Talk:Yemenite Jewish poetry

Exchanges between editors

User:Contributor613, Welcoming here any input that you might have. Although this article is still in the preliminary stages, it is a start.Davidbena (talk) 02:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Davidbena Firstly, it's great that you've started this article; I can't think of a more appropriate individual. Here are some comments I have, primarily regarding organization:

A) The Manner of performance section begins "In Israel," etc. I think you should delete this and that a distinction should be noted between Yemen and Israel, with the meat of the article focusing on Yemen, and a separate section/subsection with any changes from what was done in Yemen as well as inclusion of a link to Yemenite Jewish music(the involvement of musical instruments which, unlike other Jewish communities, only began in the past several decades among Yemenite Jews). Otherwise the article will be begging for imprecision in future edits and lend to more confusion with the blending of multiple unique practices. As a separate side point, I imagine it'll be easier to reference scholarly sources pertaining to Yemenite practice as opposed to Yemenite-Israeli adaptations.

I have made the appropriate change in the opening paragraph, and I put in parentheses (as also in Israel), since there is no difference among religious Yemenites. The only difference between Yemen and Israel is that, in Yemen, they sat upon mats and cushions spread upon the floor, rather than on chairs. The "table" in Yemen was often woven baskets with a flat-top.Davidbena (talk) 06:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good. I don't either think it's that important to differentiate and set apart Yemen from Israel when it comes to background things like mats vs chairs, since that's not directly related to the entry at hand. So just take my comment as something to keep in the back of the mind when adding more details. Contributor613 (talk) 14:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

B) Regarding the Manner of performance section, I think most of the prelude should be moved into its subsections, keeping the prelude to the minimum necessary.

The section, Manner of performance is a general overview (operative-layout) for all three genres, and, therefore, it is inappropriate to put this general material into the sub-sections which speak specifically about the function (or description) of each genre.Davidbena (talk) 06:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I wrote that because the general overview seemed to get into specifics a bit much, making it a bit overwhelming for the beginner. Looking at it again, however, it appears that virtually the entire two paragraphs concern the nashīd and should simply have "nashīd" added as a subheading above them. Contributor613 (talk) 14:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Since the manner of performance regularly and traditionally opens with a nashīd, it was important to mention that in this section. It's part of the order of performance. The nashīd, as a separate topic, has already been discussed in the previous sections.Davidbena (talk) 16:26, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

C) In general, always try to keep the novice in mind (as simple example, instead of "the first hemistich of the stanza" have it linked: "the first hemistich of the stanza").

Yes, I agree.Davidbena (talk) 06:56, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

D) I'm not familiar with the qaṣīd but since it's under the history section I assume it's history. If so, I think a note should be made as to when the qaṣīd fell out of use. I.e., why it's history and not aside the enduring hallel, shirah, etc.

E) Finally, I think the second sentence of the article should be moved to a separate TOC section on women's singing (which would of course have to be created), which could read something like "The social strictures and norms in Yemenite Jewish culture provide for separate settings for men and for women, where the sexes are never mixed, and as a result the women developed..." Contributor613 (talk) 05:39, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Eventually, I hope to see an expanded section on women's poetry and song in Yemen.Davidbena (talk) 06:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Practice of Jews of Yemen: Source translation discussion

As a side point, if you have a better translation than banquet halls for בתי משתאות ([also] in History of religious Jewish music note 1) I'm all ears. Contributor613 (talk) 23:25, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps a better word would be "festive meals," or "houses wherein is dining."--Davidbena (talk) 23:30, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

In context (of שירים הנאמרים בבתי משתאות), how does "songs said in houses wherein are festive meals" sound to you? To me it sounds overly verbose but I don't really see a better, more accurate option. (Rav Kafih is clearly not using the term in the mishneic sense of wine-feasts [B'rakhoth, 1:2; Sotah 9:11] per Maimonides explanation of the term [in B'rakhoth 1:2 "בית המשתה, מסבת משתה יין"].) Contributor613 (talk) 05:56, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

