Jump to content

Talk:Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic

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

Untitled

[edit]

I've been unsuccensful in finding any of the later lyrics of this anthem. Has anyone else looked around for the second stanza? 83.92.244.246 11:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)Eik Corell[reply]

Translation

[edit]

Please write English translation of this song --Propatriamori (talk) 20:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lyrics restored

[edit]

I will restore the lyrics on this page because that it is not under copyright:

This work is not an object of copyright according to the Law of the Republic of Tajikistan No. 726 of November 13, 1998 on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights.

Article 5. Object of Copyright. General Provisions

Copyright shall not apply to ideas, methods, processes, systems, means, concepts, principles, discoveries, and facts. Article 7. Works that are not Objects of Copyright

Shall not be objects of copyright: formal documents (laws, court decisions, other texts of legislative, administrative or judicial nature), and also their official translations; state symbols and signs (flags, coats of arms, insignia, banknotes and so on); communications concerning events and facts that have informational character;

works of folk arts.

Comment – According to interstate and international compacts the Republic of Tajikistan is the legal successor of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic, therefore this license tag is also applicable to official symbols and formal documents of the Tajik SSR.

- TheChampionMan1234 03:27, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See also the Copyright law of the Russian Federation, the lyrics were written when Tajikistan was part of the Soviet Union:

This work is not an object of copyright according to article 1259 of Book IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation No. 230-FZ of December 18, 2006. Shall not be objects of copyright:

  • official documents of state government agencies and local government agencies of municipal formations, including laws, other legal texts, *judicial decisions, other materials of legislative, administrative and judicial character, official documents of international organizations, *as well as their official translations;
  • state symbols and signs (flags, emblems, orders, any forms of money, and the like), as well as symbols and signs of municipal formations;
  • works of folk art (folklore), which don't have specific authors;
  • news reports on events and facts, which have a purely informational character (daily news reports, television programs, transportation schedules, and the like).

--135.23.145.49 (talk) 02:40, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These arguments are irrelevant. See WP:NOTLYRICS. Any such content belongs on Wikisource, not Wikipedia. The various translations are original research unless they can be ascribed to a reliable source (secondary, not primary). Users translating according to their personal perception of what is correct or incorrect, as well as transliterations, are original research. This is not the only article using Wikipedia for such content, and there seem to be ongoing edit wars, additions and removals of content based on what users think is important, but is neither important nor appropriate. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:53, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the Russian copyright laws. This anthem seems to be in the public domain after the USSR dissolved in 1991 therefore copyrighted anthems do not apply to defunct states. Illegitimate Barrister had this precedent in the Talk:Aegukka section.
Come to think of it, someone needs to add the section on Wikisource. ---135.23.145.49 (talk) 12:25, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent: by all means, add it to Wikisource, but please read what I have written above regarding the use of WP:LYRICS on Wikipedia. I will repeat that copyright is not the issue at stake, and that I did not notice the fact that Illegitimate Barrister has been reintroducing this content despite policy for content on Wikipedia. Please stop reintroducing content which does not belong here. Thank you for taking the time to re-read what I have posted above. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:04, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss inclusion of lyrics

[edit]

So user:Учхљёная keep reverting to versions of

that include lyrics, mostly unsourced, and often including Russian lyrics for no obvious reason. Edits have involved restores of versions by the permanently blocked User:American Communist, a suspected sock puppet. I suggest this is discussed here, for all the abovementioned articles. Should or shouldn't lyrics be included -

  1. without a source?
  2. with a source (please state a proposed source, if possible)?
  3. in Russian?
  4. and why?

I'd say 1: Obviously not. 2: I don't much care, but perhaps so. 3: Only if a reasonalbe reason is stated. 4: We don't include unsourced material, and certainly not if it is challenged. As for the Russian versions I will not rule out that a valid reason can be given, but the onus of stating such reasons is on those who want to include.--Nø (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2018 (UTC):[reply]

