Talk:Mordechai Eliyahu
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Perhaps someone would like to incorporate the following: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3389481,00.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.15.127.253 (talk • contribs)
- Disagree. Unless it really does go to court, then it's a minor news item and there are many during the year like this for many public figures. Please see WP:RECENTISM too. No one will remember this or care next week.
- On the other hand, the first biography of the Rabbi was published and sold out in a day. It holds an enormous amount of newly revealed info. --Shuki 20:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Controversy - Eliyahu family
copied from User_talk:Ekhornbeck8:
On one hand, your addition to the R' Mordechai Eliayhu article is nothing other than WP:RECENTISM. Your creation of an article for his Shmuel Eliyahu reeks of WP:POINT. In either case, both sections are entirely unimportant, non-encyclopedic, and no one even cares this week about the comments made last week. IMO, we can remove the comments and not dirty up these articles like so many other articles are with them filled up with quotes, and other 'news'. On the other hand, we can be proud of what both these great rabbis have said. --Shuki 18:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- reply to User_talk:Ekhornbeck8#Response
- please read WP:BLP as well. If you really wanted to research Rabbi Eliyahu's opinions and religious interpretations, you'd probably view most of them as controversial. In fact, some of these opinions are often taken out of context (like what you quoted) in the Israeli media and are seen as pure ignorance to the subject matter. You would expect serious journalism to have a 'rabbinical affairs' correspondant, but usually the reporting (not unlike your contribution here) are glorified gossip and pieces aimed at ridiculing the rabbi. I am inclined to WP:AGF in your part, but then again, wary about the thought of clutter. Again, the thoughts expressed by the Eliyahu family do not bother me at all, and I don't want to suppress them either, just that they are only a very minute and insignificant part of these two rabbis' work. Leaving this section inside both articles does not do justice to the them. In the Shmuel Eliyahu article, it is a totally warped edit (no offense) to have only that section inside. Again, I certainly don't deny the remarks or even opposed them either, but it seems too POV at this point. --Shuki 23:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps someone wants to write about http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1180527966693 I don't think it is minor at all, I expect that the news cycle will take it up and it will become a controversy.AvatarZ 03:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)AvatarZ
[edit] Books
Can anybody supply a bibliography of Rav Elihayu's books? 75.21.81.247 15:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

