Revision as of 21:36, 26 August 2007

Why did you remove Osroene?

Hi,

There are many sources referring to Arabs who ruled Osroene. Please read the page Osroene and its Talk page. Roman sources consider the ruling class and inhabitants of Osroene as ethnic Arabs. The main reasonm that I added the material was that Ancient Arabs is redirect to Ancient Arabia.Heja Helweda 21:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi heja, I didn't remove it I just added it in a section below the Nabateans in the article. Thanks for your contribution. spaas --Skatewalk 22:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Thank you!Heja Helweda 22:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Kindah and Qays

I know that Bakr ibn Wa'il were ruled by Kindah. Possibly also Banu 'Amir (ar:بنو عامر بن صعصعة) (who were part of Qays 'Aylan). I'll try to search for others.

As for modern tribes that belong to Qays, the ones that I know of are: 'Utaybah, Mutayr, Subay', the Suhool, and most of the tribes of southern Iraq (Bani Kaab, Ubadah, Khafajah, and al-Mintifij المنتفق). Utaybah is possibly from Hawazin, and Mutayr claim to be from Ghatafan. Subay', the Suhool, and the Iraqi tribes all belong to Banu 'Amir, especially Banu Uqayl. Also, the Jabrids belong to Bani Uqayl from Bani 'Amir from Qays Aylan, and there is a remnant of Bani Sulaym still living near Medina.

By the way, the Hawazin branch is much larger than the Ghatafan branch, especially because the tribes of Bani 'Amir are included under Hawazin.

Two minor notes: usually the sources speak of قيس عيلان Qays Aylan, not Qays ibn Aylan, and بنو سليم is pronounced Banu Sulaym, not Saleem.

Keep up the good work! -- Slacker 10:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

According to Britannica, Taghlib, Banu Asad, and Kinanah were also under Kindah. Slacker 11:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ancient Arabia

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. The JPS 13:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I think Elias is taking it too serious. It is a well known fact that the roots of the Akkadians were more Southerner then they established their empire centuries later. So no, I don't get offended (and even if I did, what does it matter, facts count on wiki) if Akkad was listen in Ancient Arabia. But lets get this straight - its Ancient Arabia, not Ancient Arabs, right? Is that how every ChaldoAssyrian is ? - No, absolutely not. in the Iraqi websites they say ChaldoAssyrians and I thought ChaldoAssyrian is proper beause I saw your edit n the ANcient Arabia page, where you said Chaldean = Assyria - ChaldoAssyrian is a term used by political parties, not on a encyclopedia. Chaldean just means Catholic. I don't think its important to list the religion of a group. Ethnic group is enough. Chaldean 03:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Try using the term "Ancient Arabian" instead of "Ancient Arab" when referring to some of those groups. Hopefully that should solve the problem. Slacker 08:23, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

about protection.

You can request the protection from an adminstrator , such as User:The_JPS , or User:FayssalF . But i think they will Deny your request because the article still havent reached it worest case. ask them anyways. Ammar ( - ) 15:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

In fact , User:The_JPS has already protected Ancient Arabia. Ammar ( - ) 15:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

RFCU

I'm just a CU clerk and have nothing to do with process, so outlining the situation to me will do you no good. All I do is make sure that all the requests are formatted properly, and I've got nothing to do with judging the merits of the case. MSJapan 16:19, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Skatewalk

Hello, I am Balu, an Iraqi Arab. As i ahve noticed that you have been in a huge arguments with another user, but let me corect to you that . Akkadians are not Arabs, they are Semitics but not Arabs, Ask why? hehehe... well because therm "Arab" does orginally means thoose from Desserts, like thoose who lived in the desserts. In Akkad time Arabs where called nabataens. I think many people thinks all Semitics people are Arabs because Arabs are the largest leading Semitic people today. I hope this helped. Balu2000 16:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Balu my friend, Thats not the issue! The issues is that the Akkadians were to be included in the Ancient Arabia article because they live in Arabia not because of who they are. even if the Akkadians were German and they lived in ancient Arabia, we will have to include them in the article. you understand me? --Skatewalk 18:23, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that, in this matter yes I agree with you that this should be listed in this article Ancient Arabia. I will check futher on this Article. Balu2000 18:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

OK Balu thanks, I just restored the article. --Skatewalk 18:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ancient Arabia

