Jump to content

Talk:Asmahan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Plagiarism issues: indent text for clarity
Line 483: Line 483:


:and also the sentence "The other side of her patriotism belonged to Egypt." in the source it says "The other side of her patriotism was to her adopted country, Egypt" Third section under "Syrian or Egyptian?" part http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exzuhasp.html --[[User:Supreme Deliciousness|Supreme Deliciousness]] ([[User talk:Supreme Deliciousness|talk]]) 07:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
:and also the sentence "The other side of her patriotism belonged to Egypt." in the source it says "The other side of her patriotism was to her adopted country, Egypt" Third section under "Syrian or Egyptian?" part http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exzuhasp.html --[[User:Supreme Deliciousness|Supreme Deliciousness]] ([[User talk:Supreme Deliciousness|talk]]) 07:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

::The first example you list is plagiarism. The mediator's sentence also alters the original meaning of the source, because the commas in the sentence attribute thoughts to Asmahan that are actually the author's. By returning the periods, the revision by AC actually returns the sentence more closely to the source's meaning but is obviously plagiarism. The problem here is attempting to paraphrase the source -- rather than simply stating the important fact. The sentence should read: ''Asmahan later recalled her childhood years in Jabal as "untouched by anything truly bad".'' Everything else is the author's speculation. WP only provides factual information -- and allows the reader to draw their own conclusions.

::The second example is not plagiarism. It is a quote. However, it is sloppy writing on the part of the source's author. Parenthetical insertions into quotes should be avoided whenever possible. In this article, that quote should be paraphrased.

::The third example is plagiarism. Especially because it is then followed by ''Egypt was a planetary distance from the small villages of the Druze.'' which is a direct copy from [http://books.google.se/books?id=Eca2pXOX-F8C&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=Adham+Khanjar+Incident&source=bl&ots=A8mYmpk5VC&sig=0AUqXfiPIaM7VndOFkIsJIcYnD8&hl=sv&ei=4spRStfPOKWKmwPQy6ioBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5#v=onepage&q=planetary&f=false here]. In fact, as I look through the text, it appears most everything sourced to [http://books.google.se/books?id=Eca2pXOX-F8C&hl=en&source=gbs_navlinks_s this text] might be plagiarized. Unfortunately, it is possible that I will need to blank most of this article as a copyright violation and that the article will need to be rewritten. I will need to look further. <span style="font-family: tahoma;"> — [[User:CactusWriter|<span style="color:#008000">Cactus</span><span style="color:#CC5500">Writer |</span>]] [[User_talk:CactusWriter|<span style="color:#008000"><sup>needles</sup></span>]]</span> 15:24, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:24, 20 August 2009

End of the war

I hope I'm not disrupting Diaa's mediation efforts which I see have failed because of the disruptive editing and the disruptive discussion being done by both AC and SD. I am enabling protection for this article as it is now for a 24-48 hour period (we'll see how things go), and anything either of you want changed will be newly discussed here in this section. I will not tolerate a insults by either of you against yourselves or against me, please keep this about the article. Don't assume bad faith or go on about past history. I wish you two could make up and cooperate to improve this article, but it seems you have entrenched yourselves deeply. Keep any enmity you have against the other to yourselves and don't ever bring it to this talk page again. I don't blame Diaa for leaving and can't believe he didn't leave earlier. Also, do not respond to what I said, just listen to it. Ok, now that that's over, what is it that either of you want. Don't give me any evidence of reverts or disruptive additions, just what each of you want to be added to the article. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arab Cowboy

Salam Al-Ameer son:

Here's what I would like to see changed in the article:

1. I do not think that there should be a section dedicated to al-Atrash clan. They have their own article in Wikipedia, and a link to that article should suffice. This article is about Asmahan, not the clan. I can understand if the section is geared toward the "Flight from al-Jabal", but not about the clan.

1.a. As such, I would like the following sentence removed: "The al-Atrash clan was a Syrian Druze family, known for its role in the Syrian Revolution and the resistance against the French mandate of Syria in the 1920s.[1]". This belongs in Atrash, not here.
1.b. The source actually says that the shelling occurred in al-Qrayya, not Suwayda. I hence added a "citation needed" tag.
1.c. This sentence should read as follows: "Later in life when Asmahan spoke about her childhood in the Jabal, she remembered it as a happy and carefree period, although she did not spend much time in the Jabal, it was the Jabal that had imprinted itself as "home" rather than their residences in Lebanon and Turkey.[2]" The opponent editor's interpretation of it changes the meaning to a POV. In fact, other sources show that Asmahan did not live in Suwayda in childhood, but in Lebanon (1918-1920) and then in Turkey (1920-1923) when they immigrated to Egypt, and only went to the Jabal for visits. This is also how I read this sentence (excluding the dates) from this particular source.
I agree, there should not be a subsection for the clan and its history. Since this is an article on Asmahan we should concentrate on her life, but of course include a little background. Now, for the first sentence you want removed, I think half should be removed. I'll restructure the sentence to say "The al-Atrash clan were a well-known Syrian Druze family." If the source says Qraya, then it's Qraya, although it says the al-Atrash home was in Qraya. About 1c; I can't fully read page 36, but from what I can read, it says "She remembered a carefree period. She did not actually spend much time in the Jabal itself and probably remembered visits in the early 1920s..." So this should not be contested. We could use other sources to say when and where she lived during her childhood, but the sentence you have a problem will not be removed. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you use "well-known" to describe the family, please restore "popular" to describe Saad Zaghloul. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 00:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. On second thought, it's not fine. "Well-known" is not a POV because it's just saying the Atrash family were well-known (which they were), but there are people who liked and disliked them. To say "popular" reflects a POV. Now personally, I like Zaghloul and many, if not most Egyptians do so also. Of course some Egyptians, the British, and perhaps other, may not have liked him too much. Therefore, it's a POV to say he is popular. I will put "nationalist" which neutrally describes him. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"popular" does not mean that everyone liked him, but the majority did. Also, "popular" is measured in terms of the opinion of the population that he represented, not that of the occupation or the enemy. By the same token, the al-Atrash clan would have probably had NO noteriety at all in a country like Egypt had it not been for Asmahan and Farid. I believe that these two singers brought fame to the clan, and not the other way around. The clan are probably not known at all by the average Egyptian, let alone "well-known". So, the question is, "well-known" by whom? --Arab Cowboy (talk) 22:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying they would have notoriety in Egypt, they're well known at least in Syria (maybe Lebanon and Palestine too, but surely Syria.) I could reword it to say "well-known in Syria for fighting the French occupiers." --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The source say: "When the French began the aerial bombardment of the al-Atrash home in al-Qrayya, she left for Damascus and would not return" al-Qrayya is a village/town in the Suwayda governoate, the name Suwayda is used for both the Suwayda governoate and Suwayda town. The full quote from page 36 is: "In her late twenties, Asmahan told her friend and admirer al-Tab`i about her childhood in the mountains of the Druze. She remembered a happy and carfree period. She did not actually spend much time in the Jabal itself and probably remembered visits in early 1920s. Still, it was the Jabal Druze that had imprinted itself as "home" on her consciousness, rather than her family's residences in Turkey and in Beirut. The family had a servant to help with the children, who were allowed to play pretty much where they willed. A large stone house blended in with the local surroundings, dominated as they were by the gray and stony landscape. "I felt untouched by anything truly bad," she reportedly told al-tabi`i. A child would have been unafraid of the political events concerning their elders. Until the Druze rebellion broke out, Asmahan seemed unaware of the desperate times in the world she escaped." --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, this confirms the validity of the sentence so, no this will not be removed. As for Qraya/Suwayda, this is no big deal; I'll clarify as succinctly as I can. --Al Ameer son (talk) 23:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This sentence should read as follows: "Later in life when Asmahan spoke about her childhood in the Jabal, she remembered it as a happy and carefree period, although she did not spend much time in the Jabal, it was the Jabal that had imprinted itself as "home" rather than their residences in Lebanon and Turkey.[3]", not the way it is re-written in the article now. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 00:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to use "Jabal" because Jabal al-Druze is not mentioned in the article. There's nothing wrong with using "Suwayda" or the "Suwayda area." I just added "residences", but other than that the passage is fine. Nothing in the article has to be word-for-word unless it's in quotes. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, you can use "the mountain" or "al-Jabal (the mountain)", but I am seeking accuracy here. It is unclear whether Asmahan's visits were to Suwayda town or al-Qrayya. And, if the shelling occurred in al-Qrayya and that's the place from which they escaped, then how do we know that their visits were to Suwayda? The link in the article from Suwayda went to an another article that described it as a town. I suggest using "the Druze mountain" in place of all of Suwayda, Qrayya, jabal, mountain, etc. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 22:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I realized I was wrong here; Jabal is used throughout the article. I went ahead and replaced Suwayda with Jabal. However, does it say her father was a "judge in Suwayda" in the source? I didn't remove that instance of Suwayda nor the first instance when it says her father was from Suwayda because I don't want to tamper with the source. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes the source says he became a judge in Suwayda.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:40, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I thought. In that case is the Suwayda/Jabal Druze situation accurate now? --Al Ameer son (talk) 07:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it looks good now. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 08:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2. I would like the following sentence to be removed: "Fahd sent his cousin Salim al-Atrash to bring her back together with his kids. After receiving Fahds message 'Alia told him that the only way her children would return to Suwayda was if he killed her, but that Fahd in return would be cursed for the deaths of their children, who might be killed of the fighting in Suwayda. Salim gave her all the money he had, thinking she would eventually return when the chaos would end in Suwayda." It adds no value to the article and is just boring detail.

