Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:21, 30 January 2014

Note

This account was admitted by User:Kendite to be his/her secondary account from another wiki, that he/she used on this wiki "by accident"; see user page history... Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 18:19, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, يوسف حسين, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:52, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm LogX. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Yemen without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Misplaced Pages with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! --    L o g  X   21:13, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

--    L o g  X   21:24, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Blacklisted references

When removing <ref>s using blacklisted links, as you did in this edit, please be sure not to leave orphaned refs behind (e.g. these). An easy way to check is to see if the page ends up in the hidden category Category:Pages with broken reference names after your edit. Thanks! Anomie⚔ 14:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

3rr warning on Queen of Sheba

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 05:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

The above message is just harassment. But please don't revert should Til revert you; he's also on his 3rr and I'll take care of his relentless POV pushing if he keeps vandalizing.

Frankly, it's hard to deal with that fellow sometimes.

Cheers, Λuα 05:46, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I have responded to these ad hominem attacks on User:Aua's talkpage. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 13:51, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 13:50, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yemen, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mocha, Juban and National hero (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Yemen

I don't understand your recent edits on Yemen. Here you removed what you described as "nonsense", can you tell me why did you do that? and here you basically repeated what was already discussed in the article. Yousef was displaced around 525-527 AD. When Abraha displaced Esmiphaious, Aksum lost control over Yemen permanently. Many tribes did not recognize Esmiphaious authority as evident by an inscription mentioning some 30 tribes hostile to him and everything is probably sourced. Abraha had the support of many christian tribes during the revolt of Yazid bin Kabshat . I don't understand your edits and i would love an explanation. --يوسف حسين (talk) 01:26, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Just for the record, this picture right here is about AFRICAN BLACK slaves brought to Zabid.. you removed everything in the article regarding enslaving Negroes and changed it as it would appear that the slaves were native Yemenis. Large numbers of black slaves were brought from the horn of africa, they and all Tihami Arabs who intermarried with them are called al-Akhdam. This is just actual history not "nonsense". Mamluk is Arabic for "owned" and the Mamluks of Yemen were not like the Albanian Mamluks of Egypt. The Albanian Mamluks were knights and Mercenaries while the ones in Yemen were east African servant slaves. I'm working on Yemen article and i know that country and its demographics and divisions very well. racial religious, and characteristic differences between Highland Yemeni Arabs and lowland "yemenis" are huge and noticeable. everything will be added just please do not take the liberty of adding your own thoughts and conclusions. --يوسف حسين (talk) 01:32, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. The edits were indeed inaccurate. Field slaves shipped from East Africa to Arabia were Zanj/Bantus. That's who's depicted in that manuscript . And Zanj were not from the Horn region, but rather from the area below it, in the African Great Lakes region (see Slavery in Ethiopia and Slavery in Somalia for the actual facts on slavery in the Horn region). Further, the Ethiopian Axumites actually ruled Yemen for a number of centuries. This actual fact was by contrast oddly downplayed in favor of the distorted Zanj material. By the way, your usage above of the epithet "Negroes" is inconsistent with WP:Use modern language. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 14:28, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

And that's according to who? The source does not say they were Zanj but slaves from Ethiopia. The word "Ahbash" or "habashi" is used to describe slaves in Yemen and its generaly means Ethiopians and those of east African origin. Whay would Yemenis go for central Africa for slaves where they can access its east easily? The slaves in Yemen and Arabia in general were of east African origin not Zanj. "the Ethiopian Axumites actually ruled Yemen for a number of centuries", oh yeah when was that? The only reason they were able to set a foot in the highlands was the religious division among Yemenis at the time. There was no Himyar any more as Joseph Dhu Nuwas was a warlord not a king --يوسف حسين (talk) 00:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually, the Ethiopian Kingdom of Axum's rule over Yemen is historically well-attested (e.g. ). I also just noticed your claim above that the Al-Akhdam are from the Horn. This is completely inaccurate. Besides the fact that the Al-Akhdam look nothing like Habesha and other Horn groups, they are also genetically different. The Tihama are likewise indigenous to Yemen, no different than the Mahra and myriad other similar swarthy local Yemeni groups. You are thus mistaken about the identity of those field slaves. They were most certainly not Habesha, nor does the link even claim that they were. What it states is that "the economy also boomed due to the ambitious agricultural development programs instituted by the sultans, who promoted massive cultivation of palms by the black slaves from Ethiopia". As already explained, those field slaves were Bantu/Nilotic people from the southern interior i.e. people known as the Zanj generally, and as Shankella in Ethiopia proper. Sometimes these slaves were referred to in the literature as "Abyssinian" because it was Abyssinian slave traders who transported them abroad in the first place, not because they were actually Habesha. This is similar to the "black slaves from Yemen" that Ibn Battuta wrote about (which, incidentally, I notice is not yet mentioned on that page) :

