This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Ahmed Urabi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 11 February 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Ahmed ʻUrabi to Ahmed Urabi. The result of the discussion was moved. |
The following text, from 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica was excised from the article, dismissed (correctly no doubt) as "biased":
Can anyonne re-edit the information contained here in an acceptable fashion and return it to the article ? -- Wetman 21:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
I think Ahmed Pasha Arabi may be the same person. If so, these two articles should be merged. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon jo e 18:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia has articles referring to this man either as Orabi or Urabi. Is there any evidence that his name was ever spelled in either of these ways at the time?
All the contemporary sources I have seen spell his name Arabi. That suggests to me that Wikipedia ought to standardise on Arabi.-- Toddy1 19:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
On the other hand, Arabi wrote in English - and spelt his own name "Arabi". This case seems rather like Chiang Kaishek (not Jiang Jieshi) and Sun Yatsen (not Sun Zhongshan) in that the modern transliteration should not be preferred since it was not the name by which they were widely known. The Google Ngrams result is not conclusive, since they show common use for all three versions. There is also the problem as time goes by of other people with the same name (but the modern tansliteration) resulting in false positives. FOARP ( talk) 14:07, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
When the spelling was adjusted, it was pointed out that he is often called Arabi Pasha, which is quite true. I have no opinion on this, which runs into the problem: what titles do we include for Muslim grandees? For example, we use Köprülü Mehmet Pasha but Köprülü Fazıl Ahmed for his son. Discuss? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm closing this move request. There is no consensus here and the article has been moved anyway. — Wknight94 ( talk) 15:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I just received what seems like a pretty angry message [1] from User:Pmanderson over what I thought was going to be a smooth and uncontroversial correction to this article, so let me clarify. First, my sincerest apologies for not checking the talk page to see the discussion that had apparently taken place regarding moving the page to another name. When I saw the history of the page, I thought the move was made unilaterally so I immediately moved to work. Ahmed Urabi might as well be the 19th-century historical figure of Egypt, as such it is critical, at least to me, to keep basic information on him accurate.
Now with regard to the spelling "Ahmed Arabi", it is a mis-transliteration of his name based on archaic British imperialist sources dating to the 1900's and earlier [2] -- it is hardly used by anyone today unless to quote those sources (e.g., Lord Cromer). As you can see from a google books name search, Urabi [3] and Orabi [4] are the most commonly used, but Urabi corresponds to international Arabic transliteration standards, so this is why I think it should be used. I am obviously not the only person who thinks so [5], [6]. That said, I won't quibble about Urabi vs. Orabi since both are basically accurate, and Orabi is the frequently used transliteration in Egypt itself (because it corresponds more accurately to Egyptian Arabic pronunciation) but I'm afraid that "Arabi" is out of the question as not only is it severely outdated, it is simply inaccurate. Please also note that the original name of the page was Ahmed Urabi, so I was merely changing it back to the original, which is what the name should be pending any ongoing discussion. Sorry again if I seemed like I had ignored any concerns previously raised, it was not my intention. — Zerida 22:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
With regard to the question of which transliteration system to use, let me say this. Anyone who has studied Russian, Chinese, Japanese or Mideast history for very long has seen "ruling" transliteration systems come and go. A case can be made for using the English letter which comes nearest the foreign letter in the alphabet, as when we say "Romanov" or possibly "Arabi." A case can also be made for using the English letter closest to the sound of the foreign letter, as when we write "Romanoff" or Urabi/Orabi. I think there is also a tension, in which neither side can be blamed, between those who want somehow to preserve the eccentricities (meant non-pejoratively) of the other language and those who realize that John Q. Public's willingness to strive for accurate reproduction of an entirely different "sound palate" is probably limited. I don't see anything in any of these positions that is nefarious or imperialistic or racist.