I'll try to reduce it, but won't remove it totally since it could help illustrate the background of her immediate family. Afterward, if I feel it has no relevance then I'll just take it out completely. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3. I would like the following sentence to be removed: "However she always referred to her father and Sultan al Atrash to clarify her lineage. She once said to a friend questioning her about her mission during WW2: "Don't you know who I am? Why I am the daughter of Fahd al Atrash and cousin to the Amir al Atrash and the Druze revolutionary hero Sultan al-Atrash".[4]" It was said by Asmahan as some sort of bluff on one occasion, not a statement of identity. If you see that it should stay, then it definitely does not belong in the "Career" section, and should not begin with "However". If you choose to keep it, in a different section and not as a direct quotation and not italicized, I will counter it with statements affirming Asmahan's choice of Egypt as her adopted country.

Again, I can't fully read page 37, but from what I can it clarifies that she said that, but does not say she said it as a bluff or on one occasion. It also doesn't say "always". I'll write it as "She referred to her father and Sultan al Atrash to clarify her lineage, saying 'Don't you know who I am? Why I am the daughter of Fahd al Atrash and cousin to the Amir al Atrash and the Druze revolutionary hero Sultan al-Atrash'". I wish I could see the whole page for complete clarification. I don't see any other place to put it except for the section it's currently in. However, honestly, I don't think we need to have this sentence at all. If someone has access to the full page, I'll see how we could work it in for the sake of balance. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Full quote from page 37: "Later in her life, Asmahan always refereed to her relative, Sultan al-Atrash, along with her father, to assert her lineage and status, and to substantiate her ability to act for the British. She told a friend, "Dont you know who I am? Why I am the daughter of Fahd al-Atrash and cousin (although she was actually a third cousin twice removed) to the Amir al-Atrash (Hassan) and the Druze revolutionary hero Sultan al-Atrash"" --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another ok. Does it say anything about World War 2 or just the British? It doesn't matter too much, I won't be picky. Seeing that the source backs the sentence (which will be slightly rewritten for complete accuracy reflecting the reference) I will not remove/relocate it from the section because it's good for balance. Anyhow, it's not saying whether or not she considered herself more Syrian than Egyptian (on the contrary, most of the section is about "Egypt's influence"), but that she obviously did not reject or ignore (actually seems to have been proud of) her clan's heritage. --Al Ameer son (talk) 23:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think it should be in the "Egypt's Influence" section at all; it is unrelated, undermines the whole section and should definitely not start with "However". If you choose to keep it, in a different section, such as a "Flight from al-Jabal" section, and not as a direct quotation and not italicized, I will counter it with statements affirming Asmahan's choice of Egypt as her adopted country. Please note also that the original statement says that Hassan was actually a third cousin twice removed. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 00:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't edited that part yet, but "undermine" is not the right word. Just because Egypt is in the section heading doesn't mean everything in it has to be about Egypt. Preferably, it should be only about Egypt. However, the purpose of this little sliver of info is not to undermine the entire section, but rather to expand its horizons. Now, I will read over the article again and might relocate it to the Early life section, but this isn't that likely. "However" will be removed. Let me take a knack at the sentence and we'll see how that goes. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, It was about her mission during WW2 to Syria and it was work for the british. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it was specifically about her mission during WWII, and this is why, I question the use of the word "always"; the quotation is taken out of context here. I also read it as a bluff, because Zuhur clarifies, in the same quote, that she was actually a thrid cousin, twice removed, of Haasan's, which is consistent with the definition of a bluff. In any case, if you insist on keeping it in the Egypt's Influence section, then please add, after it, the quote from Page 13 of the same book, "The other side of her partiotism was to her adopted country, Egypt." --Arab Cowboy (talk) 22:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks for clarifying. Does the source say she was bluffing? If not, for us to state she was bluffing would be a violation of WP:Original research. Also, the point is she was still proud of her Druze heritage. Anyway, what's your take now, I just changed it. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4. I would like the following sentence to be removed or properly referenced: "Her house in Syria is located in the French Quarter of Swuayda. Years after her death, that house was seized by the Syrian government, and became – like much of the French Quarter – a property of the Syrian Army. It took the government sixty-two years to give in to the demands to turn the house into a museum for Asmahan and Farid.[citation needed]". It has needed citation for ages. More specifically, there's no evidence that Asmahan ever OWNED a house in Suwayda and when she died, she was already divorced from Hassan and back in Egypt, so she did not inherit him. This needs to be sourced.

This really should have a source. Could somebody find one? Until then, I'll keep it, but hidden. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

5. The November 23 birthdate contradicts with other sourced birthdates already in the article. I hence added a "citation needed" tag. I do not care which is the correct one, but the date needs to be consistent.

Well, on page 25 in Zuhur, it says she was born on the 23rd of November, so I'll replace the October 25. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I may add more later.

It's time to remove all sentences in the article where citation has been needed and not provided. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 07:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest we wait a little longer before doing that, maybe one more week? I don't like uncited info in articles myself, but the divorce bit seems important if it's true. If not, scratch it. --Al Ameer son (talk) 11:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
how about the first sentence in the Legacy section? - still vague and uncited. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 11:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, I just noticed that. I made it a part of the hidden comment since they're quite related. The whole comment should be removed within a week too if no source is provided to back it. --Al Ameer son (talk) 11:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and Regards, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Supreme Deliciousness