You're right. It sounds overly verbose. Perhaps you can just use "houses of feasting."Davidbena (talk) 06:16, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Great. Thanks! Contributor613 (talk) 16:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Maybe you can also advise regarding כלי פריטה? I translated it as string instruments (which can be called כלי מיתר in Hebrew [both Wikipedia entries are linked]) but I'm not sure if it's necessarily more limited to plucked string instruments; I don't want to limit the term to the exclusion of bowed string instruments without being certain. Do you know whether כלי פריטה is sometimes used to refer to string instruments in general and other times used to refer to plucked string instruments specifically, or if it's always only used to mean plucked string instruments? Thank you. Contributor613 (talk) 21:15, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

My understanding of these words, כלי פריטה, is that they refer specifically to "plucked string instruments," such as the lute, the guitar, the syntar, lyre, zither, kraar, etc. Bear in mind, however, that "stringed instruments" can either be plucked by a plectrum, or played with a bow. The "kinyra" or "kinor" (Heb. כינור) was, according to Josephus, plucked by a plectrum, and not played with a bow (as in some English manuscripts erroneously translate). Today, however, the Modern Hebrew word, "kinor," means "viol" or "violin," and it is played with a bow. You see, the word has actually changed in meaning over time. Rabbi Sa'adia Gaon also translates the Hebrew word "kinor" in the book of Psalms as having the Judeo-Arabic meaning of "oud" (עוד), or lute. (cf. Josephus, Antiquities VII, XII, vs. 3).Davidbena (talk) 22:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Gezeirah prohibiting music

User:Davidbena I wrote "the gezeirah which prohibited listening to any music" and you changed listening to to playing. It is correct that Rav Qafih's statement that the Jews of Yemen do not accompany their singing with musical instruments only mentions the prohibition of playing, but the statement doesn't end there. The reason, he continues, is "בגלל האיסור שבדבר" (due to the prohibition of the matter). Rav Qafih is in agreement with Rambam's listing of prohibitions. Rambam states וכן גזרו שלא לנגן בכלי שיר כולן... וכל משמיעי קול של שיר אסור לשמוח בהן, ואסור לשמען מפני החרבן. Even things which produce the sound of shir (= instruments of shir [כלי שיר]) are forbidden לשמען. L'shaman does not mean to play and Rav Qafih doesn't dispute this Rambam. And even if someone wants to incorrectly insist that Mishneh Torah is not forbidding listening, but only playing, you can't get much more explicit than the Maimonides' responsum (siman 224)--all referenced in the article footnote--in which he writes ואם שרים... עם כלי שיר יהיו שם שלשה אסורים,... ואסור שמיעת כלי הפריטה – that with musical instruments there is a prohibition of listening to / hearing. Rav Qafih is in agreement with this so it is not correct to say that Rav Qafih allows listening to others play. That in our day this is a גזירה שאין… is another story, but Rav Qafih does not disagree with Maimonides who rules that there is a prohibition to hear (שמיעה), not only play. To say that Rav Qafih disagreed with Maimonides is a tall order and that certainly can't be said just because Rav Qafih references the halakhah (in stating בגלל האסור שבדבר) without immediately citing Maimonides' every word as to what the halakhah is, all the more so when he appears in full agreement with Maimonides in his commentary to Mishneh Torah and doesn't say a word in disagreement. And not that he's reliable, but even the שע"ה states "וכן גזרו חז"ל שלא לשמוע שום כלי שיר" (emphasis added). Contributor613 (talk) 03:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

In Yemen, there were at least fifty halachic rulings mentioned by RAMBAM in which Yemenite Jewish custom differed, and, therefore, they did not follow Maimonides. While playing musical instruments was prohibited all throughout Yemen, they did not observe the same restrictions with regard to hearing music played at random, say, by a Bedouin on his flute. It is well-known knowledge that playing musical instruments was the primary proscription, which they arduously adhered to. I have never once heard it said by the rabbis of Yemen that if they overheard music played by the Arabs they would shut their ears. They may not have attended such places, but they would never shut their ears. This is plain to me as daylight. By the way, did I ever send to you the paper on the 50 Places Where the Halacha (in Yemen) was Not Like Rambam?Davidbena (talk) 03:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

