specific one being discussed by Haaretz. you are making an assumption. What we have are multiple reliable sources that explicitly make that statement that divorce rates are rising. You can’t simply remove those based on you POV which what is clearly going on here.Pipsally (talk) 04:01, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Finally you are adding content and sources. Well done.Pipsally (talk) 09:15, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

References

Edit war

@IP: just because you're fighting against a WP:SOCK it does not mean you're absolutely right. tgeorgescu (talk) 19:34, 9 August 2021 (UTC)