Talk:New Square, New York

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Judaism Mid‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jewish history Mid‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jewish culture Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish cultureTemplate:WikiProject Jewish cultureJewish culture articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York (state) High‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Borscht Belt#Today|Homowack Resort]] The anchor (#Today) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Twersky or Twerski?

I was reading around and it was funny to find out that his surname has many variants of spelling. Make it one throughout the whole article.

New Square business

What about the "New Square" orange juice?--Pharos 21:36, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

What about it? It is manufacured by/through the Hasidim living in New Square as part of their commercial undertakings...(gotta make a living somehow, right?) IZAK 09:35, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

If it's a major business there, it should probably be mentioned in the article. I myself don't know much about the commercial activities in the town other than this end product.--Pharos 09:41, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The above info is wrong. New Square dairy products are manufactured by Ahava dairy, which also makes Golan Cheese, Morning Select dairy products, and a few other brands. The owners have no connection to New Square. They simply pay New Square for use of their name, and, as part of the deal, they use the New Square Kashruth Certification.--Kotzker 19:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As they say "business is business" so who cares what the arrangements are as long as "the bottom line" adds up. By the way, why aren't you signing your comments with the four tildes ~~~~ ? Thanks. IZAK 09:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Sorry, Izak. It took a while to get the hang of the whole Wiki thing, and couldn't figure out how to add a signature. I've added it now to my previously published comments. --Kotzker 19:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Info on Chernobyl/Rachmestrivk Incorrect

There are individuals in New Square who identify with other groups, such as Belz, Viznitz, Rachmestrivk, Klausenberg, among many others. However, those individuals do not constitute groups. There are currently no *groups* of those chasidim that identify as such.

In years past, the Rachmestrivka Rebbe lived there and gained a following among some residents. The subsequent friction, which intensified after his father Reb Zusha passed away—manifested in acts of thuggerry committed with tacit approval of the Skver establishment— resulted in his move to Borough Park, and there has been no Rachmestrivk presence in New Square since that merits mention.

The New Square community does not allow any sub-groups to form that would undermine the homogenity of Skver. It is for that reason that no other schools, synagogues, or even private minyanim are allowed. Kotzker 05:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So if you know all this why don't you add it into the article? And again, why aren't you signing your comments with the four tildes ~~~~ ? Thanks again. IZAK 09:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain the demographics

The article states

median income for a family is $12,208. Males have a median income of $21,696 versus $29,375 for females

How is this possible? Doesn't a family contain at least one person who is either male or female? How does a family's income get to be lower than that of the people in it? (Please note: I have looked at demographics for other places, including Monsey, New York, Spring Valley, New York, and Brooklyn, New York, and in those cases, the family income is above that of the individuals, as is logical. But I must admit that in the demographics for Kiryas Joel, New York, family income is below that of the individuals.) --Keeves 02:22, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My guess (based on my knowledge of the community) is that figures are skewed by the number of young couples being supported by their families and the community. KJ and NS have a good sized number of zero-earner families. --alexisr 04:01, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Correct: The average family has a constantly growing number of children. Most families end up with having anywhere between seven to fourteen kids each, and then the kids start getting married from about eighteen years of age onwards -- with the parents footing the bills for the weddings and the setting-up of homes for the newly-wed couples -- quite enough to wipe out the income/s of any single earner/s in the family. In fact there are a huge amount of charitable appeals and borrowing that's an ongoing aspect without which many families would sink financially. So published figures are not just misleading they do not even begin to tell the true scope of the financial "black hole" faced by most of these struggling families. IZAK 09:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

US Census data doesn't take into account how much money a family spends. Alexisr has the correct answer. Male Median Income is derived from all males who work and Female Median Income is dervied from all females who work. Family Median Income is dervied from all familes(families headed by those who work and families headed by those who are currently involved in schooling and study but do not yet work). Therefore the number of families who devote the bulk of their time to study will have zero- or near zero-income and skew and family income. Chops79 18:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Twersky or Twerski

The artice has both spellings of the name. Which is correct in this context? I know that different branches of the family spell it differently. JoshuaZ 14:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yiddish in New Square