I spent some short period of time in Egypt, trying to converse in Arabic. I can say that the first vowel in Xrabi is truly neither an O nor a U, but something in between, and to that extent, the heated argument over how to transliterate it is after all rather off the target. Oh, and I didn't think the hotel clerks were terrorists because they asked to see my "Bassbort." Every language has built-in limitations in its ability to faithfully mimic another, so can we please all calm down about the imperialist agenda of saying "Arabi?"
In closing, may I say that the furor over this article surprises me in the light of the one on Aga Khan III, which IMO contains more whitewash than ink. I hope we're not headed toward an Xhmed Xrabi article in the same vein. Terry J. Carter ( talk) 21:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
His name's pronunciation is specifically pronounced in Egyptian Arabic as [ˈæħmæd ʕoˈɾɑːbi]. Literary Arabic's pronunciation, not Standard Arabic, because there is no single standard phonology for the literary variety of Arabic. Each region has its own pronunciation, they are loosely similar, by not the same. For example, a Levantine speaker would pronounce his name as [ˈʔaħmad ʕʊˈɾaːbi], the open vowels' value is the same in both words and it's fully open, half-way between the front and the center; the rounded vowel may or may not be near-close. In the metropolitan Egyptian pronunciation there are two distinct vowels, a near-open front and an open back vowel. -- Mahmudmasri ( talk) 14:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
First, remember not to clutter the lead of the article. I think we're good to go with the four standards: A. Urabi, Orabi, and Arabi and Arabi Pasha. If you really feel there needs to be more variants than that, begin a #Name subsection. Unhelpful laundry listing of variants like Ahmed Urabi Pasha, Ahmed 'Urabi Pasha, Ahmed ‘Urabi Pasha, Ahmed Urabi Paša... don't belong in the running text at all but (if you feel like being thorough and helping the article's SEO) in a PERSONDATA entry above the category listings.
Second, Wikipedia makes no stand for or against transliterations: we just go by the common name in contemporary and reliable English-language sources. It looks like that is now "Urabi": both personally and (by far) in reference to his actions. That is where the article should be located, pending a shift in the scholarly consensus, but all common variants should be mentioned.
Third, the lead starts out by calling him a colonel. By definition, then, he was *not* a general officer as claimed here and at the Orabi dab. (Conversely, if he was promoted to general, we should probably accord him that rank unless he is—for whatever reason—traditionally remembered as a colonel; such a reason should be explained.) — LlywelynII 12:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
There are many mistakes in this article:
1- Orabi did not spend the rest of his life in Ceylon , he returned back to Egypt in 1903 , and died in Cairo in 1911 .
2- Egypt was officially made a British protectorate in 1914, not in 1882, or any date before 1914, and stayed British protectorate until 1922.
3- There is no any mention for battle of kafer El-Dawar, what Orabi beated the English army in it .
If possible, could you provide a source? Currently this article appears to contradict Battle of Kafr El Dawwar. Zeklandia ( talk) 03:00, 27 October 2017 (UTC)In September of that year a British army landed in Alexandria but failed to reach Cairo after being defeated at the Battle of Kafr El Dawwar.
4- Also there are many other important missing facts and details, like his career in Egyptian government.
5- Most of the article is unsourced.
6- No mention of the cuases of the revolution and the situation in Egypt, specially before 1882.
7- The article represents only western view, specially British colonial one.
-- Amaihmaa69 ( talk) 19:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
8. the first quote belongs to AMir al Mu'mineen 'Umar ibn al khattab — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.244.196.22 ( talk) 11:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:‘Urabi revolt which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 01:30, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ahmed ‘Urabi. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
The Encyclopaedia Britannica gives his date of birth as 1839. The 1911 ed. (quoted above) gives it as 1839 or 1840. Wilfrid Blunt gives it as 1840. William Wright's Tidy Little War: The British Invasion of Egypt 1882 (Spellmount, 2009), p.26 gives it as 1841. The Kandy Times article quoted gives it as 1842! I, consequently, am confused. It would be good to have a reliable source for this! The Grand Lunar ( talk) 14:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:ʻUrabi revolt which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 15:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:ʻUrabi revolt which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 18:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Ahmed Urabi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 11 February 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Ahmed ʻUrabi to Ahmed Urabi. The result of the discussion was moved. |
The following text, from 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica was excised from the article, dismissed (correctly no doubt) as "biased":
Can anyonne re-edit the information contained here in an acceptable fashion and return it to the article ? -- Wetman 21:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
I think Ahmed Pasha Arabi may be the same person. If so, these two articles should be merged. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon jo e 18:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia has articles referring to this man either as Orabi or Urabi. Is there any evidence that his name was ever spelled in either of these ways at the time?