I'll agree that your reasons are somewhat valid, but you can't just remove the lyrics with the summary reason "per talk" without an actual consensus here. As for the questions you listed, I will answer them to the best of my ability ATM:
  1. It's fine if they are, the lyrics can be easily verified and a source can easily be added later.
  2. Obviously so, but I cannot list a single source, as it varies.
  3. Yes in Russian, why not? It's a significant part of their histories, Russian is a prevalent language in their nations, and the translations are available and are used widely.
  4. Lyrics should be included because there is nothing explicitly against their inclusion and there is no problem with adding such constructive content to the article. It has already been decided at Talk:Anthem of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic that WP:NOTLYRICS does not apply to anthems, and other than that, I can't see any plausible reasons why they should be excluded. If the lyrics are to be transcluded on Wikisource, that's absolutely fine, just be able to reach a consensus about the removal of lyrics on the article itself.
I hope that answers your questions, and I'm sorry that I didn't have time to reply earlier. -User:Учхљёная(talk,relevant directory,edits). 21:18, 2 July 2018 (UTC).[reply]
  • I have no opinion on whether the lyrics belong here or not, but if they are kept, then they must be sourced. Учхљёная, your remark in #1 above takes things up the wrong end: you don't add content and then expect someone in the future to come along and add the sources for you the way they would fix a misplaced comma. You start with the sources and then you add the content that is based on those sources. Unless you've composed those lyrics yourself (in which case they don't belong on wikipedia) or you've dug them out of the article's history (which you shouldn't be doing as wikipedia is not itself a reliable source), then you must have found those lyrics from a source somewhere. All you need to do is provide that source. – Uanfala (talk) 21:44, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree with user:Uanfala. Ideally, all the versions included should be sourced (definitely for the original and for poetic translations, preferably for literal translations, but not necessarily for translitterations, I think). As for Russian versions, if they are to be included because they commonly are or have been sung or have had an official status, this should be stated and sourced in the articles in each case. "Why not" is not a reason; being "a significant part of history" is, and it should be possible to find a source for that.
On top of this, there may or may not in each case be issues about copyright, or other issues that I have not looked into.
I do not object to inclusion of any of this material if it is done properly and all concerns are met, but otherwise, unsourced content will be removed again at some point.--Nø (talk) 10:26, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
PS. User:Учхљёная above called attention to the discussion at Talk:Anthem of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic, and I agree consensus there seems to be that WP:NOTLYRICS does not apply as long as copyright issues for the original and translations included are resolved. But the discussion there brings up several other concerns, and I think the post by User:TU-nor sums it up pretty well.--Nø (talk) 11:29, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Allthough not the subject of edit warring, a few more articles may be impacted by this discussion:

Additionally, more articles in the following category may be impacted:

My 2p:

  • on the copyright question: we can only consider including lyrics or music if they are undoubtedly free of copyright; in general that will be because the author or composer has been dead for 100 years or so. It's definitely not enough to quote an unsourced translation of a bit of law that doesn't mention anthems at all, and say that it proves the material is copyright-free. If there is doubt, we err on the side of caution. Translations carry their own individual copyright in addition to the copyright in the original work; we can't host any copyright translation at all, or any unattributed translation unless it is demonstrably out of copyright (probably because it was published before 1923 or thereabouts).
  • on transliterations and the like: these are of no encyclopaedic value or interest
  • on the vile colours in the tables: those almost certainly violate our accessibility guidelines. Category:Song articles with TOCcolors-class lyrics section should be emptied and deleted. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:04, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with all points made. Transliterations are not "of no value or interest" to the reader. Transliterations make lyrics in other writing systems readable, whereas the reader could otherwise literally not be a reader and read them. Furthermore, the public sector is by its very nature literally the public's domain. We're not talking about Despacito, we're talking about Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic. The burden of proof is on the side that says there exists a license that prohibits the legal ability to show the lyrics. Show us that copyright license. This is a national anthem. WP:NOTLYRICS couldn't be any clearer in stating it relates to copyright, and there is very obviously no copyright to be found on a national anthem article like this. Lastly, read MOS:COLOUR. Colors are most commonly found in Wikipedia articles within templates and tables. ... Ensure that color is not the only method used to convey important information. Ensure the contrast of the text with its background reaches at least Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0's AA level, and AAA level when feasible. I see no MOS:COLOUR violation here or on any of the articles I've seen; you're going to need to substantiate that claim. Advocating for the emptying and deletion of that entire category with zero exceptions is something that can only be done if you just DONTLIKEIT and blatantly disregard the content of MOS:COLOUR. It provides basic guidelines on how to use colour (all of which were complied with, none of which you've cited), it does not say "All TOCcolors are prohibited for inherently violating accessibility guidelines." Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 17:55, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To the users that have sweepingly removed the lyrics from every national anthem article in the former Soviet Union, stop. Stop citing WP:NOTLYRICS without actually *reading* NOTLYRICS. All of these lyrics are without question not copyrighted, and NOTLYRICS explicitly relates to copyright. We're talking about government-endorsed public-sector national anthems, not pop songs by for-profit artists. There is a discussion to be had on a case by case instance about whether or not we should have colours in the tables, whether or not we should transliterate them, or whether or not a citation is needed, but to blindly remove all lyrics from national anthem articles citing a copyright policy that obviously doesn't even apply deprives readers of information for an unsubstantiated and misguided reason. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 17:51, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's public domain and there was obvious proof right in front of you

[edit]

