→:Lithuanian Wikipedia as a base ?: re format and information from Russian Wikipedia |
No edit summary |
||
Line 387: | Line 387: | ||
[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC). |
[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC). |
||
I think it would be best to bring such comments from the Russian article here. I agree with you which is why I changed the Lithuanian source article to the Russian source article. You made a very good point. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Some of your comments are a bit too passionate for an encyclopedic article. I would like to include them in a relevant section but wonder if it would be ok to re-phrase them? Also, |
Some of your comments are a bit too passionate for an encyclopedic article. I would like to include them in a relevant section but wonder if it would be ok to re-phrase them? Also, |
||
Line 398: | Line 398: | ||
Some Jewish blood or even Jewish family name still does not make somebody non-Karaim. Yuri Polkanov's father was ethnic Russian, orthodox priest's son.Yuri Polkanov has Russian name and surname,and his articles based on his father publication dated manly by Holocaust time,but he is still defined as ethnic Karaylar,So the reference to Gershon Kirspichi , may be presented in the version of this page like in the Russian article with the same right as reference to Polkanov [[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
Some Jewish blood or even Jewish family name still does not make somebody non-Karaim. Yuri Polkanov's father was ethnic Russian, orthodox priest's son.Yuri Polkanov has Russian name and surname,and his articles based on his father publication dated manly by Holocaust time,but he is still defined as ethnic Karaylar,So the reference to Gershon Kirspichi , may be presented in the version of this page like in the Russian article with the same right as reference to Polkanov [[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
I agree with you, Karaims have always been mixed, not just Yuri Polkanov. However, Gershom does not have any Karaimi or Karaylar in his ancestry. He simply changed his Yiddish name to a Karaylar name. Of course anyone who wants can to convert to our religion to marry one of us, we have always been Universalist in our acceptance of others. I even welcome Gershom if he wants to adopt our identity in its entirety and fully join the Karaimi-Karaylar, but what I object to is a person attempting to infiltrate our community, establish himself as a leader without the approval of our own traditional chiefs, and attempting to silence our own native reverence for Jesus, Muhammad, Tengri, Buddha, etc., and pretend our own native practices such as use of oak groves and the historical distinction between circumcised clergy and uncircumcised laity are recent innovations rather than remnants of ancient practice. It seems not very secular but very religious fundamentalist in attitude. Karaimi-Karaylar were always very peaceful, and universalist being friendly and welcoming to others in our religious attitudes. Don't you agree? Our community is dying because we are allowing outsiders to infiltrate and divide us so that they can tear us to pieces and fight over our heritage. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Did you read his works,[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
Did you read his works,[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Line 405: | Line 408: | ||
You should check his background for yourself rather than simply follow him blindly. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
You should check his background for yourself rather than simply follow him blindly. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
It is only his word against your word about Breslav origin that also supposed not to be followed blindly 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
It is only his word against your word about Breslav origin that also supposed not to be followed blindly 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Well said. :) [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] |
|||
he definitely distinguishs between Karaimizm and Judaism .He claims that Karaim have different origin from Jews.[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
he definitely distinguishs between Karaimizm and Judaism .He claims that Karaim have different origin from Jews.[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Line 412: | Line 418: | ||
I am glad that you agree with him,but the encyclopedic article must represent also other opinions.[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
I am glad that you agree with him,but the encyclopedic article must represent also other opinions.[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
OK, then I propose we put in a section entitled "Critics' Views" to cover all external opinions. However, I would like to point out that no one would insert the critics opinions in an article about Romanian ethnogenesis despite all the evidence contrary to native Romanian opinion. It seems unnecessarily tolerant to allow critics views on our ethnogenesis in our own article. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
In opposite to you he references to Karaim authors like Sultanskij Firkovich and Shishman ,[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
In opposite to you he references to Karaim authors like Sultanskij Firkovich and Shishman ,[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
I often make reference to Firkovich, Babovich, and Polkanov, three great Karaim-Karaylar.[[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
I often make reference to Firkovich, Babovich, and Polkanov, three great Karaim-Karaylar.[[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
You reference to Firkovich is strange enough,claiming him supporting |
You reference to Firkovich is strange enough, claiming him supporting Khazar theory. In fact he clamed that Karaim were in Crimea before Christianity and Khazars. He claimed an Israel origin of Karaites that differs from Judean origin of Rabbanists. Although the Polkanov use the "references" to Firkovich at the same way. I suppose that you took the "references" to Firkovich from his publications. [[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Yes he did indeed you are correct, but he also told us that the Khazars themselves descended from these tribes, especially THE Levites of Simeon. But not Just Firkovich told us this, others too. I am sure I can find an independent source concerning the Khazar origins from the Levites of Simeon. Polkanov does make slight references to Firkovich in a similar way, but as you certainly know well, Polkanov did not understand everything about it completely in his earlier works. Yet he knew more than most Karaims who were under the Soviets at that time don't you agree? We should be understanding of the difficult circumstances. Polkanov, Teriyaki, Lavrinovich, Shapshal etc. are all of the same opinion and therefore at least more reliable than Gershom's Jewish interpretation of the facts. Please don't misunderstand me, Gershom is extremely well educated and I enjoy many of the things he has said. But at the same time, he is nevertheless an outside from a family of outsiders who absolutely has not inherited an understanding of our traditional practices (e.g. like all Jewish fundamentalists he does not understand our reverence of Jesus or Muhammad nor understand our Oak grove practices etc., etc., etc.) but instead tries to interpret everything through a Jewish point of view which is genuinely alien to our own unique heritage. I hope you can catch my gist here. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Why every man having another opinion from you defined by you as Jew ,every source about Karaism even encyclopedia defined by you Jewish ? [[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
Why every man having another opinion from you defined by you as Jew ,every source about Karaism even encyclopedia defined by you Jewish ? [[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Line 428: | Line 439: | ||
I am very appreciate your very helpfull to me efforts ,I hope that syntax and phraseology corrections wil not affect the intention like it was be done with Karaim leaders objection to Khazar Theory,that was replaced to d the idea that Khazar theory was suggested by Grigoriev.--[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
I am very appreciate your very helpfull to me efforts ,I hope that syntax and phraseology corrections wil not affect the intention like it was be done with Karaim leaders objection to Khazar Theory,that was replaced to d the idea that Khazar theory was suggested by Grigoriev.--[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
I will look at what you have written again. :) [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
I suggest you to refer your opinion by cites from Nazis Newspapers from Holocaust period.They are also cited in Russian article. But is only one opinion you cannot remove other referenced opinions with replacing them by you unreferences opinions like you try to do with Karayim Husars, Guardians ,farmers e.t.c,removing reference to historical documents showing that it is no more than modern legend. It is looks like vandalism [[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
I suggest you to refer your opinion by cites from Nazis Newspapers from Holocaust period.They are also cited in Russian article. But is only one opinion you cannot remove other referenced opinions with replacing them by you unreferences opinions like you try to do with Karayim Husars, Guardians ,farmers e.t.c,removing reference to historical documents showing that it is no more than modern legend. It is looks like vandalism [[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Line 449: | Line 462: | ||
I want it to be recorded here that I fully support Toddy1's suggestion to revert this article back to its beginning version, before the religious/sectarian POV of a self-avowed priest of a small ethnic-religious sect started a massive campaign of rewriting "Karaite" history. As I have said before in other articles, changes of the scope and depth this editor is making, without any discussion or consensus, and without really pointing to any reliable sources, have to be discussed term by term and sentence by sentence, based on reliable sources in all languages available. I want it also to be recorded here that I can also read some Russian, at least for the purposes of discussions here, and that Russian and Lithuanian sources are indeed key for this article. [[User:warshy|warshy]][[User talk:warshy|<sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #129dbc!important;">talk</sup>]] 16:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
I want it to be recorded here that I fully support Toddy1's suggestion to revert this article back to its beginning version, before the religious/sectarian POV of a self-avowed priest of a small ethnic-religious sect started a massive campaign of rewriting "Karaite" history. As I have said before in other articles, changes of the scope and depth this editor is making, without any discussion or consensus, and without really pointing to any reliable sources, have to be discussed term by term and sentence by sentence, based on reliable sources in all languages available. I want it also to be recorded here that I can also read some Russian, at least for the purposes of discussions here, and that Russian and Lithuanian sources are indeed key for this article. [[User:warshy|warshy]][[User talk:warshy|<sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #129dbc!important;">talk</sup>]] 16:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
:Let it be noted also, if I wasn't sufficiently clear above, that the self-avowed priest is editing articles in Wikipedia about HIS OWN small ethnic-religious sect. How NPOV can his editing be in such a case? It is indeed a massive campaign of ethnic and religious propaganda that is targeting the English WP, for some reason, as its medium. Why doesn't he wage that propaganda campaign in the Russian and Lithuanian WPs first, where all the sources are? [[User:warshy|warshy]][[User talk:warshy|<sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #129dbc!important;">talk</sup>]] 17:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
:Let it be noted also, if I wasn't sufficiently clear above, that the self-avowed priest is editing articles in Wikipedia about HIS OWN small ethnic-religious sect. How NPOV can his editing be in such a case? It is indeed a massive campaign of ethnic and religious propaganda that is targeting the English WP, for some reason, as its medium. Why doesn't he wage that propaganda campaign in the Russian and Lithuanian WPs first, where all the sources are? [[User:warshy|warshy]][[User talk:warshy|<sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #129dbc!important;">talk</sup>]] 17:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
:Warshy you are hysterically funny :D Any of the Karaims who begin to observe all the laws of Torah and get circumcised become clergy Karaylar lol Everyone knows that. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
I think that format of Russian page presenting all the opinions about Karaim origin will help to find the article the acceptable for all of us.So let start from it.--[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
I think that format of Russian page presenting all the opinions about Karaim origin will help to find the article the acceptable for all of us.So let start from it.--[[User:Неполканов|Неполканов]] ([[User talk:Неполканов|talk]]) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
I agree. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:If you wish to incorporate information and structure from the very good article on Russian Wikipedia, that would be very helpful.--[[User:Toddy1|Toddy1]] ([[User talk:Toddy1|talk]]) 23:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
:If you wish to incorporate information and structure from the very good article on Russian Wikipedia, that would be very helpful.--[[User:Toddy1|Toddy1]] ([[User talk:Toddy1|talk]]) 23:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Line 462: | Line 477: | ||
==Gershom Tzipris== |
==Gershom Tzipris== |
||
I would like to invite the "anti-Polkanov POV" supporters of Gershom (ben [http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%87,_%D0%9B%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B4_%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87 Yonah]) [[Tzipris]] (namely Toddy1 [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Karaim_language&diff=next&oldid=512931964] and Неполканов [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crimean_Karaites&diff=514000340&oldid=513845622]) to submit here for discussion and inclusion into the article one of his peer-reviewed teachings from an independently published source relevant to the ethnic group of Karaims on whom this article is written. I am a fan of ''some'' of his opinions, and would also like to see someting of his in the article, but so far have found nothing that meets Wikipedia source guidelines. If you know better, please post below. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:09, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
I would like to invite the "anti-Polkanov POV" supporters of Gershom (ben [http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%87,_%D0%9B%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B4_%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87 Yonah]) [[Tzipris]] (namely Toddy1 [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Karaim_language&diff=next&oldid=512931964] and Неполканов [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crimean_Karaites&diff=514000340&oldid=513845622]) to submit here for discussion and inclusion into the article one of his peer-reviewed teachings from an independently published source relevant to the ethnic group of Karaims on whom this article is written. I am a fan of ''some'' of his opinions, and would also like to see someting of his in the article, but so far have found nothing that meets Wikipedia source guidelines. If you know better, please post below. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:09, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
I see that my comment above was a bit like talking to a brick wall LOL. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
==Karaite Jewish POV pushing== |
|||
Toddy1, your so called "revert" or in fact vandalism of logical order, and attempt to delete references and insert un-sourced POV into the article to mislead the average Jewis reader is not a good idea. Rabbinical Jews do permit marriage with Karaite Jews, but not with Crimean (or any other) Karaims, you should not attempt to force such an misleading agenda into an encyclopaedic article. You should probably move on from this article and work on the Karaite Judaism page where your opinions may be more welcome. [[User talk:Kaz|Kaz]] 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:47, 29 September 2012
Crimean Karaites was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
Complete re-write needed
Since the religion of "Crimean" Karaimlar/Karaylar (the correct terms) is Karaite Karaism not antithetical Karaite Judaism, this article needs to be completely re-written. I have the knowledge to do this but do not yet (despite years of wiki editing) know how to re-write an article when there are a group of editors who are hell-bent on perverting a theme. I think I will need the assistance of some objective moderators for this task. Let me start by highlighting to our Jewish (not Karaite Jewish) friends, why "Crimean" Karaimlar/Karaylar can not be considered Jews.
