Jump to content

Talk:Prince Hashim bin Hussein

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

This article lacks sources, especially regarding the prince's alleged homosexuality, which is not confirmed by any serious news source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8070:DAD:4600:C8EA:F7A9:1A9E:DCF7 (talk) 05:51, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Prince Hashim bin Hussein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:06, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 June 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Editors are unconvinced that the proposed titles are the WP:COMMONNAME (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 06:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– This is not a request to change any of the first names, but to correct the way in which the Arabic definite article has been or should have been properly used. The names appear in an official statement released by the Royal Hashemite Court to mark the wedding of the Crown Prince and Princess Rajwa Al Hussein (note the use of the definite article). It was not simply possible to submit a single technical request for 13 pages, but I think an RM could solve the issue even more effectively. Keivan.fTalk 20:02, 1 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE (please mention me on reply) 22:07, 8 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE (please mention me on reply) 01:05, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All reputable sources or publications use the correct spelling and the suggested names are common in English. Individuals such as Haya and Ali also specifically use the definite article on their social media accounts and the whole family is represented by the Royal Hashemite Court which put out a statement with all their names, so not only are the names common and recognizable they are also preferred by the subjects (MOS:IDENTITY). Keivan.fTalk 05:16, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One of your suggested moves is Prince Hassan bin Talal to Prince El Hassan bin Talal. That's a personal name. And these moves would also basically require moving the late and future King Husseins to Al Hussein. Instagram is not a reliable source. The IOC link actually says "Faisal Al Hussein". And I'm certain there are many more mainstream English media examples that don't use the definite article. Tad Lincoln (talk) 23:09, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Barring the one on Hassan, there's no change in the first name with the other ones. And no, a move here does not guarantee a change for other pages. If you want to take out Hassan's page out of concern for the page on King Hussein, that's fine with me. Also, the Instagram pages cited are not fan pages. They are verified pages used by the individuals concerned to demonstrate the way in which they spell out their own names. I'm pretty sure they know better than anyone how to write their names down. Not to mention that the names are also consistent with the statement put out by the Royal Court. And here's Faisal on the Olympic Council of Asia with his name spelled out with the definite article and the word "bin" (which means son of). And there's no such rule that we should always follow what the mainstream media says. Not to mention that adding or removing a definite article does not make a name uncommon as long as the first name's spelling has not changed. Nobody is going to look at Princess Sarvath El Hassan vs Princess Sarvath al-Hassan and think they are two different individuals. Keivan.fTalk 02:07, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Google Ngram is not giving any results for any of the names listed above (current or suggested). Additionally, a simple search on Google is not solid proof for pushing any names per WP:GOOGLETEST. Also, I think I should disclose the fact that it was me who omitted the definite article by moving the pages on Hashim, Hamzah, Iman, Haya, Ali, and Faisal back in 2015. The title of these pages and the other ones were inconsistent so, as User:Alexandermcnabb pointed out below, I thought the definite article would be redundant in English and moved the pages accordingly. That does not appear to be the case, especially now that we have official statements and/or websites with their names including the definite article. Considering that the pages had the definite articles included back a few years ago without anyone opposing, I really doubt that the suggested names are uncommon. In fact, they were in use before the current ones. Keivan.fTalk 02:33, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here's King Hussein of Jordan (King Hussein bin Talal). Not Al Hussein, you'll note. This is all part of the Great Mess of Arabic Transliteration that exists today across the Arab world and looks like it will persist for a great time in the future. In Arabic, it's Al Rigga Street - in English, it's Rigga street. The definite article makes its way into Arabic translation the other way, too, so Arabs are fond of throwing 'the' around with gay abandon, or omitting it in the wrong places with just as much insouciance. How people would like to be referred to is not what WP's about - look at Persian Gulf, which the inhabitants of the Arabian coast dislike to a man, preferring Arabian Gulf. WP standard is Persian and so it stays. I'd say this could possibly be fixed by a much larger and more participatory RfC about WP's treatment of the prefix 'Al' in ALL Arab names when translated to English. I would settle happily myself for a standard of Al with no El, An, al- or other variation permitted, which simplifies search etc. I would just as readily settle for omitting the Al, which as I said below, is a redundancy in English - it's a linguistic convention that only leaps the languages when we 'machine translate' or literally translate from one to the other... Rashid Al Maktoum could just as easily - and perfectly correctly - be rendered Rashid Maktoum in English. