Talk:Azzi

Resolved content dispute

Content dispute User:CedrusLibani075 has recently added a lot of material related to the history and genetics, etc., of the Azzi family in Lebanon. This material is all cited to a single source: the family website. This website is created and maintained by a non-profit association dedicated to preserving the history of this rather large family group in Lebanon, but as such, must be considered a primary source, and not reliable. Additionally, the page was originally a proper disambiguation page, listing many people with the name Azzi who may or may not have any relation to this particular Lebanese family. CedrusLibani's attempt to create an article through the WP:AFC process (see Draft:Azzi (surname) was rejected as lacking sources. I have suggested to this author (see User talk:CedrusLibani075#Azzi family that this DAB page be restored, and that he/she rewrite the Draft article with proper sources to go through the AFC process. CedrusLibani has rejected this idea. I seek a third opinion on the matter. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC) Wikidan is correct that the material is cited to a single, well researched and fairly concrete source. However, the remnants of the old page are not simply deleted. All content in the old page is still present or properly links to where it is supposed to. The Notable People listing does not contain members of other families, the members listed all belong or belonged to said non-profit organization and are listed in their registry (Excluding the jazz musician, he is long since deceased) The page is based upon research from not only one member, but a variety of members of the family and friends in pursuit of a single verifiable source of information of the family. A collective research effort which happens to bear the family name is hardly invalid, seeing as to how the research project has been ongoing since even before the advent of the website. More sources are being researched, but as of now the only valid (and I stress valid, as there are other invalid sources available) source is the Azzi Family website. The original page was deleted because it LACKED sources, but sources were since added. However, the page that was rejected had no citations in in, and this one does. Said citations are not only valid, but I believe of good enough standards until others are found online. Various books on the family have been written and published, but by the family members themselves, does that make them invalid as well? To put it bluntly, if the family doesn't research their own history, who would? So why would their hard work be invalidated based upon the supposition that their research would be inferior for some reason. Yes, the contents of the original page are still included, but now there is an implication that all of these people are members of the Lebanese Azzi family, whereas, in fact, we have no evidence to support that conclusion. And yes, families research their own history. But if families are historically significant, others research them also. We need evidence of that research. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC) I understand what Wikidan is saying, but I also ask who deems a family significant? There is other research on the family, namely from the Lebanese Geneological society, but they have absolutely no online material I can find anywhere. The Lebanese government also has records on the family, from which the website uses as a source itself. Truly, there is no material ONLINE but plenty in books and physical publications. A family doesn't have to be important to warrant mention, the article doesn't claim that the family is "the greatest in the world" or even that it's important. It's a simple article with factual information of use to anyone wanting to learn more about them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CedrusLibani075 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 29 January 2015 (UTC) @CedrusLibani075: Wikipedia has very clear notability guidelines. These guidelines are used to determine what content is included and not included. It does not mean that a family is or is not significant, it only means what content can and cannot be included in the encyclopedia. The guidelines exist mostly to assure that there are sufficient reliable sources to draw from in order to create a properly verifiable article. And whether or not the Lebanese Azzi family merits an article, it should not supplant the existing disambiguation page. Any article on this family should be written at a different title. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC) That's never been in question, if it warrants it's own Lebanese Family page on a disambiguation page then by all means. My only issue was that you kept deleting the entire thing when you could have easily just made it into another page entirely. I even mentioned in the article that there are more than one Azzi families, this was not in the original page. So no problem, I want to resolve this amicably and without issue. As of now, however, I will not be able to respond for at least a few hours. If you wish to make it its own page then by all means. Also, worthy of note, is that the disambiguation page was itself an article written about the family beforehand. However that particular article I had requested deletion for based on idiocies like: "Magical powers" in the family. So whatever was there before, this is by many standards better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CedrusLibani075 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC) @CedrusLibani075: I could make another page entirely if I thought the family merited its own article. I don't. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:14, 29 January 2015 (UTC) Well then, that's the problem. You are not the judge of what merits an article and what doesn't. I don't think Alan Wilkins, some obscure playwright, is important. But I didn't go and delete your article now, did I? The study of human surnames, especially those as large as the Azzi and Nakouzi family, are not only historically relevant but very much acceptable as articles on Wikipedia (an open source format encyclopedia). This isn't about sources, this issue is about what Dan thinks should be on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CedrusLibani075 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC) @CedrusLibani075: You are correct. I am not the judge of what merits inclusion. Wikipedia has clear guidelines to decide what merits inclusion, and the community decides whether any particular article meets those guidelines. That is why I have asked for a third opinion on this page: because you and I clearly disagree on whether this page meets the community guidelines. And please refrain from ad hominem attacks on me. This discussion is not about what I think, it is about what the community consensus will be. When other members of the community weigh in on the topic, we will see. For now, since the article has been allowed to stand in its expanded format for now, I think it best that you and I disengage from the discussion, as tempers appear to be getting short. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC) There were no attacks, just scholastic criticism in a civil tone. As you correctly pointed out, tempers appear to be getting short, especially with regards to your endeavor to eliminate this page from Wikipedia and carry on this discussion instead of just letting it be. I, have absolutely no feelings on the matter, it is in fact you who presses on. I simply don't want knowledge to be suppressed from the community, especially the study of a lesser known subject which needed expansion. I have removed any potentially dubious information, and kept only what could constitute a fairly decent understanding of the family. The reader can now choose to go on to the source page and find out more. Middle ground, not you nor I but right in the center. The reference about Jenniffer Azzi, however, I will stand by because she is in fact a part of this family in her own words. Consider this a fair enough resolution? If someone else comes along and contests the issue, then so be it. As of now, I have to attend to more important military duties, so you can feel free to have the last word if it will quell the issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CedrusLibani075 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC) Response to third opinion request: This new material on the Azzi family seems nicely written, but unfortunately www.azzifamily.com does not meet the requirements at WP:RS. At most it could be used as a WP:SELFSOURCE about the Azzi Social and Cultural Association that hosts the page, but even then there would have to first be some other academic or journalistic source to establish that the association is WP:NOTABLE. If you wish to pursue the matter, perhaps someone at the cultural association could share the sources that they relied upon. Citations of works in other languages are permissible, especially when there are no relevant works in English. Without a reliable source there cannot be an article. It was said there was previously a disambiguation page here, which should be restored for the time being. If the Lebanese Azzi surname gets sufficient sourcing for an article it would be preferable not to clobber an existing valid page. If there is only one alternative besides the Lebanese Azzi, it can be linked as a "You might be looking for" hatnote. With 3 or more there should be a full disambiguation page with unambiguous page names for all the possibilities. Rhoark (talk) 20:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC) Rhoark (talk) 20:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC) A book written by a family member may be a valid source, if it is not from a vanity press and not used to support a claim about its author. Rhoark (talk) 20:47, 29 January 2015 (UTC) I appreciate your non-biased and civil answer, very well thought out response. I will attempt to find the other sources in their physical format, however I believe they are in fact published by a printing press owned by the family, so that eliminates some of them. The other one is in Arabic and is a compendium of all Lebanese surnames, I will attempt to get more information on that particular book. As for the hatnote, by all means. However, it's worthy of note that the original page made specific reference to the Lebanese family in the first place. I was the one who added that there are other families with the name, in hopes that someone would eventually write their own article on the matter as I have little knowledge on them other than a few records from online archives listing their original locations. Also of note, the Italian Azzi's don't pronounce it the same way, and it only happens to be spelled Azzi in English. Atzi vs. El-Ez-zee, Italian and Lebanese variants. If this page must be taken down due to lack of references I completely understand, however in the meantime I will endeavor to find some more adequate references from both the website (Azzi family) and other means. I appreciate your correspondence and neutrality, have a great day or night. Alright, page moved, disambiguation page restored. Problem resolved, everything is as it should be. Will get to work on finding sources for the other page, which makes it clear that it is about the Lebanese family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CedrusLibani075 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Kazzi