One more thing: The Yemenites, in this case, followed the Talmud, where it prohibits playing musical instruments.Davidbena (talk) 04:05, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Maimonides elaborates in disagreement with your assertion that the Talmuld only prohibits playing musical instruments. Contributor613 (talk) 04:17, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Overhearing music played by their Arab neighbors is irrelevant as it's אונס. As you write, the idea is to avoid attending such places. That's plain to me as daylight as well. 50 Places Where the Halacha is Not Like Maimonides I know from https://yemenitejews.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/50-places-where-the-halacha-is-not-like-maimonides/ and in it you, correctly, didn't document a differing practice from Maimonides as it pertains to music. I already explained above that Rav Qafih agrees with the Rambam and I'm sure you don't have a source with him changing his mind and writing otherwise. Contributor613 (talk) 04:17, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

No, it's not irrelevant. Hearing is almost always אונס, and therefore it isn't necessary to shut one's ears. However, purposely going to such places where musical instruments are being played is forbidden. Look at the Talmud (Sotah 48 and Gittin 7). The bottom-line is that we still have people living in Israel who remember the custom, and they would not shut their ears in passing if they heard an Arab play a musical instrument.Davidbena (talk) 04:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

We'll have to agree to disagree on that, but as to the opinion of Rav Qafih, which is what you called into question (or more precisely you stated "It is clear by Rav Qafih's words, 'the Jews of Yemen do not accompany their singing with musical instruments,' meaning, playing was prohibited, but not actually hearing others play"). I give you much thanks in giving me the push to examine this further:

Initially I did not realize how clear Rav Kapach really was. He writes "ובימינו נפרץ הדבר כפרץ בור שופכין, לא דיים ששותים יין בכלי זמר שיש כבר שתי עברות כפי שמנה רבנו לעיל" "It's not enough that they drink wine with [the accompaniment of] musical instruments which already involves two sins as our master [Maimonides] enumerated above" (emphasis added). Let's count: This corresponds to two and only two prohibitions in Maimonides' listing, which he starts off stating "ואם שרים אותם עם כלי שיר יהיו שם שלשה אסורים," specifically numbers three and four (of five total), and those two are "אסור שמיעת כלי הפריטה. ואם היה זה במקום שיש שתיית יין יהיה אסור רביעי" (emphasis added). Thus, Rav Qafih is crystal clear in his agreement with Maimonides. Your assertion regarding divergent Yemenite custom is clearly counter to Rav Qafih, which is what I cited in the article footnote with reference (if you insist tell me and I'll add שע"ה in the reference). Contributor613 (talk) 04:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Again, Rambam, when he prohibits "listening" to musical instruments played (Hil. Taanith, chapter 5), he refers there, I would think, to when a person goes willfully there to listen to such music, but not when he hears music played at random, or while passing a certain place where music is being played. R. Qafih would have understood it this way. The general rule with us states: אנוס רחמנא פטריה.Davidbena (talk) 04:55, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Therefore, writing on the page, "it is forbidden to listen to music," leaves room for error and misunderstanding.Davidbena (talk) 05:03, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

That would ignore Rav Qafih in his footnote who explicitly refers to Maimonides' responsum 224 (which he refers to in writing שתי עברות כפי שמנה רבנו לעיל). Rav Qafih is clear in agreeing with Maimonides that there exists a prohibition on listening (שמיעה) to musical instruments. You were wrong before to state that Rav Qafih only forbids playing musical instruments as he is in explicit agreement with Maimonides responsum here. Contributor613 (talk) 05:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Writing that they "observed the gezeirah which prohibited listening to any music" is better than "playing" which would whitewash the prohibition against שמיעה that Rav Qafih ratifies from Maimonides' responsum. אנוס רחמנא פטריה is a given in any circumstance but if you're worried about misunderstanding then a note to that effect could be added (in-text or via footnote) saying something like "Understandably, there were instances where the Jews in Yemen, by no fault of their own, would hear music of their Arab neighbors." Contributor613 (talk) 05:16, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

