Talk:Satmar

Untitled

Locations

As far as I know, there is also a Satmar community in Vienna, Austria - but I am not completely sure whether this is the case. Could anyone verify this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.69.244.219 (talk) 22:33, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Hungary in WWII

This paragraph

Many Satmar Hasidim were murdered and dispersed during World War II and the Holocaust,
though the group's destruction was less complete than many other Hasidic sects. Though widespread
shootings and deportations had already killed aproximately 100,000 Jews under Miklós
 Horthy's leadership, Nazi-allied Hungary was not occupied by Germany until comparatively late
in the war. The the first deportations of Jews and death marches to the extermination camps in
Poland did not begin until the spring of 1944, when 440,000 Jews were rounded up by the
Hungarian police.

keeps getting changed to

Many Satmar Hasidim were murdered and dispersed during World War II and the Holocaust,
though the group's destruction was less complete than many other Hasidic sects. Though widespread
shootings and deportations had already killed aproximately 100,000 Jews under Miklós
 Horthy's leadership of Nazi-allied Hungary, the firts deportations of Jews and death marches
to the extermination camps in Poland did not begin until the spring of 1944, when 440,000
Jews were rounded up by the Hungarian police, under the oversee of SS Colonel Adolf Eichmann.

Aside from the spelling and grammar errors ("firts"? "oversee"?), this looks incorrect to me and the previous version appears correct. Nazi-allied Hungary was, in fact, occupied by Germany in 1944. Check out this text from the Hungary article:

Hungary passed a series of anti-Semitic laws throughout the 1920s and thirties, and some
massacres of Jews by Hungarian forces took place in the early part of the Second World War,
but Hungary initially resisted large scale deportation of its Jewish population. Ultimately,
however, during the German occupation, the Arrow Cross Party and government authorities
participated in the Holocaust: in May and June 1944, Hungarian police deported nearly 440,000
Jews in more than 145 trains, mostly to Auschwitz [1]. Ultimately, over 400,000 Jews in Hungary
were killed during the Holocaust, as well as several tens of thousands of Roma.

The note about Adolf Eichmann also seems inappropriate and unnecessary to this article. If one is interested about who commanded SS troops in Hungary in 1944, one should look at an article like World War II, not an article about Satmar. I don't believe these edits to have any merit and I move for their reversion. Thoughts? --Makaristos 22:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, feel free to revert. Sorry for my error, it`s just that on the article Holocaust#Hungary it says that it was "October 1944, when the Horthy regime fell from power and was replaced...". This contradicted with this article which sayd that "The the first deportations of Jews and death marches to the extermination camps in Poland did not begin until the spring of 1944". It`s either Spring or Autumn? Also, the article Arrow Cross Party says that it "ruled Hungary from October 15, 1944 to January 1945. During its short rule, 80,000 Jews, including many women, children and old people were deported from Hungary...". Does this refere to the same event, and if so, why does it says 80,000 instead of 400,000? And I also don`t like the word "occupied". De facto, the deportations and death marches were done by Hungary, by the Hungarian police (under the oversaw ("oversee") of Adolf Eichmann - his mentioning is indeed superfluous) which altough had a puppet goverment, was not occupied as Poland or Ukraine were for example. AdoniCtistai 23:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

In Satmar Custody

Why was the section on this documentary removed? It is material which is entirely relevant to the topic.

Morgan Leigh 08:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe it was removed because it doesn't belong in this article. Movies, documentaries, television show episodes, and such are generally given their own pages if they are notable enough. ShalomShlomo reverted the edit but left the link to the documentary's webpage at the end of the page with all the other links. --Makaristos 16:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Makaristos hit the nail on the head- it was removed because it's a complete nonsequiteur. It would be one thing if there had been a major reaction to it, or if this was supposedly a widespread phenomenon. Without either of those things, it's just a one-sentence publicity ad- certainly not worthy of being its own section on the page, and not, IMO, appropriate for the page itself, anymore than a Discovery Center episode on "the Mysteries of Satmar" would be. No one's tried to put mentions of "A Life Apart" in the body of the article, even though that's probably one of the more comprehensive (and widely received) documentaries on Hasidim in the past ten years. I just don't see why it should be here. Feel free to try to change my mind, though.ShalomShlomo 19:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Shalom, many wikipedia articles contain sections titled "xtopic in popular culture" and I think that including such references is useful and relevant, so long as they are on topic, which I feel this one is. Moreover, these popular culture references are often the only way that people find out about things in the first place. I hadn't heard of "A Life Apart" until you mentioned it here, and I am an academic of religion. Now that I have been able to assimilate that information about Satmar, it has provided a more balanced understanding of the group than "In Satmar Custody" did. I'd like to suggest that we make a section 'Satmar in Popular culture' and include both of these films in it, and any others you might know of. Let's face it, most people's only source of information is popular culture. Most are not going to do any sort of decent research, so if we can provide them opportunities to gain information in a medium they will access then we are facilitating a wider dissemination of knowledge. This can only be a good thing.