Hello @Werldwayd:. You added Kazzi to this page. Is there evidence that Kazzi (قزي) and Azzi (عزي) are related? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:17, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Of course they are 100% related in Arabic names. The whole Kazzi/Azzi family dispute is in the "Resolved section" above which shows all the Lebanese "Azzi-Kazzi"s. A correction though. The second variant in Arabic is not عزي but أزي with the aleph أ and not the ayn ع. The K in many Arabic dialects becomes a silent letter and is pronounced as A although the qaaf is still there like in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt etc. Incidentally the A is a variant of Qazzi as well with the Q. The base is the presence of the K/Q but without pronouncing it in certain vernaculars. For example See Nadia Azzi of Lebanese origin and go her Arabic language article and you find ناديا قزي where the Kaff/Qaff is still there. Another example from vocabulary. Pencil is قلم read in literal Arabic with the k as "Qalam". But when you speak in Egyptian or Lebanese or Levantine Arabic you say "alam" where the k is still there in writing but is not pronounced. But I am not adamant. If you want Kazzi as a separate disambiguation, go ahead because in non-Arabic names, Kazzi is certainly not Azzi and I see some foreign names, where the Azzi-Kazzi relation would not be true. werldwayd (talk) 18:27, 21 March 2021 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 18:27, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

To almeliorate the situation a little bit, I moved the Kazzi item to "See also" section, so that only Azzis appear in the main section and Kazzis as a separate section. This is a compromised position in which both are reflected but Azzi remains the main one as I realize in non-Arab literature and written materials, they use more the name as pronounced and not as originally written in Arabic which may be difficult for non-Arabic readers. For example the Lebanese Australian rugby player Andrew Kazzi kept the K but the Australian Lebanese rugby player Steve Azzi and the Canadian Lebanese football player David Azzi dropped the K which is in their surname. werldwayd (talk) 18:39, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Werldwayd:, that's much better for a disambiguation page. If this were ever converted to a name article then what you said above would need to be included and sourced. I was lead somewhat astray by Ayoub Azzi (أيوب عزي‎) ! Regards, Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:55, 25 March 2021 (UTC)