By Arabic you mean Arabic Wikipedia? I'm probably not going to change that since I can't read or write in Arabic. If you can, go ahead, this has nothing to do with this article. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2. This I want removed from legacy section: "The Egyptian Media Production City and a private investor jointly produced a television series" unnecessary text no one cares about. "Farid al-Atrash was played by Egyptian actor Ahmed Shaker Abdel-Latif[53]." Its of no relevance to the article which actor played Farid al atrash.
The first sentence seems relevant since the rest of the sentence says "depicting the life (and death) of Asmahan." The Farid part does have no relevance so yes that should be removed. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What is the relevance of Sulaf's nationality in the article? None. If you are going to delete reference to the actor who played Farid, then please remove also Sulaf's nationality. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's no relevance problem here. Farid was totally removed because he's not Asmahan and has his own article. Sulaf doesn't have an article so it's good to provide minimal background i.e. "Syrian actress." If she was any other nationality we would put that, no big deal. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, the farid sentence is still in the article.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 3. This I want removed, in the death section: "in her family’s burial plot at the Fustat plain in Cairo" I look at the source, and there is nothing saying or implying that its a "family burial plot"
I just looked and you're right there is nothing on "family burial plot". This will be removed. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do people get buried in unmarked graves next to unknown dead people or do they get buried in family burial plots? Since Asmahan and Farid had restored the burial site then it was their family's burial plot there. They were not buried in unidentified gravesites. There are Atrashes who live in and are citizens of Egypt. Like everyone else, they have a family burial plot. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The source doesn't say other Atrashes were buried there. If you find a source that says that it was a "family burial plot" then fine. The source used mentions that Farid, Asmahan and another famous Egyptian entertainer are buried there so I think the cemetery is not really for "families," but rather celebrated figures. Farid and Asmahan were both famous and it also happens that they were siblings. So, if you bring a reliable source confirming it as a family burial plot by all means we will put it in, but until then we just can't state that. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, the "family burial plot" is still in the article.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This source says that Fuad, Farid, and Asmahan are buried there. I guess this makes it a family plot. There are no plots for singers only in Egypt. Everyone is buried with their family. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 09:48, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Man, I don't want to sound picky, really, but I still think we can't write "family burial plot." However, I suggest you ask another admin who is more familiar with guidelines to see if this wouldn't violate original research. It is interesting that Fuad is also buried there which should be mentioned in the article. Go ahead and add it with the additional source when the block expires shortly. --Al Ameer son (talk) 11:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ok, i will do that. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 11:28, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 4. You removed a lot from the early life section including the Adham Khanjar incident, that section is clearly referenced in Asmahans Secrets page 38 as "It was in fact the Adham Khanjar incident that sparked Asmahans emigration to Egypt". And that it was her relative Sultan al Atrash that had participated in it, I just feel its important info and shouldn't have been removed.
Huh, I overlooked that. We should really try to keep the info in this article tight on Asmahan so I removed a lot of al-Atrash stuff since they have their own article. But since the source says that exactly it does seem relevant. Let me take a second look at the section to see if it's needed. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you take a look at this and still don't found it important? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 08:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that SD, I'll try to put it in, but in a reduced form. --Al Ameer son (talk) 11:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC) Actually, looking at the article there's no need to mention the incident since we'd have to elaborate more on it (what the incident was exactly, how al-Atrash was related to it, and the result of the incident i.e. the hostilities in the Jabal). What's mentioned now suffices, but a compromise would perhaps be "When fighting between French and Syrian forces erupted following the Adham Khanjar incident and resulted in the shelling of the al-Atrash home in al-Qrayya near Suwayda in the Jabal al-Druze, 'Alia fled with her children for Damascus and refused to return." Does this work? We shouldn't go any further. --Al Ameer son (talk) 11:56, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok that sounds good, but thats a very long sentence, maybe you should try to divide it into several sentences. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good how it is now, but the direct link to "Jabal al-Druze" was removed. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 14:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 5. Problem: Suwayda - Jabal Druze, both words are used all over the article, Jabal druze covers almost all of Suweyda governorate, but the reader might not understand this and think they are to separate things.
I apologize for that (didn't realize Jabal was used later in the article). In that case, did Asmahan live in Suwayda city or next to Suwayda? If it's the latter then I have to clarify this in the article. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 6. In the word Suwayda here: "When fighting between French and Syrian forces erupted and resulted in the shelling of the al-Atrash home in Suwayda" it should be linked to the Suwayda governorate (where al-Qrayya is) to not confuse it with the Suwayda town. Or "al-Atrash home in the Jabal".
Will do. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The source used to back the first sentence doesn't totally back that sentence (it says they "never again sang in the Syrian dialect". However, I put more trust in the Zuhur source. If this becomes a big issue, we'll have to resort to attribution meaning "according to... However, on the contrary..." --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I used the word "virtually", which means almost. If you would like to change it to "almost", then that's fine. There's only one song (in a bedouin dialect) of which I know that is not in the Egyptian dialect in Asmahan's repertoire of more than 40 songs. This one song is attributed to the lyricist Bairam Al-Tunsi (from Alexandria) and was filmed in a bedouin setting in Asmahan's second Egyptian movie, Gharam wa Intiqam. I would not put any more trust in Zuhur's source than any other. There have been "questions" about that author. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I prefer Zuhur is because her book(s) are dedicated to the subject of Asmahan, while the other source is one that discusses the Druze, particularly those in Israel. The Druze in Israel source, if I'm not mistaken, says "never again sang in the Syrian dialect" not "virtually" or "almost". Zuhur on the other hand states Asmahan "sang a number of compositions...more closely related to folk themes, both Syrian and Egyptian." Actually, they don't really contradict. Zuhur is not saying Asmahan indeed sung in Syrian dialect, but some of her compositions were related to Syrian folk "themes" which doesn't necessarily mean Syrian "dialect." So again, no problem here. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, done. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 9. In the immigration to Egypt section it now says: "were confronted by Egyptian immigration officials for not possessing any passports." This is the direct quote from the source AS p39: "`Alia had no proper traveling documents"
Is you concern plagiarism? If so I'll just reword it. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the video clip reference, the interview with Fuad al-Atrash, he uses the word passports. He says, "at the border, we did not have passports or anything". (please note that Fuad is spelled Fu'ad in some places in the article. let's make it consistent as Fuad. also, two "son" should be two "sons".) --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ohhh, well this is not a problem. Obviously "proper traveling documents" are "passports". Plus Fuad Atrash confirms this so no original research on our part. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 10, I think her lebanese part(her mother) should also be in the lead, Syrian-Lebanese-Egyptian.
This seems unnecessary (too many nationalities). Since she was a Syrian citizen at one point and Egyptian at another point we should just stick to Syrian-Egyptian. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This has been over-killed in debate before. The lead now is the best compromise we will ever reach. It would best be

protected. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 11. Excessive use of the word "Egyptian" in many places in the article, in the lead for example. "Having immigrated to Egypt in childhood, she became the apprentice of Egyptian classical music pioneers"
No, that just makes sense. It's not excessive since the singers that are being described are indeed Egyptian and she became their apprentice after moving to Egypt. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 12: This I want removed from the article, I just saw it, "However, the other side of her patriotism belonged to Egypt." there is absolutely nothing on page 37 saying anything close to this. The segment after this says "I did. But, I was created for another purpose. I prefer the work of Farid, and the work of Umm Kulthum, and of art." this has nothing to do with "Patriotism belonging to Egypt" but love for music etc. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:01, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:If the source doesn't back that then we have to remove it. Thankfully, this won't ruin the balance since it says something about being more loyal to her happiness in Egypt than her clan. Anyway, I'll just hide it until AC could find a source (giving it a 7-day limit like the rest of the hidden comments.) --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC) Never mind, AC found the source. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ameer, it is on p. 13, not 37, as I had pointed out in the Arab Cowboy section, above. I corrected it in the article. Also, someone had removed the sentence, "They were later naturalized as Egyptian citizens." I've just restored it. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 20:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Al ameer, "Syrian homeland" is sourced in the AS book and was not allowed to be added to article therefore, "adopted country" can not be allowed. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Homeland" and similar were rejected as subjective by mediator in previous discussions. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 20:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on what context we're using "homeland." It shouldn't be stated to contradict the "adopted country" bit. So how do you intend on using it? --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First line in the marriage section, "So she returned with him to her Syrian homeland" - the wording "Syrian homeland" is sourced--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I think we should just state "...returned with him to Syria" for simplicity. Why state "homeland"? It's use in this case doesn't seem flagrant anyway since it is not contradicting the fact that Asmahan chose Egypt as her adopted country which must be stated explicitly. Please, let's make this compromise here and use "homeland" and let, what I think is, a Syrian-Egyptian rivalry of some sorts end. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I dont see any problem with "She returned with him to her Syrian homeland" - it is sourced, and the part about "chose Egypt as her adopted country" - I can not confirm if it really says so because I can not view page 13, and I do not have any good faith in him, for very good reasons. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:48, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, regardless of whether or not you have good faith in him, we as in the community must assume good faith. Therefore, I state again, let's make a compromise on this one. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:52, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I must say im disappointed, I don't see any wrong in my proposal, but let it stay as it is now instead of replacing it with just "homeland", Is there somewhere else in the article where "Syrian homeland" would be acceptable to you?--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think where you wanted it now, in the marriage section, would be an acceptable place. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I got a better idea, how about: "Asmahan's cousin, Prince Hassan al-Atrash, came from Syria and asked for her hand in marriage. So she returned with him to her homeland," .. is this ok? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 16:19, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. Go ahead an make the edit. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 13. Ameer, the latest edits by AC hey are highly POV. "The migrant family was later naturalized as Egyptian citizens." if you are naturalized in Egypt , then of course it is Egyptian citizenship, this is what it means. This is excessive use of the word "Egyptian". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
who has deleted this sentence in the first place, without discussion? --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What section is it in? Anyway, SD is right about this one being redundant. If it's clear in the previous sentence or two sentences that we're talking about their immigration to Egypt, then yes, obviously they were naturalized as "Egyptian" citizens rather than any other country. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Asmahan&diff=305510040&oldid=305509387 also the farid article has "naturalized as Egyptian citizens" --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, removed the redundancy. I'll do the same in Farid's article. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the Farid article its enough with "Later, they were naturalized as citizens." of course its the Egyptian government that naturalized them.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:48, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • 14. In the Egypt influece section it says "and relocation to Syria" I looked up the word "relocate" in a dictionary, it says "To move to or establish in a new place" "To become established in a new residence" which is not true since she came from there and lived there before. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That looks like a mistake, it should be "return". --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC) Actually, there seems to be a frequent use of "return." Some would be need to be replaced. Any substitute word suggestions? --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"moving back to Syria" ? just replace it with something better. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:30, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but could you make the edit? I'm a little busier today than I thought. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done, thank you.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is all I can found right now, maybe ill ad more later. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 16:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Was she not Lebanese as well? Her mother...and she was raised in Lebanon.... once again Arab cowboy omitting truth. She was Syrian Lebanese. Lebanese bebe (talk) 09:20, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Objection