No, I don't think you understood me. When I said that Rav Qafih only forbids playing musical instruments, I had in mind his agreement that we do not hold a person guilty if he inadvertently heard a musical instrument being played; nor would he have to shut his ears. It should have been self-understood that to willfully go to such places is an abrogation of "mourning" over the Temple's destruction. Still, I emphasize here, there was no practice to shut one's ears in Yemen if he heard, in passing, an Arab playing a musical instrument. If you should write on the page that it is "prohibited to listen to music," some of our readers may think that if a Jew in Yemen inadvertently heard a musical instrument played he would have to shut his ears. This would be misleading.Davidbena (talk) 05:25, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I really needed to go 10 minutes ago (and earlier) but this back and forth wouldn't end! I understood what you're saying and if you see the article your concerns are addressed, although I don't personally know a source for your assertion that "there was no practice to shut one's ears in Yemen if he heard, in passing, an Arab playing a musical instrument" (is this documented one way or the other?). But in the spirit of compromise I copied your words to the article. Contributor613 (talk) 05:33, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Also, one last thought for now as I really have to go: I seem to remember Halikhoth Teiman mentioning Arabs playing music in the street, so after finding this maybe you/I could add this to footnote one in the article. Contributor613 (talk) 05:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I searched the book, Halikhoth Teiman, albeit briefly, but could not find anything on this subject. In general, there is no disagreement between us. We both agree that it was prohibited in Yemen to play music. We both agree that there was never a practice in Yemen to go, willfully, unto places where musical instruments were being played and to listen to them. We both agree that one was not culpable for inadvertently hearing music played by an Arab while walking down a street. So... the question is, what should be our priority here. This article deals with poetry which is sung. It was never a custom to play musical instruments while reciting such poetry. That, I would think, should be stated here. Rambam says:וכן גזרו שלא לנגן בכלי שיר כולם וכל מיני זמר וכל משמיעי קול של שיר אסור לשמוח בהן ואסור לשומען מפני החורבן. Note that he mentions twice the proscription of playing musical instruments, or of rejoicing at musical instruments being played, before he mentions the prohibition of listening (attentively) to musical instruments. It is clear that, under the Wikipedia policy of WP:Due weight, we ought to be giving emphasis to the prohibition of playing musical instruments. Had we emphasized the prohibition of listening, even though Rambam's intention was clearly to willfully put one's self in a position to listen to musical instruments, it could be misunderstood. My greatest fear and worry about writing it is forbidden to "listen" to such instruments is that it could be easily understood that they would transgress a rabbinic command had they inadvertently heard musical instruments played on the street, and that they would be required to stop their ears. One word can be very misleading.Davidbena (talk) 14:21, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Davidbena, your application of Wikipedia due weight policy to the Rambam is a truly unique interpretative methodology for the elucidation of Maimonides. :) Anyways, it is not precise to say that Maimonides first speaks twice about the prohibition of playing musical instruments (something which if he did would be uncharacteristically redundant for him); the "second" mention is not a repeat of playing but the addition of rejoicing. Therefore your argument for changing the article text from "the gezeirah which prohibited listening" to "the gezeirah which prohibited playing" with the support of WP:Due weight does not hold water. Furthermore, considering the cited sources, WP:Due weight would actually dictate that listening be emphasized, irrespective of your personal, above-mentioned, "greatest fear and worry about writing it is forbidden to 'listen' to such instruments". With the support of WP:Due weight there is actually ample grounds to undo your change and, in the body, replace playing with listening. However, as I would prefer not to single-handedly carry on with this debate (isn't it amazing that we're the only two ones currently active here!), I'm ready to bring this deliberation to a close on my part so long as mention is made, although it's not in the body of the article where I think it belongs. Regarding my above reference to Halikhoth Teiman, from glancing though Halikhoth Teiman for just a bit I found טקס אלחומאר (what would happen to the Muslim that drank wine or beer purchased from a Jew) on page 288. I've incorporated a reference to this in the first footnote along with some additions of sources I cited in the discussion above. I have not changed the in-text "prohibition of 'playing' musical instruments" to 'listening' as if you're willing to meet me halfway I'll do so as well. Let me know if you are willing to leave it at this. I think we'll both be contented in proceeding to directly focus on the subject matter at hand, namely, Yemenite Jewish poetry. Contributor613 (talk) 05:55, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

The policy of "Due weight" doesn't apply only to Rambam's words, but also to the Gemara, which speaks about the prohibition of playing musical instruments. I don't know why you're insisting to add the detail about listening, when playing is far more applicable here in the context of poetry being sung. From the very start I have repeatedly mentioned the problem that could easily arise by adding the prohibition of listening to musical instruments. Besides, it's already implied that if playing musical instruments is prohibited, listening attentively to musical instruments is also prohibited. Shabbat Shalom.Davidbena (talk) 14:28, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I am not insisting on adding the detail about listening and I wrote as much. Please note the words I had bolded above and I look forward to your response. Contributor613 (talk) 14:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

