Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taharrush gamea

Taharrush gamea

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Taharrush gamea

Taharrush gamea (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence apart from recent hype that this is actually a thing — goethean 17:34, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

"No evidence"? There are, of course, indictments, arrests, in Sweden as well as in German cities. Government officials describing the phenomenon. And, indelicate to mention, but that's a pretty narrow - not to say sexist, perspective. You might want to speak with young women who live in the Middle East, South Asia, and elsewhere outside Western Europe. This not new in the world, it's merely new in the recent experience of Western Europeans.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:24, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 January 12. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:51, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Human3015^{Let It Go}  18:33, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

• redirect to "recent hype", which is not a hype but a problem. A searchable term. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:56, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Not an eligible solution since the Swedish press is also all over this Aerabic term because of an outbreak of groping and sexual intimidation at a teen rock concert last summer. Swedes are pretty horrified by the idea of gangs of men surrounding and groping 14- and 15-year-old concertgoers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:45, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• • P.S. About being actually a thing, yes it is, in some sexist and sexually-repressed cultures, see e.g. "Eve teasing". You have to admit that we (wikipedians) are 98% ignorant amateurs (outside of our area of expertise/training), therefore unfortunately I don't know a better redirect target for a generic article about this type of sexual violence. Also the transription "gamea" from "jamai" is quite inept. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:07, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
    • BTW, the piped link "recent hype" is a link to New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Germany. That wasn't clear. I've spelled it out. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:15, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:15, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

• What is the rationale for deletion? If it does not warrant a standalone article, wouldn't it be better merged with street harassment or sexual harassment? (I would have added the term to one of those articles instead of creating this one but, like Eve teasing, it didn't seem a great fit with either.) —  AjaxSmack  02:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • AjaxSmack, what was your rationale for creating[1] the article in the first place? You based your addition entirely on news articles published in the last 48 hours. Why didn't you just write about this in the suggested articles? At best, this seems to be a neologism. Peter ^Isotalo 12:09, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• KEEP : It is a more generic phenomenon, not a hype. Zezen (talk) 04:54, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Keep: Widespread coverage in the media, even important authorities know about it. Then everyone should.--Gerry1214 (talk) 06:17, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Delete : This is just another name for group assault like the term "Wilding", which had many headlines at the time - but is now a mere mention under "other" on a disambiguation page. --Versageek 06:44, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• STRONG KEEP: Another case of manipulative deletionism. No need to even elaborate. Ahriman2014 (talk) 07:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• KEEP: Deleting a well-researched article on mass phenomenon would constitute political censorship. Tiphareth (talk) 07:59, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• DELETE “Taharrush gamea” is simply Arabic for “collective harrasment”: the term is used very recently in the press about the event in Cologne because the perpetrators seem to be migrants, but no study — sociological or otherwise — talk about it being a specially Arabic phenomenon. When it happens in an English-speaking country, it's called “harrasment”; in French it's “harcèlement”; in German “Belästigung” in Arabic it's “تحرش”: we should not create an article for every language. --Superbenjamin (talk) 09:30, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Comment This article needs to undergo a serious scrutiny. I have removed plenty of content that was completely unreferenced, based on obviously unreliable sources like Infowars.com (run by conspiracy theorist Alex Jones), or that used sources simply reporting on recent sexual harassment without making any connection to this term. The remaining attestations are all directly related to the news reporting relating to New Year's Eve in Köln. At the very least, this seems like a politicized neologism. Peter ^Isotalo 10:21, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• ABSOLUTELY DELETE: The concept of collective rape being a uniquely Arab or Muslim phenomenon, or even having some form of casual acceptance in Arab culture specifically, is so obviously a fabrication that I can't comprehend how anyone could even consider for a second that it's factually accurate, let alone objective, neutral, or depoliticized. This article doesn't describe a phenomenon distinct from already-existing concepts of collective rape - unless you happen to be viewing it through a very particular lens. Deadwreck (talk) 11:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• I would support an article on the phenomenon of group sexual harassment (groping, surrounding a victim, verbal threats and verbal sexual harassment) carried out by gorups that does not escalate to the point of gang rape. The phenomenon is real, and terms for it in sundry languages can be included.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Keep. Reliable sources indicate this is a notable phenomenon. Kelly ^hi! 14:00, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Keep, although I would prefer an English name for this phenomenon. The fact is tha tcoverage of this is now massive [2] and multiple incidents [3] have been revealed, some are enumerated in the Cologne article. As a topic, it passes WP:GNG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:51, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • This is not how Swedish media are reporting on the issue. There's a very heated debate, but nothing about it being organized. It also seems to be limited to a single festival (We Are Sthlm).[4] A criminal investigation was just laid to rest,[5] but there is going to be an investigation about whether the problem actually exists or not[6] (besides the "normal" festival raping that has been going on for years[7][8][9][10][11]) One 15-year-old has been charged so far for groping at We Are Sthlm.[12] And no one seems to be using the term "taharrush" about any of it. Peter ^Isotalo 16:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Delete as neologism. Article relies entirely on sources from the past few days. Google Trends indicate it's extremely recent,[13] and there's pretty much just a single hit on Google Books.[14] It might be relevant to redirect it to New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Germany, but a standalone article is extreme recentism and sensationalism. Peter ^Isotalo 17:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