- First of all, ONLY our clergymen are circumcised and do their utmost to observe all the Toral Laws of Moses. There are only a handful of living clergymen around the world, so the majority of "Crimean" Karaimlar/Karaylar are laity (i.e. not Hachan, not Hazan, not Ulu-Hazan and not even Shamash). And within this point you can see that we only have the word Hazan in common with Karaite Jews, but the role of the Hazan in Karaite Karaism is as the one who calls the believers to prayer and has nothing to do with the role of the Hazan in Karaite Judaism. Our religion descends from the Sebomenoi of the Bosporan Kingdom, as taught by the Shammuti (indeed the Shammuti Halakhah is still the oral tradition of our clergymen and we call it the Bashyazi sevel ha yerushah which is totally different from Karaite Judaism but a little bit similar to Hillelite Torah shebeal peh) the same religion that Abu Hanifa converted Anan Ben David to. Clearly anyone can see that this is a massive difference with ancient Karaite Karaism and Karaite Judaism.
- Secondly "Crimean" is a misnomer, not all the Karaimlar/Karaylar in the world call themselves Crimean, the Polish and Galician Karaimi believe we have been in these locales since the time of the Hungarian conquest, so it is really stretching it for us to call ourselves "Crimean" now.
- Thirdly, "Crimean" Karaimlar/Karaylar practice substitution with regards to the Torah Laws of Moses where something is done in-place of something required in the Torah, as permitted by Karaite Karaism. But Karaite Judaism does not even have have such a concept.
- Fourthly, we believe Christ and Muhammad (salallahu aleihi wasalam) are prophets, while Karaite Judaism on the other hand does not require saying "salallahu aleyhi wasalam" after his name.
- Fifthly, Firkovich's collections have nothing to do with Jews. His only interest was in our pre-Khazar origins. Just because some of the documents which belong to our community are considered valuable "Jewish" documents (e.g. the Leningrad codex) it does not mean that Karaite Jews can come along and change the history in order to steal them from us just like you did our Synagogue in East Jerusalem in 1967 after bombing the hell out of it.
- Sixthly, we are not allowed to make Aliyah under the law of return. Those of our number in Israel today are the relatives of those of us who were there before 1967. Doesn't that give you a big enough clue? Kaz 00:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Finally, our word for God is like all Tatars Tengri or Allah but not Adonai.
In brief, the religion of "Crimean" Karaimi/Karaylar is a unique (in the world) Torah observant form of uniquely Tatar Islam, but we have always respected what we consider in our opinion to be real (i.e. orthodox) Jews (not Karaite Jews whose teachers, like Jeshuan ben Yehudah and Jacob ben Reuben of Byzanteum, have called us Bastards for centuries) so much so that many of our members with a clerical vocation have, just like Subbotniks, Molokans, and Gerei etc., been converting to orthodox Judaism for centuries, starting with Bulan (Khazar). What I can say is that the authors of this article certainly have a connection to Mordechai Alfandari and therefore Israeli-state funded "Universal Karaite Judaism" which is mis-allocating Israeli government money to spend on baring false witness about us and and re-write our history (something Karaite Jews, who are really just Sadducees, do very well indeed) but to what end, only God knows best. Many thanks for your patience in reading. Kaz 00:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- It seems to me that the Russian language Wikipedia article on this subject is a much better quality article than the English language version. Perhaps that should be a starting point for a rewrite of this article.
- By the way, I have trimmed the heading of this section, in accordance with Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines.--Toddy1 (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, the Russian version is much better.Kaz 18:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- I have noticed that the edits done in the August-September 2012 period, in some cases changed the statements to nearly opposite meaning, but in some cases retained the citations. This needs reversing.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well if you READ the references then you will see why the first version of the article which was mainly lifted from by Mr Qannai's websites was misusing the sources. Kaz 18:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- Who is Mr Qannai? What are the URLs of his websites? Why should I look at self-published websites anyway - they are not reliable sources.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- It would seem he has recently closed down all of his orahsaddiqim websites, but I wouldn't worry too much, they will probably be back up and running after this little bit of bad publicity has cleared up right? :) Oh and you are absolutely correct, his websites are an extremely unreliable source. Kaz 08:43, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Who is Mr Qannai? What are the URLs of his websites? Why should I look at self-published websites anyway - they are not reliable sources.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well if you READ the references then you will see why the first version of the article which was mainly lifted from by Mr Qannai's websites was misusing the sources. Kaz 18:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- I have noticed that the edits done in the August-September 2012 period, in some cases changed the statements to nearly opposite meaning, but in some cases retained the citations. This needs reversing.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, the Russian version is much better.Kaz 18:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Religion section
I am not the only editor to have complained about the August-September 2012 version of the religion section. If you have not see these comments, please search for "Dude, you've changed entire religion of this ethnic group in just few days." and "I've checked that site being used as primary arguement used by those who support the change (you and Kaz) and who mass-changed artices releated Crimean Karaites (without actual reference or source) and this site is all about showing how 'Islamic' Karaites are and so-called 'Jewish deceptions', degrading Jewishness of of Karaims and replacing it with Islam, which actually supports the absurd mass-change done in this article."
The only citation in the religion section of the August-September 2012 version is to a dictionary, which tells us that the Crimean Karaite word for God is the same as the Arabic language word used by both Arabic-speaking Christians and Muslims. In the old version of the article there were statements about the Crimean Karaite religion that were backed by citations. Editor Kaz claims that they were "lifted from by Mr Qanni" and that they were "misusing the sources". I know from other sources that there are a number of points of view about the Crimean Karaite religion. One point of view is that in terms of religion they are Karaite Jews who came from the Crimea in the 14th Century. Another point of view is that the Crimean Karaites are a fourth Abrahamic religion. Both of these points of view have reliable sources. There is a point of view that Crimean Karaites are "islamised" - but the only source for this appears to be a self-published website (which is not a reliable source).
I would like to delete all the uncited statements in the section on religion.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- You are so dishonest. You claim to have read the Russian version of this page and yet you still deny its references to the Islamic nature of the Church of Karaims? But be my guest in removing anything as of yet un-sourced which you don't like. I will be doing the same to every POV and weasel word you put in. Watching like a hawk if you try to mis-use one letter from a source to insert your own Avraham Qanaï/Messianic Judaism POV here, whichever sect you are. It will be reverted immediately. Just stick to the facts you can find. Who knows, you might just learn something. Kaz 07:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability. It is not dishonest to ask for citations for unsupported assertions.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Absolutely! But that is not what you did. :) Kaz 08:43, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability. It is not dishonest to ask for citations for unsupported assertions.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Identity Section
This section can be paraphrased as "X and Y true, but Jews believe Z." There are three citations to reliable sources for the "Jews believe Z" part", and no citations for the "X and Y true". I propose to delete the uncited parts of this section.
There are reliable sources (not cited here) saying that Crimean Kariates are Jews and that they believe themselves to be descended from the Khazars. There are also reliable sources (cited on the Russian language version) explaining why this belief is unlikely to be correct. So let us have verifiable information based on reliable sources.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Evrei, but not Iudei, please try not to twist the translations to suit your own Messianic Jewish POV. If you have reliable sources produce them. And here is an academic Peer review of the sources which dismiss Karaims' belief that we are descended from Khazars [1]. How do you respond to all the references cited in that review? I imagine you will not respond, as you simply ignore every fact which is against your own POV. I do long to see you produce just one academic peer review for your Karaims = Jews POV. I am also interested to see how you now use Russian sources on the Karaims' nation and refer to Karaims yourself (rather than Crimean Karaites) while you deny that this article is about the Karaims' nationality but about some non-existent sect of Crimean Karaite Jews. LOL. You use whatever you can to push your own religious POV and then throw the rest behind your back pretending it does not exist. There is only one Crimean Karaite Jew in the world, a convert called Abraham Kefeli who lives in Ashdod, regarded by other Karaims as having turned his back on the religion of the Karaims. Therre are more Karaims from other parts of the world who have converted to Judaism than there are of these imaginary "Crimean Karaite Jews" you think you can find reliable peer-reviewed references to. Ievrei yes, but not Iudei (Chufut). Of course you will probably use poor English translations to back up your crackpot fringe theories. But all you will succeed in doing is making yet another laughable Wikipedia article unless you drop your POV and start dealing with the academic peer reviews. Let's make Wikipedia great. Kaz 07:32, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Please could you rephrase some of the above comment in the light of Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Assume good faith.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:48, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- I personally have had enough of "re-factoring" talk-page comments. But I know it is something you like to do to my comments, so please feel free to go ahead yourself. Why stop now? :) I'm sure if you are worried about it you can get one of your admin chums to do the deed for you if you really like. You have demonstrated that you are quite adept at Admin manipulation, and nothing much else. Kaz 08:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- Please could you rephrase some of the above comment in the light of Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Assume good faith.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:48, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
And let's not forget that this section with phrase "Y" as you put it was inserted for you Toddy1 [2] glad to see you now agree there is no source for phrase "Y" which I inserted for you in good faith to see if you could bring just one source, but you couldn't and have now changed your mind. Well done. You are making progress. :) Kaz 07:45, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- You posted the wrong diff in your comment.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:50, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
- No, but you would certainly like people to think that wouldn't you. :) Kaz 08:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Pluralization ?
Throughout the article, "Karaims" is used as the plural form; but isn't "Karaim" plural already?--Jrm2007 (talk) 19:51, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Excellent question and I am extremely glad you asked! Karaim the Kypchaq word is not to be confused with the completely unrelated Hebrew plural word Qaraim which is also erroneously spelled Karaim. The Kypchak word Karaim is both a singular noun and adjectival. The Hebrew word Qaraim is a plural noun but may also be adjectival as in the phrase Ha-Yehudim Ha-Qaraim meaning Karaite Jews. This Hebrew word has nothing to do with the Kypchak word Karaim which is singular and appears as Karaimlar in plural form if using a Kypchak dialect or Karaims if using English. :)
- The Kypchak singular noun and adjectival Karaim refers to any disciple of the Karays. The Karays are the clergy who serve the Karaims they live among. The Karay dynasty ruled in Crimea from the time of the Golden horde. Unlike the Karaim laity (who wore white) the Karay clergy wore black which in the Kypchak languages is the meaning of Kara (black) although Judeo-centric scholars have sometimes argued that it comes from the same etymological origin as the Biblical Hebrew word מקרא (convocation). Despite the coincidence of Karays wearing black, the Karay name of the clerical dynasty actually in fact comes from Aramaic being identical with the Koranic Arabic term قارئ (reader). The plural form of the Kypchak word Karay is Karaylar which in English would be Karays, and in Arabic would be قراء and in Hebrew would be קוראים but not קראים.
