Talk:Chabad mitzvah campaigns

Tefillin campaign was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 26 December 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Chabad mitzvah campaigns. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Rename

I would like to ask for consensus on renaming this page to Chabad mitzvah campaigns, since they are the brainchild of the Rebbe and are unique to Chabad, as far as the article mentions. Yoninah (talk) 17:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest merging this article into Chabad outreach, since essentially that is what this article is and there is no need for two articles. People searching for Chabad outreach activities will more likely find it under this title then "Mitzva campaigns" which is probably used near exclusively in Chabad. Shlomke (talk) 20:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, the Chabad outreach article looks like a much less developed page than this one. It cites no references and reads like a press release. At least this article has clear sections and a more encyclopedic bent. How about merging Chabad outreach here? Yoninah (talk) 21:58, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree to merging Chabad outreach here. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 23:04, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True this one is much more developed then Chabad outreach. It doesn't really make a difference which way you merge it, but the name of the article should be Chabad outreach for the reasons I stated above. Shlomke (talk) 03:06, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are all linked to from Kiruv, aren't they? If so, that would seem to be a logical relationship. Bus stop (talk) 03:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bus, I'm not sure what your trying to bring out. Can you elaborate? Shlomke (talk) 03:33, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My initial inclination is that as long as the articles branch off of the kiruv article in a logical way that perhaps they legitimately deserve to stand alone as short articles. That is the justification for each of these short articles — they all treat examples of kiruv in action. I would disagree that these are examples of Chabad kiruv, though of course they are that. I think they are primarily examples of kiruv. Some of them just happen to fall under the auspices of Chabad, but I think that is secondary. Some (editors) have been pointing out the specifically Chabad and Schneerson connection but of at least equal importance is just that these are examples of kiruv. Kiruv is of course practiced by many people and organizations, though often with less fanfare than seen in these examples. Bus stop (talk) 04:44, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am for placing all the genuine Chabad engineered/sponsored/staffed/publicized/funded etc mitzvah campaigns under one obvious logical heading and that would be Chabad mitzvah campaigns. It would be a great pity to lose such a specific article that is not being contested, just a more accurate name to identify it better. In any case, mitzvah campaigns are only ONE over-all aspect of Chabad kiruv. By the way, what is "Chabad outreach" and why shouldn't that be incorporated into Orthodox Jewish outreach if you keep on going, whereas the mitzvah campaigns are undeniably and unquestionably specific actvities unique to Chabad ONLY done in a similar way all over the world by Chabad. Then, it should read like a brief summary and not be swallowed up into more general philosophical discussions about Chabad outreach or any outreach in general that lacks specificity. IZAK (talk) 12:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it's alright with everyone, I'm going to change this article name to "Chabad Mitzvah campaigns". It looks like there is an additional discussion here of merging this article with Chabad outreach so I won't touch that. Joe407 (talk) 04:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with "Chabad Mitzvah campaigns" (is mitzva capitalized here?). As far as merging with Chabad outreach, my rational for that was because there are other Chabad outreach activities, institutions, etc. that will not fall under mitvah campaigns (which are principally only 10 Mitzvah's). But after rethinking, adding info to this article, and per comments of Izak and Bus Stop, I think they should be separate, with links in each one to the other. Chabad outreach is currently underdeveloped, but I hope to find the time to develop it and add sources, and anyone else that can do that is welcomed. Shlomke (talk) 05:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support rename to 'Chabad Mitzvah campaigns'. --Shuki (talk) 07:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merge to/with/from 'Chabad outreach'. Mitzvah campaigns is a legitimate sub-article to Chabad outreach and can be developed very nicely and respectfully once the separate FORKs are merged and expanded. The Chabad outreach article should be developed to include the entire broad philosophy. --Shuki (talk) 07:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"White Tanks"?

I search in vain for anything about the white tanks, the walk-in trucks into which volunteers invite people for teffilin-teaching and talk.

In the 1970s I thought they were a New York phenomenon, and I never saw them anywhere else in the 33 States I have worked in. In the 1980s I saw them in Montreal, though I had never seen them there in my many visits to Montreal in the 1950s and '60's.

In 2010 I visited one in Toronto for the first time.

I betcha a single white tank sent to Kaifeng would find a legitimate minyan or two in no time at all. Particularly if some enterprising Jew invested in, say, an electronics plant in the area...

If anybody's got any good stories about them -- including the provenance of the nickname "white tanks," with its obvious parallel to other Jewish tanks, the chariots of David -- this might be a good place to add them.

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 19:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chabad mitzvah campaigns. 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/20070903071124/http://www.sichosinenglish.org/essays/42.htm to http://www.sichosinenglish.org/essays/42.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070516180134/http://www.sichosinenglish.org:80/books/sichos-in-english/1/21.htm to http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/sichos-in-english/1/21.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070516173402/http://www.sichosinenglish.org:80/books/sichos-in-english/4/21.htm to http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/sichos-in-english/4/21.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 21:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]