  Not a persuasive argument. The question is whether this term is in substantive use now. New York Times, [15]; The Spectator [16]; The Daily Telegraph [17]; the BBC [18]].E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:40, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• Keep. Significant coverage in multiple reputed sources, and such coverage is likely to increase.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:48, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Keep. This is a highly notable and specific phenomenon (not a rape!), which is now widely covered in numerous publications and in many different countries, for example [19], [20], including political debates in connection to other events [21], etc. My very best wishes (talk) 19:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Keep: These also: Source Abdelmonem, Angie, Angie (2015), ”Reconceptualizing Sexual Harassment in Egypt”, Kohl: A Journal for Body and Gender Research 1 (1): 23–41 (PDF) and the german article.--Empiricus-sextus (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Strong delete absolutely unnecessary article--Opdire657 (talk) 23:20, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
• Keep: and kudos to Empiricus-sextus. We have done some work on the German article, which was in a similar poor state before. There are two reasons for a keep: First, Taharrush is a about a strategy started by Egyptian police forces and hired thugs to use sexual harrassment as a means of politics, denying (activist) women access and participation at public rallies and demonstrations. This has been covered in various research papers, NGO studies and serious media. Second, the behavior has spread as well to young men in their prime using it as an everlasting spring break on the cost of young women and girls in public spaces. Thats been covered by similar high quality sources. That said, its not a mere sort of sexual harrassment but a new type of molesters flashmob with a political cloud in Egypt, including some changes in the penal law. Therefore keep - in the updeted version. Polentarion Talk 01:38, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• Yes. In addition, judging from this Gender Research paper, it appears that "taharrush" is a social activity/activism by Muslim men to achieve public humiliation of women. Making this publicly (i.e. in the public space) is required for humiliation. Here is another scholarly source about it. My very best wishes (talk) 02:38, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• This source does not define the phenomenon as you do. The article makes it very clear that the phenomenon at hand is called "sexual harassment" and refers to it in its Arabic form in order to specify the legal struggle of defining harassment. The very title makes that plain enough. The article by the way does not refer to "Muslim men" but to the gendered nature of space in Egypt. As it stands, neither the term "Muslim" or "Islam" are present in the document, and the word "Islamic" is employed as a quote of one of the parties of a conflict. There may be sources providing a defition of a hypothetical phenomenon such as the one you provide, but this clearly is not one. 88.105.128.78 (talk) 09:25, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

• STRONG KEEP The article is well-sourced and is not biases. It discusses a real activity that people will seek to understand.Kmccook (talk) 02:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
• Strong delete The article takes a single event, turns it into a social phenomenon, and presents biased and unproven by the literature explanations of this so-called phenomenon. It compromises the integrity of Wikipedia. 88.105.128.78 (talk) 11:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

:*— 88.105.128.78 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC). E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• Keep – A lot of coverage and is a definite concept. --Article editor (talk) 11:44, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
• KEEP This article is well-sourced and is not biased. It describes a phenomena which is hard to understand and new in Europe. The press in Britain uses this term. I agree with a previous keep-comment on this. The article describes a crime that has taken place several times in Germany and Sweden lately, which people will seek to understand. Oyvindlyslo (talk) 14:08, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