- If we try to devise an accurate term to describe the Karaim in Hebrew it might be "חברה של הקוראים" while Arabic would be "آلحواريون من القراء" which is why the most ancient attested name for the Karaims was Khavari.
- I hope this will answer all the questions you might have. Kaz 10:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Karaims and the "ОН-ОКЪ" (Ten Tribes)
It is common knowledge that Karaims (but not Karaite Jews) boast descent from Khazars, but what they do not realize is that we believe the Он-окъ (On-oq) whence came (mixing with Carian mercenaries from Caphtor and Kolhkis) our Khazar ancestors were in fact the remnant of the lost Ten-Tribes of Israel who formed our priesthood. It is precisely for this reason that Karaite Jewish scholars like Jacob Ben Reuben of Byzanteum and Yefet ben Ali or Jeshua ben Judah call us bastards in their writings.
The following editor (User:Yaaqov B. Yisrael above) points out very eloquently that Karaims explained this this long standing tradition to the Russian authorities as soon as we started to come under their dominion, almost a century before Firkovich published the results of his attempt to test the theory. Kaz 09:23, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Proposed renaming of article
The 7 year history of this discussion page shows that from the outset, the move of Karaims to Crimean Karaites was considered to be inappropriate action which confounds numerous issues. The Talk:Karaims history shows that even the very suggestion of merging Karaims with Karaites was opposed [3]. The Editor who initially proposed the move [4] even reformed his views having learned more about the irreconcilable differences [5]. The current naming of the article has done nothing but spread confusion and misinformation. Before and after its move, this article has never even been solely about the Crimean portion of the Karaims. The conclusion therefore is that the fervent and baseless oppositions of some confused and/or misinformed editors to the facts are preventing the article from being named appropriately to attract the attention of people knowledgeable about the subject to work on it and improve it to a worthy standard.
Unfortunately the initial move from Karaims to Crimean Karaites was performed twice with disregard to Wiki license policies, and another user was forced by the same confused editor to perform it a third time. It therefore needs the attention of an administrator who can restore the current article to its necessary location. Is there any admin out there who can clear up this mess soon please? Kaz 09:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
The renaming of the article to Turkic Karaims was proposed by me on 11:36, 27 August 2012 then almost two days later on 03:46, 29 August 2012 revised the proposal to restoring it to its original location on the Karaims page. Kaz 01:11, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
That is why I felt obliged to place a proper introduction to the section. Kaz 09:35, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Move reverted
I've reverted the article from being moved from Crimean Karaites to Turkic Karaites without discussion, per request of User:Toddy1, as he couldn't perform the revert over redirect himself due to technical issues. Since this is a contested move, it needs to have a discussion started and a consensus formed before considering a move again, per the spirit of WP:BRD. This revert shouldn't be construed to mean I have an opinion in the name, as I don't, and it is purely technical. Do not move it back until (and if) a discussion takes place that determines that this is the consensus. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Dennis, Hope all that will get the ball rolling now. Kaz 19:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Discussion of proposed renaming and merge
Yes, Karaimlar might very well have been named after Crimea (Qirim>Qirimlar), but despite proposed etymological origins, is it correct to refer to people in 22 different countries (to my knowledge) as Crimean? In general we have been referred to by academics as Karaites but at the same time so too were our historical adversaries the Karaite Jews. Only careful reading of the contexts reveal whether Turkic or Jewish Karaites were intended by the authors. Thus it is extremely necessary to distinguish between us. Some other term for our articles has to be decided if only temporarily to emphasize our Turkic (specifically Kipchak) identity and put an end to the confusion. Kaz 21:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
- I have now found a reference (which should have been the job of the opponent to the move in the first place) to where the idea that Karaimi is originally linked to Crimea (Seraya Shapshal suggested that Karaimi are the Kerami-Huns who settled in Crimea) and although I concede that it may be included in the article, it is still not a strong enough basis that the whole article should be named Crimean. Kaz 10:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- It has also been suggested that Crimean Karaites be merged into a section in the Karaims article. Seems reasonable. There could of course be sections for Polish Karaims, Ukrainian Karaims, Transylvanian Karaims, Lithuanian Karaims, and Russian Karaims too. What do you think? Kaz 17:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Please note Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion,, so engaging with the idea and talking about its pros and cons should be more important than just opposing it because Karaims are what you might see as an unpopular religions sect. Fact, Crimean Karaites is a misnomer, It should be Crimean Karaims, except that this article is about Karaims as a whole not just in Crimea. Fact Crimean Karaims are not Karaite Jews, but they are a sub-division of a unique Kipchak ethnic group known as Karaims which has nothing to do with Karaite Jews. Therefore this article should never have been re-directed from Karaims in the first place but should be moved back there.Kaz 06:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:UCN (use common names). The current title might be considered a misnomer but the intro of the article claims "significant numbers now only remain in Crimea" so I could question this assertion. However, it is not really relevant since it is not Wikipedia's job to rectify common usage in reliable sources. We merely reflect what others use. A search of Google Books reveals 1390 hits for "Crimean Karaites" (and 32 for "Crimean Karaims") but only 5 hits for "Turkic Karaites" (and 6 for "Turkic Karaims"). — AjaxSmack 00:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
- Note that my comment above was directed toward the original move proposal of Crimean Karaites → Turkic Karaites. The proposal was subsequently modified. Evidently, there has been some cut-and-paste moving going on and Karaims nearly duplicates Crimean Karaites. — AjaxSmack 00:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Does this mean you support the modified move proposal which was prompted by your own input and suggestions? Kaz 10:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- Note that my comment above was directed toward the original move proposal of Crimean Karaites → Turkic Karaites. The proposal was subsequently modified. Evidently, there has been some cut-and-paste moving going on and Karaims nearly duplicates Crimean Karaites. — AjaxSmack 00:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh well in that case we should re-name the Jews article "German Jews" because Google books gives the most results with that. Or Maybe "Israeli Jews" because the majority live in Israel? Come on let's please try to keep the discussion serious. The common usage would simply be Karaites, but then we run into problems without context. So how about Karaites (Turkic) then to clarify?Actually AjaxSmack's google solution is a good one, the term should be simply Karaims as per Google books 234 results. Kaz 03:46, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose The final goal of the proponent here is to really 'conquer' the name "Karaite" to his insignificant minority religous sect. You can see the campaign he's currently waging on Wikipedia towards that end at the Karaims article and at the Wikipedia "Project" he is spearheading for that purpose. This is a religious and political campaign that is being waged currently on Wikipedia against what the proponent himself terms above as "our historical adversaries the Karaite Jews." Let it be noted here that the "historical confusion" between the different streams and sects was started by this same sect in the Russian Empire throughout the 19th century, also for purposes of religious and political gains that were in the end granted them by the Russian Imperial authorities. warshytalk 23:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
- Warshy has a personal vendetta so his opinion should be counted as invalid. Nobody wants to confuse Karaites with Karaims here except Warshy. It is a simple matter of language. Karaim = singular Karayce noun. Qaraim = plural Hebrew noun. I don't know why there is so much confusion among those who can't get their facts right. 11:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Reply to personal slander: To say I have a personal vendetta on this issue is another slander to add to the one still standing on the Abraham Firkovich talk page. I oppose the narrow Islamic religious and political motivations behind all the massive changes being currently made en masse in Wikipedia content, without any reliable sources to support them. These massive content changes are being made by this same self-avowed priest of a small ethnic religious sect. These unsourced, religiously motivated changes have far reaching historical implications which have to be carefully weighed by Wikipedia editors concerned with the ovarall reliability of the encyclopedia. The confusion being sown here has actually very similar religious, ethnic, and political precedents in the history of the Russian Czarist empire in the 19th century, as I have pointed out above, and it is being now re-enacted once again right here, before our eyes [or underneath our noses, if you prefer...] warshytalk
- We are trying to clear up confusion by dealing with the sources of several years of misinformation propagating throughout the internet thanks to mirror sites of ambiguously written Wikipedia articles. We are certainly not trying to sustain the confusion. I don't know what you have against Karaims or why you are reverting references to us on Wikipedia, but your edit history speaks for itself. Kaz 15:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- I have already said and I will repeat. My only concern throughout this religious campaign of misinformation and confusion has been only the historical reliability of the encyclopedia, and the lack of any reliable sources for political and ethnic allegations that are being concertedly made here every day. The two slanders, and especially the one at the talk page above still stand. And, for any impartial observers, my edit history is as open as yours here on Wikipedia. You are editing on a single area, and an area that refers directly to your own personal religious beliefs and ethnic belonging. Actually, more than 'editing,' I see here a concerted campaign of misinformation that is based on religious faith and ethnic belonging, with no respect for any reliable sources. warshytalk 16:10, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- For Regardless of what we might *think* the agendas of those who post here might be, it is only the references and reasoned evidence presented that should concern us. 'Factuality' is not democratic, it's meritocratic. Whereas there may be room for some debate on the wider matters presented here, the evidence given by the previous poster with regard to the etymology of "Karaim" and "Qaraim" seems sound enough. Rather than slating it we should engage with it point by point and try to negate it using equally compelling evidence. If we can't, then it should stand. If the evidence is equal on both sides, then both should stand until more in uncovered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marek Hubert (talk • contribs) 12:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support and Comment The two articles have similar, almost identical content; this an anomaly. First of all the two articles should be merged. There is no problem in opening a "rename" discussion later (after the merger/move) but first of all WP has to solve this problem; i.e. the conflict about having two articles on the same topic. --E4024 (talk) 16:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Duly executed. Kaz 17:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support I know very little about this people but having two separate articles in WP on such a small community is meaningless so a merge is not only justified but also necessary. On the other hand, the discussion about naming can be continued after the merge. It should involve more users though, as 2-3 contributors are too few to form a real consensus. In short, IMO go ahead with the merge/move but a RfC for the naming issue would be good. --E4024 (talk) 18:21, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- The reason there were two articles was because Kaz had edited a redirect page to turn it into an article that was virtually the same as this article.[6] I have restored the redirect page to its former status.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Karaims existed as a stub before Crimean Karaites existed. It should never have been turned into a re-direct in the first place.Kaz 21:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- The reason there were two articles was because Kaz had edited a redirect page to turn it into an article that was virtually the same as this article.[6] I have restored the redirect page to its former status.