Talk:Akkari-Laban dossier

Arabic speakers - Request for translation of Akkari dossier
Continuing a discussion, requesting translation or English summary of the pages of the document scanned here: (Ekstra Bladet seems to have pulled the webpage off the internet.  See below for scans of the original material.)

(The whole discussion thread available in Archive 10; old posts have been removed here.) -- Vanitas 19:07, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I speak arabic fluently. However the links to the scanned pages at the site you were taking about are all broken []. Am I missing something? --130.111.19.110 18:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Bashar


 * Some scans of the documents are now available here at Image:Akkari-report-1.jpg through Image:Akkari-report-43.jpg (not all pages here). -- Vanitas 11:46, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I've been able to reconstruct the entire document here, combining the "censored" and "uncensored" sources cited in the original article. -Sorenr 23:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * All 43 images are currently uploaded to Wikipedia. See the gallery at the bottom of the article page. --Valentinian 23:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * EkstraBladet is up and running again. They even made an English version.


 * If anybody has a better scan, feel free to correct me. --Valentinian 09:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * BTW, the Danish image was one of the small "advertisements" for articles further into the paper. There's usually three or four on the front page. The story was *not* headline news. --Valentinian 10:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

The front page of today's Wall Street Journal writes about the cartoon controversy with the headline "How Muslim Clerics Stirred Arab World Against Denmark... Dossier Fans the Flames." It's another example of the media standing between the original sources and the readers. I think it's increasingly important to give people access to the original dossier instead of only relying on newspapers re-reporting their own interpretation. Arabic-English translations, I think would be quite helpful. Any volunteers? -- Vanitas 13:30, 7 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I've made a few minor edits. The description of clipping from "Weekend Avisen" is based on my memory. It is a long time since I read it (and it wasn't even that good.) --Valentinian 16:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what license we are hosting these under.. I'm not sure the hosting of the entire dossier can count as fair use - they certainly aren't historical photographs as tagged - the copyright in those images is presumably of the author of the dossier not of the person who scanned it in. I understand your desire to mirror the content - especially if they seem to have been pulled - but we can't act as a mirror for controversial documents. Secretlondon 19:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, those images could all be tagged for fair use images not actually being used in any article. Just a note.&#160;—  The KMan  talk  19:40, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Some of the images are still there, but the main page is down.  AlE  X  19:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Layout
Teh layout sucks. I'm no good at this sort of thing. Help!!!

Missing images
I have temporary put some of the missing scans up.  At the moment I don't have time to upload to wikipedia, so feel free to add them. I will be taking them down as soon as they have added to this article. AlE X

Like above, but all 43 pages (source: 42 from Ekstra Bladet's website, and 1 (page 10) from Wikipedia); [Peace4all]

This page has a bad name.
I specifically don't like that "p"--Greasysteve13 07:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 * True. But pages that are considered for deletion cannot be moved, unfortunately. Azate 13:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 * But its pages like this that make wikipedia so valuable.--Greasysteve13 03:22, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I propose we call it the Akkari-Laban dossier. Reasonably short for wikilinks, and probably unambigous enough. --PeR 10:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Great! (central role of amehd Laban )and what about "Akkari-Laban 43p Dossier" ? Oe kintaro 17:47, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I sugest the name Akkari-Laban 43page Dossier, but I do not care as long as it is shortend down Angelbo 22:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * In that case, there should be a dash or whitespace between "43" and "page". Documents are normally not identified by their page count, so I stand by my original proposal. (Redirects from "43p dossier", "43 page dossier", "43-page dossier", etc.) --PeR 17:38, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with user:PeR short name and then redirects. Angelbo 23:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Just noticed that the vote on deletion is over, and it should again be possible to move the article, so go ahead PeR. Make the move. Angelbo 00:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

It is time to shorten this article
The text right now is a verbatim translation of the 43p dossier. In order to merit its place in the wikipedia it needs to be an encyclopaedic article about the dossier. While the translation may have been a necessary first step, now is the time to do some serious editing.

I suggest that:
 * The verbatim translations are replaced by summaries of each section
 * Most of the images are removed, keeping only a few illustrative ones.
 * For the illustrations, color versions from Arabskole.dk are preferable.
 * More text is added about the circumstances surrounding the dossier: It's creation, the tour of the middle east, the diffusion of the "pig person" picture on BBC and al-Jazeera, etc.

The full text of the translation can still be kept on the talk page, a subpage of the talk page, or in wikisource. There is a copyright issue, however. I doubt that it is OK to distribute translations of Danish newspaper articles without the permission of the newspapers in question.

