Talk:Abraham Chazan
Add topicLatest comment: 1 month ago by Pettek Nanach in topic COI request: alternative tradition concerning Nathan's foremost disciple
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
COI request: alternative tradition concerning Nathan's foremost disciple
[edit] | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. Per WP:ELNO. |
Disclosure: Pettek Nanach is affiliated with ajew.org and with Likutay Nanach.
The article currently describes Rabbi Nachman Chazan as Nathan of Breslov's "closest disciple." Please consider adding an explanatory note after that wording:
- {{efn|An alternative tradition recorded in ''Likutay Nanach'' attributes to Rabbi Yisroel Ber Odesser the view that Rabbi Moshe Breslover was Nathan of Breslov's greatest disciple. ''Likutay Nanach'' argues that Nachman Chazan and Moshe Breslover were the two disciples who served and received from Nathan most extensively, while regarding Moshe Breslover as the principal line of continuation.}}
The directly relevant statement reports that Odesser was asked whether Moshe Breslover was Nathan's greatest disciple and answered, "Certainly": source text. The surrounding discussion gives the work's reasoning and distinguishes Moshe Breslover's largely hidden role from Nachman Chazan's more visible role.
This is an affiliated primary source presenting an alternative tradition, so please independently verify it and decide whether an explicitly attributed note is due. Pettek Nanach (talk) 16:04, 2 August 2026 (UTC)
Declined A check of the website's security certificate revealed SCT DigiCert 'Wyvern2026h2' (Embedded in certificate, Invalid signature) SCT Let's Encrypt 'Willow2026h2' (Embedded in certificate, Invalid signature)
rendering this unacceptable as a source. Regards, Spintendo 19:15, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you for checking. Disclosure: I am affiliated with ajew.org and with Likutay Nanach. I have now rechecked the live endpoint and obtained a fresh Qualys SSL Labs report: grade A, no warnings, certificate-chain issues 0, and trusted paths for Mozilla, Apple, Android, Java, and Windows. The served Let's Encrypt certificate for ajew.org is valid from 25 July to 23 October 2026, and standard TLS verification succeeds. Could you please identify the checker that reported those two SCT signatures as invalid, or reconsider whether this is a site-certificate problem? I understand that the affiliated primary source and the proposed attributed note still require an independent editorial assessment; I am asking only that they not be rejected on a certificate problem that current independent testing does not reproduce. Pettek Nanach (talk) 22:28, 15 August 2026 (UTC)