All the contemporary sources I have seen spell his name Arabi. That suggests to me that Wikipedia ought to standardise on Arabi.-- Toddy1 19:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
On the other hand, Arabi wrote in English - and spelt his own name "Arabi". This case seems rather like Chiang Kaishek (not Jiang Jieshi) and Sun Yatsen (not Sun Zhongshan) in that the modern transliteration should not be preferred since it was not the name by which they were widely known. The Google Ngrams result is not conclusive, since they show common use for all three versions. There is also the problem as time goes by of other people with the same name (but the modern tansliteration) resulting in false positives. FOARP ( talk) 14:07, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
When the spelling was adjusted, it was pointed out that he is often called Arabi Pasha, which is quite true. I have no opinion on this, which runs into the problem: what titles do we include for Muslim grandees? For example, we use Köprülü Mehmet Pasha but Köprülü Fazıl Ahmed for his son. Discuss? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm closing this move request. There is no consensus here and the article has been moved anyway. — Wknight94 ( talk) 15:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I just received what seems like a pretty angry message [1] from User:Pmanderson over what I thought was going to be a smooth and uncontroversial correction to this article, so let me clarify. First, my sincerest apologies for not checking the talk page to see the discussion that had apparently taken place regarding moving the page to another name. When I saw the history of the page, I thought the move was made unilaterally so I immediately moved to work. Ahmed Urabi might as well be the 19th-century historical figure of Egypt, as such it is critical, at least to me, to keep basic information on him accurate.
Now with regard to the spelling "Ahmed Arabi", it is a mis-transliteration of his name based on archaic British imperialist sources dating to the 1900's and earlier [2] -- it is hardly used by anyone today unless to quote those sources (e.g., Lord Cromer). As you can see from a google books name search, Urabi [3] and Orabi [4] are the most commonly used, but Urabi corresponds to international Arabic transliteration standards, so this is why I think it should be used. I am obviously not the only person who thinks so [5], [6]. That said, I won't quibble about Urabi vs. Orabi since both are basically accurate, and Orabi is the frequently used transliteration in Egypt itself (because it corresponds more accurately to Egyptian Arabic pronunciation) but I'm afraid that "Arabi" is out of the question as not only is it severely outdated, it is simply inaccurate. Please also note that the original name of the page was Ahmed Urabi, so I was merely changing it back to the original, which is what the name should be pending any ongoing discussion. Sorry again if I seemed like I had ignored any concerns previously raised, it was not my intention. — Zerida 22:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
With regard to the question of which transliteration system to use, let me say this. Anyone who has studied Russian, Chinese, Japanese or Mideast history for very long has seen "ruling" transliteration systems come and go. A case can be made for using the English letter which comes nearest the foreign letter in the alphabet, as when we say "Romanov" or possibly "Arabi." A case can also be made for using the English letter closest to the sound of the foreign letter, as when we write "Romanoff" or Urabi/Orabi. I think there is also a tension, in which neither side can be blamed, between those who want somehow to preserve the eccentricities (meant non-pejoratively) of the other language and those who realize that John Q. Public's willingness to strive for accurate reproduction of an entirely different "sound palate" is probably limited. I don't see anything in any of these positions that is nefarious or imperialistic or racist.
