Talk:Belly dance/Archive 1

Opinions
Please do review this article and remove personal opinions from it. Statements about Shakira's singing are out of place and out of scope. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.242.7.148 (talk) 02:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Minor Corrections/Additions
Overall, I found this this to be a well-researched, informative article on bellydance. However, I did notice some spelling, grammatical, and syntactic errors in the text. It seemed a shame to me that an otherwise well-written article should suffer from these errors, so I took the liberty to correct them. I also made some other minor changes that I thought might help clarify things for an uninformed reader, such as spelling out American Tribal Style, where it had originally only been abbreviated. I attempted to leave the basic content of the text alone as much as possible, as I had no complaint with it overall, and I did not wish to subvert the author's original intent. I did had some additional thoughts about the health benefits of bellydance, which I took the liberty of adding to that section, although I did not delete any of the original content. I felt the additional information might be helpful to those interested in learning about bellydance. I hope I did not offend anyone by making these changes; my only interest was to put forth before the public the best face possible for bellydance, as I'm sure would be in keeping with the author's original intent, as well as the desire of all of us that are bellydancers. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.1.44.191 (talk &bull; contribs).

This page has links to some articles on belly dancing in the middle east (eg bans being placed or lifted). Andjam 12:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed the 'fortunately for us' bit but I made a slight mistake in my edit summary. It should have read "Whether or not what the dance creating a craze was fortunate is an irrelevant POV that shouldn't be discussed. Also, 'us' assumes reader cares about what happens in the west". I am not disputing inclusion of the discussion of a craze. I am disputing discussion of whether something was fortunate or not. I have also since re-read the original text and realised, it's not so much an issue of the west. My main point still remains though. Us assumes the reader shares the same view with what is written and should NEVER be included (except in quotes and stuff like that). Words like fortunately should not be included either because they express a POV that something is fortunate. While you may feel it is fortunate and indeed many people may feel so, POVs should only be expressed in appropriate contexts. Nil Einne 16:05, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

So I removed the sentence "The name of the dance says all that is needed to be said," since it seemed really unnecessary. Natalie 22:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

This article, while apparently having problems regarding sources, seems to be adequately copy-edited. So I took off the "needs copy-edit" tag at the top. Natalie 22:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I hope you do not mind my correcting the spelling of "shaquri" to "sharqi" and adding the meaning of it all in Arabic. I removed the sentence in the beginning stating that the term indicates something more exotic than local dance, because although the term "sharqi" means "eastern" and could indicate a different origin, the term "baladi" is most commonly understood as "local" or "folkloric", if you will, which would indicate quite the opposite of not local or different.

I thought the wording was awkward and flowery in many parts of this article to the point of distraction, so I tried to correct that by rearranging certain sentences, replacing certain words, and correcting and standardizing grammar. Also spellings of some words were different throughout the article such as "nightclub" and "night club," and "raqs baladi" and "raks baladi." There was some obvious redundancy that I deleted, too. Someone said that the copy editing seemed to be okay, but I don't think this article is as clean as it could be, even after these most recent corrections. There's a lot of wordiness, things could be simplified. I wanted to change more, but as a new editor I'm a little on the shy side. I tried not to change content with my corrections, although I think the content could use some help in terms of clarification, simplification, and organization. (Complote (talk) 06:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC))

Also, I noticed that all of the words in itals are gobbledygook on my computer. They're fine in the "edit" section, but in the "preview" and in the final page they're nonsense. Does this tend to happen on certain browsers? I'm using Safari on a Power Mac. (Complote (talk) 07:06, 23 August 2008 (UTC))

'unless the wife performs for her husband which is acceptable)'
This is an erroneous statement in your article. If anything (eg. drinking) is prohibited in Islam, it is prohibited for all in Islam, & is prohibited in public & as well as in private. & including whether for wife or for husband. Any exception must be supported by a legal stipulation: Qoranic or Hadith or Scholarly Ijmaa or Fatwa of Majority(though unbinding except following by conviction though deterrence to unfollowing is Hadith:'Whoever diverges from majority, diverges into Hell-fire'). In Islam all prohibited acts are classified into these three categories of sins for deterrence & deterrence of some left unspecified to the 'Tazeer' for the authority, as permissible acts are classified for greatness of reward into 3 categories 'makrooh', 'mandoob' & 'mustahab'. If it is not a major sin for which 'Hadd' is provided (even for some is not provided {eg. Aqooq} & the judgment is left to God & 'Tazeer' of the authority), it could be middle (or non-major) or a minor sin which could be atoned by repentance or seeking forgiveness of God where the good deeds overcome the bad deeds & the later are replaced with the former as a grace of God. In Islamic Fiqha, there is a principle of committing of the lesser of the two sins, if one is confronted with no other choice. In Islamic Fiqha, the deeds are by their intentions per the pivotal Hadith. So if 'a wife performs for her husband' to protect him from going stray to other function of dance, so this act of hers will become 'mustahab' she being rewarded to protect her marriage & her husband from sinning. otherwise as dancing of woman is prohibited by Qoranic text (the women should not undulate or strike their feet on the ground) & Hadith (Some of my community will legalize musical instruments..) lowered from major needing tazeer to non-major sin {as she is doing in non-public in her home only & not for strangers only for her husband}(& homes in Islam are 'haram' ie. protected against undue intrusion) requiring forgiveness & 'not acceptance' as alleged in the article, except dancing of small girls on tambourine is allowed on functions of happiness such as marriage or a party of welcoming by Hadith & Sunnah... (Ilaila (talk) 07:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC))

Vandalism
In light of recent levels of vandalism by anon IP users, I've requested temporary semi-protection--if approved, edits by anon IP users and registered accounts less than a few days old will be disallowed for a short time. - Zhukora (talk) 08:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Request denied due to length of time elapsed between most recent vandalism event and protection request. However, if vandalism continues to be a problem, feel free to request again. :) - Zhukora (talk) 09:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Number of Links
This article is extremely heavy with external references placed within the text. This is against wikipedia guielines.

Those who are fans of this artcle, please rearrange it in such a way that al external links are placed where they are belong, namely, at the "external links" section. If a external link points to a notable person or event, please consider writing a wikipedia article (at least a stub) and link to it, rather than to the outrer world. mikka (t) 21:19, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Mikkalai, it took me a while to understand your posting, it is a little bit confusing. For my understanding, "external links" is a section with links to webistes out (external!) of the wikipedia website, not a link to another article inside wikipedia. If you don't think that external links should be placed here, then maybe we should consider changing the title "external links" to "other links inside wikipedia". There are several great external links that you keep deleting, and I can't understand why do you do that. People who have interest for Belly Dance is also interested on everything that is happening now in that area. Unless the external link goes to a website that doesn't have anything to do with Belly Dance, then it is understandable that the link is removed, but otherwise, it sounds more like a blockage to the freedom of contribuiting to Wikipedia. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yonisha (talk &bull; contribs).


 * Mikkalai, I just noticed that the link to Bellydancenet is a dead link... is that the idea of a good external link? I think there are lots of contradictions when different people are allowed to free edit, and there will always be different opinions, and people will always be "adding" & "editing" endless things. Concerning the external links for Belly Dance, I think the links to pages where you can visit what other dancers are doing should be included as external links. Maybe we should create different categories of external links there. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yonisha (talk &bull; contribs).


 * Further, Mikkalai has been removing links to sites with accurate and researched information about belly dance and overall doing some really odd things which suggests little understanding of the topic. Following what has been happening here for the last few months, on a topic I am very educated in, makes me realize the total uselessness of Wikipedia. If people can put rubbish in and remove factual information - or links to factual information - or twist the wording (yes, Morocco is a dancer - but in the context she was mentioned her credentials in field research and history were far more relevant) then I can trust NOTHING I read in Wikipedia. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.167.249.253 (talk &bull; contribs).

Robsk, I'm personally grateful that you have an interest in promoting solid information on the dance. At the same time, as you can see from reading this Talk page, we're working hard to keep the number of extraneous links down. Would you consider adding information to the article itself, rather than a link to your site? Woodrow, known to some as Asim 15:39, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Why should there be 2 Links to shira.net Please delete one of these external links!!! User Eaglesk -- Please add www.bellyartist.com to your list of links. A link to this article has been added to http://www.bellyartist.com/faq.htm, for a link to info on belly dance history.

Keren is a well known AZ Belly Dancer and instructor. Her website contains useful information, images, and videos about Belly Dance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.25.184.123 (talk) 18:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Quality of Links
My link to my site keeps getting deleted bellydancevideos.blogspot.com. I'm not sure how to go about finding out who is deleting it and why? please explain. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.29.61.232 (talk • contribs) 86.29.61.232|86.29.61.232.