"The predominant language spoken in New Square is Yiddish." New Square community profile Culturalrevival 22:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Separated sidewalks

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_Square%2C_New_York&action=edit&section=7 This is a frequently-heard accusation (you call it blood libel) against chareidim in E. Israel. Seculars who write about "Bnei Brak and Meah Shearim with their separated sidewalks". Well, tell you what: in Bnei Brak there are no such places that I know of, and in Jerusalem there is only one street where there are such signs (it is a side-street of Rechov Yechezkel, between Kikar Blumenthal and the Shuk HaBucharim, in the direction of Rechov Bar Ilan) - and that isn't even in Meah Shearim at all.: Thus, regarding New Square, I'd like to see some proof. As far as I'm concerned this doesn't have to be a real 'source' - it is enough for me if someone shows up here and testifies that he has indeed been in New Square and has indeed seen separate sidewalks there. So I'm not talking about "it seems in line with the rest of the article" or "it says so in the newspaper". I would like someone to tell us that he has actually been in New Square and has actually seen the separated sidewalks. Or bring me a reliable source, such as: 1) a chassidic Jewish source (for example, an American Yiddish newspaper) or 2) a picture of this separated sidewalks. Until such evidence has been provided, I will not allow this allegation to remain in the article. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 11:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you read WP guidelines. You are supposed give the author the benefit of the doubt and time to prove his/her claim, which you yourself admits exists somewhere else. I think the acceptable time is one week. --Shuki (talk) 18:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to allow unproven libelous allegations to remain in an artticle. There is no proof anywhere that I know of that this is actually true. This is a frequently used libel thrown at chareidim by secular people: see for example this, a huge exaggeration (for example, that bank they mention has 6 regular MIXED lines and 1 part-time women-only line - it's the Bank Pagi branch on Rechov Chazon Ish, I used to have an account there). Also, the buses in Bnei Brak are not separated, as far as I know. There is no Mehadrin arrangement there as there is on some lines in Jerusalem. And I have *never* seen the men and the women line up separately anywhere. In any case, there is not a single line there where the women get on via the back door (as in Jerusalem, with lines such as 10, 40, 56 and 49A). Everybody stands in the same line and men and women are completely intermingled when getting on the bus, so that's a plain LIE. How often do you go to Bnei Brak? How well do you know these things? How dare you spread such slander about things you don't even know about! --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 22:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello. it was not my intention to slander hasidim or any group. i've been staying in monsey this summer and i heard a few people mention that new square has gender separated sidewalks. i thought they were joking but they said it was true. i'm suspicious about the claim because i first heard it about meah shearim to later find out it wasn't true and then i subsequently heard the claim about kiryas joel also to discover it is false. i have driven through new square but never paid particular attention to the sidewalks (they are mostly full of nice kids running around). i've been busy but i'll ask around more and i can try to take a short drive over there to confirm/disconfirm the rumors. 68.50.99.248 (talk) 04:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)jonah[reply]

Thanks! This is exactly what I mean. It is a frequently heard claim about many chareidi/chassidishe places and as far as I know, it has so far always been a lie. In Bnei Brak and Jerusalem there are no separated sidewalks - anywhere. (Except on chol hamoed sukkos, when the Edah separates Rechov Meah Shearim.) If you would be able to personally go there and check it out, that would be great. If you maybe know someone who actually lives there who can confirm it to you, that's also fine with me. I'd just like to hear that someone - either here or indirectly - declares that he has actually seen these separated sidewalks. If they exist, fine. If not, then also fine. All I want is an accurate, encyclopedical article. And including something because "it sounds in line with the rest of the article" (Shuki) is not the editorial behavior that I would expect of anyone who wants Wikipedia to become more reliable. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 06:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave a note on Redaktor's talk page and ask him. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 11:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no personal knowledge of New Square. If someone can find an authoritative source which mentions separate sidewalks in New Square then put it in; otherwise it is speculation and should be left out. I think that is the correct approach. --Redaktor (talk) 21:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Piz, you accuse others of WP:OR but continue to bring your own as 'proof'. I know Bnei Brak, and have in fact been on a mehadrin bus there though I don't know if it's as easy to enforce since non-religious and non-Haredi people also use the bus system. --Shuki (talk) 00:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shuki, would you please stop distorting what I say, twisting my words around? I am merely making comments on a talk page and am not putting what I said in any article. Since when does anything that is said on a talk page be sourced?? And I definitely believe that you have been on a bus there where the men sat in the front and the women in the back. But unless you are talking about an intercity bus (such as the 402) - and I thought we were talking about city buses here; the existence of Mehadrin intercity buses is not a matter of dispute as far as I know - then this was merely a natural segregation that the passengers themselves came up with. This often happens on non-Mehadrin buses in Jerusalem also, such as the 11, 15 and 35: almost all of the men are in the front and almost all of the women in the back. But they do get on through the same (front) door, and there is no rule anywhere saying that these lines are Mehadrin. Thus, this is irrelevant.

