Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-05-18 Kol Yaakov Torah Center

Wikipedia Mediation Cabal
Wikipedia Mediation Cabal
Article	Kol Yaakov Torah Center
Status	closed
Request date	Unknown
Requesting party	Yodamace1 10:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Parties involved	User:Talmudscholar, User:Chocolatepizza, Yodamace1
Mediator(s)	The Rhymesmith
Comment	Needs a new volunteer.

Mediation Case: 2007-05-18 Kol Yaakov Torah Center

Please observe Wikipedia:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. IZAK 10:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request Information

Who are the involved parties?

User:Talmudscholar, User:Chocolatepizza, Yodamace1

What is the involved article(s)?

Kol Yaakov Torah Center

What's going on?

User:Chocolatepizza originally informed me that Talmudscholar had made some "horrible untrue" edits on the Kol Yaakov Torah Center article and I then looked into his record, finding he had made similarly minded edits on the Ohr Somayach, Monsey article. He later made another article in the same vein, Haredi Criticism (User:DLand and I placed tags on Haredi Criticism for speedy deletion). I responded by editing the articles to be what I felt was NPOV and cutting out the OR (although now I notice that they read like advertisements and this too needs to be changed) and sent Talmudscholar warnings. He then emailed me and we had a not-too-pleasant conversation about his edits. I asked him permission to post the conversation on the Wiki, but he did not acquiesce and I respect that right. --Yodamace1 10:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that he has stopped posting his edits for now, but I feel that our relationship is scarred because of it and I would prefer that he understand that while I overreacted with my aggressive warnings, what he did was against Wiki policy and that my edits were not efforts to censor his contributions, but make the articles conform to the Wikirules. --Yodamace1 10:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would you like to change about that?

Mediator response

Ok, the main user who the issue was raised against has responded to his awareness regarding policy. I think this comes down to a simple misunderstanding of how to be bold within the context of various WP policies including neutral point of view, verifiability and no original research. No specific ideas as to what the parties wish to achieve has been included within this MedCab request. Do the parties involved agree that everyone is now better informed of the issues relating to these edits and there is no further need to continue this MedCab request? Thewinchester ^(talk) 17:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Administrative notes

Statement by user:talmudscholar

I didn't fully understand, am currently looking for sources that meet the wikipolicy. Talmudscholar 15:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of criticism of the frum yeshivas, and a few good things too. I didn't feel my email exchange with yodamace was hostile, I was trying to ascertain 1) how to find the talk pages 2) what was the exact nature of why he was deleting valuable pertinent information.

I brought up the fact that Newsweek said Wal-Mart Criticism was put into a different page than Wal-Mart to appease corporate PR flacks and because there was so much information on both pages, trying to see if that would be an acceptable approach, so I found the old deleted information and moved it into a charedi criticism page, which the Orthodox mafia also deleted.

It is common knowlege in Orthodox Jewish circles that hagiography is common and community members are strictly indoctrinated against ever airing the truth about abusiveness, emphasis on fundraising at any cost and several other harmful aspects I know many expereinced at Kol Yaakov Torah Center and also at Ohr Somayach Monsey.

I am not sure how well documented a school with less than 25 students would be that I could find tons of sources to report in wikipedia. Most everyone in the Orthodox world is very clear that of course the institutions are starved for cash and give much focus on people who can afford to support the institutions. But many experiences are varried and for some it is very different than for others. In addition I found it strange how everyone at some of the shuls was a doctor or a lawyer or owned a successful business until I found out how they are nice to those types of wealthy people, but other people are discouraged from relocating or participating with increasing levels of discouragement, starting with a mild no, moving up to verbal abuse, hostility, anger, shunning, and even declaring people unfit to be members of a jewish community and forbidding community members from hiring them or talking to them etc.

Of course the entries read like advertisements since they are horribly one-sided. But Yodamace won't allow the wiki to read how they make incredibel promises and disappoint thousands so they can bring in a few financially advantaged donors alone. The question is where to post this. There are email groups, blogs and some books and studies.

Talmudscholar 04:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Talmudscholar: Allow me to add my two cents worth. Firstly, you are globalizing the subject. You are revealing that you have huge grudges against Orthodox Judaism, and Haredi Judaism in particular, and that you wish to write articles on Wikipedia to embarrass them. That is called venting and it will get you into trouble because you will automatically be violationg one of Wikipedia's main rules of WP:NPOV because you seem so obsessed with the negatives of the Orthodox world, when as even you admit there are positives. So please try to pull yourself together and get more focused. Secondly, I believe you do have a valid perspective and that it could be incorporated as part of "Criticism" or "Controversy" sections in articles which is done all the time on Wikipedia, as long as you follow WP:CITE or you can back it up if need be with reliable sources for WP:A. Thirdly, please try to avoid creating things like Haredi Criticism because that is a neologism and a violation of WP:NEO and WP:NOR (no original research). Feel free to create an article called Criticism of Haredi Judaism or Criticism of Orthodox Judaism but it must be well-sourced and should not come across as a "hit job" or a violation of WP:LIBEL. Fourthly, it's always healthy to have various articles on topics, Wikipedia is not a monolithic entity and you should not criticize editors as belonging to an "Orthodox mafia" because that is a violation of WP:NPA. Finally, keep in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and it is WP:NOT#SOAPBOX. You must grasp that difference! If you can't do that, then your attitude and writings would be better suited to http://theunorthodoxjew.blogspot.com/ or http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/ where they tirade against Haredi Judaism all the time with room for posting comments. I hope you can see your way to being sensible. IZAK 09:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just want Talmudscholar to express that he understands Wikipolicy. It seems he's being much more rational about it than my original impression of him and that's good. Talmudscholar, if you want to talk about how bad Orthodox Jews are without sources (i.e. books or things of that nature. For more info on what a reliable source is, I'm not the best person to talk to, but I can refer you to those who are.), Wikipedia is not the place for you. As IZAK said, there are various other websites willing to hear you out on such things.--Yodamace1 19:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does this *really* need a mediation case?! Seems quite exaggerated. This was taken to mediation much too soon, judging by what I am reading now. --Rabbeinu 08:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Rabbeinu. This is not deep enough into "trouble" or conflict, to have required this level of conflict resolution. But once it's gotten here already it should be seen through to a satisfactory conclusion which in turn can be used as a point of reference and of understanding about a core agreement between the arguing parties. IZAK 21:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As previously noted, Talmudscholar and I have had an extensive discussion already which he does not wish to put in public (and that should be respected), so it's been dealt with more than you might know. --Yodamace1 14:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yodamace1: Ok, no problem. So what is this case about now? Why are we all still here? IZAK 02:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Case Status

It appears that the issue has been resolved. Is there any further need for mediation that anyone can think of, or shall this be closed?

The Rhymesmith 07:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closing. The Rhymesmith 09:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]