 * You can check out the lastest edits by going to the main article, then clicking the "history" tab. My guess is that your link is being deleted because it is a link to your site; that's generally not encouraged on Wikipedia.  It might be helpful to review Wikipedia's Spam policy and the article about what Wikipedia is not.  In addition, please remember to sign your name at the end of any comments you post on this site.  It's easy, just use four ~'s in a row, or click the button that says "sign your name" below the edit box. --Zagsa 17:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * thanks for your reply, but I still fail to understand why my link keeps getting deleted. I would understand if it was a link to a site that was irrelevant & profit making, however it is a site of bellydance videos which I feel is completely relevant! Other wikipedia articles contain external links to video sites, so I don't see why mine keeps getting removed. I clicked on history, and as I am not very computer literate I can't tell who is deleting my link or how to contact them about this matter. Can anybody advise me further?86.29.61.232 18:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If no one else replies, try posting a message on Pschemp's talk page. She appears to be the one who edited it out and can perhaps explain her reasoning better.  --Zagsa 23:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * thanks for the info zagsa86.29.61.232 21:57, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi...Michelle? I'm Woodrow -- asim on here and in the dance world -- and I'm one of the people who's taken out the link to your weblog.  I'm going to briefly discuss what's up, from my perspective, and hopefully give an understanding as to why I've been removing it.  If you need more detail, feel free to respond.


 * First, let me apologize if I offended. Since you posted the link anonymously, I had no way to know if you were the contact for the action(s) in question, and I'm glad you took the time to come ask.   One concern was that you appear to link primarily to YouTube clips from DVDs, mostly of Belly Dance SuperStar material.  I know there have been copyright concerns regarding the BDSS material on YouTube brought to Miles' attention, and as Wikipedia is strongly concerned with avoiding even the hint of copyright infringement (as you reply, look down at the "Do not violate any copyright!" note), that came to be one concern.


 * In addition, BDSS -- and I have two acquaintances who've been Desert Roses, so this is not a dig at all! -- is but one piece of the dance world this article attempts to cover. If they decide to ask YouTube to remove the clips, your site will be lacking in content.  With more, and move varied, content, I think it might be a great link...with the next bit as a caveat!


 * Wikipedia is not a set of links, but an series of articles; excessive linking is, as Zagsa noted, ga concern of Wikipedia overall. As you've no doubt noted, this article is under copy revision.  We're trying to actually slim it up, tone it down, and make it a very focused & strong resource.  I'd actually prefer fewer links than we have now, and links to sites with dance videos are, as you yourself noted, something we already have in the article.  And I say this as someone with a now-dormant dance linksite myself; I'm all-too-aware of the challenges of putting together information for other webfolks, and I personally thank you for the service.


 * Does that make more sense, overall? -- Woodrow, known to some as Asim 23:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * thankyou woodrow for explaining this to me..it makes perfect sense;) much appreciated. Michelle86.29.58.226 13:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

AtholM is repeatedly deleting external link to rare videos...hidden agenda? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.48.158.69 (talk • contribs) 08:20, 30 March 2007


 * No hidden agenda. I believe that the busker central web site does not provide any useful reference to this article. This article is repeatedly abused by people trying to promote useless and/or irrelevant web sites. I'd suggest that you discuss the relevance of the site on this talk page before putting it in the article. If you can explain how it provides relevant reference material to this article and get a consensus on adding it, it'll stay when added. If you are directly associated with the site or its content, you will need to convince someone else to add it to avoid a conflict of interest. --Athol Mullen 23:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And that is seconded by myself. We are not a list of links to dance stuff on the web, rare or not.  There are many sites, such as Shira's, that do provide such links -- and I should know, as I used to run a belly-dance link site!  If you read through the commentary on this page, you will see that said link is far from the only one to have been removed, and will also gain an understanding as to why we're trying to focus additions on the text, not simply add links.  Does that make sense? -- Woodrow, known to some as Asim 23:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia shouldn't like to a web site merely because it's a good site on the topic, because that's too vague a criterion. They should only be linked to when cited (in which case it isn't really an external link), or (in the case of an organisation or person, which doesn't apply in this case) to the person's/organisation's official web site. All of the links listed under "external links" should go. Andjam 11:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia itself recognizes that "good" links should be included this is from their External link page "Wikipedia is not a web directory; no page should consist solely of a collection of external links. Wikipedia always prefers internal links over external links. However, adding a certain number of relevant external links is of valuable service to our readers." Cassandra581 06:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Personal Links
Mel Etitis has been removing links which I think are helpful to the bellydance article. He thinks links should be limited to 5. I think the links should be allowed to be more provided they are all highly realavent to the content of the article and fall within wikipedia's guidelines for external links. One that he has removed which I think is very beneficial and should be permanent is Middle Eastern Dance are there any other dancer out there who don't think this resource should be include in the external links section? Or would you also like to see it included? I think it should be included since it offers hundreds of useful articles and how-to's on bellydance and bellydance related things which would be a great asset to the article. Anyone else have an opinion about the links? Cassandra581 09:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Despite the plural, as though you're pointing out some general behaviour of which your example is just one example, the issue concerns only the link that you're determined to add. I now see that the site is yours; please read Wikipedia's strictures against adding sites that you own or maintain. --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 16:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The site is not mine although I do find it to be an extremely helful site. The plural still stands since you have removed not only that site but several others which are beneficial to the article and those who wish to learn about bellydance.  I figured it's hard enough to get you to add one site why try to get you to add more.  I picked the one I thought was most useful.
 * Cassandra581 19:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Cassandra581, just out of curiosity, what exactly is your relationship to middleeasterndance.net? SteveHopson 19:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm just a user who happens to think it's one of the better sites out there involving belly dance. I have visited it many times since I dicovered it and I encourage other people to visit it as well because I feel the content is of a good quality and tries to represent all points of veiw equally and fairly. It's free, there's no marketing, and it provides a lot of good information for all levels of bellydancers. I frequently refer back to it and have used the contract templates from it as well. I would not make such a big deal out of it but we are supposed to be free to add content and links that are beneficial to the article and some administrators won't allow us to add sites even if they are really good. I have tried adding it several times and I also noticed it was added by people other than myself earlier but continues to be removed. It falls within the guidlines of what links we can add and is far too massive, just as Shira's site is too massive, to be integrated into the article itself. Mel Etitis probably thinks because both myself and the creator share the same first name that we are one and the same however I would like to point out that my Name is Cassandra Mohamed and the sites creator and owner is Cassandra Strand. 2 different people! Cassandra581 20:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Since you and Cassandra Strand are "2 different people," will you explain the similarities between you, Cassandra581 (Cassandra Mohamed) and Casandra Strand, the owner of the site in question, middleeasterndance.net? For example, Cassandra Strand has registered a Yahoo! profile under your user name, Cassandra581 [].  And, Yahoo!'s Cassandra581 clearly shows a homepage of middleeasterndance.net.   An updated version of Yahoo!'s registration for Cassandra581 [] is registered under your name, Cassandra Mohamed, but shows the same photo as Cassandra Strand.  Similarly, Cassandra581 is registered on Tribe.net to Cassandra Strand [].   SteveHopson 23:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Please not that I have put the issue into informal mediation to resolve dispute. You can visit the [case] if you wish but I will also post what the informal mediator has posted.  If the matter remains unresolved I will move for further measures in mediation.  I also would like to point out that many people who have added "helpful" sites.  May also wish to pursue further action if they are continually denied the ability to freely add useful information to the article and it's external links.  Here is what the informal mediator has posted:
 * "Mediator response


 * Here's what I can see about this case:


 * Limits
 * There are no limits written in WP policy about the limit of external links
 * You don't want too many external links because it is better to expand the article instead of just linking
 * The belly dance article is plenty long enough and has more than enough information
 * Result: You should be able to put (almost) whatever link you want in the external links section and Mel Etitis is incorrect in removing them


 * Eastern Dance
 * This link is currently under construction, so it doesn't actually provide any information
 * The URL indicates that it could potentially be a good source
 * Result: For now, leave the link off, but keep an eye on it and if the site comes back, go ahead and put it on


 * Make sure to point Mel Etitis towards my response. If you continue to have problems, let me know and we can escalte the problem. Amalas =^_^= 21:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amalas (talk • contribs) 16:41, 16 May 2006

Sorry link was not written correctly I forgot to space it properly. should be [Middle Eastern Dance] Cassandra581 21:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)"


 * I have no idea who "Amalas" is (aside from apparently not knowing enough to sign his/her comments), but his/her comment is not only obscure (though it suggests a peculiar lack of logic) &mdash; it ignores the plain fact that Cassandra581 has been trying to add a link to her own site (as SteveHopson has pretty conclusively demonstrated), and has been dishonest about that fact. That Amalas threatens to escalate the problem doesn't fill me with confidence either; nor does the fact that he/she seems to have chosen to issue a "verdict" on my action despite having failed to contact me. --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 19:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Pardon me, but I do know how to properly sign comments. What is written above was copied from the Mediation Case about this topic.  I thought it would be better to maintain the original timestamp rather than adding a new one.  Also, I was not the one who copied that message to this page, it was Cassandra.
 * As to why I am involved in this case, Cassandra requested an informal mediation (link in above paragraph), and I responded to it. It is my first case, so I do apologize for not contacting you directly.  I had assumed that Cassandra had done so.  In addition, she had posted my comments on this talk page, so I assumed that you would see it.
 * Regarding escalating the problem, what I meant was that if a simple informal mediation does not resolve the issue, there is a more formal Mediation Committee that can take it from here.
 * I hope this answers your questions and I would encourage you to stay cool in resolving this issue. Amalas   =^_^=  19:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

