Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/The Talmud Unmasked

From Wikiquote
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: Merged with Justinas Pranaitis. --Saroj (talk) 04:42, 9 November 2023 (UTC).[reply]

The Talmud Unmasked

[edit]

Lack of referencing and no associated English Wikipedia article on a claimed controversial book. The link to the author on the English Wikipedia does not exist. This leaves us with the issue the creator can place or even platform their own unverifiable commentary and select and bolden the quotes they choose on a controversial subject. Wikiquote welcomes all views but there are concerns if a contributor may be using Wikiquote to promote their viewpoint. — DeirgeDel tac 22:25, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vote closes: 23:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

  • Keep. The book does have an associated Wikipedia page: The Talmud Unmasked. Many of the quotes are verifiably authentic and can be sourced with links to Sefaria.org. At the present time, though, the page employs a nonstandard quoting style and is in need of cleanup. I would therefore add a cleanup tag, convert the page to standard quoting style, and where possible add links for sourceable quotes. Update: It is to be noted that the book contains factual inaccuracies (see below). – BurningLibrary
  • Delete The book itself is noted for being a misleading misrepresentation of the Talmud. It is problematic for Wikiquote to showcase, as if they were real translations from the Talmud, a mistranslated collection cherry-picked by the book's author for antisemitic purposes. HouseOfChange (talk) 13:33, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "It is problematic for Wikiquote to showcase …" It sets a bad precedent if one cannot quote from certain works because someone deems them to be "problematic" or "offensive". History is full of offensive truths, and censorship is not the way to deal with that. One cannot construct a category of "problematic" works which are not to be quoted from without turning Wikiquote into a censorious zone. That outcome is so disastrously bad that we should do everything in our power to avoid it. Better, then, to permit this book to be quoted from in some capacity, than to attempt to airbrush it out of history. As for the issue of potential mistranslation, this can be dealt with by cross-referencing the quotes with the William Davidson translation, which is available for free on Sefaria.org. – BurningLibrary
My objecgtion is not to offensive material but to having wikivoice misrepresent this particular material as a "translation" of the Talmud. HouseOfChange (talk) 06:04, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, how the material is presented is a matter of how the description is worded, of course. That description can be edited to better represent the work for what it is. Update: See also my reply to ᘙ below.
However, while the word "mistranslation" has been used a number of times in this discussion, I am not quite sure what is really meant by it here. Take, for example, Pranaitis' translation of Keritot 6b:19–20 (p. 49):
"The teaching of the Rabbis is: He who pours oil over a Goi, and over dead bodies is freed from punishment. This is true for an animal because it is not a man. But how can it be said that by pouring oil over a Goi one is freed from punishment, since a Goi is also a man? But this is not true, for it is written: Ye are my flock, the flock of my pasture are men (Ezechiel, XXXIV, 31). You are thus called men, but the Goim are not called men."
For comparison, here is the William Davidson translation of Keritot 6b:19–20:
"But if one applies anointing oil to gentiles why is he exempt? Aren't they included in the meaning of the term person [adam]? The Gemara explains: Indeed they are not. As it is written: 'And you My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, are people [adam]' (Ezekiel 34:31), from which it is derived that you, the Jewish people, are called adam, but gentiles are not called adam."
What, exactly, is being mistranslated here? Isn't the same essential message conveyed by both Pranaitis and Davidson?
For context, the William Davidson translation is available in its entirety from Sefaria.org, which is a Jewish non-profit organization dedicated to making Jewish knowledge available for everyone. If it is granted that the William Davidson translation is an accurate rendition of Keritot 6b:19–20, can't we just leave it at that? Why speak of "mistranslation" at all if this is what the Talmud really says? We should, at the very least, be able to agree upon the verifiable facts of the matter. – BurningLibrary
  • Keep: Now that the key issues are addressed and the lead section can be verified against the vetted linked :enWP article. While I do sometimes help out less experienced editors it is my view that experienced editors should do this themselves especially for anything that may be contentious. Thankyou. DeirgeDel tac 00:19, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I am not familiar with the book, but it seems to be a compendium of quotes, a selection of quotes from the Talmud. Why should we write articles consisting of selected quotes from a book that already consists of selected quotes from the Talmud? If there are verfiable, notable and quotable quotes they could be added to Talmud with a reliable translation. And if a mistranslation should be notable, they could be added to the Misattributed or Mistranslated section. Our article "Wikiquote" also does not consist of selected quotes from various Wikiquote articles, but of quotes about Wikiquote. I will change my vote to keep if quotes about the book are added. --ᘙ (talk) 13:20, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a good point. The book can be judged notable because it has an article. However in this sort of example I personally suspect it would perhaps usually be used is to select quotes from the original work. Of course in this case that selection would probably be a biased collection. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel tac 15:47, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    For what it's worth, the entire book is available in PDF format from the Internet Archive. This might be of help in deciding upon best practices for quoting from works like this. – BurningLibrary
