Talk:Mukhannath

message: I input the arabic text given here for mukhanathun and get "the lady boys" as the translation.  Also interesting to me is that if I take the word "transvestite" translate it into arabic, then from arabic back into English using their tool I get transsexual.  Also the arabic text from what little I know seems to read more like the way mukhanathin (singular) should sound.  Notice the three dots at the end (reading right to left now) المتخنث .  Here is how I read that from left to right.  The vertical bar and the line following it denote the ubiqutos "Al" the characters in between resemble the ones in the text we have here on wikipedia.  Last but not least the three vowel dots on the end sound like eeen  as in Al-mukahathin. I thiks we should consider changing this text.  Perhaps someone more expert in Arabic than I cay say which is more correct to use. --Hfarmer (talk) 17:52, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thinking about that a bit more I am now totally confident to replace that spelling.
----
Not sure exactly what you mean -- مخنثون mukhannathūn (note long vowel) is the "sound" nominative plural form, while مخنثين mukhannathīn (again, with a long vowel) would be the "sound" accusative/genitive plural form.  In colloquial Arabic, mukhannathīn would be used in all grammatical case contexts, but in standard written or Classical Arabic, mukhannathūn is the basic plural dictionary form or "citation" form (if you want to cite the word in the plural).  The form mukhannathin with short vowel, spelled مخنث would be the genitive SINGULAR form, but the final -n in the singular (marking indefiniteness) would not ordinarily cooccur with the definite article... AnonMoos (talk) 00:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Woah I never realized that arabic had an accusative plural form. :-?  So what I gather from your expert advice is that there are classical and coloquial variations.  So what we should do is use the one that is appropriate to the source.  Perhaps using the colloquial term would be best for the title. and the classical term when citing sources from back in the Islamic golden age? --Hfarmer (talk) 12:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the usual practice at Wikipedia is to go with standard written Classical Arabic unless there's some specific reason to do otherwise. AnonMoos (talk) 19:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fun with google translator

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mukhannathun. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927222247/http://doc.ilga.org/content/download/4522/27322/version/1/file/ILGA-July06-Religions.pdf to http://doc.ilga.org/content/download/4522/27322/version/1/file/ILGA-July06-Religions.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:40, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Hey all,
The mukhannathun in Medina during the Umayyad days were really the most notable ones, as in the ones that are mentioned the most often in historical sources and little tales, so I tried to make them a more prominent part of the article. I described the two most frequently-mentioned ones (Tuways and al-Dalal) but if anyone has more information on any of the others, please add it in. Dragoon17 (talk) 18:21, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added stuff about Medina mukhannathun