None of the links to any of those profiles says it's registered to Cassandra Mohamed they all say they are registered to a Cassandra Strand, the updated yahoo profile simply says cassandra581. MY name happens to be Cassandra and when I registered here as Cassandra the name was already in use I tried several othe number combinations and 581 is the one that was not in use yet. I can't explain the similarity other than the fact that we both have the same first name and apparently have picked the same following 3 digit number to follow our names. I suppose that everyone in every state who has the name Cassandra Mohamed is also me? I searched the name Steve Hopson and guess what there are probably at least 5 different ones that I came upon in my brief search, are they all you? I doubt it. In our ever expanding world we are bound to have overlap of real life and user names. Being as my name is in real life Cassandra, do I not have a ligitimit claim to also use a handle which reflects that? What proof do you have that Cassandra Strand and Cassandra Mohamed ARE the same person? Especially when none of those profiles mention MY name? They mention her name only. And I'm not surprised that as they are all registered to her that her homepage is listed in her profile. Despite that, we're getting away from the real issue which is that wikipedia does not have a specific limit as to how many links are allowed with each article! Also that external links should be allowed as long as they follow the guidelines wikipedia has set forth. Mel Etitis is assuming that he can choose which links and how many should be included on a page that is supposed to be freely edited within reason. If there are 10 relavant links, I think all ten should be listed if there is only 1 than only one should be listed. Especially with a subject which is already so widely varied and complex you should naturally expect to find more links than you would on other topics which may not be as diverse. Since there is no official anything in bellydance you can't just link to one official link to go further into the topic. Cassandra581 05:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Fascinating; not only do you share the same (somewhat unusual) name as the site's owner, which is certainly within the bounds of possibility, but you chose exactly the same three-digit number as her, by complete coincidence. Note that the odds regarding this don't only concern choosing the same number out of all the possible three-digit numbers, but choosing a three-digit number in the first place...
 * I notice that you have no e-mail address set up; would you do that now, so that I can e-mail you? --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 22:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Even more fascinating. You gave your e-mail address at the "mediation cabal" page &mdash; and, surprise surprise, it was the address of the owner of the site.  Now you've changed it (by one letter).  Another mysterious coincidence? --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 22:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Have you ever heard of a typo? It's no coincidence it simply that our addresses are off by 1 letter and in my hurry to finish typing I did not catch it.  I changed it to my correct e-mail address.  I happen to use the number 581 because it's a number that has significance for me.  There are 3 number combinations which I use in that way and 581 is one of them.  I do not know what, if any significance the number holds for Cassandra Strand.  You may email me at all the e-mail adresses which you believe are mine and see if I answer them.  The only one I would respond to is the cassandram581@yahoo.com since that's the only one I have.  I have also confirmed the e-mail address with wikipedia if you would like to e-mail me.  Either way you still are avoiding the point.  The point is that no matter what site I want to add or anyone else wants to add you will still remove because you think that you are somhow better than other contributers and continue to follow guidelines set by yourself not by wikipedia. Cassandra581 03:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Cassandra581's answer to my question yesterday is that she is not the owner of the Cassandra581 Yahoo! name, that it belongs to the owner of the contested site, Cassandra Strand, not Wiki's Cassandra581 who she acknowleges to be Cassandra Mohamed. I certainly believe in taking people at their word, but this posting to a Yahoo! bellydance site seems to cast some doubt on the statements by Cassandra Mohamed here by clearly showing her name associated with the other Cassandra's identity: []. SteveHopson 23:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't know what to say about that one other than it wasn't me. I'd suggest asking her why she used that name when it differs from her name listed.  I can't answer for her although it was strange to see her use my name as I've never seen her use it anywhere else.  As I pointed out in my other statement this is beside the point since the dispute has little to do with the actual site would it make you feel any better if I were asking to add www.zilltech.com?  I feel this is another valuable resource which should be added.  However, Mel Etitis would still not allow it.Cassandra581 03:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I would like for us to stay focused on the issue of allowing people to freely add apropriate links. As of yet you both have been focusing onwho I am and not the matter being disputed.  Besides that the wikipedia policy on external links says this
 * "NOTE relating to items #3 and #9: Because of neutrality & point-of-view concerns, a primary policy of Wikipedia is that no one from a particular site/organization should post links to that organization/site etc. Because neutrality is such an important -- and difficult -- objective at Wikipedia, this takes precedence over other policies defining what should be linked. The accepted procedure is to post the proposed links in the Talk section of the article, and let other - neutral - Wikipedia editors decide whether or not it should be included."

First of all I'm not the first person to have posted it. If you read theough the history you will also see it has been added by others before my first contirbution even existed. The first [] on November 21, 2005 and the second [] on December 3, 2005. My very first contribution was on December 3, 2005 to another article Samia Gamal. Furthermore, the link remained there from December 3, 2005 until January 20,2006 when it was removed with other sites by an anonymous user. Obviously others already wanted it to be added, so even if I were the owner of the site, I was not the one adding it. However, I'm not the owner of the site and I chose to add something that had already been present for 1 1/2 months with no problem. Either way it's on the talk page now so that people can visit the site to determine if it is a good link to include and both of you are trying to take to dispute in a different direction. Please focus on the actual dispute at hand. Cassandra581 22:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

undefined Cassandra581 07:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Links
Why were some of the really helpful links removed? There used to be one to a site called Middle Eastern Dance that's been there forever and I'd place it right up there with Shira's site in usefulness. I understand removing links that are personal sites and offer no useful information on the subject but this site really had good info on it. Orientaldancer.net also has some really good information along with an active forum where people could ask questions. Personally I would probably have left that one up too. I'd certainly say both those sites are more helpful and relevant then the Rakassa Dance Festival link. Can we please add those links back into the list?Aaliyah1010 (talk) 22:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Above on this page, there are already a lot of discussions about links... However, the links you mentioned have been removed with these two edits by someone who seemingly is interested in Maria Shazadi only. I propose we add the two links  Middle Eastern Dance  and  OrientalDancer.net - The Belly Dance Hub  again, any objections? --Cyfal (talk) 00:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd concur on both links being placed back. -- Woodrow, known to some as Asim 01:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asim (talk • contribs)


 * Ok, I now added middleeasterndance.net. The orientaldancer.net seems (currently?) unreachable (was still reachable on January 8th). --Cyfal (talk) 06:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * orientaldancer.net is reachable again, I added it now. --Cyfal (talk) 18:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * First, I understand that you want to keep the links about the Middle Eastern Dance. But you need to provide the citation which makes the link you mentioned can be in external links. Link you added on this article was considered to be lacking citations. That's why it was removed. I would recommend you to find another helpful links that you can provide a citation. Daniel5127 (talk) 02:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry Daniel5127, but I don't understand what you are talking about. Did you talk about the link  Middle Eastern Dance ? If so, here is the reason why I added it: There are two different sections with external links in Wikipedia articles, see Guide to layout: The section "references" is used to provide the sources (citation) for any assertion in the article; and the section "external links" is used for links that we recommend for further reading. My impression was that the Middle Eastern Dance site is useful for the readers of the belly dance article, therefore I added it to the latter section. What do mean by "providing a citation" for these links? Your confused --Cyfal (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Commercial Entities Link
Clerkalive, I'm uncertain what guidelines you're utilizing for removing these links. If we're saying that every link must be to an NGO, or similar, then I suspect we need to be pulling a number of links, all over Wikipedia. We regularly link, in articles, to corporations, for example. To take but one example, Shira.net is a site run by one woman. It is true that she sells items on the site, however they are tangential to the reams of information on her site with regard ot this dance form, and the sales are a recent addition, as well. To look at another site you've removed the link from, middleeasterndance.net does not even sell anything, it's all information on the dance. So I'm very confused, yet also wish to avoid a revert war. Could you -- or some other editor -- explain your actions, please? Woodrow, known to some as Asim 17:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

content in Belly dance
Please leave the content template in this section until the dispute is resolved. Amalas  =^_^=  20:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * There is no genuine dispute. Cassandra581 has tried repeatedly to link-farm, and the link is to her own site (typically for such cases, she placed it first in the list, with a gushing, PoV description .  Open and shut case. --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 21:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

It's a resource with lot's of how-to articles so how is that "gushing" PoV? Besides which that is not the dispute the dispute is you and your excessive removal of links which according to wikipedia guidelines may be added but according to your guidelines cannot.Cassandra581 03:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

There obviously is a dispute because Mel and Cassandra have differing opinions about what links should appear in the article. As such, content should stay until you can come to a consensus. According to WP:EL:
 * Wikipedia is not a web directory; no page should consist solely of a collection of external links. Wikipedia always prefers internal links over external links. However, adding a certain number of relevant external links is of valuable service to our readers.

