Jump to content

Talk:Beth Medrash Govoha

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Lakewood yeshiva)
Okay, but which edits belonged to which users? — Rickyrab | Talk 13:33, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Those edits are gone now, it is therefore impossible to answer that.--Shmaltz (talk) 00:42, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dang. — Rickyrab | Talk 23:06, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sedorim times

[edit]

Those sedorim times are incorrect. Talk about the yeshivas acceptance policy (twice a year)and rename the article.

So tell us what's correct and we'll change it. Shkoyach. - CrazyRussian talk/email 00:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have been a student at the Yeshivah for over 7 years and those were the soderim times, they are posted on a small note in a locked up bulletin board that is located in the main beis madrash (it might not be ther anymore but was there when I was still there in 2004). If they are not correct then please by all means corrcet them.
I do plan on writing up the acceptance policy and procedure, just give me some time. --Shmaltz 05:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sedorim times
I managed to take a photo from the offical times as posted on the official locked bulliten board in Yeshivah.--Shmaltz 02:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why "managed"? Did you encounter some particular difficulty in taking the photo? 140.239.199.34 (talk) 03:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why 4 years latter, I don't remember why I wrote managed but thinking about it I guess you have never tried taking a picture in the main Bais Madrash of BMG.--Shmaltz (talk) 03:08, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The better questions is why is in the article at all. WP:OR. Joe407 (talk) 09:03, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
While we're on the topic, why does there seem to be an anti-photography climate on or in the vicinity of the campus? (At least it seems that way to me... I don't know about you... it's not in the article because it's unsourced OR, and some might argue POV, but that's what I observed firsthand.) — Rickyrab | Talk 01:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

[edit]

Shouldn't the article be under "Beth Medrash Govoha" since that is the actual name of the yeshiva? Not the popular name - "Lakewood Yeshiva"

Agree - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Discussion about naming yeshivas

[edit]

There is no "one best way" to name any yeshiva on Wikipedia. There is an unresolved debate on Wikipedia about how to name yeshivas, see the long discussions still underway about this issue at Talk:Telshe yeshiva#Best name for the institution and this article. Thanks. IZAK 08:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think there are few enough to handle on an individual basis. - CrazyRussian talk/email 11:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How about a redirect?--Shmaltz 15:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of course. Tell us how you want the primary article to be named tho? - CrazyRussian talk/email 16:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it makes any difference. --Shmaltz 00:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If it makes no difference then why bring this up in the first place? IZAK 01:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I meant to say it makes no difference with one is a redirect. But I do think that there should be called Beth Madrash Govoha or at least that Beth Madrash Govoha should be redirected. --Shmaltz 02:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

faucets

[edit]

The following makes no sense:

And the following is a very insignificant fact:

    • Special faucets for hot drinking water, for tea and/or coffee.


I think they should be removed (I tried to yesterday but my change was reverted).


While I might agree that the hot water faucets is an insignificant fact (I don't realy agree since if/when you see it you can't but wonder about it), I do disagree about the faucets that don't require ones hand to activate them, as it is very noticable when you have a washing room with more than 20 faucets and none of those allow you to use your hands to operate them. --Shmaltz 00:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming poll

[edit]

Lakewood yeshiva - or Beth Medrash Govoha?

Lakewood yeshiva supporters

[edit]
  1. I like this name because it is so widespread and it in no way detracts from its greatness. When was the last time anyone heard of a yeshiva bochur saying he was learning in the "Beth Medrash Govoha." In any case, these kind of votes can swing in both directions at any time, and since the editors who have worked on this article so far have given the article the "Lakewood yeshiva" name it should be left alone for now. IZAK 01:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Don't have a strong view on the merits either way, but agree that when in doubt, principle that editors should not be interfered with too unduly should control. Also, the Yeshiva is almost certainly much more notable in the English-speaking world by its English colloquial name than by its Hebrew one, especially since this Yeshiva has spawned a whole approach. The "Lakewood point of view" is a well-known term, and I've never in my life heard of the "Medrash Govoha point of view." I imaging many notable yeshivas in the English-speaking world are more notable by their colloquial English names. --Shirahadasha 06:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. More well-known name. Who ever heard of Beth Medrash Govoha? Aside from that, that name is a pretty inaccurate version (it's British-style) of the name. I always oppose that. When did you hear any mention 'beth medrash'? It's 'beis', not 'beth'. Anyway, that's not the issue here, since 'beth' is their official name I guess. In any case, I vote for 'Lakewood yeshiva'. --Daniel575 07:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --רח"ק | Talk | Contribs 21:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC) (Basically for the same reasons as everyone above)[reply]