My response here is what I told to Justlettersandnumbers: I would like to politely remind you that the copyright status of the Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic has already been assessed. Tajikistan is the legal successor of the Tajik SSR and national/state symbols are not and cannot be copyrighted. The same holds true under the law of the Russian Federation, the legal successor of the Soviet Union. "it has not been demonstrated that the music, the lyrics or the translations of the lyrics are out of copyright" simply means you didn't check information readily available, as it has already been evaluated for copyright and determined to legally not be subject to copyright. In the future, please stop and see for yourself before you purge an entire Wikipedia article. Furthermore, the sources cited explicitly stated that this song is in the public domain. All of this information was immediately and readily available. With all due respect, the next time you see text that you believe is not public domain, click any one link on the page, whether the citations or the wikimedia copy of the entire song, and see for yourself. It is because of rash, uninformed, and lethargic behaviour that readers are being denied information that's obviously not copyrighted. I say this not as an attack on you as an editor, but as an expression of disapproval of your action. Before starting an investigation, inconveniencing all readers, inconveniencing all editors, and putting more of a workload onto the administrators and copyright clerks, take the time to do an extremely basic "investigation" yourself. This foolish behaviour helps nobody, and should be strongly condemned. I still believe it was done in good faith, but it has to stop. Considering how this makes the entire article unusable based on a blatantly obviously false rationale, the only difference between this and severe vandalism is that we're not allowed to do anything about it. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 14:39, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@BrendonTheWizard: Assessed by whom? Note that "...the Law of the Republic of Tajikistan No. 726" is far more convoluted than the cherry picked wording of the translation of the section provided would suggest: i.e., the entire document is a general overview of copyright laws, and the state symbol clause does not mention lyrics or audio recordings, much less whether that recording is public domain. The You Tube uploader doesn't even stipulate who the choir is, nor are lyrics provided in either of the two references currently in place, so how can we even verify the veracity of the lyrics? Without prolonging this parsing of where this article stands per WP:NOR, I'll cut to the chase: unless we have explicit documentation from professionals who interpret international law, personal interpretations of what is understood to be implicit are guesses, and guesses cannot be accepted as good coin (even if they are in good faith). --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:53, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's quite a non-argument. Yes, one of the fellow involved editors added the tag regarding state symbols. And? I'm waiting to see how that's an issue. That doesn't change the fact that it's a state symbol of Tajikistan. How is that "convoluted?" How is the rough translation "cherry picked?" Furthermore, I can tell you haven't taken a look at any one source cited in the article. Both of the sources used to support the information of the article state quite clearly that it's public domain and uncopyrighted. As for the English lyrics, the site from which they originate states that the site and its content is licensed under the CCA 3.0 unported license, preferring that, if possible, the website is cited as the source of information, and that anyone is free to "use music files / lyrics / sheet music / information on my website / in my project / on a CD" with the only exceptions being anthems or translations marked as being copyrighted, which includes: files for the Aland Islands, St Barthelemy, Sovereign Military Order of Malta, sheet music for the Turks and Caicos anthem, and the English translation of the Botswana anthem. It doesn't take very much research to learn that the state anthem is a state symbol, that Tajik law declares that state symbols can not be copyrighted, and that the translation is released under a CCA 3.0 unported license and not included in the list of copyrighted exceptions. The fact that you said "nor are lyrics provided in either of the two references currently in place" which proves you didn't even LOOK. The Tajik/Persian original lyrics and English translation lyrics are in one of the sources cited, and this is further backed up by the other source which includes the vocal, which anyone can transcribe to text by listening, even if you can't read Cyrillic. The text of your response proves without question that you didn't look at the sources, because the text of the lyrics and the translation is in them. I'll say it again: it's public domain and obvious proof was right in front of you the entire time. I don't mean to be disrespectful, but do your damn research the next time you want to purge an article on the encyclopedia. That goes for everyone, not just you or justletters or anyone else. I should clarify: I don't believe any involved editors have acted in bad faith, but it is frustrating how there's clearly no effort being put into supporting the claim that the anthem is not in the public domain, as all of this information is literally only a couple of clicks away. I mean no ill will towards anyone, but this is simply disappointing. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 19:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "info":

  • From Anthem of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic: Kazakhstan (1945-1992), NationalAnthems.info, 2013. Kendall, David.
  • From Anthem of the Karelo-Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic: http://www.nationalanthems.info/kar.htm Karelia. nationalanthems.info. Kendall, David.
  • From Hai Tanahku Papua: "West Papua". Nationalanthems.info. Archived from the original on 30 November 2021. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  • From Anthem of the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic: Moldova (1945-1991) – nationalanthems.info

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:46, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anthem_of_the_Tajik_Soviet_Socialist_Republic&oldid=1228519617"