The article is long enough to warrant more than a small number of links. There is no arbitrary limit. Regarding the one that is purportedly owned by Cassandra, can you at least agree to leave that one off until its ownership can be verified? Any other links should be allowed to be added. Amalas  =^_^=  14:28, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Persian vs. Arabic Influences: Citations needed
To whomever changed "Arabic" to "Persian" -- I reverted because the vast majority of sources indicate an Arabic origin, with some Persian influences. Please feel free to cite a source for your assertion; see Verifiability for more on that. I hope this is not a bother. Woodrow, known to some as Asim 17:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

NO mention that it started in India?
There are many people who blieve belly dancing originate from India, and yet nowhere in this profile is that mentiond as a possiblity? 71.119.255.31 02:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Err. had spread from the migrations of the Romani people (also called 'Gypsies') and related groups, with origins in India. Looks like there is a reference to Indian origin to me. If you can find a reference to some other form of origin in India and method by which it travelled to the middle east, you're welcome to add it (along with that reference), or put the ref on this talk page and someone else can review the ref and add it to the article if appropriate. --Athol Mullen 02:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

If belly dancing started in India then how come no Indians have a native belly dance today?????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.227.166 (talk) 23:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Wow this is very illogical reponses im getting. Anyway in the origin section I added the possiblity it came from India then here 71.105.87.54 (talk) 21:27, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going to revert your change for now. You need to provide reliable sources, rather than unsourced speculation, per the verifiability guidelines. Don't take it personally; if you find appropriate sources you are more than welcome to restore the information with an appropriate citation. &mdash;ShadowRanger (talk 21:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * But some of the other sources of where Belly dancing originated dont have sources. So why you picking on mine then here? 71.105.87.54 (talk) 01:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Rroma are Dravidian?
I'm removing the reference to the Rroma as 'Dravidian' because it's inaccurate. The Rromani language is Indo-Aryan, like Panjabi, Urdu, Hindi, Gujarati, Sinhalese, etc, and genetic evidence suggests that the Rroma themselves originated somewhere in northern India/Pakistan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zekeriyah (talk • contribs) 08:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Insultive to Romani people
I am so insulted how you can suggest Belly Dancing has anything to do with Romani people as not one Romani group in the world Belly Dances and it would infact to most be seen as offensive for a Romani woman was to dress and dance this way. Surely if Belly Dancing was anything to do with Roms then they would still do it today?? Secondly there is no evidence to say that the Roms come from the Banjara. It is just one possible origin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsigano (talk • contribs) 22:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Evidence needed as certain information on this page is giving false information about Romani people
Please provide evidence that the Roms of Europe and the Domari tribes of the Middle East are actually related and this is not just incorrect theories backed by certain scholars. Please provide evidence that the Roms of Europe come from Rajasthan and the Banjara tribes? If you do not provide this it needs to be changed as it is a lie.

Also can you provide any evidence that Belly dancing has been and is a native dance of India or that Roms have ever had a native belly dance. If not can you please make this point very clear.

I tried correcting it twice and both time it was changed back. Please therefore provide the proof of your claims as this is a site provided to give acurate and factual information built on truth and not information that is incorrect or a lie.


 * Hello again, 82.34.227.166. Please know that I understand your frustration that what you consider to be false information has been included in the belly dance article. I would like to apologize if my comments misled you into thinking that the only necessary requirement for information to be included on this page is proper citation of reliable sources. You are correct, the belly dance article does include a lot of uncited and improperly cited information, and it is possible that some of it may not be entirely true. This is a problem that the regular editors of this page have been working on for some time, and it is hoped that it will be corrected at some point in the future. However, demanding that long-standing information be removed because of a simple lack of citation, or the addition of a significant amount of new uncited information will not make the jobs of those who are trying to find sources for the existing information any easier. This is why I (and I'm certain many others) would like to respectfully request that you do not make any major alterations to the existing article unless you can provide some kind of citation.


 * Certainly it is not ideal to have potentially false or exaggerated and uncited information on the belly dance page, but it has heretofore at least existed in a format that most editors considered stable enough to leave well enough alone until better information and sources could be found. Significant alteration of the preexisting article can therefore only be considered destructive to the stability of the article unless citations can be provided. We are trying to improve the quality of the article with each new addition of information, after all, and adding new information without citation does not help that cause.


 * You may find it to be more helpful and relevant to refer to Asim's response to your comment at the bottom of the talk page. As he says, the main reason your changes were reverted in the last case is because it was, honestly, irrelevant to the section you changed. In order to remain as neutral as possible the Belly dance section is written as a list of proposed theories of the history of the dance. The fact that these theories have been proposed does not automatically mean they are true, and if you read the section carefully, you will notice that the text acknowledges that the theories listed are only possibilities suggested by people who have not had much academic research on the subject available to refer to.


 * I would like to second Asim's notion on his unsigned revert to the main article that if you find the topic of Roma dance and their possible connections or lack of connections to other groups so compelling, that you write a separate article where you can expound on this at length, and link back to it through the Belly dance section, because the debate about the Roma and their connections to belly dance is something ultimately tangential and unrelated to the main body of information included in the article belly dance.


 * I do thank you for your concern about the truth of the information included in the article, and also for your efforts to discuss this on the talk page before making changes. It seems to be a hotly debated topic, and I hope that it can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. - Zhukora (talk) 01:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I should also note that even if any of the theories of possible origin listed in Belly dance can be definitively proven false, it would still be useful to acknowledge their existence in the section because there are many people who may not realize the truth or falseness of the variety of theories they have heard, and who would subsequently benefit more from being able to refer to another article which discusses at length the validity of an individual theory than from simply not seeing said theory on the list--the absence of a particular theory may in actuality cause them to think that someone simply forgot to list it, and we would again end up with the origins section the way it is now.


 * I for one would find it very interesting if you could write a supplemental article to discuss the issues you have brought up. Please let us know if you end up doing so. Thanks again! - Zhukora (talk) 01:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Evidence that Domari and Romani people are not related
The Romani language source is from a much later time period of India than that of the Domari source. The Romani language is very much a Sanskrit based language with Rajasthani mixed with Panjabi brought together as one language using the Rajasthani / Rajputti gender of 'o' on the end of masculine words.. Most the Persian words in the Romani language are also found in the Indian language Urdu.

The Domari language is from a different origin to Romani and is more Hindi based. (Hindi uses 'a' on the end of its masculine words).

I will give example

ENGLISH        ROMANI          PANJABI          HINDI          DOMARI Brother        Phral / Phal*   Phra / Pha (ji)  Bhai           Bharos Sister         Phen            Phen             Bhen           Bhenos Horse          Khuro           Khora            Ghora          Ghoryos There          Ote             Ote              Udhar          Hundar

* The English Roms gave the English the word 'Pal' for friend.

In addition to this Romani uses the Rajasthani / Rajputi mascaline 'o' at the end of words whereas Domari like most other Hindi styled languages use the normal 'a'.

e.g.             ENGLISH          ROMANI          RAJASTHANI Uncle           Kako            Kako           (Domari = Mamun) Fat man         Thulo           Thelo Hot             Tato            Tato Infant boy      Tikno           Tingar My              Miro            Mero           (Domari = Mura, Hindi = Mera) Dirty / greasy  Chikno          Chikano

There is evidence in recorded Persian history and also amongst Domari myth to suggest that the Domari nomads of Asia are from the Luri of India who were taken to Persian as musicians and entertainers and become a part of the Persian empire. The Roms however it is believed came from a later time period approximetely around the time when Islam invaded India in around 1000ad. Many scholars on the subject believe the Roms were made up of Rajput & Jatt military who lost the battle and either fled along the silk route to the country now known as Turkey which was then not Islamic or they were drafted into the Islamic forces and were stationed in the country now reffered to as Turkey. - signed by a Chavo (son) of a Romani family —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.227.166 (talk) 23:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Roma is a Romani word and actually means 'Roms' in English (plural of Rom)
How is there is no native belly dance in India today or any record of one and there is also no Romani belly dance either. Romani dance such as flamenco is the movement of arms and the stamping of feet which can been seen in India today.

Amongst Romani lifestyle and code of living, belly dancing would be seen as very incorrect. Perhaps a full study into the Romani strict codes of Marime should be conducted before such accusations are included. This would be far more respectful and politically correct.

The idea that belly dancing comes from Roms has very little support behind it and if anything has much to suggest it is nothing more than an insult and a slander to the Romani people.


 * Hello, 82.34.227.166, I notice you have been making significant changes to belly dance, particularly in regards to how the dance relates to the Romani people. I hope you will note that there has already been significant and ongoing debate on the talk page about the possible origins of belly dance which have already taken into account the possibly tenuous connection between Roms and belly dance. The version of the belly dance article you edited from was a relatively stable version that most editors seemed to feel was sufficient given the lack of sources to support any alteration.


 * Please note also that if you are unable to provide sources to support the changes you have made it is highly likely that they will be considered unconstructive edits or vandalism and will be reverted. Think carefully about the edits you are trying to make. If they consitute major alterations of the pre-existing text, but do not cite sources, they likely fall under the category of controversial changes and would best be discussed at length on the talk page with other editors until a consensus can be reached.


 * In any case, thank you for your efforts, and I hope you will be able to find some reliable sources to back up your changes. - Zhukora (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. I'm the person who wrote the original origins section.  I understand your complaint, however, the intent was NOT to prove or disprove any one origin, but to simply list out the extant theories, and where those theories seem to have sprouted from.  Sadly, these are very, very prevelant in the belly dance subculture, but I felt a detailed breakdown/debunking would go aganist the neutral stance of Wikipedia, and I think the subsequent edits have born out the essental correctness of that stance.


 * We're trying, here, to balance respecting the Romani people, and their culture, with the reality that these theories exist, and need to be addressed on some level. I did this because this is an article that's attempting to be comprehensive, not a statement of opinion -- and I have some very strong ones on the subject!


 * If you think the text is incorrect, corrections are welcome. But as Zhukora says, and as I tried to imply in my (unsigned) revert, it needs to be cited.  Indeed, I'm going through a slow effort to gather more citations for other sections.  And I reverted not because I felt you were incorrect, but because it was a great deal of text on a subject that's tangential to the topic, which is Raqs Sharqi -- "Belly Dance".