Beth Medrash Govoha supporters

[edit]
  1. Official name - we must honor that I think. - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Agree JJ211219 03:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Rename / change existing to redirect Alansohn 03:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Rename to Beis Medrash Govoha - a simple "Lakewood yeshiva" redirect should suffice -- Nesher 12:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Agree, the official name should be the WiKi name. Yossiea 13:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Beth Medrash Govoha was once "the Lakewood Yeshiva". Today, the Jewish population of Lakewood has grown and there are many (dozens?) of yeshivas in the town. Beth Medrash Govoha cannot now be referred to on Wikipedia as "the Lakewood yeshiva" without inviting confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.85.139 (talk) 14:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

Concluding the naming poll

[edit]

By a 5-4 squeak, we have decided to move the article to Beth Medrash Govoha, which shall be done forthwith. - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub?

[edit]

I don't think this detailed article should be classified as a stub. Remove stub template?--Jms2000 17:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Next time feel free to be bold and just remove it with explanation. Worst case, someone will revert you. - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy house

[edit]

Enough of this, Shmaltz. Ad kan with the OR. - crz crztalk 19:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shmaltz, you should be aware that even if you know something to be the truth, it does not mean that it can be included in wikipedia. I am sure you are not the only beginning editor who feels frustrated by this. However, bear in mind that if anyone could edit articles based on personal witness or whim, wikipedia would be a wasteland of chaos.
P.S. By the way, I studied in BMG for many years, in fact I dormed in the facility on Clifton. Regardless of what you say it is called, wikipedia prohibits inclusion of Original Research.68.198.236.57 19:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any consensus? It seems clear that including this constitutes OR. Other votes?38.117.213.19 22:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Shmaltz has agreed with me privately (offwiki) that it's OR. I think we're all agreed not to reinstoduce this thing until and unless we can adduce a WP:RS reliable source in support of this fact, like a newspaper article or a book or something, which is to say, never. - crz crztalk 22:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As crz notes I agree that it shouldn't be included until RS is interduced, however I did not agree to the never, I actulay told him that this might make me go out of my way to find the RS. --Shmaltz 03:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I edited the article per consensus. I'm actually pretty impressed. The last time I looked at this article (a couple of months ago), it had almost no information. I believe we have shmaltz to thank for the current article. s'is zayer ah fineh. 38.117.213.19 06:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you--Shmaltz 19:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

==

Tumul(t?)

[edit]

Tumult means "The noise as made by a crowd." or "A riot or uprising.". Though I can believe that the discussions are noisy, I assume the day is not named after the noise generated therein, but by the tumel created by tumelers. And due to the lack of mention of riots in the article, I'll also assume that that sense of tumult is not meant either.

In short, I think that the day is probably known as "Tumel day" - using the Yiddish word, not "Tumult day". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 168.168.67.112 (talk) 18:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

As far as I know, the word tumel from yiddish is just the translation of the english tumult.--Shmaltz 00:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an expert, but my impression was that the connotation of "tumel" is more like a hullabaloo "An uproar or fuss" (the usage example given in Wiktionary would fit: They made such a tumel about the change that the authorities were forced to change it back.). That is somewhat less serious than a "tumult" which has an connotation of being, well, more tumultuous.
Any other thoughts out there?
Actually, you are correct in the sense that it is called "The Tummel" and not the Tumult. However after checking around, it seems clear that the Yiddish Tummel is merely a yiddishised version of the english word tumult.. I will edit the article to reflect this. 38.117.213.19 03:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both tumul and tumult are correct forms of Yiddish. Tumul is a verb, as in "er macht a tumul" ("he is 'noisy/yelling'") and tumult is a noun, as in "genug mit dem tumult" ("enough with the 'noise'"). But sometimes they are used loosely and interchangeably, as in some of the examples above that are confusing people here. The English word "tumult" could have been taken from the Yiddish or is just a shortened version of "tumultuous" as one finds many words that English may share with other languages. At any rate, the yeshiva bochurim at Lakewood are not Yiddish professors and they apparently do refer to that day as "tumult day" so let's leave it at that and not make a mountain out of a molehill, or a tumult out of a tumul. IZAK 09:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am a bit confused by your erudite comment. You seem to imply that the "bochurim"- not being professors- are incorrectly using the word "tumult" when it should be "tumul". However, if indeed "tumult" is the noun form, then surely it is the bochurim who are displaying encouraging signs of future tenure, and you who are incorrect? 38.117.213.19 18:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of details because compared to other university pages