:*— Oyvindlyslo (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• KEEP per Dwaipayan. Some references were copied & pasted from the French and German Wikipedia, I corrected and/or translated most of them, others are caring for the rest presently. --tickle me 15:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• KEEP With the amount of references that have been added so far, it would be completely absurd to delete the article. Fojr (talk) 15:30, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
• Keep the amount of references means it has achieved WP:SIGCOV and therefore WP:GNG notability and so the article can't be deleted. It could be improved with prevalence, history, definition etcetera. AadaamS (talk) 17:54, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• KEEP This is a recurring phenomena that people need to be aware of for their own protection. Deleting this amounts to political censorship. --Paldrion (talk) 19:16, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

:*— Paldrion (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• KEEP There are plenty of reliable sources. I can only imagine that the nomination to delete has some political basis. 2.98.172.201 (talk) 00:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

:*— 2.98.172.201 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

• KEEP: i came to get the non spin version of facts rather than relying on simple news stories. articles like this absolutely have a place to inform people. Nosdan (talk) 01:43, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

:*— Nosdan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC) hey nutjob Flyer22 Reborn keep your paranoid schizophrenic accusations well away from my comments and preferably out of wikipedia altogether. they are neither wanted nor helpful. Nosdan (talk) 06:54, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Per WP:Talk, do not mess with my comment like you did earlier. As for your WP:Personal attack, meh. I know when I'm right. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

do not make unsubstantiated accusations about me (or anyone else for that matter), thanks Nosdan (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

This little "This account is not good enough for its arguments to be considered" game has lasted long enough and does provide none to little insight to the debate. Out personal observations about each other's personalities are irrelevant to the matter at hand. The content of an argument is unrelated to the durable presence of an account on the website. Please try to maintain the discussion on a factual, rather than ad hominem, level. 88.105.128.78 (talk) 09:15, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

WP:Single-purpose accounts matter because they should not be allowed to WP:Game the system; you know that. Single-purpose accounts voting in AfDs will always matter, and rightly so. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:24, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Which is what the IP identification system prevents. Besides, this is completely outside of the point I was making. Please keep to the arguments instead of making this discussion ad hominem. Because someone could have the idea of following all your messages with "This account has a strong tendency to deviate the discussion to personal accusations rather than arguments", which would only make the page less interesting and legible. End of the discussion on my side about that topic, please do stop the fingerpointing. And please do stop copypasting messages where they had not been originally published, or modifying them in any other way. Thank you kindly, and do not hesitate to provide arguments about facts, rather than other people's haircuts. 88.105.128.78 (talk) 09:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

• Keep Those who want this deleted have no strong arguments towards its non-notability and while it requires an increase in credible sources it is certainly within WP:N Hemi9 (talk) 03:01, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Comment to closer: This AfD has a number of WP:Single-purpose accounts and WP:Sleepers. No doubt in my mind that WP:Socking is going on here. A tainted AfD. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

That is...unless the one-time accounts and other barely-there accounts can be chalked up to the media attention. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:24, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Whatever points you are making about the single-purpose accounts, I disagree with them. And I'm sure you know why. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 09:31, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Taharrush gamea as a concept

I'd like to discuss the fact that Taharrush gamea is presented as a distinct and somehow new form of sexual harassment:

1. Sources in the article use the term Taharrush gamea as the local term for “collective harassment” in Egypt: nothing justifies creating an article for a mere translation.
2. Scientific articles study the phenomenon of sexual harassment in the Egyptian context, especially during the Revolution and as a political tool, but the fact these studies exist does not mean sexual harassment is specific to Egypt. Sexual harassment is a universal phenomenon with particularities in every country/situation: if the topic of the article is sexual harassment in Egypt, it should be called Sexual harassment in Egypt. Nothing in the sources point to taharrush as a distinct concept from Sexual harassment or as something typical of Arab or Muslim countries.
3. All sources about Taharrush being spread in Europe are VERY recent (not more than a few weeks) and most of them are based on a single report from the German police.

