Talk:2002 in music

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Years Low‑importance

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

History Low‑importance

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

Format

I dislike the "<- xxxx in music | ( yyyy ) | zzzz in music ->". It looks awful. Would this be better as "See also: xxxx in music, yyyy in general, zzz in music."? -- SGBailey 17:44 Dec 23, 2002 (UTC)

Is there an arrow character? That would be the ticket. But yeah, the <- is hardly aesthetically pleasing.- Tubby

There are &larr and &rarr. -- Zoe

In mathematics articles we often use -> (edit the page to see how this is done). <- and -> look better than <- and -> on all browsers I've tried, and unlike ← and → they do actually work on all browsers. --Zundark 20:46 Dec 23, 2002 (UTC)

I've tried the <tt> on 2002 (only) and it looks better but not good. The entire line looks too geeky. I really do prefer a textual approach such as my original suggestion, however I'm not (too) fussy about the details. I don't like the arrows, the pipes or the parentheses. -- SGBailey 22:54 Dec 23, 2002 (UTC)

Votes for 'years in music' event

(I note that as of 2002-12-30, neither the two events listed in "years in music" is in 2002 itself! -- SGBailey)

Nothing stands out to me, I abstain -- SGBailey

In the abscence of a better choice (or maybe I'm not suppressing my biases as well as I think I am...), The Rolling Stones' Forty Licks. nknight 14:04 Jan 1, 2003 (UTC)

Yoshimi gets my vote. - Tubby

Small question

Hey, is that list of top selling 10 albums actually accurate? Looks very fishy to me.... --

Yeah, we should put a source on that. - Tubby

Changed it to that from a citable source that also looked like it probably had sane data, namely http://www.soundspike.com/story/724. -- nknight 00:29 Jan 9, 2003 (UTC)

Here's the list that WAS on the page:

KoЯn - Untouchables
Queens Of The Stone Age - Songs For The Deaf
Sum 41 - Does This Look Infected?
Beck - Sea Chage
Crazy Town - Darkhorse
System of a Down - Steal This Album
Audioslave - Audioslave
Red Hot Chili Peppers - By The Way
Soundtrack - 8 Mile
Various Artists - Now That's What I Call Music! Vol. 11

The top selling albums needs to state a geographic area. Is this the USA or the world? -- Hotlorp

I think that was Billboard, so it's USA. You can specify it if you want, I'm just not sure I see the need unless somebody can point us at reliable data for sales outside the U.S. --nknight 03:38 Jan 13, 2003 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 2002 in music. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Page views

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Leo1pard (talk) 11:51, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

The name of Shaam

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The name 'Shaam' (Arabic: شَـام) would originally refer to the Syrian region,^[1]^[2] so the actor's page was renamed to Shaam (actor). Leo1pard (talk) 11:51, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

References

^ Article "AL-SHĀM" by C.E. Bosworth, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Volume 9 (1997), page 261.
^ Salibi, K. S. (2003). A House of Many Mansions: The History of Lebanon Reconsidered. I.B.Tauris. pp. 61–62. ISBN 978-1-86064-912-7. To the Arabs, this same territory, which the Romans considered Arabian, formed part of what they called Bilad al-Sham, which was their own name for Syria. From the classical perspective however Syria, including Palestine, formed no more than the western fringes of what was reckoned to be Arabia between the first line of cities and the coast. Since there is no clear dividing line between what are called today the Syrian and Arabian deserts, which actually form one stretch of arid tableland, the classical concept of what actually constituted Syria had more to its credit geographically than the vaguer Arab concept of Syria as Bilad al-Sham. Under the Romans, there was actually a province of Syria, with its capital at Antioch, which carried the name of the territory. Otherwise, down the centuries, Syria like Arabia and Mesopotamia was no more than a geographic expression. In Islamic times, the Arab geographers used the name arabicized as Suriyah, to denote one special region of Bilad al-Sham, which was the middle section of the valley of the Orontes river, in the vicinity of the towns of Homs and Hama. They also noted that it was an old name for the whole of Bilad al-Sham which had gone out of use. As a geographic expression, however, the name Syria survived in its original classical sense in Byzantine and Western European usage, and also in the Syriac literature of some of the Eastern Christian churches, from which it occasionally found its way into Christian Arabic usage. It was only in the nineteenth century that the use of the name was revived in its modern Arabic form, frequently as Suriyya rather than the older Suriyah, to denote the whole of Bilad al-Sham: first of all in the Christian Arabic literature of the period, and under the influence of Western Europe. By the end of that century it had already replaced the name of Bilad al-Sham even in Muslim Arabic usage.

Add topic

[Volume_9_1997_page_261-1] Article "AL-SHĀM" by C.E. Bosworth, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Volume 9 (1997), page 261.

[Salibi2003-2] Salibi, K. S. (2003). A House of Many Mansions: The History of Lebanon Reconsidered. I.B.Tauris. pp. 61–62. ISBN 978-1-86064-912-7. To the Arabs, this same territory, which the Romans considered Arabian, formed part of what they called Bilad al-Sham, which was their own name for Syria. From the classical perspective however Syria, including Palestine, formed no more than the western fringes of what was reckoned to be Arabia between the first line of cities and the coast. Since there is no clear dividing line between what are called today the Syrian and Arabian deserts, which actually form one stretch of arid tableland, the classical concept of what actually constituted Syria had more to its credit geographically than the vaguer Arab concept of Syria as Bilad al-Sham. Under the Romans, there was actually a province of Syria, with its capital at Antioch, which carried the name of the territory. Otherwise, down the centuries, Syria like Arabia and Mesopotamia was no more than a geographic expression. In Islamic times, the Arab geographers used the name arabicized as Suriyah, to denote one special region of Bilad al-Sham, which was the middle section of the valley of the Orontes river, in the vicinity of the towns of Homs and Hama. They also noted that it was an old name for the whole of Bilad al-Sham which had gone out of use. As a geographic expression, however, the name Syria survived in its original classical sense in Byzantine and Western European usage, and also in the Syriac literature of some of the Eastern Christian churches, from which it occasionally found its way into Christian Arabic usage. It was only in the nineteenth century that the use of the name was revived in its modern Arabic form, frequently as Suriyya rather than the older Suriyah, to denote the whole of Bilad al-Sham: first of all in the Christian Arabic literature of the period, and under the influence of Western Europe. By the end of that century it had already replaced the name of Bilad al-Sham even in Muslim Arabic usage.

[1]

[2]