--PeR 07:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I think it's too early. The translations are not complete (several letters are missing) and the rest are still second hand translations. The images at arabskole.dk are useless, they are completely blurred. You can't even identify the Mona Lisa or the other classical artworks. I'm no expert on copyright, but I doubt that the lousy reproductions of them here are objectionable. Da Vinci's copyright has probably expired anyway. The translation of the cartoon's captions is entirely within the realm of citation or excerpt, something that is done on an everyday basis by every newpaper in the world, without any copyright issues arising. About the letters, I don't know. They may count as historically significant documents and as such are covered by Fair Use. If it is OK for the Danish Newspaper to translate them into Danish, why should it be objectionable here to translate them into English? Azate 00:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Translation work could continue on the talk page, or a subpage therreof. When I was talking about copyright violations I was talking about the Danish newspaper articles that are included in the dossier. For example, the translation of page 6 of the dossier probably violates JyllandsPosten's copyright. Images of the front page, and of the letters in arabic are in much higher quality on arabskole.dk, only the pages with cartoons need to come from ExtraBladet. --PeR 08:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The "too early" argument no longer applies, as the source has been here for ten months now. I reiterate my proposal to significantly shorten this article. See also Don't include copies of primary sources. --PeR 18:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Personal postal Address should be deleted
On the scan of of the Bjarne Jacobsen letter it states his home address in the upper right corner. Given the state of this case, it might not be a very good idea if wikipedia showed his home address to the entire world. And for this reason I think the address bit should be edited away from the scan. -Hans Henrik Juhl
 * There is unfortunately some truth to that. However, since thes scans originate from Ekstra Bladen and none of them has been altered by them (I assume they have a lawyer who thinks about such matters), we shouldn't alter them either. It think it's a fictional name and address anyway. Azate 08:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I just made a search using www.krak.dk and found a match. It is a genuine name / address. --Valentinian 08:28, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

We should give this page a better name than "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy 43p dossier "
Suggestions?!--Greasysteve13 06:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Transwiki or reduce substantially
So far this article seems to contain an enormous amout of the source text, making it a prime candidate for transwiki-ing to wikisource, yet this would certainly run into copyright problems. Thus, it seems that we'll need to trim this article back substantially, perhaps even by 90%. As it is now, it's essentially just one, big, perhaps informative, copyvio. -- Zantastik  talk  02:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree. See my coments above. --PeR 08:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment You might be right regarding the articles from Jyllands-Posten, but I can't see any copyright problems with the Arabic letters. They were sent by a number of institutions to public individuals and I've never heard of anyone copyrighting a letter. Even if the translation for those is inspired by the Danish translation, that translation is not printed here. If that translation is correct, a direct translation from Arabic would result in virtually the same text. The letters must originally have been PD, so translations of them must be the same. Just my 2 cents. But yes, the article should be re-written and shorted. --Valentinian 08:34, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Depends on what jurisdiction the letters were created in. Does Denmark have an auto-copyright law, or must an item specifically be designated as copyrighted, through registration or display of the circle C symbol, to receive copyright protection? Calwatch 07:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * They were created in Denmark. I'm no lawyer, but the Danish copyright law can be seen here: http://www.kum.dk/sw4550.asp (2003 version). The law was slightly modified in 2005, but no major changes (and I can't find an English version of that text. Perhaps it is somewhere on www.kum.dk ). More information is here: I still believe that it must be impossible to claim a copyright since the Arabic material must have been PD originally. Do you mean that if a different newspaper (e.g. Politiken) wanted to commission and publish their own translation of the Arabic letters (the translation would be made by a different individual and the two texts would naturally be virtually identical) that this would be impossible, because Politiken would be violating a copyright held by Ekstra Bladet? (Bear in mind that Ekstra Bladet did not produce the original material). This scenario doesn't make sense to me. As I've said before, the text should still be shortened, so I think it is a rather academic problem. --Valentinian (talk) 11:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I was bold and deleted copyrighted material. Denmark has automatic copyright; i.e. as soon as something is created it is protected by copyright: no permits, registration, etc. needed. Same is in the US. That means that these words that I typed here are copyrighted by me (yes, letters can and are copyrighted by authors). So the report was automatically copyrighted by the commission. so unless the commission expressively released it under a free license (like GFDL or Creative Commons) or into public domain, it is copyrighted and posting images of every single page along with verbatim translations is a copyvio. Therefore it has no place in Wikipedia. If somebody is keen on summarizing the report and pointing the main ideas an issues - be my guest, but posting the entire report is a big no-no. Renata 02:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

danish translation available
Further translations are available in Danish (of particular interest is probably the Hlayhel piece). Can sombody translate them to English?

