User talk:JeMa

Dear JeMa,

I just came across Wikipedia and have found it on the whole balanced in presentation. Unfortunately, I found the entry on anti-semitism http://www.fact-index.com/a/an/anti_semitism_1.html misleading and more harm than help. I have checked the procedure for criticizing articles, and found the talk page and your discussion, and as yours was the only email I could find, I'm turning to you for assistance.

I've written up a few criticisms (use of 19th c term for the age-old problem of anti-Jewish sentiment, no mention of the REAL sources of anti-Jewish sentiment, i.e., the racist and anti-Christian elements of the Talmud and the role of Jews in their host countries) if you are interested.

This unbalanced presentation of a very delicate issue feeds a dangerous misunderstanding of the role of Jews in their host societies at a time when the world is descending rapidly into world war prompted in the view of many authorities (including the likes of Finkelstein and Chomsky) by the actions of Israel.

It is telling that in other articles dealing with Jewish matters (Schneerson, anti-Zionism) the entries are qualified with "The neutrality of this article is disputed." Curiously the entry on anti-semitism is BOTH protected and free of this qualification, though I see there is at least some discussion going on the talk page. I'm not interested in engaging in online polemics, and I understand this issue is perhaps the most explosive in Wikipedia, but I see no reason why 'the other side' should not be fairly presented, even if the pro-Jewish POV gets the final word. Can you suggest how I could proceed? Thanks.

Eric Walberg eric@albatros.uz

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them;

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Angela 08:26, Oct 18, 2003 (UTC)

Hiyas. Just so you know, the anti-Semitism material was not deleted, but rather I merged in with the content at Anti-Zionism#Anti-Zionism_and_anti-Semitism. I explained why at talk:anti-Semitism. Maybe we should move the debate on the topic from talk:anti-Semitism to talk:anti-Zionism? Martin 20:46, 6 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Re racism. You don't get my point, see my comment on the talk page. Your paragraphs under "basis" are DUPLICATIONS of what already exists. Read the history again. The latter part of the previous section is the same as the part you keep adding back in, other than my changes. We don't need two copies of the same information. I edited the first one for brevity (it was redundant), clarity, and neutrality (noting that it is controversial rather than there is a consensus, because that is true, and referring readers to race and intelligence which discusses the issue in more depth). And your present edit is simply wrong. It is not true that all "racists" are motivated by science about race; many are probably not even familiar with these studies and just don't like the tribe next door. If you think more info should be added, you should add it to the existing text rather than making an extra copy and changing that. I will try to integrate your alterations to the existing paragraph. -- VV 00:29, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Actually it was I who inadvertantly restored that nasty link to the Zionism article when I reverted all the recent junk edits. Apologies. Adam 02:09, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Factual accuracy dispute header

read Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute and [1]. You made an error in removing my dispute of factual accuracy. If you do so again I will report you as a vandal. Discuss the issue at Talk:Anti-Semitism if you have anything to add. Jack 01:28, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Read article first before making changes

JeMa, I would humbly suggest you read an article first before making changes. You changed the article on Talmidi Jews to read that we reject the Jewish principles of Faith, when the only one we dispute is the one about the authority of the Talmud, which Karaite Jews also dispute.