Content deleted Content added
Line 257:
::::::::::::::: Update: I see why you were sharing that opinion, there appears to have been a slight edit war about whether there should be a dubious tag on the point of the article saying he is a rabbi. What I have done now though is add the details to the article that were lacking and which were needed to clarify the point in question. I think that with this information, the article is no longer misleading (if read in its entirety anyway), and I think it is fair enough to leave the term rabbi. On the point of the dubious-discuss tag that Sir Joseph wants, although I think it was fair enough to leave that tag as it was indeed being discussed, I don't think that tag is, at least anymore, especially needed. Nevertheless I won't get in the way of further discussion or debate on whether this article should say he's a rabbi or clarify the point any further, but I don't think it is really needed anymore. (To me it's like a debate on whether an article can call someone a doctor who medically treats people, maybe with homeopathy, and so who people refer to as a doctor despite not having an MD from an accredited medical school. Would I say he's a doctor? No. Would I be okay with others doing so? I suppose. What would Wikipedia's practice be in that case? I really don't know.) I'm okay leaving the term as it is, but frankly I am okay without it too. I don't feel strongly either way, but I do encourage that discussion and consensus be reached on the talk page as opposed to doing edit wars over the word rabbi. [[User:Althepal|Althepal]] ([[User talk:Althepal|talk]]) 03:42, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::: I am fine with having both "rabbi" and the explanation. [[User:Debresser|Debresser]] ([[User talk:Debresser|talk]]) 11:33, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::: Excellent. I am fine with that too. (Not to say I fully endorse that, but I recognize the need to balance representation of perspectives. Again to me it's akin to an example of a medical practitioner without a medical degree, and I don't know what Wikipedia's practice is for that. Maybe it would be a more widely-accepted thing to say in the article that Mizrachi is a "Torah educator" than to say he's a "rabbi" since that is how you define "rabbi" and it would be a term everyone will accept. But again I'm fine with any outcome here since the article does explain the point.) Possibly off topic, but your talk page identifies you as a rabbi, so I have a question about how your status of a rabbi informs your perspective on the point: Do you consider yourself to be one because you have Smicha or because you are a Torah teacher? [[User:Althepal|Althepal]] ([[User talk:Althepal|talk]]) 22:09, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
== Suggested change of title from Kiruv Organization to Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi ==
| |||