 * As far as your "no native 'belly dance'" claim, it's a point that the Ghawazi are an offshoot of the Luri, as I believe you mentioned. Also, there's at least one Northern Indian dance form, Kathak, that shows some similarities to 'belly dance', though it's debatable which influenced which -- I did some research on the topic 3 or so years ago, and did not come up with a satisfactory answer.


 * Also, it's debatable if "belly dance" is incompatible with Romani culture (which Romani culture, among other points) -- I referenced the dancer Morocco, who is, herself, a VERY proud Roma woman. She would be better able to tell us if this dance form is shunned in her culture, but I doubt it's any more taboo than in it's native Middle Eastern culture, where fundamentalist forces have been known to use violence to coerce women to stop dancing.


 * Anyway. I'm sorry to have developed a section you find untenable, and how we can all work together to address your issues with it.  Woodrow, known to some as Asim 05:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Origin Section Revamp
Djalirecords, I see you've completely re-written the Origins section. However, you've provided NO citations whatsoever. As my previous attempts made clear, there are a number of versions of the back-history for this dance form. Could you provide some academically-sound citations? If not, I will move to revert back the the earlier versions, which at least had some citations and evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asim (talk • contribs) 13:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Astret: Hi, I'm not used to editing Wikipedia articles, in fact this is my first attempt! So I'm sorry I didn't realise this big debate was going on until after I had done some editing to the article. Nonetheless I hope whomever is doing the redraft would please include some of the material I have referenced (especially regarding the Mazins and the Ghawahzee. There are lots of articles which are on web communities as they are out of rpint and unobtainable elsewhere, so the quality of the references are better than they might otherwise appear! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Astret (talk • contribs) 16:39, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

The last paragraph in the Origins section is a biased reinterpretation of the article cited (http://people.uncw.edu/deagona/raqs/origins.htm) The original article in no way expresses that belly dance originated solely from prostitution. Belly dance, like all forms of dance, originated from various cultural groups. Art reflects culture and when different cultures meet they exchange ideas and this perpetuates innovation and change. There are many facets to the origins of any art form and it's more difficult to trace these elements throughout the evolution of dance than, say, visual art. The origins section should merely present those folk dances and cultures that we know influenced this dance form, where these folk dances came from, that there may be other influences that historians cannot agree on, and that we know little beyond that. It seems to me that this section has been re-written over and over because authors keep attempting to nail down or oversimplify a deeply complex art form that stems from many origins. Please edit this last, merely speculative section.68.102.45.119 (talk) 15:57, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Male Bellydancers
The introduction to this article sounds very, very strange. Raqs Baladi beeing danced by male (!) and female - especialy in Palestine and Iraq??? Where does this come from, please name sources. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.1.44.191 (talk &bull; contribs).


 * Baladi as well es Raqs Sharqi is considered a female dance in the Arab word. Sure, there are some men dancing, however, not in public or seriously.
 * Reyhan, not registered  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.178.216.101 (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure if Tsifteteli counts, but if it does, this guy is an ace! Picture http://www.btinternet.com/~christopher.blackmore/rebetiko/stavros.jpg on my site http://www.btinternet.com/~christopher.blackmore/rebetiko/hydra2004fri.html The Real Walrus 09:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

User 75.152.149.100 (talk) recently made an edit re: Male belly dancers changing the statement that

"Despite the fame of female dancers, men often perform Raqs Sharqi as well, however, not in public in Arab countries."

to

"Despite the fame of female dancers, men often perform Raqs Sharqi as well, however until recently, not in public in Arab countries. Tito of Egypt is credited as being the first male dancer to perform publically in this sphere."

This change was, however, reverted to the prior version. I've seen videos of Tito dancing, so 75.152.149.100's change does not strike me as an inaccurate one. Am I mistaken? If not, I feel it would be in the interest of the article to reinstate the edit. - Zhukora (talk) 18:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Proposed Article Expansion
Some items I'd like to work on -- comments, anyone?
 * "Belly dance has been known in Egypt since the pre-Islamic era, based on oral tradition." & "It has a long history of depictions in Persian miniature paintings from the 12th and 13th centuries" -- This is, to the best of my knowledge, in some dispute. This has been pervasive in the dance community since at least Jamila Salimpour's book in the early 70s (but likely earlier than that).  I *do* have a academic reference to pre-Islamic dance from MUSIC IN THE WORLD OF ISLAM, and of course there's the oft-cited reference to "quivering thighs" from a dancer in Roman times.  However, it's questionable if either of these, or the Ethopian male dancer related in a haidth, are actually extant forms of raqs. I believe we should include some of this, but inform the reader of the open-ended nature of the "is it raqs/history of raqs" question.


 * I've been cosidering changing that as well. Since it is a very disputed issue.  It's pure speculation that bellydance has been around since the time of ancient egypt.  In fact a very good book that's been well researched called Ancient Egyptian Dances by Irena Lexova (sp? sorry don't have the book with me right now) Talks about what is known of ancient egyptian dances and for the most part what is known is quite different from the current dance know commonly as bellydance.  If you think you can fix it up and make it a little more accurate or at least note that it's only one of many theories than I fully support you. Cassandra581 08:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I think I can fix it -- my current plan is to give a couple of sentences to each "major" theory -- the Egyptian, Goddess/Matrifocal, and Morocco's Childbirth ones. I'll cite the more-or-less definitive article or book on each, and hopefully that'll encourage anyone who comes after to cite similarly.  I'm hoping to encourage contributors to CITE CITE CITE work, so we can avoid the "I heard from my teacher who heard from her teacher's best friend that bellydance come from X" bit.  I'll also touch on the Rom contributions, but those aren't usually seen in the dance community as origins, per se. Woodrow, known to some as Asim 20:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I tend to think of all of those as part of the same theory. Could you possibly elaborate a little on what's different about them to you?  Not that they couldn't be seperate as well but it seems as though those three are usually inter-related by most dance historians.  I'd also be likely to agree with them that if it were done by ancient Egyptians it's likely already in worship of the Goddess and most likely would have something to do with childbirth in relation to that.  But that also wouldn't neccessarily cover the theories that suggest the dance was spread by Gypsy migrations from India and it also wouldn't cover those theories which suggest it developed naturally in regions by way of trade and border expansions.  Were you planning to mention those as well?  If this is getting too long for the talk page your welcome to e-mail me or to post on my user talk page. Cassandra581 04:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, I can drop a link to the draft re-write, so you (or anyone!) can take a look-see... Sorry for the 2 weeks "off" -- it's been crazy 'round here. Woodrow, known to some as Asim 21:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * "Egyptian tomb paintings dating from as far back as the fourteenth century BC depict partially-clad dancers whose callisthenic positions mirror those used in belly dancing." -- Is raqs even callisthenic? I'm not sure there's a viable link here at all; this one I'd like to either find a solid citation for, or recommend removal of.


 * Perhaps re-rwiting it to say something that some positions are similar and look for pictures of egyptian tomb paintings that may resemble belly dance Cassandra581 08:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure that rubs up against the "no original research" guideline in Wikipedia. I'd rather simply mention it, and let someone who's deep into that research come on and give some citations. Woodrow, known to some as Asim 20:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I guess that would depend on how you go about it. I've seen egyptian pictures with dancers that look exactly like they are doing khaleeji and I've seen ones that look like common folk steps used today as well.  I don't know if there is anything that could really be considered original research by saying this picture looks similar to this move/step/dance done today.  Especially since it's not exactly original research if the same kinds of comments have allready been printed in countless bellydance books... which it definately has.  I guess that I myself would prefer it be re-written as opposed to just completely removed but if it can't be re-written better I just as soon remove it as well. Perhaps the article here would also be of help in re-writing this section and possibly other sections as well http://www.bdancer.com/history/ it seems pretty well researched.  I asked her for a list of her sources before but she did not have a comlete list. Cassandra581 06:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Well...here's the thing. Have you read Dr. Shay's work COREOPHOBIA, where he talks at some length about the issues in interpreting images as items for dance?  For an overview, which this article is, I'd rather mention it, and get someone else with some expertise to fill in that blank, than for one of us to stick out neck out with "it could be..." statements that could get shot down.  I don't see this article, or us as writers, as providers of support for the theory itself; I'm OK (as my first bit will show) with defining the apparent support level within the dance, native and/or scholarly communities, however.  As far as Mei'ra work, I know it well -- we're both in the [|SCA], and indeed, her work was key to stimulating my interest in raqs historical research.  At the same time, I have...a number of issues with her work; she tends to conflate timeframes and not "connect the dots" on regional variations, for a couple of issues.  I was hoping to use some of her data (she quotes The Dancer of Shamahka, for one), but perhaps take another approach to laying out the theories of origin for raqs shaquri.  Woodrow, known to some as Asim 21:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * "Some Western women began to learn from and imitate the dances of the Middle East [...] Mata Hari is the most famous example" -- I've been told by a number of people that we should point out that MH was NOT a dancer. I do believe, however, that she used Orentalist motifs, so this is another point I'd love to see citied and clarified.