I spent some short period of time in Egypt, trying to converse in Arabic. I can say that the first vowel in Xrabi is truly neither an O nor a U, but something in between, and to that extent, the heated argument over how to transliterate it is after all rather off the target. Oh, and I didn't think the hotel clerks were terrorists because they asked to see my "Bassbort." Every language has built-in limitations in its ability to faithfully mimic another, so can we please all calm down about the imperialist agenda of saying "Arabi?"
In closing, may I say that the furor over this article surprises me in the light of the one on Aga Khan III, which IMO contains more whitewash than ink. I hope we're not headed toward an Xhmed Xrabi article in the same vein. Terry J. Carter ( talk) 21:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
His name's pronunciation is specifically pronounced in Egyptian Arabic as [ˈæħmæd ʕoˈɾɑːbi]. Literary Arabic's pronunciation, not Standard Arabic, because there is no single standard phonology for the literary variety of Arabic. Each region has its own pronunciation, they are loosely similar, by not the same. For example, a Levantine speaker would pronounce his name as [ˈʔaħmad ʕʊˈɾaːbi], the open vowels' value is the same in both words and it's fully open, half-way between the front and the center; the rounded vowel may or may not be near-close. In the metropolitan Egyptian pronunciation there are two distinct vowels, a near-open front and an open back vowel. -- Mahmudmasri ( talk) 14:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
First, remember not to clutter the lead of the article. I think we're good to go with the four standards: A. Urabi, Orabi, and Arabi and Arabi Pasha. If you really feel there needs to be more variants than that, begin a #Name subsection. Unhelpful laundry listing of variants like Ahmed Urabi Pasha, Ahmed 'Urabi Pasha, Ahmed ‘Urabi Pasha, Ahmed Urabi Paša... don't belong in the running text at all but (if you feel like being thorough and helping the article's SEO) in a PERSONDATA entry above the category listings.
Second, Wikipedia makes no stand for or against transliterations: we just go by the common name in contemporary and reliable English-language sources. It looks like that is now "Urabi": both personally and (by far) in reference to his actions. That is where the article should be located, pending a shift in the scholarly consensus, but all common variants should be mentioned.
Third, the lead starts out by calling him a colonel. By definition, then, he was *not* a general officer as claimed here and at the Orabi dab. (Conversely, if he was promoted to general, we should probably accord him that rank unless he is—for whatever reason—traditionally remembered as a colonel; such a reason should be explained.) — LlywelynII 12:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
There are many mistakes in this article:
1- Orabi did not spend the rest of his life in Ceylon , he returned back to Egypt in 1903 , and died in Cairo in 1911 .
2- Egypt was officially made a British protectorate in 1914, not in 1882, or any date before 1914, and stayed British protectorate until 1922.
3- There is no any mention for battle of kafer El-Dawar, what Orabi beated the English army in it .
If possible, could you provide a source? Currently this article appears to contradict Battle of Kafr El Dawwar. Zeklandia ( talk) 03:00, 27 October 2017 (UTC)In September of that year a British army landed in Alexandria but failed to reach Cairo after being defeated at the Battle of Kafr El Dawwar.
4- Also there are many other important missing facts and details, like his career in Egyptian government.
5- Most of the article is unsourced.
6- No mention of the cuases of the revolution and the situation in Egypt, specially before 1882.
7- The article represents only western view, specially British colonial one.
-- Amaihmaa69 ( talk) 19:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
8. the first quote belongs to AMir al Mu'mineen 'Umar ibn al khattab — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.244.196.22 ( talk) 11:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:‘Urabi revolt which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 01:30, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ahmed ‘Urabi. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
The Encyclopaedia Britannica gives his date of birth as 1839. The 1911 ed. (quoted above) gives it as 1839 or 1840. Wilfrid Blunt gives it as 1840. William Wright's Tidy Little War: The British Invasion of Egypt 1882 (Spellmount, 2009), p.26 gives it as 1841. The Kandy Times article quoted gives it as 1842! I, consequently, am confused. It would be good to have a reliable source for this! The Grand Lunar ( talk) 14:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:ʻUrabi revolt which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 15:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:ʻUrabi revolt which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 18:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)