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:38, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, nobody is suggesting adding "Al" before the first names; especially for monarchs whose pages are also governed by WP:SOVEREIGN. Which is why I earlier agreed with User:Tad Lincoln that the page on Prince Hassan bin Talal should be omitted from the discussion. How "people" like to be referred to is a factor that needs to be considered because it's their personal choice (MOS:IDENTITY; ex. Elliot Page, etc.). The situation is not comparable to geographical naming disputes as a landmass or sea or any other inanimate object cannot name itself. It's interesting that you brought up Rashid's page, because I think the "Al" (آل) in his name is not a definite article but a noun that means family, so I'm not entirely sure if it can be discarded. More importantly, I don't think users would agree on setting a rule that would dictate either removing or keeping the transliterated from of the Arabic definite article. Similarly I don't think a consensus can be reached concerning its form (al vs el). Currently we have Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Princess Rajwa Al Hussein. I don't think any attempts at either removing or altering the definite articles would be successful if they are used in their common names. And similar to Rajwa, other Jordanian royals appear to be using it in their names and it has been picked up by secondary sources. We could at least make the pages on all Jordanian royals consistent by including the definite article and then go on with a discussion as to what needs to be done generally with the definite article in all pages. This is not the right place for that broader discussion. Keivan.fTalk 22:20, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I simply want to say that I agree with you, Keivan.f on everything. The correction should be made to the names. Go by how the royals themselves write their names and what the official royal court says it should be. Simple as that. Mark9900 (talk) 02:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not (ex. Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, etc.). It's in fact used in English sources in this case as I just demonstrated. Or are you suggesting we should throw it out of Rajwa's name as well? Because we cannot have one rule for a group of people and another rule for others when it comes to similar articles per WP:TITLECON. Keivan.fTalk 05:18, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose: My short opinion: not part of original name, not used by majority of sources and redundant anyway. My long explanation: Let's differentiate the usage and meaning of "Al-/El-" according to context:
    • In family names: basically just meaning "the", to refer to a group of related people, mostly redundant and is mostly kept out, such as Bisher Al-Khasawneh ==> Bisher Khasawneh. When it is not kept out, as is the case for Abdel Fattah el-Sisi (stressing Sisi is a last name not first name) it is usually because Sisi alone sounds weird in Arabic, so it is kept in secondary sources as is.
    • Added to females married to royal family: used in this case to refer to identify who these females are married to, for example Princess Rajwa Al Hussein, basically Rajwa of Hussein. I support here omitting the dash from "Al Hussein" to emphasize that it is not part of the name and so not a last name.
    • Some Jordanian royals first names: such as Al-Hussein and El-Hassan, The Hussein and the Hassan (the current king is not referred to as Al-Abdullah because it sounds horrible), but this is strictly a matter of "self-honorification" so to say. It is both not used by majority of independent sources nor should it be kept as it is redundant anyway. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:26, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is used in different sources. You cannot just throw around statements without factual support. And even though I'm against searching names in search engines to determine a common name, if we were to utilize it we would get 11,000 results for "Prince Faisal bin Al Hussein" vs 5,000 for "Prince Faisal bin Hussein". Similarly, we would get 5,000 results for "Princess Sarvath El Hassan" vs 4,000 for "Princess Sarvath al-Hassan". The second point you make is also not entirely correct because it does not apply to all female members (ex. Princess Ghida Talal). And regarding the third point, again for the nth time, nobody is suggesting adding "Al" or "El before the first names. Keivan.fTalk 13:40, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
These are official names which are replicated in media. Sarvath El Hassan serves the same purpose of Sarvath Al Hassan. Al and El are just ways of saying "the" depending on the phonetics of the word. Yes Ghida Al Talal sounds horrible in Arabic and that is why it was omitted (it would sound Atttalal). Hussein is a first name, so why say Prince Hashim bin Al Hussein? Makeandtoss (talk) 10:41, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If they do serve the same purpose, then it would be natural to go with the one that is more common and preferred by the subject. And, yes, Hussein is typically a first name but not in this case. For example, Hashim's Ism or given name is "Hashim". His name as a whole is a patronymic, similar to other Arab figures such as Zubayr ibn al-Awwam or Abu Ubayda ibn al-Jarrah. As you can see the "al" or "el" can appear before the father's name. The way it is transliterated can vary depending on the subject. With the Jordanian royal family, they prefer it separated from the father's name (Al or El [Name]) and the trend is observable in sources when searching their names. Keivan.fTalk 02:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Prince_Hashim_bin_Hussein&oldid=1207582764"