Well I see; Ancient Arabia is a geo term while the origins is different unless they originated in the region which shouldn't be confused with blood mixing, Akkadians were not Arabs and is absurd to mention them except for geo purposes I will work on it thanks. --Vonones 22:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Arabia never had a blood mixing issue? til this day I still dont recognize the Arabs as a race, so Elas is barking on the wrong tree! --Skatewalk 22:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay but you shouldn't call him a extremist especially about Dabachmann since he is a admin. --Vonones 22:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Well thats the truth. AT the end of the day you cant change history admin or not. Regarding the article I will fix anything you point out, myself I still lots needs to be done (removed), but Elias has been vandalizing the article for the last week now. --Skatewalk 22:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Dbachmann is not Assyrian and not related he is more of a neutral editor. --Vonones 22:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Well not really, going through his history. You will se him closing in on Elias (naySayers). Follow the Arameans article. comon you know what I mean--Skatewalk 23:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

He probably followed Elias's edits to make sure the article is accurate, he is not Assyrian, I assume he is German but he is on a alot of Indian, Armenian, Sumerian etc articles too he is npov editor. --Vonones 23:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The message was abit confusing since I am not part of the argument. I agree with Cheldan that Arabia is different than Arabs since we are talking about a geographical term. Although I disagree with people saying that Arabs are a pure race since there is No pure race, anyway how can I help?--Aziz1005 22:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Well the problem is that Elias is insiting that the Akkadians should not be included in the Ancient Arabia article, although they originated from Arabia. Myself I know that modern ARab is a cultural/political term that dont translate into the geographical Arabia we are discussing here. Elias is either confused or stubborn. I dont believe in race, let alone an Arab race!--Skatewalk 23:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Well the problem is the text makes a assumption that Akkadians are Arabs, Arabs as in the people; since Arab is not a region but people. --Vonones 23:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Seen, I got your point of view --Aziz1005 23:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I changed it to Arabian, User:Slackster suggeted that we change it to Arabian so it dont get confused with the modern Arab term. Not every Arab is Arabian and vs Versa. --Skatewalk 23:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay but that is not a geo name. --Vonones 23:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The Arabia entry on the Britannica they refer to it as Geographic region they reffered to the ancient Semites. (Arabian tribal federations). At that time there was nothoing such as Arab identity so they were refering to the Arabian peninsual as a geographic location. (do you think they were reffering to an ethnic Arab group at that ancient period of time?)--Skatewalk 23:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Co-operation needed

Hey man , please read Talk:Ancient_Arabia#Co-operation_needed , thanks Ammar ( - ) 23:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

History

Here are a couple of links to Jawad Ali's المفصّل: . The book is printed in 9 volumes plus an index, but only the first two volumes are available online. Those two volumes still contain a wealth of information.

Regarding Bani Sulaym, yes the Sulamis that reside around Medina today are the same Bani Sulaym that migrated to North Africa. Their land was Nejd and Hejaz, especially Harrat Bani Sulaym حرّة بني سليم near Medina. Hilal are from Banu 'Amir. They may have resided near Yemen, but they were not considered a Yemeni (i.e. Qahtanite) tribe. -- Slacker 00:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:

Armenians are not semitic, not sure what you mean I wasn't offended by anything. --Vonones 01:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

• I know that the Armenians are an IndoEuropean group. I was refering to your addition on the Akkadians.Akkad were descendants of Armenians - Added--Skatewalk 01:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Ahh no man, I was messing around with another user; because he was following my edits so I did that to see what he will do LOL :-P --Vonones 01:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

That was only in a edit summary, Akkads are not related to Armenians. --Vonones 01:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

OK lol! I thought that was the reason you were editing Ancient Arabia, and I didnt want you to feel left out!--Skatewalk 01:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Banu Hilal/Sultans of Oman

There is just as much linguistic evidence linking Bani Hilal and Bani Sulaym with the beduoin tribes of Nejd and Hejaz, in my opinion. I'll try to expand the Bani Hilal article later. It's a big topic.

The current sultans of Oman are from Bani Tamim, though in previous times many Ibadhi Imams were from al Azd. Don't forget one of the two founders of Ibadhism, Abdullah ibn Ibadh himself, was from Bani Tamim, while the other, Jabir, was from al-Azd. Unfortunately I don't know anything about how the Omani succession would proceed. Slacker 03:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Ancient Arabs / -ia

