Talk:Anthem of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Soviet Union Low‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Armenia

	Anthem of the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to improve and better organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.ArmeniaWikipedia:WikiProject ArmeniaTemplate:WikiProject ArmeniaArmenian articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Lyrics[edit]

I've removed all lyrics, transliterations, and translations as not one has been reliably sourced. Even there, WP:NOTLYRICS applies, and anything gleaned from WP:PRIMARY sources is for Wiki source, not for this project. First and foremost, Wikipedia is WP:NOR. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:00, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's a well-accepted longstanding practice to include the lyrics of a national anthem, and all national anthem articles on Wikipedia do this. WP:NOTLYRICS exists because - and I quote - "Most song lyrics published after 1922 are protected by copyright; any quotation of them must be kept to a minimum, and used for direct commentary or to illustrate some aspect of style." That does not apply here. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 21:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@BrendonTheWizard: I understand that you are making this assertion in good faith, but invoking some unjustified notion of 'standard practice' as being "well-accepted longstanding practice" on Wikipedia is meaningless when it violates WP:NOR: no original research is policy, not some sort of practice that has evolved because no one was paying close enough attention to problematic practices. See WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES, along with the RfCs referred to, as an example of more recent reigning in of bad practice (being the use of hefty galleries of notable people in the ethnic group infobox). At some point, someone had an idea they believed to be pretty terrific, and others have gone on copying it, but the idea flouts policy, and has not been demonstrated to be anything other than redundant. Please bring an argument with legs to the table (pardon the terrible pun!). --Iryna Harpy (talk) 19:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again, NOTLYRICS states, and I quote, "Most song lyrics published after 1922 are protected by copyright; any quotation of them must be kept to a minimum, and used for direct commentary or to illustrate some aspect of style. Never link to the lyrics of copyrighted songs unless the linked-to site clearly has the right to distribute the work. See Wikipedia:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources for full discussion." It exists for copyright reasons and it very clearly, unambiguously, unquestionably, and explicitly says that. That does not apply here. WP:NOTLYRICS applies to Despacito, but not La Marseillaise. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 19:54, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to forget the fundamental nature of the use of primary sources: the deconstruction, general content, and transliteration of "La Marseillaise" is based on reliably sourced SECONDARY sources. Secondly, the entire article is not exclusively dedicated to unsourced transliterations and translations. Context is everything. Would you also care to elaborate on who the consensus 'WE' are? I see no other discussion here, and only WP:SPA user accounts and IP accounts adding content and edit warring content back in. Even if you believe this to be consensus (and the copyright business as being the primary concern... something not discussed or revised for years), please be aware that consensus can change, and that no original research trumps NOTLYRICS every time. Pinging SMcCandlish, TU-nor and Cordless Larry for third party opinions on the matter (and noting that their opinions may not reflect my own). I suspect that this issue can only be laid to rest via an RfC on this matter. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:04, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article does need more references, I don't think anyone disputes that. However, that would be a violation of WP:UNSOURCED, not WP:NOR. Whether or not the article is a stub featuring primarily the text of the national anthem is not a factor in whether or not the national anthem should be included. When I used the generic "we" I was referring to the Wikipedians that evidently contested this change in the revision history. Pinging editors that recently edited the article to allow them to give their thoughts: @Galanthro: (made an edit per NOR), @Учхљёная: (participant in the edit conflict), @Jeromi Mikhael: (improved the infobox image and may be interested in the discussion), not pinging Textexamine because they were blocked indefinitely, @SUM1: (participant in the edit conflict), @九鐵千九公主: (made several edits to the article during a previous conflict over the same subject), @Glide08: (made a sizable contribution). Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 22:48, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was pinged, so I'll just say that I apologize for just blindly reverting things, but it's good to see that it was resolved. And in my favor, nonetheless. If I recall correctly, there was a similar conflict, I believe somewhat still unresvolved, at Talk:Meniń Qazaqstanym because of the issue of NOTLYRICS applicability, of which I am still weary from. So, yeah, oof, sorry about that. -User:Учхљёная ^{(talk,philosophy,edits)}. 04:30, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that NOTLYRICS isn't applicable here, because the copyright concern isn't valid (it might actually be for some Commonwealth countries' anthems, due to the stupid Crown copyright notion, but that would have to be examined on a case-by-case basis). However, I also agree with a basic WP:V / WP:RS / WP:NOR concern: We have to have a reliable source for at least the original lyrics. We do not need one for translation; it's permissible for WP editors to provide accurate translations; see WP:No original research § Translations and transcriptions. It's preferable generally to provide a sourced translation of something, but we have the problem here that most previously published translations are likely to post-date the copyright cutoff, and thus will be subject to copyright as new, albeit derivative, works even though the original is public domain. Thus a wholesale copy-paste of someone else's translation probably wouldn't be permissible. For the same reason, we can't copy-paste Stephen Addiss's, Stephen Little's, or Stephen Mitchell's translated editions of the Tao Te Ching. [Isn't it weird that three of the top-five selling English-language editions were all translated by Stephens? I think it's a conspiracy!] Anyway, no this doesn't need an RfC. There is no actual dispute to resolve here, it's just people not reading and following extant policy, which is quite clear on all this, though distributed over multiple policy pages. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:52, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Agree with Brendon and SMcCandlish. WP:NOTLYRICS allows for inclusion of these anthems' lyrics. The lyrics of these anthems provide complete encyclopaedic value. The only concerns that should be applied here are WP:V, WP:RS and WP:NOR, as SMcCandlish states. By all means remove lyrics if they cannot be verifiably sourced, however do not remove lyrics just because "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information", as it doesn't apply here. SUM1 (talk) 23:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite sure why I was pinged here. My experience in the topic is rather limited, mostly as spin-offs from other topics. But since I am asked, here are – for what they're worth – my comments. They are mostly ept in general terms, not specifically for this anthem.