Now back to the subject: as Redaktor said, if it has not been proven, it should be left out. I should note that for me an 'authoritative' source would also be if our anynomyous contributor above would be able to go to New Square some day and see it for himself, or if someone - any of us - could call someone in New Square, or find someone who has actually been there, and find out the truth. Unfortunately there aren't so many Skverrer chassidim in Eretz Yisroel. There is a Skverrer Talmud Torah though, so I assume that they also have a shul somewhere. Bli neder I could try to find that shul on Sunday or so and ask whether someone there has been to New Square and has actually seen the separated sidewalks. If I get such confirmation, that's already enough for me to accept it. I am not interested in anything else. I just don't want anything which could be seen as slanderous in this article unless it is actually true. And by the way, I trust our anonymous contributor above way more than some newspaper article from a non-Jewish sensational newspaper. --Piz d'Es-Cha (talk) 06:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to set the record straight: New Square indeed has gender-segregated sidewalks. I've lived in New Square for eighteen years, so if all you want is someone who can attest to seeing the signs, I can do so unequivocally. Every road in New Square has blue signs saying "Mener Zeit" on one side, and orange signs "Froyen Zeit" on the other.

I should add, the signs are a fairly recent phenomenon, and have only been put up in the late 90's / early 2000's.

It's been a while since I've been active here, so I won't be updating the article itself. But you now have that personal verification. Kotzker (talk) 04:30, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Clinton controversy and the blanket revert

I am going to address this blanket revert here: [1]

The Piz d'Es-Cha version restores an error - the "Hebrew" supposedly of New Square is actually Yiddish! (Notice the article names for this in the Hebrew and Yiddish Wikipedias)
The previous Clinton revision was not properly footnoted - Here in my version I have the proper references and page numbers.
I have identified who made accusations and who said what
In the Piz d'Es-Cha version there is no source referencing that the investigation was "dropped"

My revision should be restored, and then THAT should be worked upon. Also, generally it is a good idea to not use "controversy" sections - work the controversy throughout the article. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to sort-of-revert after I found more information - I added more details (the men were commuted, not totally pardoned) - PLUS that Hillary Clinton said that she was not involved. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:24, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing passages

There are some very confusing passages in the History section. It often jumps around chronologically, is very vague, and sometimes contains outright non-sequiturs. For instance:

One dozen people received welfare in 1975. In 1992 the village administrator said that in 1975 about two thirds of the families received food stamps and Medicaid.[6]

Two thirds of which families? Was it one dozen people, or two thirds of the population? To whom did the village administrator make the claim? What is his/her name?

Can someone with some knowledge of New Square please clarify?--TremorMilo (talk) 04:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Accidental Edit under Wrong Account

I accidentally edited this page using my staff account when I intended to use my personal account, Jorm. My edits to the article were personal and not from my role at the Foundation.--Jorm (WMF) (talk) 21:52, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How is "all-Hasidic" demographic enforced ?

How do they keep non-Hasidic people out ? The article needs to explain what the term effectively means and implies. I thought discrimination on religious grounds is illegal. Who owns the land and properties ? Rcbutcher (talk) 23:09, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on New Square, New York. 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:

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) 09:26, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Square Cemetery

Why does this article mention nothing about the cemetery in NS? --תנא קמא (talk) 19:46, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done, added. StonyBrook (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]