No problem. Anyway, please stop re-creating your "Ancient Arabs" stuff. We have Pre-Islamic Arabia. This is on "Ancient Arabia", 600 BC to 600 AD. Please work on that. For prehistoric times, we have Category:Archaeological sites in Saudi Arabia (and you are free to create Archaeology of the Arabian peninsula if you like). For ancient history, we have Ancient Near East. Your classification of Akkadians and Canaanites as "Arabs" is wrong, no matter under what title you post it. --dab (𒁳) 06:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I never classified the cannanites as Arabs! And the Akkadians are listed among the people of Ancient Arabia. Please reread the article--Skatewalk 08:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Brigitte gabriel.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Brigitte gabriel.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 02:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Brigitte gabriel.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Brigitte gabriel.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

August 2007

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Arab, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Q 08:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Talk:Arab. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Q 08:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Messages

When leaving messages for users, those go on their User Talk: pages rather then their User: page. Q 09:08, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Stalking=

report this stalking to Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents — Balu2000 12:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

17-30 million

• • I'm afraid you're the one making the claim, so the burden falls on you on on me. In other words, until you can come up with the Arabic website or show us some statement or declaration from what you call neqabet el ashraf, only then could we look into the issue. --Lanternix 21:58, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Lanternix, I am not Egyptian or Egyptian Arab. If I was you I will make sure I include every group in Egypt to perfect the article. I don't have a problem with your article. I am mildly interested in the subject because it causes edit wars for the Arab article....sigh & I was fancyin an easy solution --Skatewalk 00:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Award

		The Saudi Arabian Barnstar
		For your extreme care about the history of the Arabian peninsula . good job boss Ammar ( - ) 23:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Arabia

Go propose for a name change for example, to Pre-Arabia or PreHistoric Arabia or whatever. --Vonones 01:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Arab Wiki project

Sign up! http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Arab_Wiki_Project

Funkynusayri 22:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

A reduced entry on Ancient Arabia

Can you please evaluate before I start editing on this subject?

The Akkadians and Amorites in Ancient Arabia

The earliest known events in Arabian history are migrations from the peninsula into neighbouring areas . Around 3500 BC, Semitic-speaking peoples of Akkadian origin migrated from their homeland in the Arabian peninsula into the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Mesopotamia, supplanted the Sumerians, and became the Mesopotamian Akkadians (see Akkadians). The Ammuru/Amorites is another group of Semites left Arabia around 2500 BC during the Early Bronze Age and settled along the Levant, mixing in with the local populations there. Some of these migrants became the Amorites and Canaanites of later times

• Bernard Lewis mentions in his book The Arabs in History:

"According to this, Arabia was originally a land of great fertility and the first home of the Semitic peoples. Through the millennia it has been undergoing a process of steady desiccation, a drying up of wealth and waterways and a spread of the desert at the expense of the cultivable land. The declining productivity of the peninsula, together with the increase in the number of the inhabitants, led to a series of crises of overpopulation and consequently to a recurring cycle of invasions of the neighbouring countries by the Semitic peoples of the peninsula. It was these crises that carried the Assyrians, Aramaeans, Canaanites (including the Phoenicians and Hebrews), and finally the Arabs themselves into the Fertile Crescent."

References

1. ^ Philip Khuri Hitti (2002), History of the Arabs, Revised: 10th Edition
2. http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/AKKAD.HTM Washington State University; Akkadians Study
3. http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article-9007224/Amorites The Amorites migration from Arabia
4. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9007224/Amorite The Amorites origin - Britannica
5. Bernard Lewis (2002), The Arabs in History, Oxford University Press, USA; 6New Ed edition, page 17

--Skatewalk 08:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Very good now, but also try to find the ISBN numbers for books . good work boss. Ammar ( - ) 15:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll see what i can do , but don't depend on me so much. Ammar ( - ) 23:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

What do you think?

Hi Skatewalk. Thanks for you note. I wanted to ask you what you think about Balu2000 being blocked. I know he crossed the line in his statements, but it's the first time I encounter him and he's expressed remorse. I just don't want to see someone get banned for saying something in the heat of the moment in a very heated discussion where both parties felt under attack. Anyway, just thought I would see if you wanted to add anything to the subject or not. He's asking to be unblocked on his talk page. Tiamat 22:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Skatewalk. If you know of any other editors who might have an opinion on the subject either way that have dealt with Balu2000 (talk · contribs) before, letting them know what happened might not be a bad idea too. I worry sometimes that we Arabs or Arabized non-Arabs or Muslims or Christians or Jews for whom English is a second-language seem to receive quick judgments that lead to permanent blocks. I've seen it happen a few times now. Perhaps we need a mentoring program? Tiamat 01:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Arab Wikiproject

