" 

 == Poor Citations == 
 Maybe I don't completely understand the Wikipedia citation guidelines, but this article is loaded with sloppy citations. Look at the section ""Jewish Tradition"" and the first subsection ""Rabbinic commentaries"". The secondary source ""Jewish Encyclopedia"" is cited about a dozen times, while the text itself cites the (far more relevant) primary sources. If the text cites the primary source, is it necessary to re-cite anything? And if so, why not re-cite the primary sources ALREADY MENTIONED rather than an intermediate secondary source like the Jewish Encyclopedia? Take ""nevertheless, Judah killed several members of Jashub's army (42 men according to the midrashic Book of Jasher, but 1000 men according to the Testament of Judah)."" Here we have an in-text citation of the ""Book of Jasher"" and another citation of the ""Testament of Judah"", which are both ancient sources that are publicly available from multiple editors/translators. Shouldn't these two sources be the references since it is actually where the information comes from? Am I the only one who sees a problem with crediting the Jewish Encyclopedia here? If there is another standard being used, I would like to know. Otherwise, I would like to go back and revamp all the article's citations. 
   "