This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lebanon-related articles 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.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I'm sorry, but this article has almost no sources, and is, in fact, one giant celebration to, and a fan page for Nancy Ajram. I've added the clean up label because of all this. Robster1983 (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
More sources and a way more neutral style of writing is needed. Sections needing clean-up/different style of writing are:
1. Development and release: No sources added whatsoever.
2. Composition and musical styles: No sources have been added whatsoever.
3. Promotion: Seems as if the promotion continues on this page. Of course Nancy's manager says that something is "the best music video we've shot yet." I would drop the following line: Contrary to the lead single, "Sheikh El Shabab" has a comical music video which her manager described as "the best music video we've shot yet."
4. Rumors: Such sections are dicey to begin with here on Wikipedia, and are most of the times removed, for Wikipedia is not a gossip magazine. And naming a subsection Rumors, here, on Wikipedia, is just like (knowingly or without intent) plunging in open water with a big open wound in front of a great white shark: both don't stand a chance. However, if sources can be found, then maybe someone could add it to/blend it with the subsection of Development and release? Otherwise it's best to be removed.
Other than that, I also must say: kudos to all the people who put effort in the article adding all them sources, it really improved!! Again big kudos!!!:) Robster1983 (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