Kommentar fra den århusianske imam Sheik Raed Hulaihil: Vi tier ikke stille af frygt for en (demokratisk) undertrykkelse

På baggrund af, at den danske avis, Jyllands-Posten, fredag den 30.9.2005, valgte at bringe, det der påstås at være satiriske tegninger af vores profet, ”Guds fred og velsignelse være med ham”, hvor tegningerne tydeligt indeholder utilstedelig hån, der under ingen omstændigheder kan accepteres. Da vi, som muslimer, har accepteret at bosætte sig i det her land under forudsætning for, at vores fulde frihed, især den religiøse del af denne, vil være sikret og respekteret, ønsker vi hermed at gøre den danske offentlige mening opmærksom på følgende:

1. At vores profet, Mohammed ”Guds fred og velsignelse være med ham”, har i vores hjerter en unik og usammenlignelig status. Da Mohammed og hans andre brødre, såsom profeten Moses og profeten Jesus, er Guds budbringere, må de ikke hånes. Det påhviler enhver troende uanset religion, ikke mindst enhver besindig person, at forhindre hån af en så stor fyrste med en så stor betydning hos sine troende, selv hos sine besindige rivaler.

2. Det tankevækkende er, om der er nogen i Europa, der tør håne semitisme i ytringsfriheds navn og under demokratiets paraply???

3. Vi har ikke brug for lektier om demokrati, men det er faktisk os, der med vores handlinger og taler, underviser hele verdenen i demokrati. At kirketårnene forblev i god behold fra vores storhedstid og indtil i dag, er det bedste bevis [det der her menes at under de forskellige tider hvor muslimerne regerede store dele af Europa, var de tolerante overfor de kristne og ødelagde f.eks. ikke deres kirker].

4. Denne diktatoriske måde at bruge demokratiet på, er fuldstændigt uacceptabel.

5. Kan det være rigtigt, når værdier nedbrydes, når menneskets gode handlinger ikke erkendes, når helligdomme hånes, når værdier og principper ikke skånes, når ære ikke respekteres, og alt dette i frihedens navn? Denne form for demokrati, hvor den stærke udnytter den svage, er sygt.

6. Der må være en balance mellem ytringsfrihed og religionsfrihed. Når den ene underminerer den anden, vil der opstå en krise med uberegnelige konsekvenser.

7. I dag er der en hel del forvirring iblandt muslimer, idet man ikke ved hvilken af de her to ting, er den rigtige. Passer det, at Vesten står fjendtligt overfor en bestemt gruppe af muslimer på grund af deres gerninger, men samtidigt erkender, at islam er en respektabel himmelsk religion? Eller er det der passer, og det der kom frem i avisen, måske at selve islam med alle dens symboler og helligdomme ikke er noget værd, og at vores profet, Mohammed »Guds fred og velsignelse være med ham«, er den største terrorist?

8. Betyder demokratiet latterliggørelse af det helligste hos muslimer, at vi bare skal lade det ligge, som om intet skete, men også at lade være med at blive sure og føle os krænket, så ytringsfrihedsfolk kan føle, at muslimer endeligt har udviklet sig og er begyndt at tage imod kritik og andres meninger, selv på bekostning af vores tro og hvad der er helligt for os?

9. Hvis vi kigger lidt på den meget omdiskuterede ”integration”, er det så logisk, at den pubertetsagtige handling er den optimale vej til integration? Eller vil den gøre kløften større? Det der blev bragt i avisen, er som at hælde olie på ilden. Den stupide person, der har fortaget en sådan uklog handling, bør selv påtage sig ansvaret for sin gerning og dennes følger, hvor den mindste følge af disse er en øget splittelse i det samfund, som ellers ønskes at være harmonisk uden nogen som helst form for uenighed.

10. Det mindste Jyllands-Posten kan gøre, er at fortryde denne form for latterlige filosofi, og undskylde overfor de muslimer, der har følt sig krænket i deres helligste, nemlig deres profet. Det skal gøre sig gældende, hvis I reelt tager hensyn til hvad jeres medmennesker føler.

11. Afslutningsvis vil jeg henvende mig til de besindige i dette samfund og opfordre dem til at blande sig og stoppe denne latterlige situation, og til at lade være med at udnytte fænomenet ”krig mod terror”, der bruges til at håne religion, bl.a. islam med alle dennes symboler og helligdomme.

Sheik Raed Hulaihil Uddannet i Det Islamiske Universitet i Medina E-mail: hlayhel68otmail.com

more pieces at http://politiken.dk/VisArtikel.iasp?PageID=440579 thanks Azate 20:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Full translation removed
I have removed the full translation of the document. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and as such does not include copies of primary sources. If the text is free under GFDL (which I don't believe it is), it should be move to WikiSource --  Wasell ( T ) 16:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Akkari-Laban dossier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060304214002/http://www.e-jp.dk/12-02-2006/demo/JP_02-01.html to http://www.e-jp.dk/12-02-2006/demo/JP_02-01.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080708204534/http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article344482.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article344482.ece

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:53, 29 June 2017 (UTC)