Ameer: the changes above are not acceptable to me. Diaa had approved an equal number of "return"s for both Egypt and Syria and he has objected to the use of the words "homeland" and "hometown". SD is chipping away at past agreements and compromises by not telling you of them and his continuous nagging. I am trying to be flexible, but the continuous edits are changing the meaning completely. His "better idea" above removed Egypt completely from the meaning and it is not known anymore where Hassan proposed to Asmahan. "relocation to Syria" can be changed to "residence in Syria", which is more neutral. "came to Cairo" cannot be changed to "came from Syria". The sentence about Asmahan being required to sing the praises of the republic is not only ridiculous, but also grammatically and historically inaccurate, regardless of what Zuhur says. Egypt was not a republic until after Asmahan's death altogether. I can go on and on, but this endless nagging and chipping away at every sentence must stop once and for all. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its not factual to say "residence in Syria" because with the whole sentence it implies that she only lived there twice, which is false. "homeland" is sourced and was okeyd by mediator. Diaa said no "homeland" and therefore "adopted country" was not added also. you added "adopted country" without going to talkpage, therefore I got "homeland" with ok from mediator. If "homeland" is removed then "adopted country" is also gonna be removed. Amsmhan was required to sing about certain things, this is straight from Asmahns secretes page 13: "The other side of her patriotism was to her adopted country, Egypt. That loyalty is hard to measure, since she and other singers were dependent upon the Egyptian elites, as were the recording studios. They were required to sing songs of praise for the king and his line and other songs with republican themes." http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exzuhasp.html Arab Cowboy changed this sentence to "The dependence on Egyptian elites led Asmahan and other singers to sing songs of praise for the king and his line." --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 10:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Diaa never objected to the use of "adopted country"; he objected to "homeland". --Arab Cowboy (talk) 10:43, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Diaa never allowed "adopted country" Ameer didn't object to "homeland".--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 10:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Diaa never allowed a billion other words that you've added since he left, yet he specifically objected to "homeland". you did not tell Ameer that when you kept nagging again about the same thing. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 16:06, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Egypt was certainly not a republic then, I think Zuhur means nationalist themes when she talks of republican themes. I made the edit, but if one of you want to better clarify go ahead then (just don't re-add republic). If the source says "required" then we should use required. Who are we to challenge it? As for "homeland", I preferred we didn't use it, just saying Syria is enough, but I allowed it as a compromise. To be honest, I don't think we should compare "homeland" to "adopted country" since the two are not completely parallel, but since the individual issues with their usage seems unlikely to cease, I opt we drop both of them. Saying Syria and Egypt alone is fine. --Al Ameer son (talk) 16:45, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My problem was not with the republic, my problem was that AC removed "required" so the meaning of it was changed. AC threatened to ad "adopted country" as a counter if we added "homeland", so Homeland was not added, then AC added the "adopted country" so therefor homeland will also be in the article, this is fair. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 16:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer: "led to" was added by SD, and "led to being required... praising songs" is grammatically wrong. I agree, "homeland" is not completely parallel to "adopted country"; I can also argue that Egypt was Asmahan's "homeland", with reliable sources. For that reason, Diaa objected to the use of the term altogether, and he made no comment on "adopted country". Also, homeland was never used in the book to refer to her moving to Syria after her marriage to Hassan; SD takes it out of context to fabricate a different meaning. Ameer, please also address the other changes made. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 16:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about homeland for that reason (Egypt could also be considered her homeland). However, I'm not too fond of using "adopted country" either. Let's be completely honest, both aren't necessary to have on Wikipedia. I reiterate: Egypt and Syria alone are fine. You're right about the grammar problem; we should remove "led to" and just have "required her to". --Al Ameer son (talk) 17:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Answer to AC: if "led to" is not in the book is of no importance, this can be changed. There are copyright issues and we can not copy exact texts from books, the important thing is that the meaning of texts are not lost, like when you removed "required". Exactly you yourself can argue that "egypt was her homeland".. but the truth can not. This would be something you made up. Diaa did not allow "adopted country" either, if that stays, then Syrian homeland(which is in the book) also stays. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let's not bring up "homeland" and "adopted country" again. I already explained what to do with both of those terms; throw 'em out. --Al Ameer son (talk) 17:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Ameer. It's ok to remove "adopted country" too. Now, please remove also "moving back" and restore "came to Cairo", etc., as I had explained abover. Or, I can do it myself. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 17:12, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Moving back" makes sense and so does "came to Cairo" (I prefer the latter over "came back from Syria" since obviously she was in Syria. Go ahead and restore it, but keep "moving back". --Al Ameer son (talk) 17:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Ameer, I will stop here, though I disagree with "moving back" and a few others, and you can consider it a compromise. Thanks again for everything. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 17:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, this source, page 82, also by Zuhur, used the word "relocated" to the Jabal, which along with SD's definition of the word "relocated", emphasizes my understanding, from Zuhur's other book and all the sources that I have read, that Asmahan did not live in Syria in childhood. She lived in Lebanon and Turkey. "Moving back" has a different meaning which may be false altogether, according to these sources and SD's definition of the word. With all due respect, I will therefore restore the use of that word in recounting her marriage. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 03:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lies do not come true if you repeat them several times: The full quote from page 36 is: "In her late twenties, Asmahan told her friend and admirer al-Tab`i about her childhood in the mountains of the Druze. She remembered a happy and carfree period. She did not actually spend much time in the Jabal itself and probably remembered visits in early 1920s. Still, it was the Jabal Druze that had imprinted itself as "home" on her consciousness, rather than her family's residences in Turkey and in Beirut. The family had a servant to help with the children, who were allowed to play pretty much where they willed. A large stone house blended in with the local surroundings, dominated as they were by the gray and stony landscape. "I felt untouched by anything truly bad," she reportedly told al-tabi`i. A child would have been unafraid of the political events concerning their elders. Until the Druze rebellion broke out, Asmahan seemed unaware of the desperate times in the world she escaped." --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your rude comment above is irrelevant to this source, page 82. The word used in the source is "relocated": "She relocated to the Jabal". I disagree with your understanding of what you typed above. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 06:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, I am still awaiting your comment on this matter. "relocated" is the word used in the "reliable" source. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry guys, I haven't been as active as usual in these past couple days. Before we get into the issue here, I have to warn you guys (again) not to make any personal comments; don't call a fellow user's words "lies" or a user himself a "liar". If these kind of attacks persist, someone will certainly take notice of it eventually and report that person to AN/I. Now, SD has been giving me notices on my talk page about possible plagiarism violations; this is a serious problem. Any sentence that is an exact copy or if there's an exact copy of a set of words (phrase) in a sentence, this would be considered plagiarism. Therefore, try hard to rewrite any of those sentences, but of course maintaining the correct interpretation. As for "relocated", this shouldn't be a big deal. In hindsight, using the word isn't totally wrong. However (sigh), if it's use causes nationalistic emotions (which isn't really an excuse on Wikipedia), let's use the most neutral words: "went" or "left for". So she went to Syria, at which time she was nineteen. "Went to Syria" doesn't imply anything but that basic fact. So let's just change that word. --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ameer, thank you for your reply. SD has been warned before for using word like "lies", but does he ever heed any advice!
  • There aren't any full sentences copied exactly from the sources, but there may be a few phrases now, with SD's objections to any words that differs from the source. Remember his "required to" sing songs of praise arguments? I will rephrase a couple.
  • As for "relocation", I think it should be used as is. It is the only way to show that Asmahan did NOT live in Syria as a child, which is what I understand from this source, "She relocated to the Jabal" in Zuhur's Images of Enchantment; "She did not actually spend much time in the Jabal itself and probably remembered visits in early 1920s," in Zuhur's Asmahan's Secrets, and "Born in 1918, she lived in Lebanon until 1920, when her father was appointed Governor of the Province of Demergi in Turkey. He soon returned, however, to spend the remainder of his life as an ordinary citizen in his native mountains." in Asmahan.com, and "Her father was governor of the district of Demirci in Turkey, during the last days of the Ottoman Empire. When Syria fell to the allies in 1918 he feared revenge, and on October 24, 1918 he fled the country with his two sons and pregnant wife. They took the boat from İzmir to Beirut, and Asmahan was born on that boat. She was named "Amal" (Arabic: آمال‎), meaning "hopes". She was also called "Emily", but always preferred the name "Amal". Her parents separated in her early childhood. Her father returned to his hometown in Sweida, while the rest of the family emigrated to Egypt (around 1923), where they were naturalized later on." in Classicalarabicmusic.com. All these sources show that Asmahan herself did not live in the Jabal in childhood, although SD has been trying to make this claim in the article all along. Do you see my point?
  • Cheers, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your claim the she didn't live in the Jabal is not supported by the evidence in Asmahans Secrets: full quote from page 36 is: "In her late twenties, Asmahan told her friend and admirer al-Tab`i about her childhood in the mountains of the Druze. She remembered a happy and carfree period. She did not actually spend much time in the Jabal itself and probably remembered visits in early 1920s. Still, it was the Jabal Druze that had imprinted itself as "home" on her consciousness, rather than her family's residences in Turkey and in Beirut. The family had a servant to help with the children, who were allowed to play pretty much where they willed. A large stone house blended in with the local surroundings, dominated as they were by the gray and stony landscape.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We've already read this paragraph a gazillion times. I read as she did not live in the Jabal in childhood, but only went there for visits. In her other book, Zuhur uses the word "relocated" to the Jabal, which supports my understanding. One of us does not understand English. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not only that, rewritten text in article from Asmahans Secrets: "During the hostilities, the French shelled the al-Atrash home in the town of al-Qrayya, near Suwayda. Due to the conflict 'Alia fled with her children for Damascus and refused to return"--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well we do agree that if she spent time in the Jabal, it was only for a short period. Anyway, AC I understand your point about "relocated" and I understand SD's point about "moved back". Let's just balance this, as we have done with other tid-bits in the article, and use a word that doesn't imply anythinh except that she went to Syria after Hassan came. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, as a compromise, I will change those instances to "moved to" and "residence in", which are neutral, although the more accurate word should have been "relocated". I will take care of any possible "plagiarism" questions. SD will not change sentences to promote his agenda under the cover of plagiarism. If there are any remaining plagiarism concerns, please state the specific sentences here and I will reword them. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 22:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns - Moved from Talk:Al Ameer son