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support I know very little about this people but having two separate articles in WP on such a small community is meaningless so a merge is not only justified but also necessary. On the other hand, the discussion about naming can be continued after the merge. It should involve more users though, as 2-3 contributors are too few to form a real consensus. In short, IMO go ahead with the merge/move but a RfC for the naming issue would be good. --E4024 (talk) 18:21, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Support Crimean Karaites are clearly a sub-sect of the Karaims and not Karaite Jews. Muthmar (talk) 18:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Support Danage (talk) 20:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Oppose as per warshy. Nozdref (talk) 13:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Support move(merge) of this article to Karaims (with the plural s). The common name status of "Karaims" supports this within WP guidelines. It allows for the inclusiveness of Karaims in Lithuania (and other areas). The name is also distinct enough from Karaim (with no s — the Hebrew term for Jewish Karaites). I would like to add the comment that a disambig page should exist for the term "Karaim" (with no s) suggesting both the Karaims article and the Karaite Judaism article in its body. "Karaylar" should redirect to Karaims as should Crimean Karaites. A disambiguation article already exists for the term "Karaite". — al-Shimoni (talk) 10:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Oppose move to Karaims - the words "Karaite" and "Karaim" seem to be used indistinguishably in English. So-called "Jewish Karaites" are also referred to as "Karaims". Wikipedia should follow English-language usage. It should not appropriate the word "Karaite" for Jewish-Karaites, and "Karaim" for the ones whom some people claim not are not Jewish, when in English usage the words "Karaite' and "Karaim" are used for both. Whatever this article is called, it should have a disambiguating word like "Crimean" or "Kipchak" or maybe even "Turkish". However I am not convinced that the case has been made for "Turkish" or "Turkic". It would be better if the article were developed further, using citations from reliable sources, and then maybe we will see what fits best. The article has been called "Crimean Karaites" for seven years; this may be a misnomer, but I do not know a better name for it, and nobody has made a case backed by reliable sources for a different name.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- Slight correction to an assertion made above: Karaite Jews, and those referring to them, would not use "Karaims" (with an s) for the plural to refer to themselves since "Karaim" is the plural form (Karai — which, like Karaim, is pronounced with 3 syllables — is the singular). The s pluralization that forms "Karaims" was a factor in my support of a move to that title because it does not "appropriate" a term used for Karaite Jews (it is a unique and common name for the Crimean Karaylar). — al-Shimoni (talk) 16:28, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- This is in the English language? or in the Hebrew language?--Toddy1 (talk) 18:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- This is in both. If you have an English language reference where Karaims is used to refer to Karaite Jews only and not to Karaimi/Karaimlar/Karaimai please do provide it here. I am quite sure you have misread it. No offense intended but I have noticed that English is not your native language sir. It is worth considering that you might have missed something in the discussions. Kind regards. Kaz 18:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- OK, here are three examples of the use of the phrase "Jewish Karaims" in English language publications:
- The Transatlantic Alliance on the Eve of the New Millennium, by Snežana Trifunovska, p156 uses the phrase "Jewish Karaims"
- Azerbaijan Since Independence, by Svante E. Cornell, p13 also uses the phrase "Jewish Karaims"
- The Baltic Times, Stateless cultures have a place at academic table, 30 March 2000, also uses the phrase "Jewish Karaims"
- The phase "Jewish Karaim" (either as singular or plural) is comparatively common.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:28, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- It is safe to say that in the first three examples you gave, the translations are mistakes. With regards to the last assertion above, kindly provide an example of English language reference to "Jewish Karaim" as a singluar noun. If you can, that too would be a mistake in translation. Alternatively it is also possible that the authors were either Jews unfamiliar with the Karaims' belief in Christ and Muhammad or non-Jews (as no Jew could make such a mistake) and simply asserted as did the Nazis at first that Karaims were no different from Jews. It is no problem however to put a "Mistaken Identity" section in the article mentioning such cases as examples of when mistaken assertions have lead to confusion, e.g. especially during the Holocaust. It is also continually worth a reminder that Jewish Karaim (plural) are eligible for citizenship in Israel under the Law of Return, but Karaims are not eligible except through regular conversion to Orthodox or Karaite Judaism. Kaz 18:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- OK, here are three examples of the use of the phrase "Jewish Karaims" in English language publications:
- This is in both. If you have an English language reference where Karaims is used to refer to Karaite Jews only and not to Karaimi/Karaimlar/Karaimai please do provide it here. I am quite sure you have misread it. No offense intended but I have noticed that English is not your native language sir. It is worth considering that you might have missed something in the discussions. Kind regards. Kaz 18:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- This is in the English language? or in the Hebrew language?--Toddy1 (talk) 18:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- Slight correction to an assertion made above: Karaite Jews, and those referring to them, would not use "Karaims" (with an s) for the plural to refer to themselves since "Karaim" is the plural form (Karai — which, like Karaim, is pronounced with 3 syllables — is the singular). The s pluralization that forms "Karaims" was a factor in my support of a move to that title because it does not "appropriate" a term used for Karaite Jews (it is a unique and common name for the Crimean Karaylar). — al-Shimoni (talk) 16:28, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Comment It should also be noted that two sites linked as offical site in external links section ([7][8]) also safely refer to themselves as "Crimean Karaites". Kaz happen to dislike the fact that Crimean Karaites are associated with Karaite Judaism and seeks to rename the article due to the word "Karaite" yet the word "Karaim" also seems to be associated with Karaite Judaism hence I found out this website about Karaite Judaism: http://www.karaim.net/ Nozdref (talk) 10:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
- Again Nozdref demonstrates perfectly the confusion caused by translating Karaylar into English as Karaites. Both sites to which I am affiliated make clear the difference between the religion of the Karaims described here http://karai.crimea.ua/karai/religiya-karaimov and here http://karaim-institute.narod.ru/pantheon/index.htm beautifully highlights clearly the distinction between us and Karaite Jews. Thank you for pointing out those two links Nozdref, if I had brought them up myself then someone might have said I can't bring something I myself am affiliated with as evidence. But they are sites only for Karaims from Crimea not other parts of Ukraine or Russia or Poland or Lithuania etc., although we all share roughly the same language and religion. Have a look at the picture in that link of a service in one of our Churches, you will see how different our ways are from Karaite Jews who do not use pews. Kaz 17:08, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes I know they are your sources, I could easily tell those sources were added by yourself since you named links "Karaylar" as you do everywhere. So you admit to be affiliated with these sources and adding some kind of self-published sources? That's good to hear. I could expect nothing less from you. I am simply pointing out there that these sources safely use "Crimean Karaites" to refer themselves, two words you have vendetta with. Vast majority of Crimean Karaites live in Crimea or Ukraine, but nobody can say those of them who live outside there are different people. Nozdref (talk) 22:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- Actually no, the vast majority of us live outside of Crimea, but Crimea does have the largest population in one place. I have no problem with calling the Karaims in Crimea Crimean (as they are), absolutely the Karaims in Crimea should be called Crimean Karaims. Karaims in Lithuania are called Lithuanian Karaims. Karaims in Russia are called Russian Karaims, in the USA we are called American Karaims, etc., etc., etc.. None of us are Karaite Jews (unless one or two of us have been converted to Karaite Judaism under the authority of some Universal Karaite Judaism program). If we had it our way we would call ourselves Karaites, but since there is already a group of Jews numbering about 45,000 in the world who call themselves Karaites already while we Karaims are the minority in this case then some sort of disambiguation is obviously called for. The vast majority of English language published references to us as opposed to Karaite Jews calls us Karaims therefore this might be best, otherwise the older form Karait (without an e) as we were called during the Golden Horde or Karaylar. Kaz 00:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- P.S. I did not publish those websites. By affiliated I refer to "informal association", the sort of solidarity I refer to exists between all Karaims who genuinely love our heritage. Kaz 10:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes I know they are your sources, I could easily tell those sources were added by yourself since you named links "Karaylar" as you do everywhere. So you admit to be affiliated with these sources and adding some kind of self-published sources? That's good to hear. I could expect nothing less from you. I am simply pointing out there that these sources safely use "Crimean Karaites" to refer themselves, two words you have vendetta with. Vast majority of Crimean Karaites live in Crimea or Ukraine, but nobody can say those of them who live outside there are different people. Nozdref (talk) 22:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Google book search counts
If doing Google book searches, it is necessary to go to the last page, as the numbers can be vastly different that suggest on the first page. For example Kaz's search for "Karaims" actually only produced 146 search results when you go to the last page (even though initially it said 30,000). Here are some results searching in English:
- Karaims[9] - 142
- Karaites[10] - 411
- "Crimean Karaites"[11] - 17
- "Crimean Karaims"[12] - 13
- "Turkic Karaites"[13] - 4
- "Turkic Karaims"[14] - 6
- ""Turkish Karaites"[15] - 17
- "Turkish Karaims"[16] - 1
--Toddy1 (talk) 20:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing that out Toddy, as you can see "Crimean Karaites" loses to "Karaims" in your results, so I suppose that means another vote to change. But I don't know why you included Karaites. Did you mean Karaite Jews? Because there is another article about Karaite Jews which has nothing to do with Turkic Karaims. Karaite Jews are not the topic of discussion here. Turkic Karaims are. In Turkic languages Karaim is a singular noun denoting a member of a Kypchak ethnic minority from Eastern Europe numbering about 2,500 people who believe in Christ and Muhammad. In Hebrew Qaraim is a plural word meaning Karaite Jews numbering about 45,000 people who do not believe in Christ or Muhammad. The words Karaite and Karaites in and of themselves are unfortunately ambiguous due to sloppy past scholarship and so can not be included without some type of clarification usually available through careful reading of the contexts. Kaz 15:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Which just proves my point just made above that what we are talking about here is really religious faith. But note the slick understanding of the Western religious mind, when a self-avowed priest of an Islamic sect, writes about belief "in Christ and Muhammad." This is the same type of political slickness that gained them the favor of the imperial authorities in Russia in the 19th century. warshytalk 15:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Why do you hate us so much? Is it because you are a Karaite Jew and you are upset that other Jews confuse you with us like this website http://karaism.org/ has done? I understand how frustrating this must be for you. Don't you think that clearly defined encyclopedic entries would be helpful for Karaite Jews in response against such criticisms against your religion? Kaz 16:38, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- That site, wow... What a crappy website. Why do you even give such crappy website as an example for "confusement"? It's obvious something antisemitic and Islamist which actually fits the mass-changes done in this article, which is mostly done by you. Nozdref (talk) 20:30, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- That is not constructive response and is in no way useful for the development of an encyclopedia entry. In fact it's just a deliberate attempt at offensiveness. I think we should allow Kaz to write this separate entry, make sure it is as rigorous as possible and then, if it is decided as being absolutely necessary (although I'm not sure what all the argument is about), simply apply a 'controversies' section with more rigorously referenced discussion about the perceived 'flaws' in Kaz's position. This should be more about *how* to include this information correctly, not whether it *should* be included. We don't censor because we don't like something, we edit to assure accuracy as far as is possible. It's irrelevant whether we *like* Kaz's community's 'dot-joining' between elements of Islamic, Christian and Jewish beliefs/tradition. All that matters is that he and his community can write about themselves lucidly and with references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marek Hubert (talk • contribs) 00:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- Your objectivity is appreciated sir, but if I may offer one suggestion, the Karaims are based primarily in former Eastern Bloc, while I am based in the UK, so I don't think it is correct to refer to Karaims as "Kaz's community". Kind regards. Kaz 07:54, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- True! I should have said "the community Kaz in referring to", or said, as you point out, "Karaims".
