User talk:Marecheth Ho'eElohuth

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Marecheth Ho'eElohuth, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 06:31, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Stop editing Kohen. I will go with you all day on this. You are twisting words because you have an agenda. I will not stop fighting this with you. I will go all day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ventura488 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks sorry about that but you have no idea of the amount of ignorance I have to deal with every day regarding Kohanim. People assume that if it is in The Shuchan Aruch it must be the only valid opinion. In actuality, the status of Kohanim today is very disputed amongst the Rishonim. Additionally, many Rabbis were and are against the Shulchan Aruch and various codified works when they came out as well as today. For more information on this, please see http://text.rcarabbis.org/?p=1020#respond —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ventura488 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i feel relieved that you somewhat realize the inappropriateness of your prior words and feel good that you responded to my message on your page. i pick up on your frustrations with the ignorance some folks have about kohanim and share and join with this feeling of frustration. i hope that we could build a freindship together and jointly catalyst the end of miseducation and missinformation about kehuna and kohanim. please, dear friend, if you could detail some of the ignorance that you encounter and also -if you have the time- to detail what it is you feel we could do to better the page we have both been working on lately -the kohen page--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 21:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is apparent that people are not remaining objective when they write of Kohanim. They treat the subject of Kohanim differently than shatnez and imbue it with subjective emotion. The Kohanim are not the leaders of the Jewish people- Joshua was with the decedents of David. They will say Kohanim are special, holy what have you without stating all the opinions. They only list the opinions that support Kohanim and not those that reject modern Kohanim. Saying things like "Kohanim have a special role and are on a "sanctified level" above every one else is not remaining objective or scholarly. This is the problem I have......dear friend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ventura488 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your edits to the page and your remarks above I consider your actions on the Kohen page to be vandalism, both due to reckless edits and unverifiable source quoting. I would like to work with you on improving the page but at this point strictly from the talk page. Please note that Wikipedia does not tolerate this activity and I advise you to undo your last edits or I will be forced to report on your activity to this page.--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth ([[User talk:Marecheth

Ho'eElohuth#top|talk]]) 22:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Dear friend, dear friend and loved one.....I will go on random computers all day ever day and do this. I will create as many accounts as I have to in order to get the truth across. You can verify my sources if you had any idea what you were talking about or were able to read Hebrew. There is a lucid shiur on this very subject in English if you wish to listen to it I have included it in my sources. You can ADD to what I have said and say anything you want as long as you state your sources and acknowledge that it is not the only opinion.

