Talk:New York divorce coercion gang

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Article name change is not a minor edit

@

Edison divorce torture plot because the year is surely not needed for a singular event such as this; and while many of the previous events and planning emanated from New York, the plot itself was centered around New Jersey in general and Edison in particular. By changing it from plot to ring, you are implying that what is most notable here is not the plot but the ring. The problem with this is only a tiny portion of the ring's activities centered around Edison, so that cannot be an accurate title for this article. New York divorce coercion ring might be a better fit. Also, is it a ring, or is it a gang, as reliable sources call it? [1][2][3][4][5][6] This one uses both terms in its headline. StonyBrook (talk) 11:35, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

  • StonyBrook First off, apologies, I certainly didn't mean to tag the name change as minor. I don't recall checking the box, and, assuming I did (and it wasn't a glitch of some sort), it was an accident. You're absolutely right that the name change isn't a minor edit. Regarding the name itself, point well taken on the Edison vs. New York issue. As for gang vs. ring, ring seemed a bit more NPOV to me, but there are certainly RS for gang, so I'm certainly not wedded to ring. If you think "New York divorce coercion gang" is a better title, then, I'm happy to implement it. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 12:35, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Mendel Epstein, whom the references say most of the story is about? All it lacks now is early bio info. StonyBrook (talk) 13:00, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply
]

June 2020

The Judge found no evidence of a ring or gang just an old Rabbi who read too much Lee Childs. So this page shouldn’t exists. If it does it should write about the women who spend years along with hundred of thousands of dollars on legal fees trying to receive a Jewish divorce from their Husbands and the US law doesn’t recognize value to a religious document so the “husbands” continue extortion to religious women and the women not only get vilified by their spouses but also the media and Justices for the religious beliefs. Esthere600 (talk) 15:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

right great wrongs. Best, StonyBrook (talk) 04:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply
]