- Your objectivity is appreciated sir, but if I may offer one suggestion, the Karaims are based primarily in former Eastern Bloc, while I am based in the UK, so I don't think it is correct to refer to Karaims as "Kaz's community". Kind regards. Kaz 07:54, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- That is not constructive response and is in no way useful for the development of an encyclopedia entry. In fact it's just a deliberate attempt at offensiveness. I think we should allow Kaz to write this separate entry, make sure it is as rigorous as possible and then, if it is decided as being absolutely necessary (although I'm not sure what all the argument is about), simply apply a 'controversies' section with more rigorously referenced discussion about the perceived 'flaws' in Kaz's position. This should be more about *how* to include this information correctly, not whether it *should* be included. We don't censor because we don't like something, we edit to assure accuracy as far as is possible. It's irrelevant whether we *like* Kaz's community's 'dot-joining' between elements of Islamic, Christian and Jewish beliefs/tradition. All that matters is that he and his community can write about themselves lucidly and with references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marek Hubert (talk • contribs) 00:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- That site, wow... What a crappy website. Why do you even give such crappy website as an example for "confusement"? It's obvious something antisemitic and Islamist which actually fits the mass-changes done in this article, which is mostly done by you. Nozdref (talk) 20:30, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- Why do you hate us so much? Is it because you are a Karaite Jew and you are upset that other Jews confuse you with us like this website http://karaism.org/ has done? I understand how frustrating this must be for you. Don't you think that clearly defined encyclopedic entries would be helpful for Karaite Jews in response against such criticisms against your religion? Kaz 16:38, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Which just proves my point just made above that what we are talking about here is really religious faith. But note the slick understanding of the Western religious mind, when a self-avowed priest of an Islamic sect, writes about belief "in Christ and Muhammad." This is the same type of political slickness that gained them the favor of the imperial authorities in Russia in the 19th century. warshytalk 15:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- @Nozdref Perhaps it is worth considering that the reason why that site is given as an example of ' "confusement" ' is because it is a very good example of the mistake in conflating two unrelated groups (i.e. the Tatar ethnic group of Karaims with the Karaite Jewish sect of Judaism)? Kaz 07:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Since Kaz raised the issue of Jewish Karaites, I have done the same searches of Google books for Jewish Karaites:
--Toddy1 (talk) 19:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC) --Toddy1 (talk) 19:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
or even closer to my comments (though this discussion is about Karaims not Karaite Jews)
- "Karaite Jews"[19] - 242 or [20] - 68 (and google [21] as you did)
- "Jewish Karaites[22] - 63
- "Jewish Karaims" [23] - 5 (a bit of a misnomer)
But Toddy1, can you explain why there are two different results for Karaite Jews? Kaz 20:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- The difference in the results for "Jewish Karaites" (searching in English language) can be explained by the following text in Google: "In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 317 already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included."--Toddy1 (talk) 07:20, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- Are you sure you are talking about google books? Kaz 10:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm getting strange results with google books on my computer. [24] this is meant to be a search without the words Karaites or Karaite or Karaim but the results seem to include some of these words. If this happens, how can we be sure any google book search for say "Karaims -llc -wiki" will be accurate? Also you can see it is on page 22 of 31, but look what happens when you click the next page. On my computer it then says page 2 of 2. Does this happen on yours too? I think as per my very first reaction to using google books [25], it might be necessary to be very careful using google books as a guide after all. I am thinking of preparing a basic bibliography ref list if I can find time. Kaz 17:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Redirect page
People keep putting this article on what had been redirect pages. - I have restored Karaims to its former status as a redirect page. If it is decided to name the article "Karaim" or something else, then it should be done by a move, preserving the history.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Please don't, it is against what people are asking for here. If anything, this article should be re-directed to the Karaims page.Kaz 20:45, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Also your efforts are appreciated, but wiki merge policy dictates that the merge discussion should take place on the Talk:Karaims page not here. but since you have moved things here, let's not jump the gun.Kaz 20:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Karaims was the (albeit extremely poorly written) original article [26] not a redirect.Kaz 20:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- There was no Karaims article until you created it from a redirect page as a POV device. You asked for a move, and started the discussion here, so let it run its course.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sir kindly check your facts. But let's please discuss. What POV do you think Crimean Karaim as a sub-category of Karaim serves? Kaz
- Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User Kaz and Crimean Karaites/Karaims POV Fork.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Sir kindly check your facts. But let's please discuss. What POV do you think Crimean Karaim as a sub-category of Karaim serves? Kaz
- There was no Karaims article until you created it from a redirect page as a POV device. You asked for a move, and started the discussion here, so let it run its course.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
The following comment is because I brought up the issue of Karaite Jews being confused with "Karaims (a turkic ethno-religious group with Islamic and Christian beliefs from Eastern Europe) as in for example the website http://www.karaism.org .... Kaz 16:17, 31 August 2012 (UTC)" Kaz 21:13, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- I've checked that site being used as primary arguement used by those who support the change (you and Kaz) and who mass-changed artices releated Crimean Karaites (without actual reference or source) and this site is all about showing how "Islamic" Karaites are and so-called "Jewish deceptions", degrading Jewishness of of Karaims and replacing it with Islam, which actually supports the absurd mass-change done in this article. Nozdref (talk) 19:00, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Further discussion
- The www.karaism.org website was not brought up in this discussion as an example of confusion between Karaims and Karaite Jews propagating on the internet (possibly as a result of wikipedia articles) until 16:38, 30 August 2012 so you can not say it is the primary argument for confusion going back many years. The internet archive indicates that website only appeared last year and makes use of the confusion between Karaims and Karaites presented in wikipedia articles as a basis for its attacks against Karaite Jews. In fact the article is primarily a hate site against against the Karaims while Karaite Jews can only be hurt there by being associated with the Karaims because Karaite Jews find unpalatable the beliefs and practices of Karaims. It is in the best interests of the people who subscribe to that site (a sect by the name of Malkut Yehudah) to sustain the confusion between Karaims (Tatar ethnic group) and Karaites Jews (Jewish sect), as for example Nozdref and Warshy are doing. Kaz 07:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- Dude, you've changed entire religion of this ethnic group in just few days. You have added your own WikiProjects, userboxes, categories, and other things based on by your own perspective and all you're doing is pushing your own POV. You've previously posted something to Warshy saying "You're confusing us with like those in http://www.karaism.org does" while the website actually says what you're trying to push here, such as removing Judaism (simply because either you don't like it or you're antisemitic) from Crimean Karaites and replacing it with Islam. I don't know how all those POV mass-change will be tolerated but it seems unacceptable to me and causing even more confusion and misinformation. Nozdref (talk) 13:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- Sir, please stop ad-hominem attacks. Antisemitism is a criminal offense in your country and mine. It is a very serious matter to accuse someone of criminal activity. Your charge will not stand up in any court of law. You are still confusing Karaite Jews (eligible for Aliyah) with Karaims (ineligible for Aliyah on grounds of religion and ethnic heritage). There are no Karaite Jews in Crimea, only Crimean Karaims are there. Unlike Karaite Jews, Karaims believe Christ and Muhammad are prophets. This was confirmed by Firkovich in a publication by the community of Polish Karaims in 1938 on the topic of the relationship of Karaims to Islam and Christianity. He said: "Karaims view Christ and Mohammed as prophets." But such citations are only necessary for Wikipedia, all Karaims are brought up knowing this anyway. A wiki project on Karaims is necessary in order to clear up the confusion between Karaims and Karaite Jews and improve the quality of Karaims-related articles for the benefit of less informed readers like yourself. Kaz 14:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not using ad hominems. I'm just stating facts about what you're doing and motives. Anyone who's of Jewish origin or holding Jewish faith is eligible for Aliyah, hence Karaims (or anyone else) who practice Karaite Judaism is eligible for Aliyah. Karaite Judaism is a religion and not ethniticy. Your campaign here is to remove any Jewish element from Karaims and replacing it with Islam without actual sources let alone reliable sources. Here's take a look at some of your "contributions":
- "The Karay interpretation of Torah is significantly different from both Karaite Judaism and Orthodox Judaism, so for this reason their observances are classified as Mosaism (along with Molokans, Gerei, and Subbotniks) but not Judaism"
- "The highest spiritual level which can be attained by Karays is Gahan (historically misinterpreted by Jewish ethnographers as Hakham)"
- "The wisdom of the Karays was greatly appreciated by the Khazars who soon became their disciples (Khavars) which Jewish scholars have historically mistaken for Judaism"
- Oh, those Jewish scholars were such idiots whom are easy to fool, weren't they? They managed to confuse Crimean Karaites, whom are "Christians who follow Mohammad salallahu aleihi wasalam", with Jews somehow. I'm sure those Karaite kenesas of Crimean Karaites are also infact mosques whom mistaken for synanogues by those stupid Jewish scholars. And Çufut Qale for sure has nothing to Karaims. I'm amazed you haven't removed those Crimean Karaite kenesas yet considering your goal is to remove any Jewish links from this article because everybody is confusing them like those clueless Jewish scholars done. The fact is nobody's confusing Crimean Karaites, but you're perhaps confusing them with Crimean Tatars, I can tell by your addition of Crimean Khanate tamgas to anything releated with Crimean Karaites. Nozdref (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- Mr Kosniowski, you are not seeming to get the point. Karaims are not יהודים הקראים. Karaims do not practice יהדות הקראית. That is why they are not eligible for Aliyah. You are still (willfully?) confusing Karaims with יהודים הקראים. I don't know how many times I have to point this out. Gahan (Hakhan if you like but he was not Hakham) Firkovich was published in 1938 stating very clearly "Karaims view Christ and Muhammad as prophets". Don't you know that this is not possible for יהודים הקראים to believe? I tell you what, you try to put in sections on the Jews and Who is a Jew pages with comment about the beliefs of the Karaims as stated by Hachan Firkovich and see if it is allowed to stay there. If it is removed then we know you are wrong. Kindly restrain yourself any more such comments. Kaz 21:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- A reminder: No legal threats, please. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- I've left a note on Kaz's talk page, that must be removed by them and it must be explained that he has no intention of seeking legal action. Most admins would have just blocked on site, but I'm trying to give a very short period of time to fix. If not, ping me, and I will be forced to do it the hard way. I don't like it, but WP:DOLT forces my hand. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- A reminder: No Personal Attacks, I will strike as soon as the causes are stricken. That is fair and equitable is it not? Dennis you are absolutely correct, most admins would have blocked those attacks on sight. It is a real wonder why no one did. P.S. WP:DOLT indicates that Nozdref's comments should have been blanked, not mine, although the policy is about Article pages not talk pages. Kaz 22:17, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- Nozdref - You need to dial it back about 3 notches. There is no reason to be that incivil, period. Discuss the merits, by all means, but keep it civil. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:17, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- I am confused here.
- Nozdref suggests that Kaz might be antisemitic,[27] and that is a personal attack, and gets the reaction above.
- Kaz then claims that I make Islamophobic edits.[28]
- On the same night Kaz also made the much less serious allegation that I run sock puppets.[29]
- What's the difference? Denis - please can Kaz's edit summary [30] be redacted.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well Antisemitism is criminal but Islamophobia isn't yet, so one accusation constitutes defamation of charachter while the other does not (yet) but in Principle yes I am in agreement. Can all such statements from all guilty parties be redacted please? Meanwhile, why you considered the sock-puppet comment directed at Nozdref actually concerns yourself is beyond me. I do not want to be distracted by rather pointless ad-hominem polemics, so I will do my best to ignore all subsequent discussion on this sort of time wasting. Kaz 07:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- In the posting alleging sock-puppetry,[31] Kaz wrote "Denis" one time, "Toddy" three times, but did not write "Nozdref" at all.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- The topic of the sentence is on Nozdref's edits. Why you thought those edits were yours is beyond me. Although something might be starting to make sense to others now. Kaz 08:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- That was a very weak excuse and doesn't justify your attacks. Also I'm nobody else's sock puppet or whatever, that's really ridicilious accusation. Any admin is free to check out. Nozdref (talk) 12:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
- In the posting alleging sock-puppetry,[31] Kaz wrote "Denis" one time, "Toddy" three times, but did not write "Nozdref" at all.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well Antisemitism is criminal but Islamophobia isn't yet, so one accusation constitutes defamation of charachter while the other does not (yet) but in Principle yes I am in agreement. Can all such statements from all guilty parties be redacted please? Meanwhile, why you considered the sock-puppet comment directed at Nozdref actually concerns yourself is beyond me. I do not want to be distracted by rather pointless ad-hominem polemics, so I will do my best to ignore all subsequent discussion on this sort of time wasting. Kaz 07:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- I have alleged he might be antisemitic just once yet and where he issued me legal threats there was no accusation of antisemitism or whatsoever, yet he kept issuing me those legal threats, leaving this alone he also does same kind of accusations as shown above. However admitedly I rather acted as if I'm in some forum and I shouldn't have done it despite his attitude isn't any different, but my point still stands and what I've been saying is very visible. Nozdref (talk) 12:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
- I am confused here.