 * I agree! Although Mata Hari is partially responsible for the interest in bellydance at the time she was not actually a bellydancer in fact she was possibly performing some sort of asian temple dance(I can't remember what exactly but I'd highly reccomend watching the A&E biography on her as it mentions it there.  If I get a chance to watch it again I will post what they believe she was really dancing).  Besides that Mata Hari is not much more than a Glorified Stripper which isn't really the message most of us want to go for... right? Cassandra581 08:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Watched the biography last night and she billed herself as a "hindu" dancer and may have learned some dancing in Java from the people and at the temples there. 66.41.7.124 20:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Right, so that's me looking for a citation, and editing that as well. Thanks for the check! Woodrow, known to some as Asim 20:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Check out the article about her here on wikipedia to see if there are any good sources there. They also have the same information on their article about her being an Indian/Hindu dancer. Cassandra581 04:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Excellent! I'll link back to her, and edit that as a clarification.  Woodrow, known to some as Asim 21:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * "Accents using "pop and lock" [...] dancing with chiffon or silk veils." -- I'd like to either clarify that many of these are Western-only concepts wrt raqs, or pair it down to the basics that all raqs dancers appear to share (and find a good citation for same). Otherwise, we run the risk of comparing McIntosh and Golden Delicious Apples.  :)
 * "Egyptian-style belly dance is based on the work of belly dance legends Samia Gamal, Tahiya Karioka, Naima Akef, and other dancers who rose to fame during the golden years of the Egyptian film industry." -- As important as those ladies were to the development and popularization of raqs shaquri, I firmly believe that we cannot write any decent history of this form without citing the ground-breaking work of Badi‘a Masabni and her Casino Opera, esp. as she's referenced in the Tahiya Karioka article.


 * I agree that Badi'a Masabni is very important to bellydance history (which is why I mentioned her in the Tahiya Karioka article) but She herself is not much of an influence on most dancers of that style simple because her style is not well known. When you hear people talking about who's dancing what style I've never heard someone saying "that's Badi'a Masabni style" but, I have heard quite frequently that's Samia, Tahiya, Naima, Nagwa, Fifi, Dina, Lucy, etc... style.  Perhaps some mention that all of them were taught by Badi'a Masabni and given a position in her troup at Casino Opera (although that was rather short lived for Naima Akef) might be more apropriate or that she was a large influence on early egyptian styles (aka Samia, Tahiya, and Naima). Cassandra581 08:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Ya! By "ground-breaking work" I refer to the core place she had in helping to develop and "sell" raqs shaquri; although some of the style did come from her dancing, it's more about her promotion and support of the dancers.  Woodrow, known to some as Asim 20:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I think adding a small part about that would be good for the article as long as it's kept pretty short. I would reccomend creating a new article specifically about her for a more in-depth understanding of her influence and contributions since the feel of the article is more of a what is this style today kind of thing. Cassandra581 06:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

That's all for now. I do have more I'd like to work on, but there's only so much trouble-makin' and citing a man can do in a day! Thanks for reading and commenting! Woodrow, known to some as Asim 14:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Personally I'd like to see the article re-organized and re-structured to have a better history section which can talk about different theories of origin and then it could ease into more specific styles after that. Only egyptian, american, and turkish are listed now but lebanese is also highly influental as well as well as other styles. I'm not an expert on that style so I haven't expanded the article to include it. Perhaps have two major headings Middle Eastern Styles and Western/American Styles. I'd like to see the whole "general" section re-done and possibly split into a "what is bellydance?"(extremely generic description) and a "History" section. Cassandra581 06:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to Pschemp for catching my horrible mistake! Mea culpla++. For everyone else, I've added the Origin stuff I mentioned above. Woodrow, known to some as Asim 15:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

From Alexandra Ahnide: I'd love to see a new section on competitive belly dancing, there are between 10-20 competitions in the US and others in Iceland, Australia, Egypt, & Lebanon. These competitions are uplifting the standards of this artform. I also edited bellydance to belly dance except in the case of proper nouns: Bellydance Superstars, FatChanceBellyDance, and Bellydance-a-thon. Be11yDancer 01:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Move?
since this is the article on oriental dance in general, I suppose the article should be moved there? "Oriental dance" includes styles that can by no stretch be called "belly dance" (Uzbek dance, Armenian dance), and "belly dance", while certainly in common use, is a term coined by "harem fantasy" notions of Orientalism. dab (𒁳) 17:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * There is a more generic stub on Middle Eastern dance. Someone created a redir at oriental dance but created is as a double redirect, so it was broken. I've edited that redir to point to this article, and I've added a note at the top that will hopefully be acceptable to all and sundry. :-) I don't believe that there is any point moving this page to oriental dance and then having belly dance redir back to there - it makes no difference. --Athol Mullen 00:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Split?
I know that there is a lot of discussion here about the length of the article. Looking at it, I think that it might be worth considering splitting out the Belly dancing in the Western world section to a sub article. --Athol Mullen 00:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article/Good Article Efforts
Rather than Mediation, an RfC would seem to be the better initial course. I've placed the article there; would editors leave their comments here please? --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 14:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Firstly, this is a very small point and I recommend the editors collaborate to expand the article to make it a WP:FAC. That would be a good use of time and energy and one to make you proud. I find the debate about identities and ownership to be somewhat excessive. I would suggest putting that to one side and concentrating on the question of whether the disputed link would be an asset in terms of being helpful to readers to gain further information. I don't know much about belly dancing, but I did check out the site and it seemed to me to be something that would be useful to the reader. If this is the case, then it should be linked. Don't fight for points of principle. Be practical. Tyrenius 16:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Mel, I whole-heartedly welcome others opinions on the dispute but you have already made it quite obvious that you are not interested in anyone else's opinions or interventions on the matter unless they are in full support of what you say and want. I have tried informal mediation you didn't contribute anything constructive to that.  I have listed the site for reccomendation in the talk page here, you didn't even leave a comment on whether the article looks as though it may be benifical to readers.  You only want to argue about my supposed identity.  I tried to to post the issue on the 3rd opinion page but, it was removed because I had already entered into informal mediation.  I decided to try the only thing you have admited that you will listen to which is someone who has authority over you.  That is why I have requested formal mediation.  You try continuously to throw Wikipedia rules and guidelines in my face but when I give you actual quotes from Wikipedia's rules and guidelines you don't care to even consider them.  If you are so certain that you are correct than why not agree to the mediation and we can all come to some kind of agreement.  If you have done nothing wrong you should have nothing to fear and nothing to lose. I'm tired of the petty arguments and would like to the matter closed.  As I stated in another post on this page I am willing to compromise... are you? Cassandra581 22:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

If you are really willing to "compromise" I suggest you do not press this matter at the current time, but get on with expanding the article. It is not worth all this expended effort, when it can be put to much better use. If an editor is contesting its inclusion, then it is probably better that it is not included. To be honest, your explanations re. your involvement or lack of it in the site stretch the bounds of credibility. Tyrenius 19:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I also feel that expanding the article is of importance which is why if you read a little further up I have commented on woodrow/asim's post for corrections and additions to the article. I'm also trying to write a little more in depth section for the prohibitions section of the article.  I also have suggestions for reorganzing the article a little bit to make it easier to understand and follow.  However, the subject is far to complex and vairied to list everything on this article.  That is why the external links are important as well.  And I would prefer to come to a working agreement with Mel on this and have said before it could be any number of other resource sites that are also good but he does not want to allow any of them.  That is why I'm opting for further mediation.  Also, not pressing the matter would not be a compromise that would be an act of submission.  Compromise means both parties must give and take a little. See also  Cassandra581 06:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

These are great ideas for the article. It can easily be over twice the length it is now. See Featured articles. You are obviously knowledgable on the subject, which is great. Seriously - write the article first, then worry about the links later. You will probably find that you have used some of the sites for references, so they will appear in the Notes anyway and will therefore not be necessary in the external links section anyway. There's time to sort out the external links at leisure and by involving other editors. Of course there should be an external links section. Don't get bogged down in a loggerheads with just one editor on the article. There is plenty of time. See what things look like in a month or so if necessary. Tyrenius 21:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Images
Umm, I hit this page on random and... the pictures didn't seem to be too great... so, I did a search on flickr

These results are CC-BY-2.0 and can be freely uploaded here...

These results are CC-BY-SA-2.0 and are also free images...

I don't know what is a good image and I didn't look through them... but if any user knows what represents a good picture I recommend they search through those images. For those not familiar with Flickr note the "different sizes" link at the bottom right so you can get the full size image. I figured maybe linking these would help. gren グレン 22:11, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I know -- some of them are my images, in point of fact. *Smile*  I'm on Flick as woodrow, and I use the CC-BY-SA-2.0 license.  Having said that -- what do you dislike about the images on the article?  I agree that there are always better images, yet at the same time I'm loathe to change for the sake of change.  If you think we can display a variety better with a different image, I'm all ears as to what folks would judge as a good image, and why.  I'm just wary about the perfect becoming the enemy of the good (enough).  For now, I'm trying to focus on the text of the article, but that's just my personal calling...Woodrow, known to some as Asim 13:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I am a little disturbed by the image "Example of a fantasy non-historical Belly Dancing Costume", but don't want to remove it without appropriate discussion. I apologize if my assumption is incorrect, but the woman in the image appears to have undergone extreme surgical breast enhancement, which looks very unnatural and could further the misconceptions about belly dance being a burlesque art form.