    @BurningLibrary:: I give up. I've been looking high and low for it there and have kept missing it - albeit its not registered on openlibrary and I might not have done an internet library search. I actually had switched focus looking at/for copies/editions of the Talmud itself! Great find. I really like to arrogantly think that I'm usually very good and finding sources and its good to be taken down a peg or two. I really impressed how some who edit on ancient religious quotes have responded and contributed on this VfD! -- DeirgeDel tac 00:17, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You are welcome. I have added a link to the Internet Archive on the Wikiquote page and on the Wikipedia page. – BurningLibrary
    @ᘙ: "I will change my vote to keep if quotes about the book are added." I have added a "Quotes about …" section and added a quote from an entry in Antisemitism: A Historical Encyclopedia of Prejudice and Persecution, Volume 1. This might help address concerns raised by another participant in this discussion about how the work is presented. The "Notes" section of the Wikipedia article provides some references which might be relevant here, but sadly, all of them are unquoted. Update: I have added a brief quotation from Antisemitism to the Wikipedia article as well. – BurningLibrary
    Keep Article has improved from earlier version and includes an about section. --ᘙ (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for reasons given by others. Markjoseph125 (talk) 00:51, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Here follows a brief summary of changes made to the page as they pertain to concerns raised by participants in this discussion. In its current version, the page does not quote from the Talmud at all; instead, it quotes Pranaitis' commentary on it and related texts. Quotes that only quote from the Talmud have been moved to the talk page, with the suggestion that such quotes should only be included if they also contain some of Pranaitis' own perspective. – BurningLibrary
  • Comment. I have established that the book contains factual inaccuracies. On page 82 of the E. N. S. edition, Pranaitis attributes to the Avodah Zarah tractate a phrase that occurs in the Soferim tractate. I have commented upon this inaccuracy in the description section of the page, as well as in the quotes section.
Another participant in this discussion, HouseOfChange, has expressed concern that the book misrepresents the subject matter. This point is now strengthened. While I still think the page should be kept, I think the main focus of the page should be to point out inaccuracies and warn against using the book as a source for anything other than itself.
I found two quotes from the book on the Talmud page, and have moved them to the The Talmud Unmasked page with the justification that the book contains errors. This justification is easier to make when the errors are documented somewhere. This may be counted as a reason for keeping the page.
My recommendation would be that the book is subjected to the same "containment policy" as Henry Ford's book, i.e., that all quotes from the book are collected on a single page and that the book is not quoted from on other pages. Possibly, a template could be created for such cases. In the final analysis, while the book does have some historical significance, it is not a good source. BurningLibrary (talk) 16:06, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestion. I think the best approach would be to create a page for Justinas Pranaitis and make a subsection for The Talmud Unmasked on that page, with The Talmud Unmasked redirecting to the subsection. This would make it possible to provide further context in the form of quotes about and of Pranaitis, including this remarkable exchange from the Beilis trial:
Q: What is the meaning of the word Hullin [animals permissible as food]?
Pranaitis: I don't know.
Q: What is the meaning of the word Erubin [Sabbath walking limits]?
Pranaitis: I don't know.
Q: What is the meaning of the word Yebamot [family relationships]?
Pranaitis: I don't know.
Q: When did Baba Batra [a tractate of the Talmud] live and what was her activity?
Pranaitis: I don't know.
I think this speaks volumes. BurningLibrary (talk) 19:00, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very good idea from BurningLibrary (talk · contributions). The idiosyncratic translations and the point-y selection of passages result in a work that has more to do with Panaitis than with the Talmud itself. HouseOfChange (talk) 17:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Very well. I have created the page Justinas Pranaitis and added quotes from The Talmud Unmasked and the Beilis trial. I have also added a merge template to The Talmud Unmasked. The merge can be carried out by creating a redirect from The Talmud Unmasked to Justinas Pranaitis#The Talmud Unmasked (1892). BurningLibrary (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update. I have carried out the proposed merge. The The Talmud Unmasked page is now a redirect to Justinas Pranaitis#The Talmud Unmasked (1892). BurningLibrary (talk) 18:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To whom it may concern: the Wikipedia page Justinas Pranaitis now contains, in its "External links" section, a link to the Wikiquote page Justinas Pranaitis. BurningLibrary (talk) 12:10, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiquote:Votes_for_deletion/The_Talmud_Unmasked&oldid=3397282"