- I've left a note on Kaz's talk page, that must be removed by them and it must be explained that he has no intention of seeking legal action. Most admins would have just blocked on site, but I'm trying to give a very short period of time to fix. If not, ping me, and I will be forced to do it the hard way. I don't like it, but WP:DOLT forces my hand. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- A reminder: No legal threats, please. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- Mr Kosniowski, you are not seeming to get the point. Karaims are not יהודים הקראים. Karaims do not practice יהדות הקראית. That is why they are not eligible for Aliyah. You are still (willfully?) confusing Karaims with יהודים הקראים. I don't know how many times I have to point this out. Gahan (Hakhan if you like but he was not Hakham) Firkovich was published in 1938 stating very clearly "Karaims view Christ and Muhammad as prophets". Don't you know that this is not possible for יהודים הקראים to believe? I tell you what, you try to put in sections on the Jews and Who is a Jew pages with comment about the beliefs of the Karaims as stated by Hachan Firkovich and see if it is allowed to stay there. If it is removed then we know you are wrong. Kindly restrain yourself any more such comments. Kaz 21:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not using ad hominems. I'm just stating facts about what you're doing and motives. Anyone who's of Jewish origin or holding Jewish faith is eligible for Aliyah, hence Karaims (or anyone else) who practice Karaite Judaism is eligible for Aliyah. Karaite Judaism is a religion and not ethniticy. Your campaign here is to remove any Jewish element from Karaims and replacing it with Islam without actual sources let alone reliable sources. Here's take a look at some of your "contributions":
- Sir, please stop ad-hominem attacks. Antisemitism is a criminal offense in your country and mine. It is a very serious matter to accuse someone of criminal activity. Your charge will not stand up in any court of law. You are still confusing Karaite Jews (eligible for Aliyah) with Karaims (ineligible for Aliyah on grounds of religion and ethnic heritage). There are no Karaite Jews in Crimea, only Crimean Karaims are there. Unlike Karaite Jews, Karaims believe Christ and Muhammad are prophets. This was confirmed by Firkovich in a publication by the community of Polish Karaims in 1938 on the topic of the relationship of Karaims to Islam and Christianity. He said: "Karaims view Christ and Mohammed as prophets." But such citations are only necessary for Wikipedia, all Karaims are brought up knowing this anyway. A wiki project on Karaims is necessary in order to clear up the confusion between Karaims and Karaite Jews and improve the quality of Karaims-related articles for the benefit of less informed readers like yourself. Kaz 14:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- Dude, you've changed entire religion of this ethnic group in just few days. You have added your own WikiProjects, userboxes, categories, and other things based on by your own perspective and all you're doing is pushing your own POV. You've previously posted something to Warshy saying "You're confusing us with like those in http://www.karaism.org does" while the website actually says what you're trying to push here, such as removing Judaism (simply because either you don't like it or you're antisemitic) from Crimean Karaites and replacing it with Islam. I don't know how all those POV mass-change will be tolerated but it seems unacceptable to me and causing even more confusion and misinformation. Nozdref (talk) 13:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- The www.karaism.org website was not brought up in this discussion as an example of confusion between Karaims and Karaite Jews propagating on the internet (possibly as a result of wikipedia articles) until 16:38, 30 August 2012 so you can not say it is the primary argument for confusion going back many years. The internet archive indicates that website only appeared last year and makes use of the confusion between Karaims and Karaites presented in wikipedia articles as a basis for its attacks against Karaite Jews. In fact the article is primarily a hate site against against the Karaims while Karaite Jews can only be hurt there by being associated with the Karaims because Karaite Jews find unpalatable the beliefs and practices of Karaims. It is in the best interests of the people who subscribe to that site (a sect by the name of Malkut Yehudah) to sustain the confusion between Karaims (Tatar ethnic group) and Karaites Jews (Jewish sect), as for example Nozdref and Warshy are doing. Kaz 07:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
You are all missing the point: Drop the discussion on personalities and get to the content itself. Be the bigger person and just move on, all of you. All the discussion on racism is getting you nowhere. Accept that you don't like each other, and instead focus on the merits here. You aren't going to like everyone at WP, that is a fact, but you still have to work with each other, so everyone just grin and bear it. I really don't want to get into the content portion of the discussion, it isn't my field of expertise, I am just trying to get you ALL to drop the personal comments. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:21, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Dispute history and resolution
- Many Users on various pages expressed the need to distinguish between Karaims and Karaite Jews who are both sometimes referred to simply as Karaites where only familiarity with the contexts and groups in question will enable readers to distinguish between what is meant. Lack of expertise in the subject areas meant that poor quality and confusing articles surrounding the Karaims have been mirrored from wiki throughout the internet for the past few years.
- Crimean Karaites is a misnomer by which Crimean Karaims is meant.
- A Page move to Crimean Karaims was attempted, but since the majority of Karaims live outside of Crimea, this was still not an appropriate move and re-name.
- In order to solve the context issue whereby Karaite Jews are accused of being Karaims (a turkic ethno-religious group with Islamic and Christian beliefs from Eastern Europe) as in for example the website http://www.karaism.org it was suggested that the Crimean Karaites article be renamed Turkic Karaites and a disambiguation page be placed at Karaites to end confusion on the issue.
- In the process of discussion a resolution was attempted following suggestions by AjaxSmack the name change suggestion was altered from Turkic Karaites to more accurate Karaims which was anyway the location and name of the original article until a user who did not understand the differences between Karaims and Karaites redirected the Karaims article here.
- User Toddy1 continued AjaxSmack's google available literature approach and indeed the overwhelming majority of literature on the topic available in English (using google books as a guide) as well as in Polish, Lithuanian, Ukrainian, Russian, and the Karaim languages themselves refers to us as Karaims not Crimean Karaims, not Turkic Karaites and not Crimean Karaites.
- In the process of name change voting on Karaims, the suggestion was made that the Crimean Karaites article should be merged with the Karaims article under the Crimean Karaims sub-section but bad faith was assumed and aggressive tactics were used to ensure the Karaims article was merged into Crimean Karaims instead thereby sustaining the naming issue.
- Although the Karaims and those who know about us understand where the problem is coming from and have supported the need to change the article name, users unfamiliar with the literature and contexts are unable to discern in the available literature when ethnic Karaims are meant and when Karaite Jews are meant.
- The decision making process has been hampered from reaching consensus by a couple of users supporting racism or discrimination from specific religious groups regarding Karaims as "bastards" against ethnoreligious Karaims and our Gahan leaders calling them dishonest/liars/forgers etc.. This might need to be elevated to the next level.
Kaz 16:17, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- Still no attempts at dispute resolution from Nozdref who only makes ad-hominem attacks, and from Toddy1 who continues to participate with only disruptive behavior. No end in sight yet. Kaz 21:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Kaz wrote:
- "Many users on various pages expressed the need to distinguish between Karaims and Karaite Jews"
Please could you list these users, giving diffs. Te reason for asking this can be found at WP:Weasel.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:29, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- Certainly sir, if I am not mistaken the users unhappy about the confusion would include: User:Lysy; User:DariusMazeika; User:Yoshiah ap; User:Neria; User:The Mummy; User:IZAK; User:Don Alessandro; User:Basejumper; User:Jrm2007; User:Yaaqov B. Yisrael; User:YaaqovYisrael; User:Galassi; User:AjaxSmack; User:Danage; User:Muthmar; User:E4024; User:Marek Hubert; User:Nonstopbrakes; User:Yogensha; User:Björn-Isak Rosendahl , etc.. If you have any more questions like that please be sure to read a lot more first, not everyone will always have the time to do your homework for you. Kind regards Kaz 09:30, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
62.255.75.224 and User:Kaz appear to be the same person - [32],[33]--Toddy1 (talk) 10:07, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes that is my IP Kaz 11:28, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Something that adds to the confusion is that Karaites (Jewish) refer to themselves as "Karaim" (also written Kara'im, Qaraim, and Qara'im). This is superficially the same word being used above to distinguish the Crimean people from the Jewish people. In English, they (the Jewish group) are commonly (by outsiders) called "Karaites" (an anglicization of קראים Qaraˀîm, the singular forms are Karaˀi or Qaraˀi) but amongst themselves, and in other languages, "Karaim" (or the Q form) is frequent. In all cases, for the Jewish group, these terms usually stand alone (that is, without the qualifiers such as "Judaism" or "Jew").
That said, the term "Karaylar", for the Crimean people, can not be confused for the Jewish group. — al-Shimoni (talk) 08:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- I agree absolutely with your suggestion of Karaylar (or better still Karaimlar) Al-Shimoni, unfortunately,although these terms are indeed how members of this ethnic group refer to themselves, these names are not in keeping with the WP:CRITERIA or WP:UCN guidelines as already pointed out by Toddy1 and AjaxSmack. It is worthwhile noting the Hebrew word is plural while the Karaim language word is singular as described here Talk:Crimean_Karaites#Pluralization_.3F. I propose that some disambiguation pages are called for. Kaz 08:27, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
I want to get back to clarifying the name of this article with reference to WP:UCN and WP:CRITERIA based upon numbers in google book searches. I will also try to explain the Russian results. Nozdref does not get the point that there are two different Russian words translated as Jews. one is Evrei which literally means Hebrew, yes Karaims believe ourselves to be Hebrews just as we consider people of all descendants of Abraham to be Evrei (Hebrew). The other word is Iudei, meaning Jewish, which we are not. Nozdref, if you want to call "Crimean Karaites" Jewish because of the word Evrei, then you have to call all Arabs Jewish too. This is plainly erroneous. Hebrews just as Abraham yes, but not Jews. You need to know that if we were calling ourselves Jews we would use the word Chufut (from Arabic Yahud) in our language, which we only use to refer to Krymchaks and never to ourselves. We Karaims are not Chufut (Jews) as any of what you are calling here "Crimean Karaites" who can still speak Karayce tili will tell you. Moreover, Karaite Jews (Chufut) teach that Khazars are bastards (but that one can live in Ashdod) while Karaims believe that we are Khazars. The two beliefs are simply incompatible, which is why Karaims can not be confused with Karaite Jews (Chufut) also as mentioned, Karaims believe in the prophets Christ and Muhammad, but Karaite Jews (Chufut) do not. The leaders of the Karaims were called simply Gahan until Gahan Babovich who greatly admired Rabbinical Judaism adopted the Hebrew title Hakham for the first time among us in 1840, he was also impressed by the Hebrew calendar which he adopted for us at that time too. This has led many to confuse us with Karaite Jews (Chufut). As Nozdref is perfect evidence of the fact, readers who see the title Crimean Karaites instantly think this means Crimean Karaite Jews (Chufut) and they remain (as Nozdref) completely oblivious to the existence of our Kypchak ethnic group of similarly but not identically named Karaims. Therefore something needs must be done about putting an end to the confusion. Kaz 23:24, 11 September 2012 (UTC) I would like to know what Toddy1 and Nozdref agree on with the 20 or so rest of us involved in this several year long dispute. Kaz 10:18, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Problems with citations of information
Some of the information cited in the article is not credibly cited.
- "However, Miller stated that the phenomenon of claiming a distinct identity apart from the Jewish people appears to be no older than the 19th century, when it appeared under the influence of such leaders as [[Avraham Firkovich]] and [[Sima Babovich]] as a means of escaping [[anti-Semitism]]<ref name=Miller_p36>Miller, ''Karaite Separatism in 19th Century Russia'' p36.</ref>."
Strangely enough I asked Kaz to provide citations on 3 September, and gave an example of the format.[34] So he added the example citation to the article as shown.[35] This is not believable.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Toddy1's book and page reference for the Miller comment has been missing long before me until he provided it. I thought he was being accurate. I am extremely happy to remove the entire sentence which I believe to be bogus anyway. I want to point out I left it in to appease Toddy1 during my revision although I disagree with its credibility.
