Talk:Gom jabbar
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Arabic
[edit]Please see my comments about Arabic translations of Herbert's terms here: Talk:List of Dune terminology#Arabic. I don't question the quality/accuracy of the translations/analysis, I just think that any interpretation on the part of editors that is unsourced is original research. — TAnthonyTalk 23:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- I provided a reference: the specific verse of the Qur'an that is the source of this phrase. I have satisfied the requirements of Wikipedia for verifiability.
Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 16:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- As always, I am not questioning the accuracy of your translations (and appreciate the sourcing), and I am consistently impressed with your detail etc. My issue is that drawing unsourced conclusions about what Herbert meant with his terms by proving Arabic "equivalents" is the definition of original research. But I do think it is interesting, so I don't mind presenting the Arabic and letting the reader draw their own conclusions, it just has to be worded correctly. For all we know, Herbert just picked words out of the Qur'an, and your definitions and analysis are so authoritative, it seems as though they are fact. — TAnthonyTalk 17:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- I read your arguments over and over--and though I'm not deficient in intelligence--I honestly can't make any sense of why you keep responding to me in this way. I simply presented the source of the phrase, which is too obvious to need justification, to let the readers draw their own conclusions, as you said. Calling this "original research" is stretching the concept much too far, IMHO, and being excessively restrictive. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 02:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Quite simply, my point is that your definitions of qawm jabbār are well and good, and it may be "obvious" that Herbert took the phrase and used it for his own ends, but the way it is presented suggests that Herbert wants the reader to associate the name of his needle with the Arabic meanings.
- In your entry, you define jabbār as 'giant', 'of exceeding strength', 'haughty', 'arrogant', or 'ferocious' and then state "Herbert's term 'high-handed' is another way of rendering this concept." How is that? You are drawing conclusions and trying to make a connection between the Arabic meaning and Herbert's use of the term, and that is OR. Can you not see how that phrasing is applying your own ideas to this entry? Herbert may have just like the sound of the phrase.
- Are we to also assume that the nonce word Jabberwocky has similar Arabic origins? It was certainly ferocious.
- In this particular case I've tried to rewrite the section to be less "objectionable" (in my opinion) by featuring your definitions and then Herbert's own, without the suggestive phrasing I've mentioned above. You will notice that I actually moved your definitions to the top of the section and preserved them almost in their entirety. — TAnthonyTalk 03:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- OK. Shake on that. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 23:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- I read your arguments over and over--and though I'm not deficient in intelligence--I honestly can't make any sense of why you keep responding to me in this way. I simply presented the source of the phrase, which is too obvious to need justification, to let the readers draw their own conclusions, as you said. Calling this "original research" is stretching the concept much too far, IMHO, and being excessively restrictive. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 02:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- As always, I am not questioning the accuracy of your translations (and appreciate the sourcing), and I am consistently impressed with your detail etc. My issue is that drawing unsourced conclusions about what Herbert meant with his terms by proving Arabic "equivalents" is the definition of original research. But I do think it is interesting, so I don't mind presenting the Arabic and letting the reader draw their own conclusions, it just has to be worded correctly. For all we know, Herbert just picked words out of the Qur'an, and your definitions and analysis are so authoritative, it seems as though they are fact. — TAnthonyTalk 17:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
gom jabbar
[edit]its meaning in arabic is stand like strong invincible man (قُم) is an order of the verb قِام pronounced (kom) and public say it (جُم) pronounced .(gom). 196.149.111.189 (talk) 06:58, 2 November 2021 (UTC)