I asked you for help a couple days ago and you didn't answer, I'm asking you again to please take a look at this before it escalates further. Arab cowboy has reverted any attempt by me to remove plagiarism and correct other info.


The only reliable source say "some claimed", this was the first sentence: "It was alleged that Asmahan had been paid a handsome sum (£40,000) for her services to the Allies,but evidence for this is nonexistent and her family claimed she did it out of patriotism, believing it would help the independence of Syria." Sources: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JI20Ak04.html and http://books.google.com/books?id=ydFpAAAAMAAJ&dq=asmahan+40000&q=40000

Arab Cowboy changed it(with an obscure source) to: "Asmahan had been paid a handsome sum (£40,000) for her services to the Allies, according to one source,[55][56] but another source[38][39] states that evidence for this does not exist in references on her life or British documents on that period, and that her family claimed she did it out of patriotism, believing it would help the cause of the independence of Syria."


And several sections are almost direct copy's from the sources:

Ac had first added "and only remembered visits in the early 1920s" I deleted it and he re-added the exact section from the book with "probably"

So now it says: "she remembered it as a happy and carefree period. Although she did not spend much time in the Jabal and probably remembered visits in the early 1920s, the Jabal was what she saw as her "home" rather than her residences in Lebanon and Turkey." Almost exaclty the same as in Asmahans Secrets: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAsmahan&diff=307112503&oldid=307099422

"She escaped by night on horseback, disguised as a male horseman and rode from Damascus to the Palestinian border." http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JI20Ak04.html

"The Allies reneged on their promises for Syrian independence and Asmahan, disgruntled, shifted allegiance to the Nazis. Asmahan boarded a train to Ankara, where she wanted to meet Hitler's ambassador to Turkey and master of Nazi espionage in the Middle East. British officials at the Turkish border refused to let her pass, and she was deported to Beirut." http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JI20Ak04.html --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:06, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ameer, You said to change "return when she was 19" but this was no problem, AC asked for this section "two bouts of marriage to her cousin and moving back to Syria" can you please make this clear at the talkpage? if she had lived there in childhood and also been married twice and moved back there twice, how come this is not "return" or "move back"? And does this removal of "return" also imply when she went to Egypt? and also answer to my first concern about the money for role in WW2 section.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


"instead of "relocated", "returned", "moved back", or whatever, we use the very simple and neutral "went to" Does this imply for all the "returns" in the article including when she went to Egypt?

If we could use "went to" or "left for" instead of "return" that would be great, but it really depends on what particular sentence. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about this section:

I wrote: "It was alleged that Asmahan had been paid a handsome sum (£40,000) for her services to the Allies,but evidence for this is nonexistent and her family claimed she did it out of patriotism, believing it would help the independence of Syria." Sources: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JI20Ak04.html and http://books.google.com/books?id=ydFpAAAAMAAJ&dq=asmahan+40000&q=40000

Arab Cowboy changed it(with an obscure source) to: "Asmahan had been paid a handsome sum (£40,000) for her services to the Allies, according to one source,[55][56] but another source[38][39] states that evidence for this does not exist in references on her life or British documents on that period, and that her family claimed she did it out of patriotism, believing it would help the cause of the independence of Syria."