Morgan Leigh 04:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Morgan Leigh, I am not opposed to a "Pop culture" section on principle. I would be willing to support the inclusion of such an article when it consists of more than two references and the analysis is longer than one or two sentences. I could contribute on it, but frankly can't spare the time at the moment, and don't see it as particularly critical to the article's content. Until you can expand the section to the point where it stands on its own, as opposed to a mere trivial addendum, I would strongly suggest such references stay in the link section, for the same reason that it is unadvisable to create articles consisting of a single sentence. Just my two cents.ShalomShlomo 05:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Neturei Karta

About Satmar and Neturei Karta. THe Cherem bit is incorrect, as is the bit of a denunciation. Also the part of asking Reb Yoilish to meet with Yasser Arrafat. It's all myth. Yasser Arafat and the PLO were not the public face of the Palestinian cause before Reb Yoilish had his stroke, so it doesn't make sense. He was just the leader of one of many Palestinian resistence/terrorist groups. There wasn't even a PLO yet, just Fatah.

About the cherem, I actually asked a chaver of the Satmar Beis Din about the Cherem, and he said it's nonsense. The Beis Din has not issued a cherem against a person or group of people since its formation in the United States. Cherem is the most severe punishment a beis DIn can issue in our day and it is almost never done by any Beis Din on people. Books, and things occasionally.

No denunciation was issued either. It's a made up propaganda piece by the Kakhnik radio station Arutz Sheva. It never happened. No such thing ever appeared in Der Yid, which is the official newspaper. Many Satmer are uncomfortable with NK, but there's no official stance. (Also, right now there's a false rumor in Satmar that NK denied the Holocaust on American TV, and since Satmar don't have TV, many believe it.)

I am going to remove it because I feel it mars an otherwise fairly accurate and informative article.Shia1 06:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. --Daniel575 | (talk) 09:32, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

R' Aharon, Admo"r d'Satmar-Kiryas Yoel

I think the title that Wikipedia has given R' Aharon (Rebbe of Satmar-Kiryas Yoel) is premature. I understand where it comes from. There's Nedvorna-Bnei Brak, Nedvorna-Tzfas, etc., and Vizhnitz-Monsey, Vizhnitz-Bnei Brak, etc. But this is a little different Here, R' Aharon has literally moved part of his operation to Williamsburgh, supposedly in an attempt to take the entire pie. Whatever our judgment is about this maneuver, it clearly eliminates the accuracy of labeling R' Aharon to Rebbe of the Kiryas Yoel branch of Satmar. The desire to label and compartmentalize is compelling. But presently, it may be most accurate to say that the position of "Satmar Rebbe" is contested. It doesn't look like either side is content to be merely Rebbe of Satmar-Kiryas Yoel or Satmar-Williamsburgh.--Meshulam 15:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Satmar-Monsey

I would love to see more in this article about R' Chaim Yehoshua Halbershtam, either in this article, or on the article dedicated to him. For ex., he is identified as the Satmar Rebbe on Monsey. But the article does not clarify whether that is something that was unilaterally decided by the Chassidim (and whether R' Halbershtam asceded), or where his "home base" is (ie, the name of his shul). There are countless Satmar shuls in Monsey. Calling him Satmar Rebbe of Monsey is a little too general. --Meshulam 15:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

R' Chaim Halbershtam is not the official Rebbe of Monsey though many regard him as the equivalent. --129.64.143.32 (talk)jonah —Preceding comment was added at 17:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Intro: when was Szatmarnemeti a part of Hungary (clarification/grammer)?

From the intro:

Satmar (or Satmar Hasidism or Satmarer Hasidim) (חסידות סאטמאר) is a movement of Orthodox Haredi Jews who adhere to Hasidism originating in the town of Szatmárnémeti (now Satu Mare, Romania), at that time in the Kingdom of Hungary. Members are referred to as Satmarer Hasidim.

"...at that time in the Kingdom of Hungary." - This doesn't make sense to me... at what time (well when it was named Szatmarnemeti i guess?)? This should either specify when the movement originated in Szatmarnemeti or should be phrased as "...originally located in the Kingdom of Hungary."