Regarding the copyright of anthems, there are so many people with much more knowledge than me, so I just leave that question to them. If the text is allowed, the next question is whether it can be sourced. I guess most, but not necessarily all national anthems exist in a formally official version that is verifiable. Any attempt to enter the text without proper sourcing should be removed as WP:OR.

If the original text is presented with proper sourcing, a transliteration would be allowed if a different script is used. In some cases, I have seen more than one transliteration of the same text using different transliteration schemes. That is, of course, nonsense. The only transliteration should be one that follows the preferred Wikipedia transliteration for that language. If no such preferred scheme exists, a consensus should be found for which transliteration scheme to use.

A literal translation to English should be allowed (and encouraged). In some cases, I have seen more than one translation, one "literal" and one "poetic". A "poetic" translation will have all the problems of any text: first of all copyright, then WP:V, WP:RS and not least WP:OR. In most cases, forget it.

Finally, there is often, as in this case, an alternate language. This will usually have the same problems as a "poetic" translation: copyright and sourcing. The text will have its own copyright issues, and it will need sourcing both for the text itself and for the "officialness" of the version. Again: In most cases, forget it.

I have looked at the history of the article, and I am not surprised to find that the Russian version was added by an IP sock of indeffed user FreshCorp619, better known to me and many others as Wrestlingring or Supreme Dragon. They had a period where they added numerous alternate version to such articles, often dubious, never sourced. They were actually the reason I sometimes stumbled into anthem articles in the first place.

In this specific case, the Russian text is not a direct translation of the Armenian one, so if the Russian text turns out to be admissible, it will need its own transliteration and also its own translation. At that point the table will become so big that it forces the question: Do we really need all this stuff to fill the article? Would that be to give undue weight to the text?

My conclusion? Cut out the Russian version immediately. Unless someone come up with proper sourcing for the Armenian text, drop the whole thing. If sourcing is given, discuss if we need it. --T*U (talk) 07:13, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the Russian version. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 07:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of lyrics?[edit]

Please join discussion at Talk:Anthem of the Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic#Discuss inclusion of lyrics.--Nø (talk) 10:29, 3 July 2018 (UTC)--Nø (talk) 10:29, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MIDI File[edit]

The "midi" file shown at the bottom of the article is actually a mp3. we need an actual MIDI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5CC:C480:1260:C1EB:371A:BBD2:9E5 (talk) 22:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Anthem of the Armenian 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 Armenian 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 Turkmen Soviet Socialist Republic: Turkmenistan (1946-1997). NationalAnthems.info. Kendall, David.
From Anthem of the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic: Moldova (1945-1991) – nationalanthems.info
From Anthem of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic: Kazakhstan (1945-1992). NationalAnthems.info. Kendall, David.
From Anthem of the Karelo-Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic: http://www.nationalanthems.info/kar.htm Karelia. nationalanthems.info. Kendall, David.
From Zdrobite cătușe: Kendall, David. "Romania (1948-1953)". NationalAnthems.info.
From Thai National Anthem: Thailand (national anthem). nationalanthems.info. Kendall, David (2013).

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 ⚡ 07:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]