Talk:Halaib

Egypt Low‑importance

	Egypt portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Africa: Sudan

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sudan (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled Section

This should be about the actual city, which seems to be at or near the location of the formerly important medieval port of `Aydhab. It shouldn't simply be a redirect to the regional page. Cheers. -114.91.67.253 (talk) 08:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page says that Halayeb is c.20 km south of `Aydhab, whose port has disappeared. -114.91.67.253 (talk) 08:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Hala'ib which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 04:00, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move

The page Halayib Triangle was recently moved. (My suggestion, but I didn't move it.) Because that page is relatively developed in comparison to this one, & because that page cites the town as the source of the name, I've moved this page to match. Pathawi (talk) 20:33, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exact name pronunciation from an Arabic-English capable user

Dear User, The exact name pronunciation in English is Halayeb. Thank you very much. --Abdelhamidelsayed (talk) 18:38, 10 November 2020 (UTC) Abd Elhamid Elsayed[reply]

Please check out WP:MOSAR. In general, it is not meaningful to say that the "exact pronunciation" of any word in Arabic is any particular string of Latin letters unless you're referring to a specific systematic Romanisation. Pathawi (talk) 19:29, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A further update: @Abdelhamidelsayed: has moved this conversation to my talk page, if anyone wishes to follow. Pathawi (talk) 20:50, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Exact name pronunciation from an Arabic-English capable user

Dear Users, The exact name pronunciation in English is Halayeb. Thank you very much. --Abdelhamidelsayed (talk) 18:38, 10 November 2020 (UTC) Abd Elhamid Elsayed[reply]

Please check out WP:MOSAR. In general, it is not meaningful to say that the "exact pronunciation" of any word in Arabic is any particular string of Latin letters unless you're referring to a specific systematic Romanisation. Pathawi (talk) 19:29, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pathawi

Please be informed that the name of many geographical areas in the Arabic countries have been published with the most known word in English, for example : Cairo, is in Arabic (Alqaheera) and another version is (Alkaheera).The first one is more near to the Arabic pronunciation, I can go on with hundred of examples. Be informed that the Arabic language has more sounds compared to the English language ( ح خ ع غ )sounds and lacks some sounds like (v). Please, I want to get an agreement as soon as possible regarding the name of Halayeb being my birth place and regarding the unsubstantiated information about the rebels that are willing to proclaim a new country in the Halayeb triangle, do you think, if they get to the light, they would have any chance against the dictatorship in Egypt? My last visit to Egypt was in 2010 and from that date and after my political views came to the the knowledge of the dictatorship regime, I was informed that I will be arrested the moment I touch the Egyptian soil. I can express my opinion, freely here in USA without fear, while the movement is secret in Egypt, and only one member beside me is in the USA, and he is my link to the people there.

So please, allow me to revert the name to Halayeb and the information and do not block me (you personally) or report me or block me in Wikipedia, if you have more power than me, please.

It is my area and my only interest in Wikipedia. Thank you, Best regards Abd Elhamid Elsayed

Abdelhamidelsayed (talk) 21:12, 10 November 2020 (UTC)abdelhamidelsayed[reply]

I'm going to copy your message to my talk page and reply there. Let's keep this conversation to one location. Pathawi (talk) 21:25, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ALL EDITORS PLEASE NOTE

WP:COMMONNAME is the controlling policy for naming articles. If the subject has a common English name, then that name is used. What the name is in any other language, including the native language of the subject area is irrelevant. If anyone wants to change the name of the article, then they must provide evidence that the suggested new name is the common name in English. Anecdotal evidence about what the people who live there use is not .Consider, for instance, that our articles are at Moscow and not "Moscova", Munich and not "Munchen", and at Cologne and not "Köln". Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Damned, Accursed Name

I have moved alternative spellings of the name to a new section. My reasoning is MOS:FIRST, which urges us not to clutter the lead sentence "with a long parenthesis containing alternative spellings, pronunciations, etc., which can make the sentence difficult to actually read." Additionally: 'If there are three or more alternative names, or if there is something notable about the names themselves, they may be moved to and discussed in a separate section with a title such as 'Names' or 'Etymology'. Once such a section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line." These alternatives, I'll note, are not alternative names, but just additional spellings used in a minority of English language publications. These spellings already redirect to this page. Including them in the lead sentence is just lead clutter.

