Talk:Ashkenazi Jews

Semi-protected edit request on 4 May 2024 ... The Origins of Ashkenaz, Ashkenazic Jews, and Yiddish

Please change this...

constitute a Jewish diaspora population that emerged in the Holy Roman Empire around the end of the first millennium CE.[8]

To this...

are not a Jewish diaspora population but one that emerged in a region in northeastern Turkey that harbors four primeval villages whose names resemble Ashkenaz.

See...

"The non-Levantine origin of AJs is further supported by an ancient DNA analysis of six Natufians and a Levantine Neolithic (Lazaridis et al., 2016), some of the most likely Judaean progenitors (Finkelstein and Silberman, 2002; Frendo, 2004). In a principle component analysis (PCA), the ancient Levantines clustered predominantly with modern-day Palestinians and Bedouins and marginally overlapped with Arabian Jews, whereas AJs clustered away from Levantine individuals and adjacent to Neolithic Anatolians and Late Neolithic and Bronze Age Europeans."

"The meaning of the term “Ashkenaz” and the geographical origins of AJs and Yiddish are some of the longest standing questions in history, genetics, and linguistics. In our previous work we have identified “ancient Ashkenaz,” a region in northeastern Turkey that harbors four primeval villages whose names resemble Ashkenaz. Here, we elaborate on the meaning of this term and argue that it acquired its modern meaning only after a critical mass of Ashkenazic Jews arrived in Germany. We show that all bio-localization analyses have localized AJs to Turkey and that the non-Levantine origins of AJs are supported by ancient genome analyses. Overall, these findings are compatible with the hypothesis of an Irano-Turko-Slavic origin for AJs and a Slavic origin for Yiddish and contradict the predictions of Rhineland hypothesis that lacks historical, genetic, and linguistic support (Table 1)." 2601:444:300:B070:F8FC:776F:48EC:78C7 (talk) 16:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

That study represents a minority view. The majority of studies and scholars, who have published on that topic, conclude very differently. And Elhaik's work in that area has also been substantially criticized by others in the field. Your proposal would be highly WP:UNDUE. It would not make sense, and would be against Wikipedia policy, to atlar the article so that it reflects or endorses a minority and arguably WP:FRINGE position. Skllagyook (talk) 18:49, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

You said that before and you were overturned ...

https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Genetic_studies_of_Jews&diff=1221590721&oldid=1221574697

Also see ...

In terms of pure theory, Elhaik has published a critique of the methodology of PCA that undergirds the whole structure of population genetics. Re-analyzing 12 PCA applications he found that the method lends itself to generating desired outcomes, and is characterized by cherrypicking and circular reasoning. The design flexibility of PCA enables anyone to buttress preconceived claims about ethnogenesis. He illustrated the point by instancing the case of genetic studies of the origins of Ashkenazi Jews. Of some 21,840 papers published by Nature Portfolio in 2022, this paper was ranked among the top 100 downloaded scientific papers for that year.

https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Eran_Elhaik#Research 2601:444:300:B070:F8FC:776F:48EC:78C7 (talk) 19:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

What you are proposing here is replacing the language of the lede/article, which reflects the majority of research and is supported by multiple references of reliable sources (WP:RS), with a minority opinion. That is quite different from what you did before at the other article. (And your previous edits there may possibly merit further discussion - with more editors involved). But as I explained earlier, being frequently downloaded is not the same as being widely supported by relevant experts. What you are proposing here clearly violates Wikipedia policies as I explained above. (Please see the links in my first reply). Skllagyook (talk) 19:41, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Also See ... The Geography of Jewish Ethnogenesis

"A reevaluation of the anthropological genetics literature on Jewish populations reveals them not simply to be a body of genetically related people descending from a small group of common ancestors, but rather a “mosaic” of peoples of diverse origins. Greek and other pre-medieval historiographic sources suggest the patterning evident in recent genetic studies could be explained by a major contribution from Greco-Roman and Anatolian-Byzantine converts who affiliated themselves with some iteration of Judaism beginning in the first and second centuries ce and continuing into the Middle Ages. These populations, along with Babylonian and Alexandrian Jewish communities, indigenous North Africans, and Slavic-speaking converts to Judaism, support a mosaic geography of Jewish ancestry in Europe and Western Asia, rather than one arising from a limited set of lineages originating solely in Palestine."

