Started as a stub, and being worked on heavily since Jan 05, this article has grown. There has been great effort into making the article NPOV, and sometimes painful. Often disagreements, all settled without arbitration. The result, in my opinion is the purpose of wikipedia.
Response to Concerns The Break out of Mormonism and Judaism topics is a result of individuals of both faiths working on the issue. This allowed individuals contributing to the Jewish or Mormon sections to not inadvertantly change the POV of the other faith and thus inadvertantly affecting the NPOV. Maintaining a NPOV is EXTREMELY difficult in this article. This article is the work of many individuals. Vchapman (04 Nov 05 UTC)
Correction Bolding of Nouns, which were bolded in original stub I found have been un-bolded. Thanks pointing it out. VChapman (5 Nov 05)
More Pictures Added but have been unable to locate a Wiki picture of a statue or painting of Moses, except for one Pegan statue with HORNS. I am asking for help in locating a more approperiate picture of a painting.
Concern here Some Individuals oppose saying paragraphs need to be merged and expanded, others object saying the ToC is to large and the articel needs to be shorter. It can't go both ways?!?!? VChapman (08 Nov 05 UTC)
Object This is a very good article on a fascinating subject but I think the presentation is too messy. This article really needs to go through peer review before coming back here. Besides Kirill's concerns on the lack of references, I would add the following:
The TOC is really overwhelming. Part of the problem is that most sections are divided into Judaism/Mormanism sections. In addition to giving a more unwieldy appearance to the article it also divides the article into many short (sometimes one sentence) paragraphs.
Short paragraphs a found throughout. These should either be merged or expanded.
This article cries out for inline citations!
A few more images would make this article much nicer, how about pics of Joseph Smith, Abraham (a nice painting of him would do), Moses, the Main Temple in Salt Lake City, a picture of a synogogue, perhaps? The images aren't required for FA but they do add to the aesthetic appeal of the article. If you need any help locating images, I'm willing to help, just leave a note on my talk page.
The introduction should summerize the article and should be around three paragraphs for an article of this size.
As I've said, this is a fine article on a great subject! It just needs some work before it goes on to FA. *Exeunt* GanymeadDialogue? 21:43, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now I agree with all that Ganymead said, and also wonder why all the nouns have been bolded in the lead instead of bolding what should be the article's title or something very similar? Harro5 04:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Please see WP:CITE and WP:MOS. WP:NPOV alone does not a featured article make. Jkelly 17:24, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this would be a good idea for a featured article, comparing and discussing two Strict, Controversial, and highly populated religions. --Z.Spy 06:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object. ToC is a monster and should be reduced (consider also moving parts of the article into a separate subarticles). There are external links in main article's body. No references. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul PiotrusTalk 18:54, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object. My large problem with this article is its significance and meaning is unclear, resulting in a number of issues to this reader informed about Judaism, but not necessarily the details of Mormonism. It seems to be drawing parallels between Mormonism and Judaism, mostly to support the one-way special relationship that Mormonism seems to have with Judaism, or at least that is the impression I get. The result is a strange article, in my view, that emphasizes parts of Judaism that are not particularly relevant -- starting with the first section "Tribal Affiliations." The idea of tribal affiliation is certainly not a major point in modern Jewish practice, but the article certainly gives that impression. Similarly, quoting the Jewish view of God directly from the Ten Commandments doesn't really recognize the 3,000 years of religious thought on the subject, such as the development of Jewish principles of faith. Again, nothing is horribly factually wrong, but the article's reason for being is not clear, and the emphasis, from the Jewish perspective, are strange. This needs to be clarified before I would support. --Goodoldpolonius2 15:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Response Modern Rabbinical Judaism has less in common with Mormonism than Ancient or Hebrew Judaism. The sections on the Jewish Perspective were actually contributed by other members, I only presume to have an extensive knowledge of the Jewish belief system. I myself am LDS and do not make changes under any heading labeled Judaism. (Except for the Section on Jewish Mormons) VChapman 7 Nov 2005 (UTC)
I appreciate your response. The article then, should perhaps be "Mormon views of Judaism" or "Mormonism's relationship to Judaism." The compare-and-contrast is clearly from a Mormon perspective, since it doesn't really cover Judaism coherently, instead focusing on areas of interest to Mormonism, presumably. --Goodoldpolonius2 18:09, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object, no references (needs inline citations as well, please). --Spangineeres(háblame) 19:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, just stylistically it needs a better referencing system. It also needs better / more references. It borders on original research when you juxtapose two ideas in comparison with citations from different contexts in order to make a point. As a result the amount / quality of citations is very important. It just seems really fragmented and scattered to me. grenグレン 09:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