Which is the correct one? please look at the sources. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They both would need work. I would write "Asmahan had been paid a sum of £40,000 for her services to the Allies, but evidence of the payment does not exist in references on her life or in British documents of that period.[38][39] Her family claimed she did it out of patriotism, believing it would help the cause of Syrian independence.[55][56]" What's wrong with the sources? --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer read the sources, evidence for her service do exist, but not that she received any money, this is the source http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JI20Ak04.html "Some claimed that she was rewarded with 40,000 pounds (roughly US$72,000) for her service to the Allies, but there is no evidence in any of the sources on her life, or the British documents on the period, to show that she actually received money for the mission. Her family later claimed that she worked with the Allies out of patriotism, believing that this would advance the cause of Syrian independence." --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


And Ameer, the removal of "return" and "moved back" is that all of them in the article? including those for Egypt?--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed my suggestion (thanks for the clarification). I responded to the "return" issue above. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But how can you start a sentence with "Asmahan had been paid" when the source say it was alleged? There are "returns" and "moved back" all over that article for both Syria and Egypt, you must be more clear in this. Arab Cowboy asked for one section and you said to remove it in another one. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We could change it to "Asmahan was allegedly paid" to reflect the sources. I thought he asked about the bit on her marriage to Hassan where it said "relocated" and I suggested we use "went to". Could you bring up specific examples of the usage of those words in the article to the talk page? We could work them out on a case-by-case basis. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


  • "During two bouts of marriage to her cousin and moving back to Syria, Asmahan's musical career would come to a complete halt, and when she ultimately rejected a return to "respectability" on her relatives’ terms, by returning to Egypt and her singing career,"
  • "and when the marriage to her cousin failed, she returned immediately to Egypt, before she had divorce documents in hand."
  • "and asked for her hand in marriage. So she returned to Syria, at which time she was nineteen. "
  • "In 1939[44], Asmahan returned to Cairo with her daughter and resumed her singing career."
  • "she had not remained in Syria long enough to obtain divorce documents before returning to Egypt, "
  • "However, in the same year, Asmahan returned to Jabal-al-Druze and remarried her cousin, Hassan"
  • "On her way back to Egypt by land, Asmahan met Egyptian film director Ahmed Salem in Jerusalem"
  • "In 1941, during World War II, Asmahan was asked by the Allies to return to Syria "
  • "After the Allies secured Syria during the Syria-Lebanon Campaign, she went back to Damascus "

all I could find--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All but the last one are acceptable (it's very balanced). Let's just take "back" out of the last line because it's not made clear in the article that Asmahan was in Damascus previously (or is it?) --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is: This is from the source: While staying at the Orient Palace Hotel in Damascus, Asmahan received death threats from unknown people, who were believed to be pro-Vichy Druze. She escaped by night on horseback, leaving her luggage behind. She disguised herself as a male horseman and rode all the way to the Syrian-Palestinian border... "After the invasion, she returned to Damascus where she paraded through"--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And you just said at the talkpage something about changing one of them.. so what is it? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was only referring to the marriage bit at the article talk page. As for the above, all are cleared. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But both marriage sections are here above: "and asked for her hand in marriage. So she returned to Syria, at which time she was nineteen." and "During two bouts of marriage to her cousin and moving back to Syria", wasn't this what he asked for? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, I am not sure why this sideshow is happening here and not on the Talk page of the article. The only location where I object to the use of "return", "move back", or similar is where she first got married to Hassan and relocated to Syria. All of the sources show that she had not lived in Syria in childhood, but only went there for visits. Zuhur uses the word "relocated" in this instance, which we should also use. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Marhaba AC, when I said above that we should bring the examples up at the talk page, I meant Asmahan's talk page. SD must have misinterpreted. Whatever, let's work this issue out here for now. I know the marriage bit is where your objection is, but so is SD's. This is why I suggest we change this one bit. I have to admit brothers, my patience is running low, so for the sake of compromise (... again) let's just change this one occurrence. If either of you really, fundamentally disagree with me on this one then contact another established user (preferably an admin who doesn't edit this topic area at all) and get his/her opinion. I won't abandon all of the issues in the article, but if you guys can't compromise on this particular issue then I have nothing else to offer. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:51, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your patience Ameer. In light of the four sources that I listed on Asmahan's Talk page, all of which show that she did not live in Syria in childhood; one states that she probably went there for visits, what would be your suggested alternative to the word "relocated" in those instances? The question is not what I or SD want, but where is the truth? Thanks again, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 21:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, you have been a great help and I hope you will never leave this discussion. I really appreciate everything you have done. I want you to decide , I have posted many times the quotes about her childhood in the Jabal and her mother fleeing Suwayda with her kids, you decide from here.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both very much. I don't think I'll be leaving all of the discussions and it's not just about my patience really, but also because I need to concentrate more on other articles I've been working on or plan to work on. Like I said guys, I got nothing else to offer on this particular issue. One of you should contact another admin (who doesn't edit much about the region) and ask him very plainly to take a look at the problem. Don't even mention each others name or any of the recent actions, just ask for his thoughts. Salaamat. --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, Arab Cowb just reverted all my changes to the article removing plagiarism, and deleted all the "returned" that you had okeyd here above.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Asmahan&diff=307250438&oldid=307246524 "let the plagiarism police get me." --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And again: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Asmahan&diff=307251328&oldid=307250909 --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer when does it end? you have to take action now, he have went completely against your words, he removed the section you okeyd, including "returned" words here above you okeyd, while keeping the ones for Egypt, and reverted my fixing of plagiarism, you have to do something! --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note, I've moved this from my talk page and for now on everything about your concerns in the article should be posted here. AC, you shouldn't blanket revert SD's edits, but rather revert particular edits you find are inappropriate because I noticed many of his edits don't have any problems. I didn't tell him what to write, but just to rewrite some of the info that is directly copied from the sources while maintaining the sources' interpretations. I will fully comment on recent changes in a couple hours. --Al Ameer son (talk) 15:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Btw ameer, AC said that Sherifa Zuhur used the word "relocated" when Asmahan moved to Syria, in Asmahans Secrets p 13 she used "return" quote. "Her family fled her homeland, Syria, and she grew so accustomed to Cairo that she longed for it after her marriage and return to Syria." http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exzuhasp.html --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 16:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Real Concerns

Ameer: It seems to me that you are not checking the article before responding to SD's repeated complaints. He's removing reliably sourced paragraphs and even bringing back spelling errors, so it is he who is blanket reverting. I had taken care of some of the words that were too close to the source in my own edits. He should do the same with his own edits, not mine, and point out where I have missed any in mine, not blanket revert. This is not acceptable. The Role in WWII section has now been significantly expanded. He cannot just blanket revert it for no reason. Zuhur states, in Images of Enchantment, about Asmahan's marriage, "She relocated to the Jabal", which according to SD's own definition of the word, means that she had not lived there before. I have accepted a compromise and used the neutral words "moved to" and "residence in". If SD will not accept the compromise, I will insist on using "relocated" in both instances. Please pardon my tough stance, but this is beyond ridiculous. Regards, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 17:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok AC, I know this is getting on everyone's nerves. I just took a look at the most recent change. Now SD, what's wrong with AC's changes? Which edits in particular? One that I personally found that might be of a concern is the removal of "allegedly" and the reinstatement of "handsome". Handsome because it's a POV, and "allegedly" because SD had told me that the source says that. Also, this should be kept: "decision to try and terminate her pregnancy". it maintains the meaning of what the source says in a rewritten form. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, the source does not use the word "allegedly" and I quoted that source as "one source states, while other sources state"... etc. with reliable references. Again, please do not believe SD; he's misleading you. I know I had copied the word "handsome" from some source, but it is ok to remove it in the meantime. I reworded "decision to try and terminate her pregnancy" to stop all the nagging about plagiarism. Which way does he want it? --Arab Cowboy (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ameer, This is my problems with ACs edits:


1.He removed the "return" and "moved back" on several areas, you said it was okey to keep when I did that list yesterday, also notice that he said that Sherifa Zuhur used "relocated" but in Asmahans Secrets she used "returned" so hes claims that it was not a "return" is false because the same author uses this word, and therefore is deletion of it is not acceptable, especially since I have not agreed to this.