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/702709

Or search... The Geography of Jewish Ethnogenesis.pdf 2601:444:300:B070:F8FC:776F:48EC:78C7 (talk) 21:37, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

This paper's section on Yiddish, to be frank, is complete gibberish and discredits every scholar involved. They admit that all Yiddish loanwords from Persian are best explained by classical Talmudic references and then somehow pretend this is evidence in their favor. The Slavic portion of the theory (which is not explained in this paper) is even more laughable. None of the authors have the slightest clue how to determine a genetic relationship between languages (see "Essays in Linguistics" by Joseph H. Greenberg, p. 35-74 for a good overview on the relevant principles). GordonGlottal (talk) 04:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

GordonGlottal, that IP editor is now blocked as the sock of a troll, but I decided to leave this section here because your comments may be useful to other readers. Drmies (talk) 12:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2024

In section "Notable Ashkenazim", add an "and" in the last sentence, making it "Though Ashkenazi Jews have never exceeded 3% of the American population, Jews account for 37% of the winners of the U.S. National Medal of Science, 25% of the American Nobel Prize winners in literature, and 40% of the American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics." Maxyyywaxyyy (talk) 04:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

 Done

🍗TheNuggeteer🍗

01:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Khazar theory

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The sources I cited for the Khazar theory are a genetic testing company [1]https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/jewish-q/about/results and a study that's in the National Library of Medicine [2]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3595026/. The author of the study, Eran Elhaik, is an associate professor in the Department of Biology at Lund University in Sweden and he also works for Johns Hopkins University Medical School, one of the most prestigious medical schools in the world. Would Johns Hopkins hire some crackpot? Hell no! The idea that the Khazar theory (as distinct from the Khazar hypothesis) is a fringe theory is patently absurd. The Khazar hypothesis is fringe because it says that the Ashkenazi Jews are exclusively descended from the Khazars, which all genetic studies have shown to be false. The Khazar theory says the Ashkenazi Jews are only partly descended from the Khazars. Not only do other studies besides Elhaik's support the theory, the fact that the Ashkenazi and Sephardic haplogroup Q lineages diverged 3,200 to 5,100 years ago (definitely before the Jews left Israel for Europe and quite possibly before Judaism was even established) is consistent with it. अल्ट्राबॉम्ब (talk) 03:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)<comments by suspected sockpuppet of banned user Ultrabomb (talk · contribs) removed. Per WP:BAN, all edits of banned users may be removed and reverted on sight regardless of content.Andre🚐 00:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)> No. FamilyTreeDNA groups are never a reliable source on Wikipedia, certainly not a user-contributed project written by non-experts and vetted not at all, which doesn't even say anything similar to what you want to add. The Elhaik study is widely discredited and criticized in the literature. It's absolutely a WP:FRINGE study. Elhaik was affiliated as a postdoc with the Department of Mental Health at the School of Public Health, and not the medical school, genetics or biology department. He may be an associate professor in bioinformatics at Lund University, but that doesn't make his study any more authoritative or worthy of any weight, when contrasted with the extensive body of research that shows the possible Khazar contribution to the Ashkenazi gene pool is negligible, by actual genetics researchers, who generally agree that the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are European and Middle Eastern in their genetic heritage. While it is true that some amount of Khazar ancestry might be found in some populations, that doesn't mean the main article on Ashkenazi Jews should give any credence or airtime to what is fundamentally a discredited theory being pushed by dubious sources and often along with antisemitic conspiracy theories. It should be afforded practically no weight and certainly not any more than it already does, which is covered in the Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry article and possibly a bit elsewhere such as Khazars and Genetic studies of Jews. This is the main article for Ashkenazi Jews. Elhaik shouldn't be cited here. Andre🚐 04:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)