I hope to eventually include information on the etymology of the name to flesh out that section, but have yet to find a published source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pathawi (talk • contribs) 10:02, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the real current situation

I think many users mistakly assume "Halaib" is a disputed territory like Kashmir but actualy it isn't, Halaib's situation like Ceuta or Abu Musa, the area is fully Administered by Egypt "De facto" and Sudan claimed it, Sudan has no influence in this area and no official/military conflict, I dont know why some users want to make it a "Neutral area" belong to both sides, that is not true and this is not the real current situation. Ibrahim.ID ✪ 04:45, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it's clearly administered by Egypt and that there is no military conflict. This is not Kashmir. However: The page says that the Sudan claims it—which is true, this is a live political issue in the Sudan—& that Egypt has de facto administrative control—which is also true. This seems relevant to potential readers: If you do an English Google News search on Halaib & Halayeb, nearly all available stories are about the Sudan's complaint against Egypt. International maps vary in their recognition. (UN maps frequently show Halaib as belonging to the Sudan rather than Egypt, tho they note that the boundaries on maps in general do not imply UN endorsement.) The previous edit removed that the Sudan considers Halaib to be part of Red Sea State; the Sudan does consider Halaib to be part of Red Sea State. I am wondering how we can address your concerns without removing information. Pathawi (talk) 05:08, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should I understand your most recent edit to mean that you want the format of the Disputed Territory infobox to look like that for Abu Musa? I don't have a problem with that change, but I think we can achieve that without losing any info. (I also recognise that this does not address your issue in full probably: I just thought it might be a first step toward an agreed solution.) Pathawi (talk) 05:21, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pathawi: my last edit was differant, this time I didn't remove any information but just confirm a undisputed information (the area administered by Egypt) because this is the real situation, the current article doesn't reflect the truth and make the area like (Kashmir) and it will be WP:FALSEBALANCE, I think it should be like Abu Musa. BTW: Halaib as belonging to the Sudan in old maps, if you see the digital map of UN they make Halaib as belonging to Egypt too, you can check britannica and google maps. --Ibrahim.ID ✪ 08:11, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ibrahim.ID: The point with the most recent edit wasn't that the content of the edit was a problem, but rather that that isn't how we handle disputes: We work them out in Talk, reach consensus, then make the change. If you look at multiple UN maps, you'll see that Halaib is quite frequently marked as Sudanese territory, including current maps belonging to UN Maps & Geospatial Services. But the point isn't that the Sudan has the rights to Halaib: The point is that it is a live issue that we shouldn't erase or obscure. If you do a search of the UN's Website, you'll find that nearly every year Egypt and the Sudan have submitted letters reaffirming their rights to Halaib. The territory is quite factually disputed, even tho—as we both agree—it's not a hot conflict & Egypt has clear administrative control. I don't think that the comparison to jump to is that of Jammu & Kashmir. If you look at List of territorial disputes, you'll see that there are a great many disputed territories in the world. In the Americas, Bajo Nuevo Bank is claimed by Colombia, Jamaica, & the US. There is no armed conflict. Navassa Island is claimed by Haiti & the US. No armed conflict. The US & Canada dispute a number of territories, but have not been at war in over two centuries. In Asia, Bukit Jeli has been disputed by Thailand & Malaysia for about the same period of time as the current state of the Halaib dispute. It is handled entirely thru negotiations. In Europe, Gibraltar is claimed by both the UK & Spain. No armed conflict since the 18th century. This isn't an issue of WP:FALSEBALANCE in any way. To say that Halaib is a disputed territory is not to say that it is a war zone. It is to state a fact: Two sovereign states both claim this land, & both have made efforts to reassert their rights to this land within the past two years.

It looks like the change you want to make in your most recent edit is just to switch the order of the de facto & de jure sections of the infobox. There is a standard format for the infobox for disputed islands, but none for disputed territory generally. Some disputed territory pages list the de facto administering party first (eg Banc du Geyser), others the disputant to the administering party first (eg Kafia Kingi). As best I can tell, most have no infobox at all. I strongly disagree with you that the version prior to your edits suggested that Halaib was another Jammu & Kashmir: I think that's an unwarranted equivalence. But I have no problem with switching the de facto/de jure order around so that it matches the order in the disputed islands infobox template. I won't dispute you're reversing my last undo. Pathawi (talk) 12:35, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]