Talk:Orthodox Jewish feminism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
WikiProject iconWomen in Religion Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is Women of the wall an orthodox organization?

WOW is mentioned in the lead paragraph, but it's not specifically an orthodox organization, but rather either either multi-denominational, or conservative/reform. The wikipedia article on Women of the Wall states:
"From the start, Women of the Wall included Orthodox members and opted to run their service according to "Orthodox standards." Nevertheless, some Orthodox were offended, including some who call themselves Orthodox feminists.[6][7] Although Women of the Wall is a multi-denominational group, including not only Reform, but Conservative and Orthodox members, it has been viewed by some Israelis as a Reform organisation.[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]" Yaakovaryeh (talk) 21:08, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

not orthodox

The relation of this organization to orthodox Judaism has not been established and the claims contained in this page are

WP:POV. The recent rulings by both modern orthodox and agudat Israel make the claims contained in this article doubtful. I would suggest removing all mention of orthodox Judaism from the page, including the title. Council2 (talk) 12:49, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

It's not our role (as Wikipedia editors) to accept other group's opionions of a group being valid/invalid/misnamed except to say that other groups feel this way. By cited ref, the article appears to describe how the subject group defines itself, so per
WP:V that's what wikipedia reports. If Y says to X "You are not Y", that doesn't make it intrinsically and objectively true; if X says "I am a Y", then we can correctly report that "this is what Y is" because the whole subject is one of self-identification. And further, there are independent references that describe X this way, so it's not just Y rejecting X despite X's protest to the contrary. DMacks (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply
]