- I am also happy to have the section about Identity removed if Toddy1 is unable to provide references for it.Kaz 07:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- The book reference for Miller was deleted by Kaz at 09:31, 3 September 2012.[36] Admittedly this did not give a page number. The book refered to was mentioned in the bibliography at the bottom, so it was clear which book was being referred to.--Toddy1 (talk) 19:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- You are not very skillful at reporting accurately what is actually going on in your links and references Toddy1. Kaz 21:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- The book reference for Miller was deleted by Kaz at 09:31, 3 September 2012.[36] Admittedly this did not give a page number. The book refered to was mentioned in the bibliography at the bottom, so it was clear which book was being referred to.--Toddy1 (talk) 19:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Problems with citations
Arabic language
Citation 5 is provided to back up the claim that the Crimean Karaite language is sometimes written in Arabic script. This citation is: "Trakų Salos Pilis - Muziejus, Book in Karaim language in Arabic script near Menorah (Hanukkah) - Trakai Island Castle - Lithuania". But the URL is from flickr.com, it does not show the uploader details. This one does:[http://www.flickr.com/photos/moacirdsp/3942867638/in/photostream/ this reveals that the uploader self-identified as Moacir de Sa Pereira (User:moacirdsp). This is therefore a self-published source.--Toddy1 (talk) 12:24, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
The book is in the Museum for all to see. Your criticism is unclear, but your POV pushing is very clear. Kaz 14:44, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Identity
The identity section contains the following statement:
- Most Jews[1][2] along with the Israeli Rabbinate and especially Karaite Jews[3] do not regard Karaims (as opposed to Karaite Jews) as Jewish.
I have been unable to find statements in the two citations after "most Jews" that would back up the statement "Most jews... do not regard Karaims (as opposed to Karaite Jews) as Jewish." Green's article does say that during the German occupation of Poland Jewish scholars in the Vilna, Warsaw and Lvov ghettos conducted "wartime research" "to help solve the riddle of the Karaites' racial origin", and suggested that "the Karaites were of Turkic-Tatar descent and therefore, were not racially related to the Jews", and also that the Karaites "had little in common with the Jews." That is very different from the statement in the article.
You must remember the circumstances. The Jewish scholars were at least somewhat aware of the fate the Germans intended for the Jews; they knew that if the Karaites were not classified as Jews, then the Karaites could escape the fate of the Jews. In addition, at least some Rabbinic Jews were on false papers pretending to be Karaites (though whether the scholars guessed this is not known). Since the Karaites spoke a Tatar language and the Rabbinic Jews spoke Yiddish, it was easy to claim that the Karaites were a different ethnicity (though this is not the same as believing that the Karaites were non-Jews).--Toddy1 (talk) 12:25, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
- There is no mistake in the cited sources, but there is a problem with your POV pushing. You have made clear again and again that you think Karaims are legitimate Jews, and I am sure there are many Messianic Jews who would agree with you but the problem is the Israeli Rabbinate does not agree with you. Kaz 14:49, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
The current corrected citations are now accurate at least. Kaz 00:21, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Other citations to Brook's The Jews of Khazaria
The citation to p110-11 of Brook's The Jews of Khazaria, does support the information cited.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems despite his significant contributions on this page, Briangotts is responsible for some of the original confusions here [37] and cites no page numbers until much later [38]. In the 1999 edition Kevin Alan Brook makes this conclusion himself on page 143, but it seems Briangotts holds Brook's view in very high regard [39]. Since you have checked out his ref as bogus I have put in the correct edition and page number. Kaz 09:02, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
The current corrected citations are now accurate at least. If you have more to offer on the subject from the 2006 book that you have then please don't hold it back. Kaz 00:21, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Call for more constructive edits
Why do I feel like I am the only principle editor doing all the hard yards here these days while at least one or two other editors who have not exerted themselves to the point where they could be called the "principal editor" of any significant article insist that their own ill-considered contributions take precedence? Can we have some real constructive input on Karaimi/Karaims/Karaimai from more editors from now on please? I think the article is finally well structured with enough appropriately named sections in the article to include any relevant references/sources for articles like [40]. Work which needs to be done includes more background information on the roles of Ułłu and Szamasz (e.g. here [41] for example). I really hope more editors than those currently involved will join in constructively. Kaz 11:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
The order of this talk page
Extended content
| ||
---|---|---|
I have restored the order of this talk page to the order at the start of the day. The wholesale unilateral changes introduced by an editor today seemed deceptive to me. I have just noticed that a new section was added on 21 August, entitled "Complete re-write needed as current version is utter codswallop and balderdash". Unfortunately this section was added at the top of the page. This is against Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, which state that we should "start new topics at the bottom of the page". It is confusing to have new topics at the top of the page, which was why I overlooked it. I would like to move this topic so that it appears in the order that it would have appeared in, if it had been put at the bottom when it was created. Does anyone mind if this topic is moved to between "File:Flicker... Nominated for Deletion" and "Proposed renaming of article"?--Toddy1 (talk) 15:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
More Ad-Hominem attacks
Proposal for cleaning up the talk pageThe parts of this talk page before 11.4 Redirect Page seem quite good. I do not think we would lose much if all the sections after that had an extended content wrapper put round it. We can carry on scratching each other's eyes out, but it is not going to do any of us any good. By leaving all this "dirty washing" in the open, we lay ourselves open to attack by people claiming that we "don't seem to be able to have a civilized discussion amongst" ourselves. Kaz, Nozdref would you both be willing to agree to this? Nothing gets deleted - but it gets put in an envelope (see below).--Toddy1 (talk) 20:35, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
I don't want the whole "Karaite Jews ain't Karaims ande vice versa" thing to be put in an envelope. Kaz 22:06, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
With the permission of Al-Shimoni we could move the "Dispute history" section directly under the google book counts and remove the title so that it all fits in one discussion. Kaz 00:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
No I did not, look at the edit again here [43] I simply undid your move of my comments. Something you seem to like doing to me very much. And even if I had, my recent Admin noticeboard appeal when you did this to me remember (surely your memory is not hat short???) revealed that there is no rule about moving or even removing another person's comments on talk page. Apology now please? No? Hmmm I didn't think so. P.S. Do I still have to be the one to restoring to their intended locations my comments which you deleted then moved to the wrong places? Kaz 07:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC) |
What a mess
Ok, Let's get a few things straight here, shall we? First off, yes, this talk page is a mess. We have established that, and we have established that no one party is to blame for it, so let's please move on from the blame game and try to fix it up. The current solution is creative, I'll give it that, but the section headings are all wrong. Also, we have several threads here that are five to seven years old. Those should have been archived a long time ago, and I intend to begin that process momentarily.
What would be best for everyone would be if everyone stopped moving comments, and agreed to let the issue drop. It is hardly the real issue here, is it? Isn't the real issue a proposed page move? It seems ridiculous to spend so much time debating how to organize a talk page. In the future everyone should just follow normal talk page procedures. Here are some talk page conventions that are followed more or less everywhere on Wikipedia:
- New remarks below old remarks. Don't insert remarks into the middle of a thread.
- New discussions go under a level two header, formatted like this: ==section title==
- Do not insert new headers over another user's comments that disparige the user or their comments
- Do not move one another's comments unless they were an obvious mistake
- Comment on the content, not the other contributors. That is what this talk page is for. If you want to complain about other users do it somewhere else.
- Given the above it may be a good idea to also archive most or all of the recent conversation that is outside the scope and purpose of a talk page.
Beeblebrox (talk) 17:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- I agree entirely. Please can you implement the archiving.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:53, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Objection to archive would hide the fact that this dispute is 8 years long and as of yet unresolved. As far as I am aware you can not do this without consent of all involved. Do you have another solution? Kaz 18:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- Archiving a talk page is done to keep it from becoming to long and cumbersome. Nobody's permission is needed to archive old discussions. They are not lost, they are linked right at the top of this page. This is not an attempt at obfuscation, it is merely a very,very common solution to organizing talk pages that have become bloated and very much in keeping with what is done on all Wikipedia article talk pages. This does not mean the debate is over, it just means that old inactive discussions are no longer cluttering up this page. I'm sure you don't want to take my word for it so see WP:ARCHIVE. This is done every day, all over Wikipedia. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Since I am back after a short hiatus to my WP editing activities due to real world events, I certainly agree with Beeblebrox and Toddy1 on this simple organizational procedure of archiving, just in order to achieve some measure of text manageability in these long partisan debates. warshytalk 19:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- Beeblebrox - please can 2010 posts be archived too.--Toddy1 (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
- Of course, page is disorganized I didn't see that there was a 2010 discussion sandwiched in between two 2012 discussions. Beeblebrox (talk)|
- +1 for great win: Thank you Beeblebrox for reading the riot act over this page. As one who was trying to figure out what the problem was from WP:DRN I gave up about half way down. Hasteur (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
:Lithuanian Wikipedia as a base ?
I would like to know what is a reason that a base of this article is a Lithuanian page, This page is written in the language unspoken by most of Crimean Karaites and includes the "knowledge" of about ten peoples,and does not include ANY source! While there is comprehensive page in Russian spoken by the most of Crimean Karaites that includes several hundreds correction,and tens of sources.
I think it is a reason while this English page so far from neutrality and reflects the opinion only of the most extreme Karaylar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Неполканов (talk • contribs) 19:09, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
The most recent Chief Gahan of the East European Karaims was one of the Lithuanian Karaims. It seems only the Lithuanian page has not been influenced by anti-Karaims POV. I am impressed to see some of your contributions to the article sir. However, one edit you contributed to this page concerns a known convert to Rabbinical Judaism and so I removed it as it does not really belong here. I notice that your Username makes reference to Yurii Polkanov, head of the World Association of Karaims. He is a great man. :) Kaz 07:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
The "Lithuanian" Karaims actually are living on teritory with Lithuanian Minority that till 1939 was under Polish Authority,so their mother tongue is till USSR collapse time was not Lithuanian ,Russian is the language the elder Karaims are speaking in their homes,(not Lithuanian). In opposite to Lithuanian source(WITHOUT ANY SOURCE) ,Russian page represents several opinions including the opinion of Chazar theory.In opposition to this YOUR page(because you remove all other opinions even with references ) ,every statement at Russian page have reference.Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Could you quote me a specific example please? You seem to be mistaken. Are you building a straw-man? Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
For example you have removed the link to wikipedia article to Dulo Tamga actually referring to Bulgar Dulo dinasty and not to Kerait .By the way the Giray tamga presented at this page actually is the symbol of Crimean Tatars so it cannot be Karailar symbol. Refer to Russian article to see invented by Seraya Shapshal,Karaylar symbol Неполканов (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC).