kohen new

I have left a message on the Kohen discussion page. I unfortunately can no longer devote my time towards disputing what I believe to be a manipulation and fabrication of the basic truths regarding the Kohen Wiki Page. Even if I could devote my time; this would most likely prove futile as I lack authority and numbers on Wikipedia. There are two users in particular who revert everything I post. They claim that only English sources are accepted, though Rabbi Moshe Feinstein specifically forbade anyone from translating his Igerot Moshe. I have sources from the Magen Avram and Rema on the Shulchan Aruch, The Rivash on siman צד, the Igerot Moshe on Even Haezer 4 siman 39, The Yam Shel Shlomo Bava Kama perek ה siman לה and Chulin perek ח siman ד, the Chelkas Mechokek EH 2:1 Divrei Yatziv by R' Y. Halberstam E.H. 6 and "Yechaveh Da'at" by R' O. Yosef, V 61, the Gra and Yaakov Emden. All I request is that there be some indication on a fitting part of this page that people today are treated as if they were Kohanim not because of a Torah commandment- but rather: in order not to cause arguments (darchei shalom). In addition I believe it is logical to assume that it is dishonest for one to quote the halachic opinion of the Rambam regarding Kohanim while at the same time entirely ignore his philosophical opinions about them. Lastly, the Gutnick Chumash in Devarim states that the role of the Kohen will be transfered to the Bechor when the third Beit Hamikdash is built; this too has been completely ignored simply because it comes from Chabad. There are statements that are left on the orthodox section of this page that come from Reformed, Conservative and Hebrew sources. There are statements that are left on the orthodox section of this page that are not even sourced at all. There are statements that are left on the orthodox section of this page who's sole authority come from as little as one shule or one Rabbi. Yet, my sources which consist of the most authoritative people in Jewish history are deemed as being outdated, in the wrong language or not popular enough. For instance, I was told that I cannot use the Yam Shel Shlomo (which the Magen Avram in the Shulchan Aruch quotes) or the Rivash because they were too old, the Igerot Moshe because it was in a different language, the Gutnick Chumash because this is "only used by Chabad" and is not popular enough and a YU Rabbi because he is only one Rabbi. Yet, an article about the practice of one modern Rabbi in the middle of no-where who allows women to receive alliyas by having a minyan composed of entirely Kohanim and women- was permitted to be left on and was not deemed to be independent research. To conclude; I can only assume that there are personal motivations by a large segment of the orthodox population to maintain whatever belief serves to benefit Kohanim while remove any information that serves as a detriment to them. There is a www.hebrewbooks.org link to all the sources mentioned above and more at the website www.kohen.webs.com Two users who delete everything I do claim that only recent, english and ("and" apposed to "or") popular sources are accepted. Yet there are many accepted pages where old Hebrew sources are accepted even though Wikipedia is "not a yeshiva" (what I was told by User "Jayjg". For example see the Wiki Kashrut page which has the following sources. It has the Igerot Moshe, Yoreh De'ah and the philisophical opinion about Kashrut from Maimonides in the Guide for the Perplexed. Yet, when I try to quote the exact same sources on the Kohen Wiki page they are removed. ^ Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 83 and 84 ^ Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 85 ^ Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 87 et seq ^ Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 1–65 ^ Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 66–78 ^ Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim, 318:1 ^ Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim, 431–452 ^ Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 114 ^ Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 113 ^ a b Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 115 ^ Many rely on lenient rulings by Rabbi Moshe Feinstein in Teshuvot Igrot Moshe. Yoreh De'ah 1:47 and other 20th century rabbinic authorities who rule that strict government supervision prevents the admixture of non-kosher milk, making supervision unnecessary. See also Rabbi Chaim Jachter. "Chalav Yisrael – Part I: Rav Soloveitchik's View". Retrieved 2007-12-02. ^ Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 112, Orach Chayim 603 The Torah does not state reasons for most kashrut laws. Many varied reasons have been suggested, including philosophical, practical and hygienic. The Guide for the Perplexed, by Maimonides addresses this topic.

Deleting a Category that you started...

See [1]. --רח"ק | Talk | Contribs 23:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sources kohen

http://kohen.co.uk/ http://torahmusings.com/2010/10/kohanic-lineage.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ventura488 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

see sdei chemed, he did the grandest job i've seen on this topic.--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Holocaust (sacrifice), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. —Half Price 19:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Niddah

I reverted all you edits to the Niddah article. There was just too much that was not good: removing alternative spelling, removing references, and in general, I really think you should discuss things before you make a major overhaul on an article that has had some good input over the years. In addition, I have noticed at least in one instance, that your knowledge of the subject was flawed. In short, you really should discuss things before you anything this big. Debresser (talk) 00:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's your right, but for advocating discussion, you should have discussed the matter first. Also note I left an under construction tag there -as my work was far from over. In any event, would you like to help with the page? for starters, it's length is problematic--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 16:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
btw, i see the refs i removed (by accident -sorry) where replaced by a bot, where you referring to those?--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 16:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling and Wikipedia

Hi. I made some minor edits to Tumah and taharah today. If you'd be so kind to have a good look at them, they might help you becoming a more experienced editor on Wikipedia. These include:

  1. Moving punctuation in front of references, in stead of after them;
  2. Proper use of capitals (names of templates are capitalized, Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Section_headings|only the first word in a header is capitalized]]
  3. Foreign words are spelled with italics, not capitals
  4. Spelling of term should follow Wikipedia conventions (mikvEh, mishnaH, etc.)