66.253.36.215 05:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Rabbi or rebbe? Pick one, please.

rabbi and rebbe seem to be present about equally; for consistency's sake, however, it'd be nice to have only one or the other. --moof 08:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• Hi moof: Sorry! It's not that clear-cut when dealing with Hasidic Judaism because its rabbis are called rebbes and Wikipedia cannot adjudicate such things. The article/s reflect the reality and truth of how these two titles are used interchangeably.

?

can someone fix this article? it was very encyclopedic before and now it's just amateur

Perhaps you can give greater detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.240.214.219 (talk) 10:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Satmars slam Naturei Karta

[1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shrike (talk • contribs) 17:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

The accuracy of the article seems to be best shown by how Arutz 7 is once again the only media outlet with this great scoop, and the scoop that Neturei Karta is now a Chasidic sect rather than a movement of largely Graniks. 82.81.120.219 10:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Newspapers

Could someone please verify the statement Satmarers have stopped purchasing or advertising in Der Yid and Der Blatt? Who authored this section? The grammar is just horrifying?Hearingpocket 19:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

grammer and spelling

Can someone help me rewrite the grammer and fix the spelling in the article; it is very bad indeed. Major rewrite needed. Any offers? Lobbuss 10:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CRChe.gif

Image:CRChe.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality

I've flagged the "Satmar succession feud" for neutrality and general cleanup. The section contains a lot of personally invested statements; it would be worthwhile to rewrite the whole section in a more neutral tone. --ArthurDenture (talk) 06:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was someone had already moved the page. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Satmar (Hasidic dynasty) → Satmar — Unnecessary disambiguation; Satmar already redirects to this article. --84.92.117.93 (talk) 22:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move

There is a consensus regarding an informal policy that all articles about Hasidic groups follow the "Name (Hasidic dynasty)" pattern. This applies both when there is an article with the same name, and when there is not. I think this policy should be kept and the article should be moved back to "Satmar (Hasidic dynasty)". Please share your opinions. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 14:49, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

No offense, but can you provide some evidence that there's a consensus to that effect? Somewhere this was discussed previously, etc. I don't agree with this practice, obviously--the point of an article title is to name the article's subject, not to describe what it is.Prezbo (talk) 21:17, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation absolutely needed

The disambiguation, by adding "(Hasidic dynasty)" is absolutely needed in this case because in Yiddish and in the Jewish world it can mean BOTH the city (not always a Hasidic place) AND the Hasidic dynasty that sprouted and derives only its NAME from there, see: "Satu Mare (Romanian pronunciation: [ˈsatu ˈmare]; Hungarian: Szatmárnémeti [sɒtmaːrneːmɛti]; German: Sathmar; Yiddish: סאטמאר (Satmar)) is a city with a population of 113,688 and the capital of Satu Mare County, Romania." Thank you, IZAK (talk) 07:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

The Spelling SATMAR in the english language only means the hasidic dynasty, so there is no ambiguation, when some one looks for the town Satu Mare, why should he/she spell it satmar? and in case some one does just but up a link above saying for the city Satu Mare in Romanie click here....--75.99.39.162 (talk) 19:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Controversial Report on Satmar victimization of children?

I just read an article on allegations of widespread abuse throughout the Satmar community in NYC and abroad. I believe that something this newsworthy requires at least a mention in the article. It seemed pretty serious to me- http://www.vice.com/read/the-child-rape-assembly-line-0000141-v20n11 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.143.215.254 (talk) 06:09, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I think there needs to be more than just one source for this before it's included. The allegations are quite devastating, they are just based on one man's anecdotal experience. i don't think it's fair to include it until there more sources support the claims in this article.

Feldman and Weisshaus' books.

These books, formerly listed in the article's bibliography section, were perhaps accidentally lost when the bibliography section was replaced by a references section. Since they offer an external view of Satmar life, I added them back into the "See Also" section.