I am not an Arab, and I surmise you are not one too. Irqirq 21:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC) I am an Arab, but you dont have to be an Arab to be part of the group. If the Arab article interests you you should join so you can participate in the article. I am Christian Arab BTW. --Skatewalk 21:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hamadan

Could you explain to User:AhvaziKaka the difference between the Hamadan tribes of Yemen and the Iranian city of Hamadan? He appears to have some confusion over this and is deleting the article you wrote on the tribe on the grounds that Hamedan is common usage for the city.--▓▒░الأهواز ★ Al-Ahwaz░▒▓ 23:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I know th difference, I restored the redirect and created a new article Hamdan tribe, because in English, the term "Hamadan" is commonly used as a common varity of the city of Hamedan (look it up on google Britannica Encyclopedia Columbia Encyclopedia or elsewhere), not the Hamdan tribe. The page should remain rediercted to the most common usage in English per common sense. AhvaziKaka —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AhvaziKaka (talk • contribs).

It is good that you made the changes after I pointed out your error. Let's hear from this user, shall we?--▓▒░الأهواز ★ Al-Ahwaz░▒▓ 00:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Hamadan is a big tribe extendeing from Yemen to Lebanon and Syria so it has its own page, just like Hamedan (the province) has its own page. (Hamedan is the Persian pronounciation right?)--Skatewalk 00:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you.--▓▒░الأهواز ★ Al-Ahwaz░▒▓ 00:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Hamadan may mean a lot things, but it is most commonly used in English as an alternative name of the city of Hamedan, you can see this by a simple serach on internet. The tribe's page should remain on Hamadan tribe, the Hamadan page should be a redirect to the city. Ahvazikaka —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AhvaziKaka (talk • contribs) 01:14, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

Do you speak Persian? Why not use the proper form? Do you want to give th impressions that Hamadan is an Arabized province? because you are using the Arab pronounciation. Hamedan is the way its pronounced in modern Farsi right? The history of Iran and Ymene, Lebanon and Syria is already close at is. You should not add to the confusion. You see what I mean? You have a whole article going to Hamedan (the province). Hamadan a whole page (the tribe).--Skatewalk 02:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Arab

If you wish to join a re-writing group on the Arab article then feel free to visit thanks — Xeljan 06:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

My talk page is not a spam page!

irqiirq, you just joined yesterday and half of your edits are personal attacks against me!--Skatewalk 09:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Calm down. Is it something wrong with this team that I should be aware off? Juju78 09:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Now its the th time IrqIrq is vandalizing the page?--Skatewalk 09:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Fuck You

Please stop bother me and wikistalking me. Don't tell me what to do, you are not an Adminstrator so we should I care what you say? Irqirq 10:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Well that just shows your class!--Skatewalk 10:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject

Yes I do see, I have joined your Wikiproject. It seems you need more. You could try to invite balu2000. I have seen him a long time editing Arab pages. He is far more kind I think. --Juju78 10:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately he is blocked! I tried to put a request to unblock him, but all the admins don't want to do it! --Skatewalk 10:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

apologize

I apologize for my act of rudeness. I hope we will work together and agree in the future. Irqirq 07:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC) Ok man, I am sorry if I gave you the wrong idea.--Skatewalk 07:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Re

Hi FayssalF, I was contacting you for the same reason! Can we organize a similar team in the Egyptians talk page?--Skatewalk 11:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand you don't understand that the term "team" is not on my dictionary Skate. We don't have teams in Misplaced Pages. People work w/in the scope of WikiProjects and that's all. I don't know what is all this fuss about "teams". All i know is WikiProjects. I participate in WikiProjects as you may notice from my userboxes but i never participate in teams as i never heard of such terminology here before. -- FayssalF - 14:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Well I saw the team in the Arab article?--Skatewalk 01:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Arab article

Hi Boss...sorry to give you more headache, but Egyegy seems to ignore the fact that we have to talk on the discussion page before editing the article.

• Me and other users agreed to remove the incomplete and POV/blog references. Egyegy came back to the article reverting it 3 times and refused to discuss the changes. (Although we didn't remove the text that he/she tried to reference). Can you please take a look at what I am talking about when you have time--Skatewalk 03:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Skatewalk, thanks for letting me know. I've left a thread at the article talk page. -- FayssalF - 05:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Answers

Hello Skatewalk,

I tried to answer your questions on my talkpage. Cheers, Benne _(talk) 09:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

3RR on Arab

Please be aware that you are in violation of 3RR. Deleting sourced content may be considered vandalism. I have made a comment on the article's talk page regarding the sources and added another. Thank you. — Zerida 21:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)