 * I am sorry you are disturbed. However, it is a legitimate image of a professional Belly and tribal dancer who goes by the name "Sahira".  She was part of a performance company at a Renaissance Festival which I attended.  They do NOT allow photographs during their performance, so I took this one after it was over. I'm sorry you are disturbed by her breast size - I must say her figure was used to great affect in her dancing.  She demonstrated both traditional Turkish belly dancing and tribal belly dancing, each in appropriate costuming.


 * Dear lord, where does she buy her bras?! I'm a 32i without augmentation and I take considerable care to keep chest accents tasteful because western society is QUITE sensitive to things like two huge honkers. No should shimmies faster than two in a measure, and no LOOK HERE! bra coverings... I just think that with the body image that belly dance normally promotes, we shouldn't be adverstising cosmetic plastic surgery as one of say, four or five pictoral examples that the English speaking world has knowing access to. 71.7.243.155 01:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

could I get some more information on the person in the image with the caption "Example of a fantasy non-historical Belly Dancing Costume"  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)
 * Given that uploaded that photo, you would probably be best asking on their talk page. --Athol Mullen 02:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

This dancer may very well have bellydanced but, I'm sorely disappointed in her choice of costume as a dancer during the Renaissance period. Truly professional bellydancers who go on gigs (paid and unpaid) are trying to get rid of the overly sexual images that lead to inaccurate perceptions that much of Western society have of bellydancers. Is this supposed to be an overly sexual cheap shot towards bellydancers? If this dancer is truly part of a troupe, why use THAT particular dancer THAT particular costume? Also, allow me to point out that this same picture poster had posted (I'm assuming it's a picture of the same woman) in a Renaissance costume in the "tightlacing" article that would have her quickly escorted off of the fairgrounds because it fully exposes her breasts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.171.26.255 (talk) 14:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I just looked at the picture to which you objected on the tightlacing article: her breast are not fully exposed - they are covered by quite a bit of black fabric.  As for your claim reagrding being kicked out - whose standards, which fair?  If she were kicked out for that costume, as a paying customer, she'd have a bit of legal redress, I believe.  You're angry, and take umbrage over, the overt sexualisation of those two photos.  On the one for bellydancing that you oppose - it isn't suggesting that it is an accurate representation of what a bellydancer would have looked like in the renaissance - in fact, it says non historical fantasy piece.  It IS a realistic depiction of a bellydancer at a renfair.  It may not be one you LIKE, but it is a true depiction of one.  As for being opposed the the picture at the tightlacing article, what's your beef with that, other than your claim that her breasts are fully exposed (which is incorrect)?--Vidkun (talk) 17:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * As it so happens, I danced at a renn faire for 4 years in the mid-90's. I've seen attendees -- not dancers -- wear such an outfit.  I have seen dancers at other faires wear similar outfits.  But given that the caption is negative towards the image, I think it's clear that the outfit is not meant to be representative of anything but a fantasy of what people think dancers wear.  And, having said that, I'm willing to approach the topic of replacing the image.  Comments on that? Woodrow, known to some as Asim 17:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asim (talk • contribs)

Bellydancing vs. Burlesque
MauraZebra: I have a number of friends who do both forms of dance; I've never heard of anyone claiming that "belly-work" is Burlesque-specific. Morocco's research, cited in the article itself, points to historical references to belly work in the Middle East that pre-date Burlesque (as does Belly Dance itself in the West).

Having said all that, I'm good with the edit because that line kind of sucked, anyway. I'd just like to get a citation about belly work being Burlesque-specific, 'cause I'm curious like that. :) Woodrow, known to some as Asim 02:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Asim, I am new to Wikipedia and I hope I have found the correct way to respond to your inquiry.

I have to apologize for not remembering exactly what I changed, but I do remember that the problem was not the word 'belly work' but 'entice men' or something similar and that the sentence(s) containing these words were at the very beginning of the article, which lends them a great weight. I also apologize for not being much of a scholar on these things, but from what I have read I do agree that Morocco is an authority on these things and that she does state that belly work originated long before American burlesque. But she also hates the phrase 'belly dance' for the same reasons that I objected to the sentence(s) that I deleted. You can find a very good article by Morocco herself on her website at http://www.casbahdance.org/CHILDBIRTH.htm which explains objection. Here's the first paragraph: 'Danse du ventre, or, to use the deliberately coined American misnomer, belly dancing, is not at all what Western society thinks it to be, i.e. a dance of sex and seduction. This is an erroneous and ignorant belief, reinforced and perpetrated by stage and movie writers too lazy to do research. Neither is it a 'belly' dance, since much more is involved than just the stomach muscles.'

My understanding from reading material such as 'Looking for Little Egypt' is that what we know call 'belly dance' received its serious introduction to American society in the late 1800s but in a very very few years (two? three? years after the Chicago Exposition) had gone from a serious demonstration of middle-eastern dancing to a plague of burlesque shows nationwide, something belly dancers to this very day have to contend with on almost any gig. The reality is that there are dancers in the Middle East who are also prostitutes, out of necessity or choice; and there are exotic dancers and burlesque performers in America dressed in belly dance costumes who are enticing men, our of necessity or choice; but the art form of the good, the great, and the best belly dancers no more revolves around enticing or seducing people than ballet, flamenco or modern dance forms do. IMO, anyway.

I hope this is the answer to your question. Maura

Belly dancing in pop culture
I have seen belly dancing in a number of movies (none of the titles come to mind right now... sorry). Does anyone think this would be valid information to add into the "Belly dancing in pop culture" section? Would this be a new section altogether? Personally, I can say that I would have liked to have found this kind of information in the article. Thanks for input. - a novice wikipedian Kealakekua 01:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

That would be a wonderful idea. I mean, hey, if it wasn't for TV I wouldn't have really seen my first belly dancer and I wouldn't be involved as I am today. Plus, belly dancers have numerous cultures themselves. Try bellywiki.com! It's only real small now but I hope people start adding. 71.7.243.155 01:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Sharqi or sharki?
I noticed that the article uses both sharqi and sharki. I understand that, because of romanization issues, both usages are probably more or less correct, but I do think that we should have a consistent spelling on this page. Normally, I would go with the one that's more common, but I'm not familiar enough with the topic to know which spelling that is. I suspect sharqi is more common, since it's more common in the article, but I'll leave that decision to more knowledgeable editors. --ChandlerH 14:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

The spelling Sharqi is the only correct one. The letter Q ist used for the arab qaf, K is used for Kaf, entirely different letters that may even chance words (i.e. qalb oder kalb - qalb= heart, kalb= dog). Reyhan, not registered yet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.178.216.101 (talk) 17:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Audience Etiquette
I'd like to request someone write a section/guide to audience etiquette. A while ago some friends and I went to a restaurant which, unbeknownst to us, had a bellydancer. So we're eating and she comes to our table and dances. Okay, where do my eyes go? If this was a strip club my eyes could go wherever and there's no problem. A bellydancer is not a stripper, though, so where am I supposed to look? Just at her face? Her belly? Avoid her chest? It was quite a dilemma so I played it safe with her face. However, she's dancing so I guess I'm supposed to be looking at her dancing. It would have been easy if she wasn't a foot away from me. I have looked all over and haven't found a guide to what the audience etiquette is so I'm requesting one. I don't know if that's appropriate for Wikipedia so I throw it out to you folks. Hondo77 17:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't know how to start writing a section on it, but I'll just say: when she's not dancing, eyes stay above the chin unless she's got a wrap on. When she is dancing, you're able to look anywhere, but the point of watching her dance is to really watch the parts she's currently moving. Best thing to do is keep this in the back of your mind: the only reason this is different from other dance forms is that she's using her hips and chest to dance, and not her arms and legs flaying around like they do in western styles. So, if you're watching a musical, you're watching the big movements and if you're watching BD, you're watching for the small movements. Also remember that she's not doing it to be sexy and that your mother can do the same moves if she practices :) Also if she seems inviting, chances are she's inviting you to get up and dance too! Try a shoulder shimmy if you dare! Your friends will love it, and so will the dancer. Some restaurant owners WANT customers up and dancing with the belly dancer. 24.222.65.225 16:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Another thing is that when a customer responds to the dancer's invitation to join her, there is no touching though she may be quite close and the movements may appear to be invitational. It's her dance; she's not your western style dancing partner. The safe thing to do is try to copy a little of what she is doing, and... feel free to look very impressed.Julia Rossi 06:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * This is a performance artist performing at your table. LOOK at the dancer. Not looking at the dancer is offensive. Averting your eyes suggests that you have some kind of problem with what she is doing. I have danced in restaurants many times and I have never had a problem with people looking at me because I want them to see the dance moves I've worked so hard to perfect. It makes me very uncomfortable when people won't look at me. Do you think ballerinas would appreciate it if you went to the ballet and hid your eyes? Ballerinas are often more scantily clad than belly dancers. Dancers of all kinds tend to wear costumes that allow the viewer to observe body movements. Proper audience etiquette for almost ANY performance genre: watch, smile and clap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.45.119 (talk) 14:22, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Belly Dance & Health
I hope no one takes offense at my suggestions, but I believe this article would benefit by removing, or at least editing down, the Health and Belly Dancing section. It reads more like a brochure than an encyclopedia article. Also, in response to the suggestion to add a section on how to act around a dancer...that seems an acceptable topic to talk about here on the discussion page, but maybe not in the actual article itself. I would help edit this article myself, but there's so much dispute regarding belly dance history. The person who wrote this shows an amazing knowledge of the subject, and I thank them for sharing. But maybe someone could make this article more accessable to the average reader. I'm a student dancer who knows some of the backround info, and I still felt bewildered by the "density" and layout of the information. SkyllaLaFey (talk) 03:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I forgot one of our guidelines... to Be Bold! So I went ahead and made the revision to the Health section. Come over to my page if there's an issue with this, so we can try to politely resolve this.  (Does that have timid noobie written all over it, or what?!?)SkyllaLaFey (talk) 04:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I posted more information on belly dance Health as it is a pertinent aspect of belly dance. Dance forms have been utilized to benefit health for many, many years and in many different forms. It is very much a part of the culture and history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Southfloridabellydancemeetup (talk • contribs) 21:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * PLEASE add some citations to the information you've added on health. We will get tagged on it, and we already have enough information that's been officially tagged as lacking citations.  And if you can't cite it, please remove it, as this article is pretty long, already.  Thanks!Woodrow, known to some as Asim 02:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asim (talk • contribs)