You also might want to read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew). Debresser (talk) 10:06, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

santriel

Santriel is an angel quoted in the book of Zohar as being in charge of certain activities in the Tzoah Rotachat location of gehinnom (purgatory). Santriel is mentioned only once in the Zohar and not quoted in another source.

Tzoah Rotachat‎

Thanks for this article. I have tried to make it more readable to English-speaking general readers.

The Babylonian Talmud, in contrast to the Zohar, lists the cause for a Jew being sent to Tzoah Rotachat as "all who scoff at the words of the wise men (i.e. Chazal) is judged in Tzoah Rotachat". The Talmud Bavli also hints that the punishment has more of a physical implication to it. Rashi explains[citation needed] the physical aspect of the punishment by noting the correlation of the two themes (scoffing and tzoah rotachat) as being based on the verse of Kohelet[which?], paraphrased as "ולעג הרבה יגיעת בשר"[citation needed][1][2]. Rashi writes that he who engages in "excessive scoffing" (the exegesis here involves switching the "ה" of "להג" and replacing it with a "ע", as they both are one of the five guttural sounds[citation needed]) (the former part of the verse) is met with the second part of the same "straining of the flesh", essentially being judged excessively (straining) of his body.

Could you help sort out the Kohelet [which?], paraphrased as "ולעג הרבה יגיעת בשר"[citation needed][1][2]. Is the paraphrase from Rashi? Thanks In ictu oculi (talk) 02:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ill have to verify the passage (or feel free to search the concordance). Your recent edits changing all "Kohen's" to Priest is questionable, among the questions, did you discuss this first with any fellow editors or was is unilateral?, cheers--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 22:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Marecheth, I cannot see other editors on most of your pages, but Wikipedia policy is fairly clear about the changes I've tried to make. Please note that I've spent a considerable amount of time on your articles trying to Wikify them. There are a couple of things to note:(1) English Wikipedia uses English words/terms where possible, in this case the JPS Bible does not Hebraize these names. (2) Comments should not be put in footnotes, which are for published RS only. Please try and stick to English Wikipedia convention in these matters. Also - please do not move Zohar above Talmud in articles. Thanks In ictu oculi (talk) 00:09, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The time invested would be welcome where it post a bit of talk on the pages you've worked on. Why is JPS Hebraization the key determining factor, are there no other translations in our libraries?

Your intent to make wording in accordance with English Wikipedia convention is welcome (and thanks for mentioning that!). Zohar should very well be above Talmud as it is from the Tannaic period. ps- i liked this page name change -good job cheerful edits--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 17:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose because JPS is the standard Jewish Hebrew Bible translation in the English speaking world. But it is also not just JPS, JPS coincides with SBL Style Guide conventions, which is more or less the standard for academic writing on ANE, Biblical, Second Temple era topics. There are very few Hebrew or Greek common noun terms/spellings employed in JPS and SBL style. I occasionally see redundant Greek terms in articles where a Greek Orthodox editor has contributed, or Arabic ones by muslim editors and anglicize those as well. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 02:30, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article almost certainly needs a rename as well, however, though I'm not sure what the English would be In ictu oculi (talk) 03:43, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

logic?

What logic is there for primary sources to not be in footnotes? See that not putting them there causes unneeded article bulk and exhaustion of the casual reader.--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 18:04, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's partly a matter of convention, particularly with religious sources. If you look at Jewish, Muslim and Christian religious topic articles on Wikipedia you'll find "(1 Chronicles, 13:1)" "(Surah 36:1)." The same would be used for Origen, Maimonides, Shakespeare or Dante. One reason is to show that a primary source is being used, the other is to avoid the misleading impression of an article being WP:RS sourced/referenced when in fact it is not. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:30, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)

Hi. Please read the above page. This guideline documents an English Wikipedia naming conventions. The important point is "most commonly used in the English-language, we should follow the sources and use it."

