Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Judaism/archive1

Judaism

Very well-written article, concise, etc. It has references as needed, too. Currently a good article, it should be featured. Yes, I know editing has been "temporarily disabled" for new users, but this is very temporary, and it is generally quite stable. Sasha Slutsker 00:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object - Lacks inline citations. Definitely a good article, but FA has slightly higher standards. Fieari 00:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I will go through and add inline citations right now. Sasha Slutsker 01:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object: explanation of the Jewish take on monotheism states that "Scholars argue as to when the notion of monotheism arose", yet there is no discussion in the same section of the dispute or who is disputing this. This leads to the section that does talk about this (Critical historical view of the development of Judaism) states "many critical Bible scholars claim that certain verses in the Torah imply that the early Israelites accepted the existence of other gods...". No reference to the scholars (or even an example of a notable scholar) is given. I cannot support until we get sources for these assertions. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object—not well enough written. For example:

"Judaism does not fit easily into conventional Western categories, such as religion, ethnicity, or culture, in part because of its 4,000-year history." Can't quite see the logical connection.

"professor Daniel Boyarin has argued that"—bit awkward to single out one commentator for naming, and then not to provide a reference citation.

"because it is not national, not genealogical, not religious, but all of these"—illogical without inserting "solely".

Let me know which other sentences you'd like to be critiqued. Tony 16:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I attempted to fix the first one, by adding "unique and varied" to better relate it to the following sentence. Let me know if that is not sufficient, or feel free to be bold and fix it yourself. I cannot presently tackle the second sentence. The third sentence seems to be in a quotation from the professor, so changing it would seem like misquoting him. --Danaman5 05:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object The holidays section should list and describe every holiday, not just the main ones. Also, the section for denominations isn't organized well. Tobyk777 20:11, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]