The footnote already mentions the prohibition of listening to musical instruments; no need to add it to the main article. The Gemara itself puts the emphasis on the prohibition of playing musical instruments.Davidbena (talk) 17:09, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

A Teshuvah concerning the tin-can (פח) used by Yemenites

User:Contributor613, Shalom. I found this Teshuvah in the Responsa (Orach Chaim, responsum # 168 and 169) of Rabbi Hayyim Kessar z"l, concerning the empty tin-can (tankah) that is beaten during the recital of poetry. This is strictly for your information:

שאל השואל, בשבוע שחל בו ט"ב, האם מותר לומר שירות ותשבחות (כמנהגינו נשיד ושירה) בסעודת מצוה, בלי רקודים ומחולות ובלי פח שקורין תנכ"ה

תשובה, לענין אם מותר שירות וכו', פשוט הוא דמותר, לפי שכל שירות של תימנים הן בסוג תפלה לה', וגם כן הן על הגלות והצרות שאירעו

שאל השואל, האם הפח שקורין תנכ"ה נחשב לכלי זמר

תשובה, הפח אע"פ שאינו כלי זמר ממש, מ"מ חשוב ככלי זמר ואסור, ובפרט כעת הזאת שישראל שרויים בצער מכל צד ומכל פנה, ואין להאריך כי אם בשלומך הטוב, וחפץ ה' בידך יצלח

It is clear, therefore, that while beating an empty tin-can is not considered כלי זמר, it is still forbidden, and this was the practice in Sana'a to prohibit the beating of tin-cans during social gatherings where they were singing para-liturgical poems. Perhaps there's a place for mentioning this in footnote # 3.Davidbena (talk) 15:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I just got off the phone where I talked to an elderly lady from Sana'a (she must be in her nineties) and where she said to me that, during weddings in Sana'a and during any Brit Milah, women would play the copper plates while singing around other women, and there was no restriction in doing so. She also said that it was very uncommon to hear any type of musical instrument played in Yemen at that time, even amongst the Arabs. When I asked her if, by chance, they were to pass by the Arab quarter and had overheard musical instruments being played, such as a flute, would they shut their ears, she said to me, "no."Davidbena (talk) 16:40, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

PS - The elderly woman to whom I posed the question is named Shoshanna Cohen, the wife of this man shown here, Mori Shalom Cohen, of blessed memory.Davidbena (talk) 21:16, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Although per Wikipedia:No original research that can't have bearing on the article, it's interesting to keep in mind. As it pertains to women in general, it's important to note that not everything Jews in Yemen did is to automatically be considered in accordance with תורה מסיני (e.g., crazy superstitions, to put it mildly), and that the yardstick for religious practice has to be the Torah. On that topic note HaRav Ratzon Arusi's words at point 48:15-50:02 in http://net-sah.org/video/20529 (although the entire speech is well worth listening to). Contributor613 (talk) 14:57, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the citation to Rabbi H"K's responsum concerning the פח; I had been wondering about that topic. I see nothing wrong with adding mention of responsum 169 to footnote 3 since the Spielberg Jewish Film Archive was incorrect in noting writing that drumming was used "by all." (I had quoted it although I knew it was incorrect so that the quotation regarding the prohibition of using musical instruments would be complete; it can't be misjudged as being selective and turning a blind eye to its "facts.") The Spielberg Jewish Film Archive's video on Yemenites wasn't of utmost accuracy but I found several sentences from that long video that were worth mentioning (mostly here). By the way, relating to my addition here, where do you think the phenomenon in point 41:55-42:07 of http://net-sah.org/video/20567 falls in, and also, how would you describe it? Contributor613 (talk)

I couldn't open your link. As for "No Original Research," this is plain to me. On talk pages, however, we're freely able discuss all things, without inhibition. In the main article, that is something different. Citing valid sources of Yemenite Jewish custom is important. Perhaps, too, we can distinguish between Yemenite Jewish custom in Yemen, and Yemenite Jewish custom in Israel, where Rav Yitzhaq Ratzaby is quoted as saying that, today, we do not prohibit even the playing of music instruments, because it is considered a gezeirah shehatzibbur lo haya yekhol le'amod bah. "They do not make a public enactment unless the majority of the public is able to bear it" (Baba Bathra 60b).

