Jump to content

Talk:Wojdan Shaherkani

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleWojdan Shaherkani has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 18, 2012Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 2, 2012.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that 2012 Olympic judo competitor Wodjan Shaherkani is required to be accompanied by a male guardian during the Games?

Wodjan or Wojdan?

[edit]

the official London 2012 website gives Wojdan as her name, a lot of newspapers call her Wodjan. are there any reliable sources? the arabic WP gives her name as وجدان (I think), and having this read by google translate sounds a lot like Wojdan [1]. could this be another case of journalists copying false information from each other? --MarioS (talk) 10:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page has already been moved. P.T. Aufrette (talk) 03:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wodjan Shaherkani → Wojdan Shaherkani – The latter is the original title. I moved it to Wojdan Shaherkani yesterday because this was the spelling used in most of the sources cited in this article. However, after a little more research I noticed that the "Wojdan" spelling is actually more prevalent in the web (48,800 ghits for "Wojdan Shaherkani" vs 13,600 ghits for "Wodjan Shaherkani"). I don't speak any Arabic, but Romanization of Arabic also seems to suggest that "Wojdan" is the correct transcription of "وجدان". Hopefully some Arabic speakers will weigh in on this.
As a side note, I suspected "Wojdan" to be a typo because it looked suspiciously Polish to me, rather than Arabic. In fact, there is a another judoka who goes by the name Wojdan – Krzysztof Wojdan, a Polish male, who competed at the 2000 Olympics. — Kpalion(talk) 14:13, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i asked the Arabic names task force for help. --MarioS (talk) 14:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whatever the name is, keep the article at one name or the other, include the Arabic rendition of her name in the article, and indicate the alternative transliteration in the text of the article lead. (I've added the alternative transliteration, but I don't do Arabic.) A short survey of some of the cited sources, plus a few other English-language sources, leads me to conclude that neither of these spellings is wrong, and the differences in spelling are not correlated with the geographic location of the source. There may be some correlation with the date of the item, in that Wodjan was used more often in early July, while Wojdan is more common now, but this isn't consistent:
  • [2] NBC Olympics, undated: Wojdan
  • [3] Global Post, 12 July: Wodjan
  • [4] New York Times, 12 July: Wodjan
  • [5] Bahrain Chronicle, 13 July: Wodjan
  • [6] The Guardian, 13 July: Wodjan
  • [7] New Straits Times, 14 July: Wodjan
  • [8] Al Arabiya, 29 July: Wodjan (same spelling in two Al Arabiya articles on 30 July)
  • [9] BBC, 31 July: Wojdan
  • [10] Emirates 24/7, 31 July: Wojdan
  • [11] NDTV Sports, 31 July: Wojdan
  • [12] Daily Mail, 31 July: Wodjan
  • [13] Wall Street Journal, 31 July: Wojdan
  • [14] New York Times, 31 July: Wodjan
  • [15] Fox News, 31 July: Wojdan
--Orlady (talk) 15:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's amazing how quickly one typo will spread when news media feed off each other.... I'm not sure a simple typo is noteworthy the lede however. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Arabic speaker here: Based on the Arabic spelling of her name, "Wojdan" appears to be correct.
Comment: I can't access English versions of the articles directly from those pages. On the English version of Al Jazeera, I find her full name rendered "Wojdan Ali Seraj Abdulrahim Shahrkhani".[16] (Note that the spelling of the family name is also different from this article name.) As noted above, English Al Arabiya gives her name as Wodjan Shaherkani. --Orlady (talk) 16:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
given that the official London 2012 website and Wrad favour "Wojdan" while the news sources are divided (I am not sure if the editors at English Al Arabiya speak Arabic), I support moving the article to "Wojdan" and using this as the spelling in the article. We could have a short sentence in the intro explaining that many news sources transcribe her name as "Wodjan" while leaving open the reasons for this. The two versions would be pronounced differently, wouldn't they? This is not the case for the two versions of her last name, so this could be explained by the use of a different system of transcription. --MarioS (talk) 20:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • These are just personal observations but the name is usually pronounced (and often spelt) "Wijdan" in Saudi Arabia. The Wiktionary entry supports this. The first vowel is short and not that clear and Saudi officials are notorious for applying outrageous mistakes when Romanising names anyway. —  AjaxSmack  01:44, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Wojdan - I have not waited and provisionally corrected first line from "Wodjan" to "Wojdan" in lede, we cannot leave that in a BLP lede for the length of an RM during a period when she'll be most notable, but as AjaxSmack correctly notes وجدان is usually transcribed Wijdan and really by WP:OPENPARA and WP:BLP Wijdan should really be in the lede even if the London registration means "Wojdan" is common name. The surname issue is less clearcut. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:48, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Wojdan - from WP:COMMONNAME: "The most common name for a subject, as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources, is often used as a title because it is recognizable and natural. Editors should also consider the criteria outlined above. Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources." I think the case is quite clear. according to WP:RM/CI, I am not allowed to move the page, since I participated in the discussion. we have a consensus, so I think the move should be done as quickly as possible, before the games are over. --MarioS (talk) 12:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I absolutely agree with this - MarioS do you want to contact Orlady please, if he agrees then we can close this and move it. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:41, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
it has already been done. thanks, Uishaki. --MarioS (talk) 18:55, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Wojdan Shaherkani/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 19:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This looks pretty solid. I've made a few prose tweaks, which you may feel free to revert if you are not happy with them or I've messed anything up. Mainly minor issues to address which are concerned with prose or clarity. There are one or two other things which it may be worth adding for a more complete article, and while I would recommend doing so, I would not insist on it to pass this GA.

