Talk:History of antisemitism in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on March 11, 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents

[edit] SS St. Louis

SS St. Louis should be mentioned.Xx236 16:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Can you write a short paragraph about it. In fact, the whole quesiton of anti-Semitism and American attitudes towards the Holocaust deserves more extensive treatment than the single sentence that we currently have.
--Richard 16:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Rather not me, because of my language.Xx236 17:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] David S. Wyman

Xx236 16:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IBM and the Holocaust

IBM was US.Xx236 17:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: NPOV Tag

The lede section is disturbingly POV’d, which I assume continues throughout, but I stopped at the top. This is not to say anti-Semitism doesn’t exist in America; it did, does, and I have seen it (especially when that Semite happened to be Arab in the 1980s, what is it like now). The editors may be sarcastically complemented for providing such full documentation. Even I have contributed what seemed to be a missing link [1]. But, what you have created is too POV’d for public consumption. Had I known of the recent RfD, I would have brought up some simple facts concerning why this article is POV, and voted to correct and Keep. I didn’t and now just can’t let this slide by any further.

  • The NPOV tag is based, first, on the following quote from the 190? (whatever) Jewish Encyclopedia:[1]

While it may be stated that Anti-Semitism as such does not exist either in England or in the United States, still amid the general class distinctions maintained in social intercourse in those countries, a feeling against the Jews manifests itself in social discriminations.

Given that anti-Semitism is of European origin, both during and following the Crusades, as well as the “new” anti-Semitism[2] noted in 1911, and referring to instances occurring in the late 19th Century. What happened in Europe has very little similarity to what happened in the US; I believe a note of comparison is valid. This is not reflected in the least.
  • Secondly, the tag is based on the simple fact that the US has the second largest Jewish population in the world, tied with Israel. One must wonder why, if according this current Wikipedia article, anti-Semitism is so bad in the US. There seems to be something wrong with this article. The reasons why Diaspora Jews came to America likely contains the answers. Simply stated, America was their refuge and a country where anti-Semitism relatively didn’t exist (similarly with England). I can paraphrase a quote from Isaac Mayer Wise in the mid 1800s to the effect that ‘America is our promised land and Washington is our Zion’. I could note the American influence on Reform Judaism and vice-versa. The Polish and Russian Jews in the 1880s they came here, up until the 1920s, they came here from Europe after WWII, the Russian Jews came again following Jackson-Vanik. So, why did they continue to come? Welcome. Where is any indication of NPOV in the current article? It is absolutely missing.
  • I could add more, but I have wasted enough time.

You can add all the incidents you want, but until this all-too-obvious, fair, alternative POV is included, enough to show some glimmer of neutrality, I will maintain the NPOV tag. Regards, CasualObserver'48 (talk) 12:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

To address your first point, the article does not say that antisemitism in the United States is the same as antisemitism in Europe. I have added a sentence explicitly states this.
Your second point reads like original research. Find a reliable source who makes this argument and then insert text describing what the reliable source says with a verifiable citation.
Wikipedia is not a discussion forum or a blog. If you have text which you wish to add that can be sourced to verifiable reliable sources, then please do so. Otherwise, what you have written amounts to a lot of "hand-waving" arguments.
--Richard (talk) 00:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removing NPOV tag

Editor who inserted the tag has made no effort in the past week to clarify and address the issues raised beyond making vague, hand-waving original research arguments. I have made some effort to address the issues to the extent possible given the non-specific nature of the issues raised. Therefore, I am removing the NPOV tag. --Richard (talk) 21:28, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Quoting Jjdon from another page...

This concerns POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors. From WP tag policy: Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort. Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements. This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags. No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 21:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How about some evidence?

Not one sentence about what David Duke or Pat Buchanan actually said or wrote that is allegedly anti-Semitic 68.183.223.176 (talk) 23:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Exactly wrong. Duke is not mentioned at all in the article and Buchanan is specifically quoted twice. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 23:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)