Talk:The International Jew

Naming structure
The PDF lists chapter 1-80, grouped in four volumes. Rather than have "The International Jew../Volume_Name", or "The International Jew../Vol/Chapter, would it be ok to use "Article Name", "Dearborn Independent/Article Name" or "The International Jew/Article Name" ?

Here are the first few articles publication details.. .... 80. An Address to "Gentiles" on the Jewish Problem - [The Dearborn Independent, issue of 14 January 1922]
 * 1) The Jew in Character and Business - [The Dearborn Independent, issue of 22 May 1920]
 * 2) Germany's Reaction Against the Jew - [The Dearborn Independent, issue of 29 May 1920]
 * 3) Jewish History in the United States - [The Dearborn Independent, issue of 5 June 1920]
 * 4) The Jewish Question -- Fact or Fancy? - [The Dearborn Independent, issue of 12 June 1920]
 * 5) Anti-Semitism -- Will It Appear in the U.S.? - [The Dearborn Independent, issue of 19 June 1920]
 * 6) Jewish Question Breaks Into the Magazines  - [The Dearborn Independent, issue of 26 June 1920]

John Vandenberg 10:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Fine by me, just seems like a lot more work. I've sworn off large projects since finishing The Awakening: The Resurrection ;) Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Henry Ford 10:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * no worries; I'll tackling this one. WS:STYLE indicates that "The International Jew/Chapter 1" is the preferred.  Which naming convention suits you most? John Vandenberg 11:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I've finished setting up the structure; and have copy&pasted the text from here, described here as "This is the full, unabridged 80-chapter version, about 1,023 pages in all." The edition on archive.org is the same found here (which points to ); while it is described as "Unabridged version, in 80 chapters. Brought to you by Ford!" it does not contain the prefaces. Both sites looks like they have a strong agenda on this topic, so I think we will need to verify the content against other sources as well. John Vandenberg 02:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Authorship
From what I have read in the last 24hrs, it is disputed that Henry Ford was involved in this work beyond financing it. In Ford vs Sapiro he claimed to be unaware of the content, and even issued an apology for the contents in 1927. Many say he was heavily involved despite this apology; see The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem/Introduction by Gerald L. K. Smith (from ).

This may still be a real legal minefield, as a search for "henry ford" apology returns "In response to a legal request submitted to Google, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read more about the request at ChillingEffects.org." John Vandenberg 02:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * As I understand it, Ford himself denied the apology had any merit and said it was issued on Ford Motor Company letterhead, and spoke as though written by himself, but was signed by the Executive Officer of the company as a business decision, not his own actual apology. I wouldn't swear on the Bible or anything, but a quick google search seems to support that Ford denied the apology, not the articles.  Regardless, it was published pre-1923, so it doesn't really matter who wrote it - as I understand, I mean our authorspace may only be giving the "attributed" author 'credit', but it's not like it would be a copyVio.  Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Henry Ford 17:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The World's Foremost Problem
This is the 2nd part of the title of Volume One.
 * The 4-volume series title is just The International Jew
 * Accordingly, this Article needs to be moved to the appropriate title --151.202.94.32 04:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Titles & Distinguishing the Newspaper articles from - the 4-volume Pamphlet - and its 1st volume
Let's bare in mind that there are 3 different items to be distinuished here. --Ludvikus 12:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

This/These is/are not the Protocols
For some reason, while I logged in successfully, I was sent here. Although there's a relation to "The Protocols", there's a difference. --Ludvikus 00:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, they are very distinct and different texts. I do not see any part of Wikisource suggesting otherwise. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: Author:Christopher Marlowe 00:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)