  • There are several places which imply that the Games have not yet happened, such as "The Saudi Arabian Olympic Committee has imposed special rules", or "The Saudi Arabian Olympic Committee has chosen not to promote Shahrkhani's participation. They have also required that she "dress modestly, be accompanied by a male guardian and not mix with men" while in London for the 2012 Games", "The other Saudi woman selected is Pepperdine University-based runner Sarah Attar", "(who often speaks for her, partially because she does not know English)".
  • Just checking: in UK English, in the lead, it should be "practised", and I'm not sure which variety we are using here.
  • Judo is overlinked: linked in first two paragraphs.
  • Fixed. --LauraHale (talk) 00:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we link blue belt and black belt?
  • "Shahrkhani was selected despite not meeting Olympic qualifying standards,[7] by specific invitation of the International Olympic Committee (IOC).[8]": Maybe better as "Although not meeting the Olympic qualifying standards, she was selected by specific [maybe "special" would work better] invitation of the International Olympic Committee (IOC)."
  • What were the Olympic qualifying standards? I think it is worth spelling it out for the reader to get an idea of how far short she was of meeting them.
  • "Unlike other judoka in competition, who have attained black belts in the sport, she had only acquired a blue belt": As the blue belt has already been mentioned, maybe this would be better as "Other judoka in the competition had attained black belts in the sport, in contrast to Shaherkani's blue belt:.
  • "Shahrkhani's inclusion in the games came despite opposition inside Saudi Arabia to women representing the country at the Olympics.": A little clumsy; maybe just "There was opposite within Saudi Arabia to the concept of women representing the country at the Olympics".
  • "Ultimately the Saudi government gave in to international pressure from sport and women's rights activists to include women or face possible sanctions.": How could the government face pressure from sport? Maybe sports governing bodies, or the sporting press?
  • IOC or I.O.C.?
  • "She also stated that although she was not accustomed to fighting in such large tournaments": Not surprising if this was her first tournament! I think something needs clearing up there.
  • Not really. It still carries this "quote", but says earlier in the article that it was her first competition. This is a contradiction, and maybe worth just cutting that section of the paraphrase. Also, the rather chatty nature of the "Still,..." does not quite work. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
* Poked User:Wrad to address as my Arabic is Google Translate. --LauraHale (talk) 01:04, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
* Poked User:Wrad for this. --LauraHale (talk) 01:05, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe specify that the men's team faced expulsion if women had not been allowed to compete?
  • Not essential for GA, but maybe a little more background in the article on women in Saudi sport? I think there is enough there to meet the GA criteria, but a little more information for context could only be a good thing.
    • This is one of those goofy things. There isn't much about her as a person in the article, and a lot of this is background on challenges to her competing (and to a larger degree, all sportwomen in Saudi Arabia). Hence there was a lot in Saudi Arabia women's national football team. I kind of feel like there is a rather large chunk already devoted to this topic in the article and adding more doesn't help. (And checking sources, I'm not seeing any additional information that isn't in this same theme of not about her, but about Saudi Arabian sportwomen in general.) Completely torn because I know at least once, this was stripped from the article as not being relevant, and the Saudi football team was nominated for deletion for similar reasons. --LauraHale (talk) 01:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possibly more could be added on the fight. She was obviously outclassed, but given that it only lasted 82 seconds, I would expect some mention of how the event unfolded in this article.
  • Added more information. The official match results don't provide much of an idea of what happened, and no one really appears to have reported on the individual match. (And having been inside the judo hall during the Paralympics, I'm not that surprised.) --LauraHale (talk) 01:34, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Spot-checks reveal no problems. One or two refs refer to things which might/are going to happen, while the article states that they did, but I think everything is fine.
  • Images, links and dablinks all check out.

I will place the article on hold to allow these issues to be addressed. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly there, just a couple of replies and a few comments left to address one way or another. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, ready to pass now. Just a couple of points:

  • I changed the 0:82 seconds back to 82 seconds as 0:82 seconds looks like it is less that one second (should it be 1:22 minutes?). Please revert if I am wrong.
  • All other points now seem fine (although I haven't bothered to strike them, consider them struck!)
  • Still not entirely convinced about the "such large tournament" thing (why not just "because she was not accustomed to fighting in such large tournaments" as she had never fought in ANY tournaments!), but that is not enough to hold this up any longer.

Passing now. An interesting read. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rank

[edit]

Shaherkani's rank is described as "blue belt". This is not a meaningful rank designation as belt colors below shodan level vary considerably not only from country to country but even by dojo. It would be better to give her rank in terms of kyu level. If she were an American, a "blue belt" would probably mean that she is sankyu, but I don't know what the Saudi belt colors are. Can any Saudi judoists supply this information?Bill (talk) 02:27, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wojdan_Shaherkani&oldid=1210330295"