 * I think there is far too much in there now, and a lot of it seems to be about exercise in general not specifically about belly dance. It does also need citations, as Asim said. I've also moved these comments into a separate section so as not to isolate Daniel5127's comment which appears to be regarding the external links. MorganaFiolett (talk) 16:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Further to the above, since no action has been taken over the weekend, I'm going to be bold and revert that section to what we had before. What Southfloridabellydancemeetup added is uncited, partly non-specific to belly dance, and a little too promotional in tone. MorganaFiolett (talk) 09:58, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Did you already revert the section you are talking about? Daniel5127 (talk) 23:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes. It's still uncited, but it's shorter, more relevant and less promotional in tone- the lesser of two evils, really. If I have a chance (when I'm not at work) I'll see if I can find some relevant sources, but I'm not sure about how to add them so I might have to ask for help. MorganaFiolett (talk) 09:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate the citations which exist in this piece -- good to know that some research exists on this lovely, vital form of dance. But the claims about how belly dancing channels "energy" should not, in my opinion, be presented as fact. What is the basis for these statements? What kind of "energy" are we talking about, here? Gus_andrews —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC).

Article Cleanup
Just checking in, to say I've gone through the general section with sub heads to help navigate the copy; wikified some stuff and made raqs sharqi the uniform spelling for style's sake. Cheers, Julia Rossi 07:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * PS didn't remove the clarify/confusion tag in case there's more to it than that. Leaving that to someone more involved. Julia Rossi 07:22, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Talk Page Cleanup
Hey y'all, I've attempted to do a very basic refactor the talk page in order to make the massive walls of discussion more accessible, and to cut back on redundant talk sections (i.e. the 5+ incarnations of "External Links"). I wasn't sure if anything was obsolete enough to be archived since the debate over external links seems to be ongoingly lengthy and it seemed like it might be helpful for future potential editors of the external links section to have all the previous debate for reference. Feel free to rework this if you feel I've miscategorized something or accidentally cut someone's comment off mid-statement. - Zhukora (talk) 11:18, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

baladi
There are two forms of belly dancing. The first is called raqs baladi. In Palestine and Lebanon, raqs baladi is a social dance performed by people of all ages and by both sexes, during festive occasions- such as weddings- and other social gatherings for fun and celebration. The second form- the more theatrical version- is called raqs sharqi, and it is this type that is most popular in America today. Like raks baladi, raks sharqi is performed by both male and female dancers.

-I would like to change this the world baladi when used to describe bellydance styles is used specicialy to describe the urban form of EGYPTION dance, although it is a general world wich tranlates looslely to local /of this place the particaluar word would not be used to decribe  folk dance in palestine or lebonon - so i would take them out - its way to confusing.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pixel wolf (talk • contribs) 10:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Romani are not the same people as the Luri / Ghorbati / Dombi / Domari nomads of Asia and the Middle East
It is crazy. This article is built on incorrect facts that are not fully research and an insult to the Romani people. Not one bit of evidence is in existance to connect belly dancing to the Romani people. If you are going to spread lies will you please study the Romani laws of living and what is considered 'Marime [mareemeh]' (defiled, polluted, ritually unclean). These laws have their roots firmly in Indian traditions. Please understand how the woman is seen in the family and what her limitations are. It is impossible for Romani to have brought belly dancing with them.

To support any link it is supported by saying a Luri tribe do it. This shows again the information is not research correctly or fully as the Luri are not Romani. It is recorded in Persian history that the Persian King took Luri from India to be musicians in his empire. Amongst Luri in central asia and the middle east they have similar stories amongst themselves. This happened way before the Romani people left India. The Luri do not speak Romani but have a different language of their own with a different root. Romani people who speak a Rajastani / Panjabi dialect from a much later date and use an 'o' on the end of masculine words. Luri / Ghorbati / Dombi / Domari are different to this. Example to support such facts are Domari use Bhar for brother from Hindi 'Bhai'. Romani use Prahl from Panjabi 'Prah'.


 * Rather than debate this again, I ask you to look again at the "Origins" section of this Discussion, where I've already debated this point at length. To summarize: I did not write the section as a listing of "truth", but simply of what ideas on this Dance's origins exist in the "Belly Dance" world. And in point of fact, I HAVE studied the laws in question, although it has been nearly a decade since I did any study, and could not quote them off-hand. I'm also fully aware that the Luri and Romani are different groups that might have some very distant relation, and happen to come from the same general region.


 * Again, I underline -- this section makes pains to underline that the origins listed are NOT academically verified, but merely commentaries and ideas prevalent in the Belly Dance Community. Since there is no academically verified origin of same, it's critical that we take pains to discuss them in detail. I personally find much of this frustration -- I think all of the origins kind of suck, but Wikipedia is not a place for me to air out my opinions on the Origins of this form, but to describe, as neutrally as possible, what a number of Dancers not only think, but have passed down from student to student.Woodrow, known to some as Asim 00:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asim (talk • contribs)


 * But if an idea had been generationally prevalent but then turns out to be false, it should be introduced with, "Although now known to be false, for many years it was believed that..." 207.237.41.202 (talk) 06:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Hollywood VS True Bellydance
Why do ppl keep deleting the section on the controvercy sorrounding Hollywood's version of bellydance? Certainly the controvercy found on this talk page is proof enough that there is a problem with western pop culture over sexualizing the dance, which is also alluded to earlier in the actual article. There is nothing wrong in admitting that there is a variation in opinions on this subject, unless the idea behind wikipedia is to deny reality. I don't have a written source right now, but as this is a culture that spreads often from word of mouth, and teacher to teacher, that is to be expected. And certainly a page that allows for such conjecture over the background of bellydance, can allow that people have a variety of opinions on whether or not it should be called belly dance if used for a strip club? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.33.24.135 (talk) 02:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The funny thing is, I am inclined to agree that I do find the trend frustrating. But, simply put, Wikipedia is not a place to have that debate -- and it is a debate, as others in the dance community will say that having them put the name out there, even incorrectly, s a boon to the dance -- I know a number of dancer instructors who've used, for example, Brittany's interest to draw in students, and teach them real raqs sharqi. I also note that the prior paragraph to yours covers this well -- few of these people have real training -- without making an assertion as to the "correctness" of their dancing. You did not present a variation of opinion, but one opinion. Moreover, neither of your sources even reference this topic directly, as Shira is talking about how pop culture, as a whole, is intersecting with our art form; she barely even mentions the celebrity angle. And the other piece you cite doesn't address this subject at all. Citations need to be pretty much on the subject in some obvious way.
 * With respect to the background statements (at least at the beginning of the article, we need a cleanup on the other, spurious ones), they, again, underlies my point. The origins are qualified as neutral non-judgmental statements, no weight is given as to their accuracy, as opposed to your flat assertion regarding Celebrities, and most have citations -- and where they do not, it's been noted. Normally such a POV would not be taken, even, but without a academically-stable origin of the form, this attempt to neutrally present what has been built, without judgment as to it's veracity or lack thereof, is the next best thing.
 * The reason, time and again, these kinds of things come up in Talk isn't because they are incorrect. It's because they aren't presented with either a Neutral POV, or because they lack citations to prove their point. Show that a considerable majority of dancers, or a number of top-league raqs sharqi artists, have spoken out against this, and this might work for you. For example of a similar issue, if I wanted to include the problems Egyptian dancers have with Western dancers, I'd cite the mainstream coverage on the issue of foreign dancers in Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries, but also quote Dina's statements on the matter -- who is, obviously, a major dance star both here and abroad.
 * Moreover, I strongly suggest a reading of at least the Neutral point of view and Verifiability sections, which can explain in more detail what Wikipedia is aiming for. Understand please -- I've just taken a considerable amount of time to explain this, because I don't want you to feel slighted, but there is a point to be made, here. Woodrow, known to some as Asim 12:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asim (talk • contribs)

"Health and Bellydancing"
The section "Health and Bellydancing" is just terrible. It's written like an advertisement. Then citations are in the section. And a quote is attributed to "Ali, the instructor at the studio"? I really would like some help with this as I'm too inexperienced to do it all on my own. Thanks everyone! -Madeleine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.166.26.192 (talk) 17:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

United States section
This section completely contradicts the earlier section, where is says that belly dance became popularized in Chicago in the 19th century. If it was a big craze in 1900, how did it first become a craze in 1950? Mister Hospodar (talk) 17:50, 20 October 2009 (UTC)