Mnavon
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!
Here are some tips to help you get started:
- Read the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the Sandbox.
- Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
- If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk or ask me on my talk page.
- To sign your name on a talk page, please finish your comments with ~~~~ (four tildes). The wiki will insert a link to your userpage and the timestamp.
- Not every subject needs its own page. Sometimes it is wiser to deal with certain subjects together on one page. See Wikipedia:Merge and Wikipedia:Redirect for some background. You may want to review Avoiding common mistakes to get started quickly.
- Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!
Good luck! JFW | T@lk 13:40, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
You added to Tzitzit:
- The chillazon dye is identical to that produced from kela ilan plant (Indigoferra tinctoria) (Baba Metzia 61b)
Closer reading of the Gemara there implies that kela ilan was used as faux Techelet, and certainly not as a replacement. JFW | T@lk 14:03, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Though there is no doubt that "kela ilan" was used as faux tekhelet, this does not, in any way, mitigate the point that it is a valid criteria for true tekhelet. Indeed, the fact that it was used as forgery implies that it was the same hue - at least close enough that people were duped to thinking it was the real color. As such, comparison to this well known plant source is a welcome "lead" to establishing the true color source. Mnavon 13:28, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)
- In that case you should have written: "The Talmud (Baba Metzia 61b) states that the kela ilan plant was similar in color to techelet." Your old insert implied that it was valid techelet. None of the meforashim say that it was a valid but inferior dye. JFW | T@lk 18:23, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
OK, I think what I need to add is that the "kela ilan" plant was a counterfeit source of the dye. Mnavon 09:43, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)
The file File:GoldenRatioTzitzit Best 019.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
orphaned image, no encyclopedic use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
