From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Introduction[change source]

The old page "Shabbat" has now been split. This page will be about Shabbat in Judaism. The page Sabbath will be about the Sabbath in Christianity. There is also a page Sabbath (disambiguation) for other customs of Sabbath.

This page is being improved. You can look at the sandbox here. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:17, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Recent edit based on NPOV[change source] (talk · contribs), please discuss your recent change here. I do not believe that my version violated WP:NPOV. I think yours might.

The only word of mine that is arguable is the use of "story". I think that is a neutral term. It does not always refer to fiction. I would prefer narrative as more neutral, but narrative is not Simple English. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

"Work"[change source]

As I understand it, Shabat is a day of rest. There are exceptions though:

  • If there is an immediate threat to the life of a person (and sometimes: animal, as in cattle), the rules do not apply.
  • Eating/drinking and elementary hygiene are permitted; this does not include getting or giving medical treatment, when the life is not in danger.
  • Some argue that getting/giving medical treatment is permitted; iirc. the rationale for that is, that in the opposite case, a life-threatening condition may develop.
  • There does not seem to be agreement over whether it is permissible to start work that continues by itself, such as eg. dying cloth.

Since all I have to write this is a Wikipedia article, perhaps someone more involved should look at extending the article in that direction...--Eptalon (talk) 16:22, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

You're 100% right. I intend to do just that. I've taken a start on it at my sandbox, which you're welcome to have a look at. But I'd rather build it there, so that whatever is here remains coherent and balanced at its current stage of development.
BTW, if you're curious where this is going, you can look at en:Shabbat, and also en:Jewish holidays#work, the second of which I wrote. I will include a reference to medical treatment, which in fact I should (and will) add to the Jewish holidays discussion, too.StevenJ81 (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 Done Taken care of at en:Jewish holidays#work. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments[change source]

  • Rather than giving an explanation of a word (that is not encyclopedic), you should link such words to Simple English wiktionary. The people who know the word already are only distracted by the explanation they don't need.
  • In the article, you link creation to Creationism. I think this may be problematic as Creationism is a movement that started to be able to teach the kids in school about religion, in the US. Creationism is often opposed to Darwinism, or the idea of Evolution. I don't know, whether the idea that organisms adapt to their surroundings is problematic in Judaism.

Other than that the article looks fine--Eptalon (talk) 08:44, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Thanks very much. First of all, I must credit Creol (talk · contribs) with some important simplification work a couple of days ago. I created a .pdf of his changes (vs. previous) to help guide me in future efforts here at simplewiki.
  • Mostly, I did link to simplewikt. The only times I didn't were when (a) there was no definition there, and (b) I didn't see one likely to appear any time soon. I suppose one answer to that is, "Well, write it yourself, dummy." But I don't have as much experience writing dictionary definitions, I don't know how complete I need to be (verb, adjective, etc.), and just didn't want to commit myself to that route immediately--especially because I see a lot of work needing to be done on Judaism here at simplewiki.
The only such parenthetical definition left, I think, is "wick", in the section on Havdalah, and I'm inclined just to leave it there now.
Many thanks for your help. I'm going to give this "comment period" another week (until after the holiday of Shavuot on Wednesday and Thursday). Then I will probably ask for your help to move the article in a way that will keep the edit history intact. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Links to the Torah[change source]

Start here: Modern English Bible translations. I wrote the section on Jewish translations myself. I am simply not aware of a Jewish translation in anything resembling Simple English, and I've tried to find one. (I could explain to you why there isn't actually that kind of need, but I'll reserve that for another day.) Most Jewish translations, except for JPS 1917, remain under copyright. (Judaism doesn't have "official bodies" quite the same way Christianity does, and publishers of new translations do defend their copyrights.) So ...

  • I used links to JPS 1917 (at, an Israeli institution for study of sacred texts) as the basic links. Problem with JPS 1917 is that it is not only not Simple English, but a little on the archaic side. On the other hand, that translation is available in {{bibleverse}}. It's the only Jewish translation there, and it makes doing citations much easier. (It also includes the original Hebrew, which is accessible to many Jewish readers.) My other two Jewish candidates (see below) would be much harder to use.
  • There are websites with Judaica Press and JPS 1985 available. They are probably a little easier for this wiki's audience than JPS 1917, but neither one comes to the level of Simple English. I'd have to create each citation by hand, and JPS 1985 is on a website requiring registration. Both remain under copyright, so I don't know how much I'm allowed to use them here anyway.
  • I could simply have made all the links go to the Bible in Basic English. Like with Judaica Press and JPS 1985, I'd have to manually create each citation. The problem with that approach is that those web pages are full of Christianity, even where the translations themselves are reasonable. And I'm just viscerally uncomfortable with that approach when writing on a Jewish topic.

So I chose to stick with JPS 1917, while giving an option to those wanting a true Simple English translation.

Now: here's a question for you: Were you suggesting that at each citation, I simple-fy the translation cited? I can do that, but I'm not an "official" translation, and I thought that might be considered original research. (I know that in general straight translation of a source is exempted from being considered original research, but is English to Simple English a translation?)

Your thoughts would be most welcome. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:54, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

As long as you stick to the source, "paraphrasing"/"summarizing" what the source says is fine. In that way, as you long as you give reference to JPS 1917 (or whatever translation you choose), replacing the words used with others with "similar meaning" is fine.--Eptalon (talk) 19:32, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
All of my links are in this form: {{bibleverse||Genesis|1:1|HE}}. That parses out like this: Genesis 1:1. If you click on that link, you'll see (probably in a new tab/window) a page with Hebrew on one side and English (JPS 1917) on the other. So what I would propose (and this would be in the sources/footnotes, not in body text) is something like this:
Note 2. Bible sources below include a Simple English version of the Jewish Publication Society's 1917 English translation. Click on the link for the 1917 translation and the original Hebrew text.
Genesis 1:1. The first thing G-d did was to create heaven and earth.
Does that work? StevenJ81 (talk) 20:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I think that is a workable approach. --Eptalon (talk) 20:31, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I greatly appreciate your advice. Shabbat, as it happens, starts where I live any second now. I'll get on this afterwards. StevenJ81 (talk) 23:45, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Red links, updated as of 13:10, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[change source]

Excludes red links in Jewish holidays template

1. Can be addressed reasonably completely with a short article. High priority.
2. Somewhere in between 1. and 3.
3. Cannot be reasonably completely addressed with short articles.
4. Covered so as not to be a red link, but really deserves own article

Comments on the above are welcome. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:10, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Brief note[change source]

This Simple English Wikipedia article has been translated into Ladino, or Judeo-Spanish, and Latin. StevenJ81 (talk) 00:13, 21 November 2013 (UTC)