Such video will not work in Internet Explorer. Can you open the link in Google Chrome? Contributor613 (talk) 05:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

אין גוזרין גזירה על הצבור אלא אם כן רוב צבור יכולין לעמוד בה.Davidbena (talk) 13:48, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Once it's already been made, however, see Hilkoth Mamrim 2:2. Contributor613 (talk) 05:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Professor Yosef Tobi's lecture on Yemenite Poetry

There is a You-Tube video showing the full lecture of Professor Yosef Tobi on Yemenite Jewish poetry. Click here to see.Davidbena (talk) 14:00, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion re Vowelization

Just a suggestion, when typing excerpts that have vowelization unique to the Yemenite tradition, if possible it'd be useful to have a footnote to each word with the unique vowelization (so people know it's not a typing error). For example, מַעְלָה Contributor613 (talk) 19:03, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

You're right. At the first available opportunity, I'll make the footnote. If you wish to add it, feel free to add it.Davidbena (talk) 19:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not just referring to this word (which was just an example), but all such words that appear (same goes for other Wikipedia entries). Not having those books I can't add the footnotes myself. Contributor613 (talk) 19:45, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Okay, your point is well-taken, and I'll do it בע"ה, only give me a list of words where the vocalization differs from the standard Modern Hebrew vocalization.Davidbena (talk) 13:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Other Suggestions

Here are some more comments (first suggestions and lastly a question):

1a) In the introduction, the sentence that reads "This arrangement was integrated into all the walks of life familiar to the Jews of Yemen" can continue to note specific examples (e.g., סעודת סבלונות, סעודת ארוסין או נישואין, סעודת ברית מילה, סעודת שבת, סעודת ניחום אבלים [copied from beginning of essay "אכילת 'ג'עלה' מה היא" [Rabbi Qafih's Collected Writings p. 909]).

1b) In consideration of inadequate (or absent) representation of Yemenite customs relating to s'odoth of weddings and other occasions, perhaps an "Occasions" section can be added (with each occasion as a subsection) to provide such background information. Not to bypass their main Wikipedia articles that need to be enriched with the divergent Yemenite practices, but to enrich this entry with the unique backgrounds in which the singing took place and, in doing so, enlighten readers with the various backgrounds that were quite distinctive from the relative void reigning in their absence in non-Yemenite communities' traditions of singing. I am proposing not an exhaustive treatment, but a basic overview.

2) Also, maybe a counterpart for "forms of song" such as those delineated in Notable examples of Jewish religious forms of song can be included in this article?

3) Regarding the nashid, the article states that the meshorerim "are answered by the rest in attendance." Isn't the nashid sung without responsive participation of the audience? I see Rabbi Qafih wrote (Collected Writings p. 910) והנה החל ראש המסיבה את ה'נשיד', השיר הראשון,... כל אחד... שם אזניו כאפרכסת והאזין לשירה ולתכנה. Contributor613 (talk) 07:25, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Yemenite Jewish poetry/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Benji man (talk · contribs) 12:24, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Note: there is textual overlap with this website, but that seems to be plagiarized from Wikipedia, not vice versa (based on date of publication). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benji man (talk • contribs) 12:36, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm ready to assist in the improvement of this article, if you should find areas of improvement. And, yes, the website that you named is plagiarized copy of our article.Davidbena (talk) 04:51, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination

This article has failed its Good article nomination. This is how the article, as of January 23, 2023, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: The style is often archaic. Information from the Structure section is repeated in later sections, resulting in redundancy.

2. Verifiable?: The use of sources is good in general, but a lot of reliance is placed on unpublished lecture notes, which are not publicly accessible. This makes the information based on them unverifiable to nearly all readers. The footnotes often cite the sources at length, which is unnecessary.

3. Broad in coverage?: Pass

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Stable?: Pass

6. Images?: Pass

I enjoyed learning so much about Yemenite Jewish poetry and I have no doubt that the information based on Prof. Tobi's lecture notes is accurate. Unfortunately, I think the structure of the article needs to be adjusted to remedy the redundancy and the information based on unverifiable sources should be left out. Often, the article cites a published source for the same information later on, so the two issues could be resolved in tandem.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— Benji man (talk) 16:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

That's fine. Perhaps when the professor publishes his lecture notes, I can resubmit the article for a second review.Davidbena (talk) 16:51, 23 January 2023 (UTC)