[edit]

Sorry but I disagree,

  1. Go ahead and add those details to other university pages
  2. Look here, here, here, here, here, here, and here, I can be busy all night finding more, but I think you now see that it's not true other universities also list details of their facilities.--Shmaltz 05:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History

[edit]

I've seen a reference somewhere on the web that BMG is the "successor" to a yeshiva in Slutsk (today in Belarus). Knowing graduates from BMG, I've never heard that before. But then I see BMG issued a Hagadah around 2001 called Hagadah shel Pesach - Slutsk-Kletsk-Laikvud. So did BMG have some kind of connection to a yeshivah in Slutsk? Even if not, it would be nice to know a bit more history. kosboot 20:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read here that might shed some light. While I don't think that BMG was meant as a successor to any yeshiva, R' Ahron Kotler was Rosh Yeshiva in Slutsk, Kletsk, and then founded BMG.--Shmaltz 19:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cat Kollel or Yeshiva?

[edit]
Copied to here from my talk page.--יודל 14:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BMG edit.

[edit]

You made this change here with the comment: becouse the main thing of this is a yeshiva not a kolel what do you mean by that? How does a Kollel get defined vs a Yeshivah? Furthermore, is BMG a kollel or not?--Shmaltz 15:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do most peape refer to it as a KOlel or as a Yeshivah? The truth is many Yeshivas have today Kolels in it this does not define the main goal and mission of it, was it opened to serve non married boys or married men? i do not think Lakewood's main goal is for married men if yes i am mistaken--יודל 15:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They refer to it by it's name, The Yeshiva. However if one is asked if he is in Kollel he will answer yes. In every definition of the word Kollel this is a kollel, do you agree or disagree? The goal of the Yeshiva is for one to die in, learn there until you are 199 years old. If more than %75 is married then it's for married men or non married men?--Shmaltz 15:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A category isn't for the purpose to give definitions, it is simply a tool and structure to facilitate the searcher and organization of the articles. If this is the goal then i will say i was mistaken but still how does the world look at it as a yeshiva or as a Kolel, i think most will put it into a category of yeshivas and not kolelilm but if you feel that most world will look for it in the category Koeleim please change it. thanks--יודל 15:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am certainly no expert, but from what the articles say, Yeshiva is an appropriate name for the whole school, even though 75% of the school is a Kollel. Did the Yeshiva come first, or the Kollel? I suspect Yidisheryid has a good point. He is being very Wiki and letting you make up your own mind. I also like Yid's point about categories. What do you think Shmaltz?
A Question -- if someone comes to Wiki and wants to find every orthodox Kollel in the United States, where should he look? Alastair Haines 14:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know which came first, but it's a Kollel now. As to your question, I think they would look under the cat.--Shmaltz 14:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was a Yeshiva and it was meant to be a Yeshivah, and nobody will look for BMG in the cat Kolelim. it is today a very common thing most if not al Yeshivahs have a group of married man joining the buys together, this isn't meant to be a Kolel in itself it is meant to better and perfect the studies of the boys. BMG is first and foremost a Yehsivah and this cat is the main i do not think it should require a separate cat for Kollel, because it is known for A Yeshivah mainly and when people look for a Kollel they look for such that is strictly a Kollel not both--יודל 14:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That wasn't the question. The question was the other way around, if they are looking for all Kollelem where would they look. and yes BMG is a Kollel.--Shmaltz 17:27, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revision Deletion on the article

[edit]

Due to a legal complaint to the m:OTRS (Wikimedia Support Desk), I have selectively deleted certain revisions to the article that contain potentially sensitive material. Please do not restore these deleted revisions without first contacting me for an explanation of the situation. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 16:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tumult

[edit]

Please note the following two lines and decide which one it is.