It is also necessary to recall that harassment or rape of women in the public space by men or groups of men is a well-documented phenomenon in Western societies ([22], [23], [24], [25], [26], etc.): presenting it with a foreign word as if it was something foreign is really worrisome for the neutrality of Wikipedia. --Superbenjamin (talk) 09:15, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• Your examples are not on point since they show that sexual crimes happens the world over. However, this discussion is about a specific type of sexual assault, carried out by a group of men who surround and physically detain a woman in a crowd, forcibly detaining her while they grope her, force their hands into her clothing, sometimes remove some or all of her clothing, rob her, and verbally taunt and humiliate her, and sometimes rape her and/or beat her, before they themselves disappear into the crowd and escape. There are a number of types of sexual assault. This discussion focuses on this specific type.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

  It's precisely my point: there is no source demonstrating that this type of assault originated in Egypt or the Arab world. If an article is needed about Egypt, it should be Sexual harassment in Egypt. If an article is needed about collective harassment, it has no reason to have a name in Arabic and should be Collective harassment. --Superbenjamin (talk) 12:48, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

  Your title shows a failure to grasp the topic, since forcible groping is not "sexual harrassment"; it is sexual assault. There could perhaps be an article about "group sexual assault" separate from gang rape as a wider phenom, but this article has sources asserting that this is a culturally specific phenomenon that emerged in Egypt, recently, first as a police tactic to suppress female participation in protest demonstrations, and was then taken up by groups of young men for the sheer joy of assaulting women. There are sources supporting this, and we should keep this discussion focused.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:03, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

  In which case using the Arabic term for "harassment" is even wronger. 88.105.128.78 (talk) 21:17, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• Lara Logan's account of her attacks in Egypt gives an example of the level of violence. If Wikipedia is to be a reliable source for women as well as men it cannot cover up men's behavior whatever the culture. Kmccook (talk) 13:04, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Sources describe this primarily as a public humiliation of European women by groups of Muslim men in public places that involves sexual harassment and frequently a robbery. This looks like a distinct phenomenon.My very best wishes (talk) 15:00, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

  Please, show me the sources “asserting that this is a culturally specific phenomenon”: none of the scientific sources say that, but there are plenty of examples of collective assaults on women outside of the Arab World. I don't understand how it is possible to ignore the fact that “taharrush gamea” means “collective harassment”: in Egypt, sexual harassment by the police or any other person is called that. There is absolutely no argument for using another term than “collective harassment” (or “assault”) in English.

  “cover[ing] up men's behavior whatever the culture”? But this article implies a universal phenomenon is Arabic, despite evidences it's not the case: that‘s covering up rape culture in the West and the rest of the world (and racism).

  “public humiliation of European women by groups of Muslim men in public places”: where on earth have you read that!? In Egypt, Egyptian women are the first victims of assaults, harassment and rapes, especially when this ‘technique’ is used by the government against activists. Transforming that in a assault of Muslims against white women is a racist manipulation of the facts. --Superbenjamin (talk) 15:34, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

• It only matters how this term is currently used in English language sources. Right now the term is actively used in English, German, Russian, Swedish and Norwegian language sources. Speaking about collective harassment (note that word "sexual" is missing), yes, perhaps that might be an appropriate alternative name or redirect, however sources on these languages do not actually use this term. Speaking about Arabic, yes, this is obviously relevant - as an etymology of the term. My very best wishes (talk) 16:01, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

The article doesn't call it a culturally specific phenomenon nor does it need to be a culturally specific phenomenon for it to have a dedicated article. Fojr (talk) 15:46, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, this is certainly the case if we speak about current version (as we do). My very best wishes (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

First I have asked to merge Rape in Egypt (the title is much more controversial) into Taharrush (gamea). The 2000 Puerto Rican Day Parade attacks show a similar behavior pattern for young machos in a non muslim country btw. Polentarion Talk 17:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I am not sure there are sources claiming that Taharrush attacks in Europe were racially or religiously motivated. If there are such sources, this should be noted. If there are no such sources, then obviously, no. My very best wishes (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Please keep this article. If the politically correct police don't like it they can edit the article to include their comments and changes. The facts don't change it has and continues to happen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.69.0.133 (talk) 17:32, 14 January 2016 (UTC)