This is the compromise, that Ameer has called for, between "relocated" (from Zuhur's Images of Enchantment) and your "returned". I used "moved to" and "residence in" as neutral words. If you do not accept the compromise, I will use "relocated". --Arab Cowboy (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You do not decide this, this is not your article and you do not own it. Sherif Zuhur used "returned" in Asmahans Secretes and that was what Asmahan did. You have no right to delete this when there was no agreement. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And Zuhur used "relocated" in Images of Enchantment, hence the compromise. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 19:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edit war is not compromise, and Ameer was not told that the word "returned" was used in Asmhans Secrets "Her family fled her homeland, Syria, and she grew so accustomed to Cairo that she longed for it after her marriage and return to Syria." http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exzuhasp.html--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Again, go with the compromise. I said "went to", but "moved to" is actually better so use the latter for a compromise. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, this is an important word and AC demanded its deletion on false claims, why should this so called compromise be when the same author uses it for her return to Syria? "she longed for it after her marriage and return to Syria." You said before if I remember correctly, that he should ask for a third opinion, he did not and just removed it, he forced it his way. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:00, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thought she also uses "relocated" in the other book? Because of this, I suggested that instead of using either word, we compromise. Now, whoever disagrees with this compromise could go to another admin (with virtually no editing history on this subject) for guidance completely on par with Wikipedia policy. --Al Ameer son (talk) 06:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
She says relocate in one book, and she says return to Syria in Asmahns Secrets,, Ameer right now it says in the article "During two bouts of marriage to her cousin and residence in Syria, Asmahan's musical career would come to a complete halt" this imply that she only lived in Syria twice, since Zuhur used "return to Syria" this goes against what the author has said.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This, I okay'd, right? The compromise I suggested was confined only to this sentence where it now says "So, she moved to Syria, at which time she was nineteen." It's not a big deal to me whatever you guys use, but I suggest compromise to prevent edit wars in this article, maintain its stability. If either of you continue to have any concerns about the usage of those words, there's really not much more I could say about it. --Al Ameer son (talk) 06:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AC changed other sections from "During two bouts of marriage to her cousin and moving back to Syria" to "residence in Syria" and then to "relocation in Syria" .. not only goes this against the mediation as you said to only change that sentence when she was 19, but it also goes against what is written in Asmahans Secrets, quote "The family had a servant to help with the children, who were allowed to play pretty much where they willed. A large stone house blended in with the local surroundings, dominated as they were by the gray and stony landscape." .. a large stone house.. so her residence in Syria was more then those two times she was married --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, this was changed from my original "relocation in", according to Zuhur, to "residence in" as a compromise. If you do not like it, we can also say "move to". --Arab Cowboy (talk) 06:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, refers to all instances about Asmahan's marriage in Syria. SD, please stop cluttering the conversation and misleading Ameer with your continuous nagging. You're welcome to accept the compromise of neutral word (move to, residence in, etc.) in these instances or continue to ask for another admin's judgment if you do not agree. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 16:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2. "told Muhammad al-Tabaʿi" .. its not appropriate to say this because no one has any idea who this guy is. Original sentence that Diaa had added was "Later in life, when Asmahan spoke about her childhood "

This is copied from the source. al-Taba'i was Asmahan's biographist. Do not truncate to suit your agenda. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The reader of the article have no idea who he is. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He can be defined, but the context of the statement must be maintained. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 19:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a problem, just say in the article "Biographer Muhammad al-Taba'i...". --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, AC changed it so it can now be counted as plagiarism, he changed it to "Later in life, Asmahan told her friend Muhammad al-Tabaʿi about her childhood in the Jabal." and also added "family's" to the section which is also in the source, this resembles the book so much that it is plagiarism, compare this to the book which says: "In her late twenties, Asmahan told her friend and admirer al-Tab`i about her childhood in the mountains of the Druze. She remembered a happy and carfree period. She did not actually spend much time in the Jabal itself and probably remembered visits in early 1920s. Still, it was the Jabal Druze that had imprinted itself as "home" on her consciousness, rather than her family's residences in Turkey and in Beirut." Therese a reason why Diaa changed it to "Later in life, when Asmahan spoke about her childhood in the Jabal, she remembered it as a happy and carefree period. Although she did not spend much time in the Jabal and remembered only visits in the early 1920s, the Jabal was what she saw as her "home" rather than her residences in Lebanon and Turkey" please go into the article and compare. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
SD, regarding plagiarism, please concern yourself with the text that you added only, not what I did. You've copied straight from the source and insisted that words I added matched the source exactly on many occasions. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 16:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3.In the Egypt influence section the sentence expanded in the source, he removed it. "But that loyalty is difficult to measure, since the dependence on the Egyptian elite...." In the source this is right after "the other side of her patriotism belonged to Egypt." part.

This is clearly Zuhur's opinion, not fact. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 19:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Authors opinions must be put higher then your own views and the context of the statement must be maintained. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, no need for the author's opinion. Just state it plainly. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, in the book it says "The other side of her patriotism was to her adopted country, Egypt. That loyalty is hard to measure"... so if the "That loyalty is hard to measure" is authors opinion.. isn't also "the other side of her patriotism belonged to Egypt." also authors opinion? This is in the article right now. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4. The role in WW2 section, the only source anyone can read says this "Some claimed that she was rewarded with 40,000 pounds (roughly US$72,000) for her service to the Allies, but there is no evidence in any of the sources on her life, or the British documents on the period, to show that she actually received money for the mission" the links AC brought can not be viewable and he has written this section in a very unprofessional way.

You do NOT have to be able to read the sources online. However, some of the sources I used are indeed online and you can go see them. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since some of the sources dispute it, put "allegedly" (like we do in tons of articles on Wikipedia, nothing new). --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AC has changed that whole section to the extent with his obscure sources (That no one can read) that it have to be rewritten, could you please read that section and come up with a solution? The source I brought is viewable: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JI20Ak04.html --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you do not have to be able to read the sources online. However, here are quotations from what you call "obscure sources". From al-Raida, p. 42: "She received a great deal of money for this mission, 40000 pounds according to one source. The British and the French were much less interested in Asmahan ...", and from Mardam Bey's book: "Collet mentioned British inteference in the Jabal Druze, how they used the wife of Hasan al-Atrash, the famous singer and actress, best known by the name of Asmahan, he said that they gave her money and sent her to the Jabal before the invasion to enlist the support of the Druse. He also recounted the occasion when the British had paid cash to several men (in his presence) to advance their interests." What else do you need to stop your nagging? --Arab Cowboy (talk) 16:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

5. And I had re written two sections and removed plagiarism that he reverted:

"The Allies expelled the Vichy forces from Syria, however, during her stay at a Damascus hotel, Asmahan got death threats from what was believed to be pro-Vichy Druze. She managed to flee on horseback, in disguise as a cavalier and rode to the Palestinian border. After the Allies secured Syria during the Syria-Lebanon Campaign, she went back to Damascus where she participated in the parades, and when General Charles de Gaulle visited Syria, she sat behind him during the celebrations.[5] "

"The Allies failed to carry out their promise for Syrian independence and Asmahan, displeased, headed for Ankara, where she wanted to meet Nazi Germanys ambassador to Turkey. But she was stopped at the border by the British and was deported to Lebanon.[5] " --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those were my sentences. I reworded some to stop your nagging. If you have concerns about specific phrases or statements, list them here. I do not see plagiarism in them as I wrote them. They are properly sourced. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No those were sentences copied almost straight from the source, and I re wrote them.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was I who had introduced those statements into the article. I do not see any plagiarism in them. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 19:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ameer, check the source, they are almost exact copy to what AC had written--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will read the source in a minute, but let me just state right off the back that it's best to rewrite text as much as possible to avoid plagiarism while keeping the source's intended interpretation so as not to drift in original research. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
so? if you have not read it yet you can compare them with the source here: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JI20Ak04.html The quotes here are mine, and the quotes in the article now is his. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

After reading all of this, I've become a little dizzy. So I decided not to answer underneath each statement. To reply to concern #1, I'm sticking with my original response; compromise with that one instance, leave the rest alone. It's really not a big deal at all whichever word(s) is used. For #2, I thought al-Taba'i was her biographer. In any case just put "her friend Muhammad al-Taba'i ..." For concern #3, either use no opinion at all, or keep both but attribute them to the author i.e. "According to biographer Sherifa Zuhur..." For #4, as a personal policy, any time one source is contradicting the other I use "allegedly". This won't be necessary if we use attribution instead i.e. "According to such-and-such, Asmahan loved hummus-wa-ful, however, such-and-such2 claims she only liked it because she was trying to befriend the cook." Sorry if that sounds goofy, but you guys get the picture. As for #5, I support rewriting (that's the norm on Wikipedia) especially to word it differently than the source. AC, if the text in question is indeed your original work, apparently it is very close to the source. Therefore, I suggest you make some rewording adjustments. Be patient SD, and just let AC rewrite that bit. If he doesn't, kindly remind him to do it.