"Tumult day" is a distinct feature of Beth Medrash Gevoha. It is at this time that chavrusos
....
that students are required to arrange entry into a particular "chaburah", or study group. This intense and highly competitive method is not unique to Beth Medrash Gevoha; it is also common in other large "yeshivos" such as Mir and Brisk yeshivos in Israel.

Joe407 (talk) 18:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is unique to BMG because of the chaburah system.--Shmaltz (talk) 01:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last I checked chaburas exist elsewhere. But if you are telling me that Lakewood chaburas are special, creating this effect, than we can remove the closing sentence of the paragraph. Joe407 (talk) 05:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update. After half a year, I've blanked this section because it was original research, unsourced, and most of all in no way notable. Almost all yeshivos have chavrusos and chaburos. If you would like to restore this section please explain why beforehand. Joe407 (talk) 13:46, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I think we should put it back. According to your reasoning you should blank the whole article based on OR. I will put it back if there is no response from you, when I do I will fix it.--Shmaltz (talk) 14:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for discussing this before reverting my edit. I appreciate your respect. As I said above, the main reason that I removed the section was because it is not notable. To the best of my knowledge there is nothing unique about finding a chavrusa and a chaburah in Lakewood vs any other yeshiva. Could you explain what you feel the notability of the Lakewood chavrusa/chaburah system is? Joe407 (talk) 15:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for thanking me anytime :). Anyhow, if you would have ever seen the tumult day then you would have never asked this question. This section is about tumult day not so much about the chavrusa/chaburah. Tumult day the way it's in Lakewood is unique to lakewood. Please comment. TIA. --Shmaltz (talk) 04:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Tumult day the way it's in Lakewood is unique to lakewood." Ideally, there should be some type of source or verification. At the very least you need to clearly explain/demonstrate the difference. Just to say "It is unique" is insufficient. Joe407 (talk) 04:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I really believe that the previous wording you removed was good, but should be fixed a bit. About the source, like I told you before, go ahead and delete the whole article based on that.--Shmaltz (talk) 06:28, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two thoughts. One, after bit of searching on the net, we probably could re-write the article based only on sourced material. There are sources and BMG is definitely a notable institute. So I do not think that we would have to delete the whole article because it is OR. Two, I understand that some of the unique features of the yeshiva do not have sources but should still be in the article. What I do not understand is what is unique about the lakewood Tumult. It sounds like what happens in every yeshiva around the world at the beginning of a zman. Perhaps if you post your proposed nussach for the section here on the talk page, it will be clear. Joe407 (talk) 06:51, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said before, it is unique if you would have ever seen this you would have not asked. In most yeshivos the chavrusas are arranged before hand or even if on the first day, it is not as it is in BMG. At BMG it's an official day called Tumult day, thousands of talmidim (over 4000) gather outside the main old building on 7th street and make shiduchim. It is a truly unique just for BMG.--Shmaltz (talk) 23:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still unconvinced. Please post your proposed paragraph and I'll RfC. Joe407 (talk) 04:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GOVOAH. NOT GOVOHA

[edit]