With that in mind, please reverse this edit to Priestly covenant:

(cur | prev) 17:19, 1 September 2011 Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk | contribs) m (22,339 bytes) (moved Priestly covenant to Covenant of Kehuna) (undo) (cur | prev) 17:10, 1 September 2011 Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk | contribs) (22,339 bytes) (undo)

I'm sorry but the above move goes against Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). And in any case "Kehuna" would not be capitalized, it would be kehuna in italics as a foreign word. Capitalisation is used for proper nouns, "priesthood" isn't one. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 02:37, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore English language spellings to Priestly covenant

Marecheth Ho'eElohuth, I'm a bit disappointed. It took a long time, over an hour, to go through this article and correct all the foreign spellings, grammar errors, mistakes, and include sources. The reversions you have made are not helpful. Please read and take note of Wikipedia policy regarding use of English where WP:RS use English:

The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources

This isn't optional, rightly or wrongly, en.Wikipedia uses English standard spelling and naming conventions. Please restore the article to the last version with normal English spellings. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:01, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hi Marecheth, see talk:kohen--חודר לעומר (talk) 20:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Again, as per comments there, this isn't optional. Visitors to English Wikipedia will be excused (and I hope helped) with grammar and spelling, but there should be acceptance of the en.Wikipedia conventions in this matter. You may also find helpful Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew), and in particular note that Hebrew heth is rarely to be transcribed "ch" which is eg. a "cheese" sound to English speaking readers. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 00:32, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The covenant of Kehuna

A tag has been placed on The covenant of Kehuna, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 18:00, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi, Please find discussion of English and Hebrew usage on Wikipedia articles Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 21:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And again today Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism#Another_example. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please read en.wikipedia policies as above. Thanks In ictu oculi (talk) 15:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In Orlah prohibition, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Tanna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In ictu oculi

I'm making a last ditch attempt to reason with User:In ictu oculi before dispute resolution becomes necessary. Would you mind going to his talk page and contributing to the discussion? Thanks. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 00:52, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Petter Chamor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lamb (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:33, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using the Requested Moves template

Hi, sorry to raise this, I know we don't see eye to eye on the interpretation of WP:COMMONNAME, WP:UE and other guidelines, but be that as it may, as a courtesy I should tell you that I have reverted 2 of the below page moves back to the WP:COMMONNAME (or at least English names as in English language sources) and left a note for someone else (not me) on the Judaism Project to look at them.

  • 20:59, 6 January 2012 (diff | hist) m (moved Meir Shiff to Meir HaKohen Shiff)
  • 20:58, 6 January 2012 (diff | hist) m (moved Malachi ben Jacob to Malachi ben Jacob HaKohen)
  • 20:58, 6 January 2012 (diff | hist) m‎ (moved Nathan Adler to Nathan HaKohen Adler)
  • 20:57, 6 January 2012 (diff | hist) m (moved Sholom Schwadron to Sholom HaKohen Schwadron)
  • 20:55, 6 January 2012 (diff | hist) m (moved Abraham Kalisker to Abraham HaKohen Kalisker)
  • 20:55, 6 January 2012 (diff | hist) m (moved Aaron ibn Sargado to Aaron HaKohen ibn Sargado)
  • 20:49, 6 January 2012 (diff | hist) m‎ (moved Alexander Suslin to Alexandri HaKohain)