I think it would be best to bring such comments from the Russian article here. I agree with you which is why I changed the Lithuanian source article to the Russian source article. You made a very good point. Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Some of your comments are a bit too passionate for an encyclopedic article. I would like to include them in a relevant section but wonder if it would be ok to re-phrase them? Also,
- Нам — современным караимам-просветителям, воскрешающим духовное наследие «Русских Караимов Ветхозаветного Вероисповедания» (то есть караимов всей Восточной Европы, в прошлом бывшей под властью Российской империи) близки идеи караимских просветителей 19-начала XX века — династии Луцких,Султанского, династии Бабовичей,Фирковича, Шишмана об этногенезе караимов Европы в качестве библейско-тюркско-персидской общины — то есть остатка библейского Израиля по мужской линии и прозелитами — перешедшими в караизм из других народов, смешанных с женщинами из среды тюрков-кыпчаков и хазар и персов-татов. В то же время нам абсолютно чужды безграмотные, антинаучные и попросту невежественные идеи-фантазии нынешних пантюркистов-популистов, не знающих по-настоящему, в отличие от их духовного вождя Шапшала, ни одного караимского языка (не только иврита и арабского, на которых созданы тысячи караимских текстов, но даже и тюркского!), и пишущих свои любительские антинаучные статейки в основном по-русски или на другом славянских языках, утверждающих, что современные караимы — это исключительно потомки хазаров-язычников."Хазарский след", сколь заманчивым он бы ни был в конце XIX начале XX века — не объясняет всего сложного комплекса этногенеза караимов, и в особенности караимов Восточной Европы. Не выдерживает эта теория и проверки современной лингвистикой и генетикой. Все тюркские языки и диалекты, которыми пользовались караимы на протяжении своей истории принадлежат к кыпчакской и огузской подгруппам тюркской группы языков, а не к хазарской, а с точки зрения ДНК — караимы Восточной Европы имеют не только тюркские, но и ближневосточные гены.
it seems this is taking the stance of a renowned Russian Jewish author Hacham Gershom Tzipris (Гершом Киприсчи), if you have a peer reviewed publication from this author which can be used as a source it would be great to insert into the article. Website comments from self-published websites like http://bakhtawiacademy.livejournal.com and www.orahsaddiqim.org are not really useful. Kaz 08:04, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Why you claiming that Gershon Kirspichi is a Jew. Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Because he told me his family were Breslov. But you don't have to accept my word for it, there is plenty on the internet about his Jewish ancestry. [44] Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Some Jewish blood or even Jewish family name still does not make somebody non-Karaim. Yuri Polkanov's father was ethnic Russian, orthodox priest's son.Yuri Polkanov has Russian name and surname,and his articles based on his father publication dated manly by Holocaust time,but he is still defined as ethnic Karaylar,So the reference to Gershon Kirspichi , may be presented in the version of this page like in the Russian article with the same right as reference to Polkanov Неполканов (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I agree with you, Karaims have always been mixed, not just Yuri Polkanov. However, Gershom does not have any Karaimi or Karaylar in his ancestry. He simply changed his Yiddish name to a Karaylar name. Of course anyone who wants can to convert to our religion to marry one of us, we have always been Universalist in our acceptance of others. I even welcome Gershom if he wants to adopt our identity in its entirety and fully join the Karaimi-Karaylar, but what I object to is a person attempting to infiltrate our community, establish himself as a leader without the approval of our own traditional chiefs, and attempting to silence our own native reverence for Jesus, Muhammad, Tengri, Buddha, etc., and pretend our own native practices such as use of oak groves and the historical distinction between circumcised clergy and uncircumcised laity are recent innovations rather than remnants of ancient practice. It seems not very secular but very religious fundamentalist in attitude. Karaimi-Karaylar were always very peaceful, and universalist being friendly and welcoming to others in our religious attitudes. Don't you agree? Our community is dying because we are allowing outsiders to infiltrate and divide us so that they can tear us to pieces and fight over our heritage. Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Did you read his works,Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Yes, many but not all. I used to enjoy many of the things he says. Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
He explains in details his Karaim genealogy,Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
You should check his background for yourself rather than simply follow him blindly. Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
It is only his word against your word about Breslav origin that also supposed not to be followed blindly 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Well said. :) Kaz
he definitely distinguishs between Karaimizm and Judaism .He claims that Karaim have different origin from Jews.Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Good :) this is as it should be. Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I am glad that you agree with him,but the encyclopedic article must represent also other opinions.Неполканов (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
OK, then I propose we put in a section entitled "Critics' Views" to cover all external opinions. However, I would like to point out that no one would insert the critics opinions in an article about Romanian ethnogenesis despite all the evidence contrary to native Romanian opinion. It seems unnecessarily tolerant to allow critics views on our ethnogenesis in our own article. Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
In opposite to you he references to Karaim authors like Sultanskij Firkovich and Shishman ,Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
I often make reference to Firkovich, Babovich, and Polkanov, three great Karaim-Karaylar.Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
You reference to Firkovich is strange enough, claiming him supporting Khazar theory. In fact he clamed that Karaim were in Crimea before Christianity and Khazars. He claimed an Israel origin of Karaites that differs from Judean origin of Rabbanists. Although the Polkanov use the "references" to Firkovich at the same way. I suppose that you took the "references" to Firkovich from his publications. Неполканов (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Yes he did indeed you are correct, but he also told us that the Khazars themselves descended from these tribes, especially THE Levites of Simeon. But not Just Firkovich told us this, others too. I am sure I can find an independent source concerning the Khazar origins from the Levites of Simeon. Polkanov does make slight references to Firkovich in a similar way, but as you certainly know well, Polkanov did not understand everything about it completely in his earlier works. Yet he knew more than most Karaims who were under the Soviets at that time don't you agree? We should be understanding of the difficult circumstances. Polkanov, Teriyaki, Lavrinovich, Shapshal etc. are all of the same opinion and therefore at least more reliable than Gershom's Jewish interpretation of the facts. Please don't misunderstand me, Gershom is extremely well educated and I enjoy many of the things he has said. But at the same time, he is nevertheless an outside from a family of outsiders who absolutely has not inherited an understanding of our traditional practices (e.g. like all Jewish fundamentalists he does not understand our reverence of Jesus or Muhammad nor understand our Oak grove practices etc., etc., etc.) but instead tries to interpret everything through a Jewish point of view which is genuinely alien to our own unique heritage. I hope you can catch my gist here. Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Why every man having another opinion from you defined by you as Jew ,every source about Karaism even encyclopedia defined by you Jewish ? Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
I think you are confusing me with someone else. Kaz 00:32, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Could you add to the article explanation what is the reason for Jews to distort Karaim History.It is clear enough why Karaylar want to differ from Jews even without multiple known references, Your opinion have no mostly any reference.Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
I am very interested in what you are trying to say here, but I can't exactly catch your intention. If you can expand on your meaning I would like to read more details. I liked your contributions, although your English is poor, I would like to encourage you to make more contributions to the article and I will do my best to correct your English. If it is easier please do write here in your first language, I am sure I will understand it better. Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I am very appreciate your very helpfull to me efforts ,I hope that syntax and phraseology corrections wil not affect the intention like it was be done with Karaim leaders objection to Khazar Theory,that was replaced to d the idea that Khazar theory was suggested by Grigoriev.--Неполканов (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I will look at what you have written again. :) Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
I suggest you to refer your opinion by cites from Nazis Newspapers from Holocaust period.They are also cited in Russian article. But is only one opinion you cannot remove other referenced opinions with replacing them by you unreferences opinions like you try to do with Karayim Husars, Guardians ,farmers e.t.c,removing reference to historical documents showing that it is no more than modern legend. It is looks like vandalism Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
I think you are certainly confusing me with someone else, please do insert your references into the article to back up the interesting things that you are saying. Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Неполканов, if you can read Czech or Slovak, I would like to recommend you to http://www.karaimskykatechizmus.estranky.cz/ as a great source for Karaite literature. Kaz 09:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Again why you refer to language unspoken by most of Karaims.There is no Czhek or Slovak Gahan Неполканов (talk) 21:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Mr. Valko is a Karaite Jewish Hazzan not a Karaim-Karaylar Gahan. Also as you know Gershom Tzipris is not a Gahan either. He was trained as a Karaite Jewish Hakham though. Kaz 00:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Неполканов, I would like you to comment more on your reference to this poem please. Kaz 10:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Неполканов, you seem to share my view that the article in its current state is not based on what sources really say, but is instead based on the opinion of an editor. I have tried checking some of the recently added citations and the ones I checked did not support the information cited. Citations in the version of 9 August 2012 do not seem to have this problem. The version of 9 August is not perfect, but much of the uncited information in it can easily be supported by citing Brook or Green's books. Brook and Green's books talk about some of the myths about Eastern European Karaites and the history of these myths. Do you think it would be better to revert the article to the version of 9 August 2012? At least that way, we could have a trustworthy basis for improving the article.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:07, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
- Toddy1, why are you distorting the truth again? You have not checked the sources in the article. You have not found that they do not support, and even if anti-Polkanov POV agrees with you it is not consensus with the majority of contributors and neither of you could take such unilateral action without starting a serious edit war, which is no substitution for civilised discussion. I have a suggestion for you. Why don't you do what normal wiki editors do when there is controversy and post below, a few sentences which you would like to see in the article with your references, and we can discuss them like civilised human beings. When we have a consensus, I myself will be happy to insert your ideas into the article. Wouldn't that make you happy? Let's just try to make a start at that shall we? Let's start with one sentence and see how well we can get along with it? Kaz 09:29, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I want it to be recorded here that I fully support Toddy1's suggestion to revert this article back to its beginning version, before the religious/sectarian POV of a self-avowed priest of a small ethnic-religious sect started a massive campaign of rewriting "Karaite" history. As I have said before in other articles, changes of the scope and depth this editor is making, without any discussion or consensus, and without really pointing to any reliable sources, have to be discussed term by term and sentence by sentence, based on reliable sources in all languages available. I want it also to be recorded here that I can also read some Russian, at least for the purposes of discussions here, and that Russian and Lithuanian sources are indeed key for this article. warshytalk 16:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
- Let it be noted also, if I wasn't sufficiently clear above, that the self-avowed priest is editing articles in Wikipedia about HIS OWN small ethnic-religious sect. How NPOV can his editing be in such a case? It is indeed a massive campaign of ethnic and religious propaganda that is targeting the English WP, for some reason, as its medium. Why doesn't he wage that propaganda campaign in the Russian and Lithuanian WPs first, where all the sources are? warshytalk 17:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
- Warshy you are hysterically funny :D Any of the Karaims who begin to observe all the laws of Torah and get circumcised become clergy Karaylar lol Everyone knows that. Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
I think that format of Russian page presenting all the opinions about Karaim origin will help to find the article the acceptable for all of us.So let start from it.--Неполканов (talk) 18:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC) I agree. Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
- If you wish to incorporate information and structure from the very good article on Russian Wikipedia, that would be very helpful.--Toddy1 (talk) 23:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
FINAL WARNING
I don't know why this is still apparently unclear to some, but the moving around of comments and all the other silly refactoring/re-editing/etc of other user's comments on this talk page needs to stop right now and there will be harsh blocks forthcoming if it does not. I hope I have made that clear enough here for everyone to underatand.
I can't imagine what anyone hopes to gain from this foolishness, and what's more I don't care. It is as disruptive as it is pointless. Stop it. Now. Don't comment here about it, don't start fighting about who started it, don't keep sniping at one another in edit sumarries, and don't undo anything that's already been done. Just cut this foolish behavior out, now, permanently. Beeblebrox (talk) 08:03, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
- Since I am not allowed to make format improvements, please could you insert spaces before comments in sensible places in the section :Lithuanian Wikipedia as a base ?. The reason for asking is that this is the normal format, and it makes it easier to read.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Gershom Tzipris
I would like to invite the "anti-Polkanov POV" supporters of Gershom (ben Yonah) Tzipris (namely Toddy1 [45] and Неполканов [46]) to submit here for discussion and inclusion into the article one of his peer-reviewed teachings from an independently published source relevant to the ethnic group of Karaims on whom this article is written. I am a fan of some of his opinions, and would also like to see someting of his in the article, but so far have found nothing that meets Wikipedia source guidelines. If you know better, please post below. Kaz 10:09, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I see that my comment above was a bit like talking to a brick wall LOL. Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Karaite Jewish POV pushing
Toddy1, your so called "revert" or in fact vandalism of logical order, and attempt to delete references and insert un-sourced POV into the article to mislead the average Jewis reader is not a good idea. Rabbinical Jews do permit marriage with Karaite Jews, but not with Crimean (or any other) Karaims, you should not attempt to force such an misleading agenda into an encyclopaedic article. You should probably move on from this article and work on the Karaite Judaism page where your opinions may be more welcome. Kaz 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)