Brothers, I will not continue to mediate between you on this article (and probably won't participate in the discussions on other Arab singers). I hope I've done more good than bad and if you are not willing to adhere to what I suggested above, the only other alternative I see left would be filing a request for comment. Salam, --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ameer. Yes, you've done more good than bad. I will rewrite my sections in the weekend to word more differently than the source. I am busy till the weekend, so no pressing me on this till then. Salam, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 18:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks and no problem AC. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Ameer, I meant to say that you've done no bad at all... As for the specific suggestions: 1. The second sentence that you would like to leave alone also refers to Asmahan's marriage to Hassan and relocation to Syria. One Zuhur source said "relocated" and another said "return". I compromised by saying "residence in" Syria. It's your call. 2. al-Taba'i was Asmahan's friend, admirer and biographer. In the specific instance where that quotation was made, Zuhur used "friend and admirer". But he also wrote a biography (book) on Asmahan. 3. I do not care much about that one. 4. I used your preferred method: one source said such and such and the other said so and so. All is reliably sourced, so I think no change is warranted. 5. I will re-rewrite as much as possible, but then SD will come back and say these are not the words used in the sources... It's a dilemma. But please all be patient on this one as my time is limited. Salam, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 19:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Number 3. SD has just removed the wrong sentence. I restored it. The sentence in reference was "whether her patriotism was hard to measure or otherwise", to which I commented was Zuhur's opinion. If SD will stop being so smart, we can bring this matter to an end. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 19:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
N3 3, Old: Actually, no need for the author's opinion. Just state it plainly. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Ameer, in the book it says "The other side of her patriotism was to her adopted country, Egypt. That loyalty is hard to measure"... so if the "That loyalty is hard to measure" is authors opinion.. isn't also "the other side of her patriotism belonged to Egypt." also authors opinion? This is in the article right now. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
'Ameer' New:For concern #3, either use no opinion at all, or keep both but attribute them to the author i.e. "According to biographer Sherifa Zuhur..." --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Stop messing with the sentence about her patriotism to Egypt. The sentence in reference was whether her patriotism was difficult to measure. Ameer's statement was to state it plainly. I prefer removing it altogether. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 20:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh My God!

I can’t believe this debate/argument is still going on! I was away and I thought by that time the disagreement would be resolved! At first, I found it very interesting to see people trying to prove their points of view but now I can see it is taking a lot of time! I wonder how you are not tired yet! You are going over the same discussions, over and over again. Is this going to end, ever? -- Nefer Tweety (talk) 15:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism issues

This article was listed at WP:CV for copyright violations in the "Role in World War II" section. A quick review reveals the text is a direct plagiarism of this source. The entire section is a close parahrasing of the original newspaper article. For example:

The article text reads: The Allies reneged on their promises for Syrian independence and Asmahan, disgruntled, shifted allegiance to the Nazis.

The source states: The Free French reneged on their promise of independence and a disgruntled Asmahan shifted her allegiance to the Nazis in revenge.

The next sentence in the article reads: Asmahan embarked on a train journey to Ankara, where she wanted to meet Hitler's ambassador to Turkey and master of Nazi espionage in the Middle East.

The next sentence in the source reads: She boarded a train and headed to Ankara, where she wanted to meet Franz von Papen, Hitler's ambassador to Turkey and master of Nazi espionage in the Middle East.

It should be noted that simply altering sentence structure or using synonyms does not relieve text of plagiarism. A finding of plagiarism doesn't require exact wording, but takes into account the structure, format and content of the presentation of an idea -- as well as the quantity of similarities. Please read WP:Close paraphrasing for further information. I have currently blanked the section to avoid the problem of copyright violation and recommend that it be rewritten, from scratch, using only original language, without the direct benefit of the source text. I have not yet checked to see whether other portions of this article have the same problem and will need to be resolved in the same way. — CactusWriter | needles 14:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


More plagarism in Asmahan article
Original line in article mediator had written was: "Later in life when Asmahan spoke about her childhood in Suwayda, she remembered it as a happy and carefree period, although she did not spend much time in the Jabal, it was what she saw as her "home" rather then Lebanon or Turkey"
Although this is close to what the source is, user Arab Cowboy changed it so it resembled the source even more : "Later in life, Asmahan told Muhammad al-Tabaʿi about her childhood in the Jabal. She remembered it as a happy and carefree period. Although she did not spend much time in the Jabal and she might have recalled visits in the early 1920s, it was what she saw as her "home" rather than her residences in Lebanon and Turkey."
Source: Asmahans Secrets p 36: "In her late twenties, Asmahan told her friend and admirer al-Tab`i about her childhood in the mountains of the Druze. She remembered a happy and carfree period. She did not actually spend much time in the Jabal itself and probably remembered visits in early 1920s. Still, it was the Jabal Druze that had imprinted itself as "home" on her consciousness, rather than her family's residences in Turkey and in Beirut.
http://books.google.se/books?id=Eca2pXOX-F8C&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=Adham+Khanjar+Incident&source=bl&ots=A8mYmpk5VC&sig=0AUqXfiPIaM7VndOFkIsJIcYnD8&hl=sv&ei=4spRStfPOKWKmwPQy6ioBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5#v=onepage&q=Adham%20Khanjar%20Incident&f=false
Also in the Egypt influence section in a quote it says "(although she was in reality a third cousin, twice removed)" in the source it says "although she was actually a third cousin twice removed" http://books.google.se/books?id=Eca2pXOX-F8C&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=Adham+Khanjar+Incident&source=bl&ots=A8mYmpk5VC&sig=0AUqXfiPIaM7VndOFkIsJIcYnD8&hl=sv&ei=4spRStfPOKWKmwPQy6ioBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5#v=onepage&q=Adham%20Khanjar%20Incident&f=false
and also the sentence "The other side of her patriotism belonged to Egypt." in the source it says "The other side of her patriotism was to her adopted country, Egypt" Third section under "Syrian or Egyptian?" part http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exzuhasp.html --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The first example you list is plagiarism. The mediator's sentence also alters the original meaning of the source, because the commas in the sentence attribute thoughts to Asmahan that are actually the author's. By returning the periods, the revision by AC actually returns the sentence more closely to the source's meaning but is obviously plagiarism. The problem here is attempting to paraphrase the source -- rather than simply stating the important fact. The sentence should read: Asmahan later recalled her childhood years in Jabal as "untouched by anything truly bad". Everything else is the author's speculation. WP only provides factual information -- and allows the reader to draw their own conclusions.
The second example is not plagiarism. It is a quote. However, it is sloppy writing on the part of the source's author. Parenthetical insertions into quotes should be avoided whenever possible. In this article, that quote should be paraphrased.
The third example is plagiarism. Especially because it is then followed by Egypt was a planetary distance from the small villages of the Druze. which is a direct copy from here. In fact, as I look through the text, it appears most everything sourced to this text might be plagiarized. Unfortunately, it is possible that I will need to blank most of this article as a copyright violation and that the article will need to be rewritten. I will need to look further. — CactusWriter | needles 15:24, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Provence, Michael (2005). The great Syrian revolt and the rise of Arab nationalism (illustrated ed.). University of Texas Press. p. 72. ISBN 9780292706804.
  2. ^ Zuhur 2000 p=36
  3. ^ Zuhur 2000 p=36
  4. ^ Zuhur 2000, p. 37
  5. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference asia-times was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Asmahan&oldid=309080279"