The grammatically-correct transliteration of the Hebrew גָּבוֹהַּ is GOVOAH. NOT GOVOHA. (Just like נֹחַ is Noach, not Nocha!) -- -- -- 05:07, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about the grammar, but the name of the school is Govoha.--205.156.136.229 (talk) 19:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure you are right, as Noach has no nekudah in the Ches while Govoha does have a nekudah in the Heh.--Shmaltz (talk) 04:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But while we're on the subject of Hebrew grammar, the correct Hebrew word for study group is 'chavurah', not 'chaburah' as it is called many times in the article. The latter term ("chaburah") means injury or wound. This is not really a criticism of the article or its author, per se, since it can be argued that s/he is only duplicating the very prevalent de facto yeshivah usage. Well, the yeshivah world tends to be rather ignorant of and oblivious to Hebrew grammar, in general, and here you have just one more telling example. But in this case, the error almost borders on the absurd -- as if the members of the group engage in some kind of mutual (or self-) flagellation. Toddcs (talk) 20:04, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's Aramic not Hebrew.--Shmaltz (talk) 03:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm... seems unlikely. Could you cite a source for that, or an example from a recognized (pointed) Aram[a]ic text, please? Toddcs (talk) 22:12, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, what seems to your purely am haeretzdig brain is not going to change a name or a fact. In any event I did take the time to search for one, Pasachim 86b. --Shmaltz (talk) 02:20, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and look at this.--Shmaltz (talk) 02:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rabbi Shmaltz, clearly you were offended by something I wrote. So sorry, I sincerely ask your mechilah. Toddcs (talk) 23:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I was, I always get offended when I have to answer someone that his arrogance clashed with his ignorance.--Shmaltz (talk) 04:12, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shmaltz, the nekudah in the Heh is there in order to show that the Heh is pronounced as a consonant, (yes, consonant), and is only found in places where the consonantal Heh is at the end of the word. Ches does not need the nekudah because Ches is always a consonant. For more info., please see: Mappiq. -- -- -- 20:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did I ever argue about גבוה? Shmaltz (talk) 23:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, on 04:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC). -- -- -- 03:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for my previous erased comment, I couldn't find that comment. Thanks for clarifying. BTW, another example is מלפני אלוה יעקב most people don't pronounce that right.--Shmaltz (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Freezer source question

[edit]

Do we want to accept http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/article.php?p=851 as a WP:RS? Joe407 (talk) 15:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The question really is is this better than nothing, I do think that its not a RS.--Shmaltz (talk) 02:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Freezer is not only, as suggested in the article, to remove distractions of dating from new students. It is also to help make sure that the dating scene isn't the primary reason for students to enroll there.

Also, the dating a girl older than you exemption needs a better source. I have not heard of this exemption from students at the yeshiva. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.85.139 (talk) 14:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. Removing. 24.89.184.42 (talk) 20:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rahim source

[edit]

The article needs a better source for the founding date and size of BMG than the Rahim article about tensions. There must be some source actually describing the yeshiva.

Worse, the numbers in the article may be pretty inaccurate. The Lakewood township projects 2008 enrollment at 5000 http://twp.lakewood.nj.us/educ.htm#bmedgov —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.85.139 (talk) 14:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Buildings update

[edit]

The article states that the campus consists of four buildings. Several buildings have been added - the Conservative Congregation Ahavat Shalom building is now the Kleinman Campus, the Reform Temple Beth Am Shalom is in processo of being converted into another BMG study hall. And there is new construction next to the current Beth Shalom building. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.85.139 (talk) 16:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Question about photography

[edit]

When I was taking pictures today of Beth Medrash Govoha, I was questioned by some folks apparently associated with said institution and was asked why I was taking pictures. I would like to understand their point of view. Why don't they want people taking pictures of their yeshiva? — Rickyrab | Talk 00:03, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

apparently associated with said institution How was that apparent? In any event you should call the main office to find out: 732.367.1060--Shmaltz (talk) 00:40, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I use "apparently" because they were in the vicinity and wearing clothes characteristic of yeshiva students but they didn't show badges or anything and they were in an unmarked car, and for all I know, they could've been from elsewhere and just visiting. Nonetheless, they did contact cops and the police did tell me they didn't want people taking pictures of "the university back there" (in my recollection)(this language can be confusing, as Georgian Court University was also in the direction indicated, but the people complaining were in Hareidi clothes). The police in question were from Toms River and some other municipality, as the local police were mourning the late, and beloved, Matlosz and had invited police from other towns to the wake and funeral. — Rickyrab | Talk 23:01, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Who are the current Roshei HaYeshivas?

[edit]

I'm surprised this information is not in the article. Danthecan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Look in the first paragraph. Yoninah (talk) 21:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Beth Medrash Govoha. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:36, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Beth Medrash Govoha. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:10, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

baalei batim?

[edit]

I personally know what this means, but I have to assume that the average reader does not. Unless a more appropriate term can be found, the section Beth Medrash Govoha#Alumni Program should be removed. Puzzledvegetable (talk) 15:11, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How about laymen? -- -- -- 20:31, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. - Puzzledvegetable (talk) 23:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done by User:Puzzledvegetable. Thanks, -- -- -- 20:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Beth_Medrash_Govoha&oldid=1206273223"