• Deborah Feldman. Unorthodox. The Scandalous Rejection of my Hasidic Roots. Simon & Schuster: New York, NY, 2012. ISBN 978-1-4391-8701-2
• Yechezkel Yossef Weisshaus. THE REBBE. A Glimpse into the Daily Life of the Satmar Rebbe Rabbeinu Yoel Teitelbaum. Translated by Mechon Lev Avos from Sefer Eidis B'Yosef by Rabbi Yechezkel Yosef Weisshaus. Machon Lev Avos. Distributed by Israel Book Shop, Lakewood New Jersey, 2008. ISBN 978-1-60091-063-0

CharlesHBennett (talk) 05:02, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

about satmar and other haredi groups anti zionists

they only hate zionism only cuz they support halachic state it is even written right here https://books.google.co.il/books?id=MVEvieysltsC&pg=PA249&lpg=PA249&dq=halachic+state+neturei+karta&source=bl&ots=mpArwVyWrY&sig=FyBqueo3qmZZESVBl4ORupMAI_c&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ellYVdPaJOjnygP30IGgBw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=halachic%20state%20neturei%20karta&f=false it said such people for example neturei karta—see “Zionism” as anti-Jewish, anti-Halachic and anti-religious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.246.130.39 (talk) 09:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Satmar Zionism section in article

It's clear (I can bring plenty of recent sources) that Satmar as a sect (i.e. its leadership and ideology) remains fiercely anti-Zionist. I've cleaned up this section for now, but if anyone objects, they are welcome to change it. DemocraticLuntz (talk) 13:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC) anti zionism doesnt necessary mean support palestine its mean not recognize israel as a jewish state which they do but they do not support palestine. for god sake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.246.130.39 (talk) 14:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Satmar (Hasidic dynasty). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060510024645/http://www.forward.com/issues/2001/01.07.27/news6.html to http://www.forward.com/issues/2001/01.07.27/news6.html

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) 02:31, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Translation of poster

The illustration of the (presumably Yiddish) poster "Rejection of Israel is expressed in a ban of voting ..." would be more accessible to English readers if someon could add a translation. Any offers? Arrivisto (talk) 13:54, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• Arrivisto, here is the full translation of the poster:

Prohibition
on authority of our master his holiness the
honorable genius Av Beth Din, Shlit"a
and the genius beth din rabbis Shlit"a
The opinion of our holy Torah regarding participation in the upcoming governmental leadership elections
Being that under the name Israel they turn their backs on our holy Torah
And most of its members are free-thinkers
We have already issued our Da'as Torah opinion to the effect that
It is strictly forbidden for any Jew man or woman young or old to take part in these elections
And he who listens shall dwell securely and care-free
Signed June 16, 1955
Pinchas Epstein
Yisrael Yitzchak Halevi Reisman
David Halevi Jungreis
Everything I have said regarding the severe prohibition of taking part in the previous elections has become even more clear to me now regarding the serious and terrible prohibition of taking part in their current elections heaven forbid
And may the Almighty have pity and save his nation Israel from terrible mistakes such as these and speedily redeem us from the dark and gloomy exile in order that we should merit to see the salvation and happiness of all Israel.
Joel Teitelbaum

StonyBrook (talk) 20:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Satmar, Chassidim or not ?

Just to make clear from the start, this means no disrespect to the Tzadik R' Yoelish or his amazing community. the Satmar Rav, Harav Yoelish said "forgotten is the Torah of the Baal Shem Tov" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.228.119.202 (talk) 00:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 12 September 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 17:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

---

Satmar (Hasidic dynasty) → Satmar – Unnecessary disambiguation ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:13, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Sătmar is a geographical region in Romania, precisely centered around Satu Mare. The name of this dynasty is probably derived from the name of the region. See wide usage of Sătmar in scientific works [2]. Super Ψ Dro 11:23, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

  It's spelled differently. Why couldn't a hatnote resolve this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:27, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support per WP:NATURAL.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:11, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose It makes absolutely no sense to refer to the name of a place which is still an actual city without specifying that the reference is to a specific chassidic group which happens to carry the name. Costatitanica (talk) 20:25, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

  It's spelled differently. Why couldn't a hatnote resolve this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:27, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support. This is pretty clearly the primary topic-- the odds that someone looking this up is in fact searching for the city are negligible. I'd like to point out WP:DPT's guidelines that we don't automatically grant primary topic status to a topic simply because it is the original source of a name. I don't think the fact that "Satmar" is derived from "Satu Mare" should necessitate a disambiguation. Also, about the use of Sătmar as a geographical region: I know Google stats are not absolute, but the usage of Satmar vs. Sătmar in Ngram and Trends is telling. Cheers, Gilded Snail (talk) 01:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  I don't care much either way. I'm no expert in wiki policy minutiae. I comment from the perspective of a fairly avid consumer of Wikipedia and what I find sensible in that role. I won't lose any sleep whatever ends up happening. Cheers, Costatitanica (talk) 17:20, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support. This is a simple reversal of a redirect that has pointed here since the two-entry dab page was deleted back in 2013. There is no other article titled "Satmar" and there's already a hatnote on this article pointing to Satu Mare for the small number who might be looking for the city. Station1 (talk) 18:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.