My view is that a move counter WP:COMMONNAME should go via WP:Requested moves but I won't take any further action, nor argue for or against any move, I'm fine with whatever action or inaction anyone wants to take or doesn't want to take. I'm merely notifying you that I've noted it on the Project talk board. For me my involvement starts and ends here. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:59, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Correction Given that other users have supported WP:COMMONNAME in this case, and that you have moved a 2nd time Alexander Suslin counter English sources I have restored Alexander Suslin. If you want to move it a 3rd time, please use WP:RM. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:24, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In ictu oculi (talk · contribs) is right here. Per what I have written at WT:JEW#Meir Shiff, article titles should follow WP:COMMONNAME, and they should also in general be shorter rather than longer. It is appropriate to add "HaKohen" when the name is first introduced in line 1 of the article; but usually not appropriate for the article title, unless it is necessary to disambiguate other encyclopaedically notable individuals with the same name, or unless it is clearly how the individual is predominantly referred to in English. (Just as for English names, we may give all of the first names when we name the individual at line 1, but generally not in the title; or for Arabic names, we may give quite an extended list of "ibn" patronymics in line 1, but usually not in the title, if there is a shorter name than has been used in English RSs.) Jheald (talk) 02:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Achiyahu HaKohain, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Nazir and Mesorah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

== Nomination of Achiyahu HaKohain for deletion ==

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Achiyahu HaKohain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Achiyahu HaKohain until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Sorry, genuinely and sincerely, since really don't don't like doing AfDs, but in this case, what is the alternative to how it is in current state? In ictu oculi (talk) 10:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I'm a little bit disappointed that you didn't greatly help to improve the article and I ended up doing most of the ref-finding myself. It's still without English sources. Oh well. Never mind. But anyway, I suppose I should let you know that I've nominated Talk:Shlomo HaKohain of Hanau and Talk:Mitzvah to kohanim to sound silver trumpets for moves to the language used in Google Books. Also can I make again the polite suggestion to please not try and produce your own English translation of the Hebrew Bible in articles, it is much better to just copy from a standard translation. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:11, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ahh, but was is "standard"?--Marecheth Ho'eElohuth (talk) 20:46, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Kohanim authors of Rabbinic literature

Category:Kohanim authors of Rabbinic literature, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

COI

Hi, most of these edits are by User:Kehuna who started editing when you stopped, but as you've also previously inserted material which later appeared on the kehuna.org website, I have mentioned in passing those edits at COI noticeboard where discussion is ongoing, cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Prohibition against slaughtering an animal and its offspring on the same day

Hi, I'm Jayadevp13. Marecheth Ho'eElohuth, thanks for creating Prohibition against slaughtering an animal and its offspring on the same day!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. If possible please add more information. Also add links to this article from other pages.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Orlah

On your article on orlah you mentioned that passionfruit is not considered kosher by many because it produces fruit in its first year only. This is false, and I have edited it to remove all information about passionfruit. I am not an expert on this topic, and apparently you are, so if you can figure out your mistake I invite you to fix it. My guess is that you were thinking of another fruit. Good faith kept Psydude (talk) 16:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kohanim - Sons of Zadoq

Hello Marecheth Ho'eElohuth:

I write you because you appear to be highly expert on the above-captioned subjects and I have a question about them.

Given the Jebusite and Sons of Melchizedeq background of David's appointment of Zadoq as his priest (or co-priest with a son of Eli), after the ascension of Solomon were any Jerusalem priests not Zadoq and his sons? If only Zadoq and his family were left as priests in Jerusalem, were they successful afterwards in keeping out "riff raff" priests who were not of their family? Can any accepted priest be other than a Son of Zadoq? (Perhaps that last question should be limited to the period before the end of the Persian Period.)

Thank you for your instruction. PraeceptorIP (talk) 18:56, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Marecheth Ho'eElohuth. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Marecheth Ho'eElohuth. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Marecheth Ho'eElohuth. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Marecheth Ho'eElohuth. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source accuracy?

Hi, on Priestly covenant there is a line, originally written by you, which goes "The Jerusalem Targum attributes the choosing of Aaron due to the meritorious actions of Jochebed, who saved the male Jewish infants from the infanticide decree laid forth by Pharaoh." It is sourced to "Targum Yerushalmi to Shmot 2:21". However, I looked this up on mg.alhatorah.org and it's not there. Could you check where this idea comes from? Thanks! Ar2332 (talk) 12:00, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]