Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Names of God in Judaism/archive1
This is my first attempt to fac an article. I have worked on it for several months and I think it is in great shape. Many have contributed to it. It has had substantial research, refs and bibliography, some compelling photos of ancient scrolls and manuscripts, and some fascinating information. --Zappaz 16:54, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Jeronimo 22:25, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Support. This is one of my favorite articles. However, I think it could be enhanced by the addition of some ogg files with the hebrew pronounciation →Raul654 23:22, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Support. An article of pleasing quality. Phils 00:38, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Support
as long as the sentence The name Shelomoh (from shalom, Solomon, שלומו) refers to the God of Peace, and the Rabbis assert that the Song of Solomon is a dramatization of the love of God: Shalom to His people Israel is thus thought to be the meaning behind the name Shulamite. is clarified. I lose the train of thought between the colon and is thus. Otherwise,the article is a pleasure. - BanyanTree 02:31, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Comment appreciated. I'll work on it.--Zappaz
- Support. All the Wikipedia:Peer review/Names of God in Judaism/archive1 feedback was incorporated, and it's a very interesting article. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:40, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Support. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:00, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Support. I second the point about ogg files made by Raul654. --Solar 17:02, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Support CGorman 23:05, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Support, now that it is clear many more than two references were used.
Question, since the word bibliography is ambiguous, were any of those sources used to add material to the article or fact check it?If so, they could be included in the references section. If not, it is less ambiguous just to call that section "further reading" to make it clear they were not used to add material, but are also available for more information for the interested reader. Also, there are a number of inline references in the text, but those sources either don't seem to be listed in the references section, or I can't understand the notation in your inline citations, or both. You could collect the inline citations in a "Notes" section in an endnotes format if you want. With that cleared up this is a great article and I would also support the call for the addition of ogg sound files. - Taxman 15:54, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments. I have use the standard distinction used in research papers: References contain only those works cited within the text. So, I use the term References to cover works cited, and Bibliography to refer to works read as general background. The Bibliography is a list of references, whether cited or not. It includes texts I made use of in the research for the article, not only texts referred in the article itself, but my own additional background reading, and any other articles or books I think the reader might need as background reading. I was under the impression that this is the standard to be used in WP as well.
- Thats certainly an ideal definition of bibliography, but I don't believe it is the standard. The dictionary definition says it could be just "A list of writings relating to a given subject.". That is the ambiguity I was referring to. If you did actually use all of those sources for background information, it seems current Wikipedia policy is to call them references. Works mentioned or cited in the article could be additionally denoted in other ways if needed, but I don't think that distinction is nearly as important as whether the resources were read or used properly by the editor or not. - Taxman 20:05, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
- As to the inline citations, I will comb the article to find these and refer them properly.
- Regarding the ogg sound files, I admit it is beyond my ability ... Is there an editor amongst us with that ability? That will be most welcome.
- --Zappaz 17:35, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I would be happy to give you technical assistance. I can't do the recording myself because I don't speak hebrew, but I could lead you through the process to the point where I could take over. →Raul654 17:57, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC) (You will need a microphone, though)