"they had for their soverign a woman, who was married to her own Chief Justice, (p. 203). The queen had a number of soldiers in her army who had been recruited from Bengal, and were paid in rice. Black slaves from Yemen were also imported. Describing the customs of the people, Ibn Batuta has recorded that, "The islanders are good people; they abstain from what is foul, and most of them bath twice a day, and properly too, on account of the extreme heat of the climate and the abundance of perspiration. They use a large quantity of scented oils, such as sandal wood oil, etc., and they annoint themselves with musk from Makdashan."

I sincerely hope we have an understanding now. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 18:42, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

No unfortunately we don't. I never said Aksum did not exercise influence in Yemen but to what extent should be detailed and Munro Hay and others did that. I don't know the reason behind your edit when the background of the conflict is already detailed in the article. it's confusing, your edit is just a repetition of what's already written you either remove my contribution or yours. the article is about Yemen not Ethiopia, and no one wants to read how great of a super power Aksum allegedly was. Abraha was an independent king who enjoyed the support of christian tribes because they simply shared his faith. it was not a nationalistic Ethiopian mission, king kaleb sent an army to help Christians in Yemen. so please keep it that way.

regarding al-akhdam and tihama and mahri arabs, i did not say anything regarding the Mahra in eastern Yemen but AL-Akhdam are of east african origin and the tihamis are of mixture origin as attested by their features. this source says the following :" a local Yemeni historian, Umara (d. 1174), reports that the Ziyadid princes collected 'a tribute imposed upon the ruler of the city of Dahlak comprising, among others, 1000 head of slaves whereof 500 were Abyssinian and Nubian female slaves.

The Yemeni historian 'Umara said the following : You must know that the Arabs of those lowlands (Tihama) have always married black slaves and have them for their mothers therefore slaves and free men have the same black skin. So i'm afraid you are wrong, the tihama people are not indigenous to Yemen. I don't know why i come across the likes of you here, i don't whats yous guys deal with Yemen. in any case, this source right here says the following  :" East African slaves were shipped across the red sea to Yemen, where they cultivated coffee beans in the northern highland".. so no we are not on the same page..--يوسف حسين (talk) 21:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Kaleb of Axum's rule is barely mentioned, and he wasn't the first Axumite ruler of the territory either. Your link also doesn't work. And the Shanqella live in East Africa, by the way (southern Ethiopia, to be precise). At any rate, it's too bad you're not familiar with genetics. Had you been, you would know better than to make half the claims you are making. Here's just one example: "These data suggest that the source population for the African ancestry of the Yemeni population is more similar to the contemporary Maasai population than either the Luhya or Yoruba" . The Maasai are Nilotes, like most Shanqella. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 21:37, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

By the way, my primary concern is the misidentification of Habesha and other related Horn populations with the Shanqella field slaves, the latter of whom did actually cultivate the palms. As long as this is understood and not misrepresented on the page, then I'm willing to let the matter of Kaleb and Axumite rule drop altogether. Otherwise, a more comprehensive solution may be required, including perhaps genetic material for additional clarification. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Your link does not work. I don't know what you mean by territory but read the part about the alliance between Himyar and Aksum against Sheba/Saba .yeah i'm not an expert on genetics, and not a lot of people are familiar or able to tell the difference really. I don't care if they are Bantu/shanquella/massai/ or whatever, they are east African and i'm sticking to the sources. --يوسف حسين (talk) 22:46, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

why did you remove this sentence ;"The Ziyadid monarchs lost effective power after 989, or even earlier than that. Meanwhile a succession of black slaves held real power in the Tihama from Hali to Aden eventually establishing the Najahid dynasty in 1022"? --يوسف حسين (talk) 23:00, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Well now, that's not very reasonable. You ask others to acknowledge that the Tihama and Al-Akhdam are distinct from other Yemenis (when in reality, only the Akhdam are somewhat, not the Tihama), but refuse to extend that same courtesy to others, even when you were shown that the extraneous DNA in the general Yemeni population is actually Maasai (Nilote/Shanqella)-related. I believe we had an earlier conversation on this same issue too and reached a mutual understanding Kendite. It went a little something like this :

The small minority you mentioned does not exist in Yemen even if they do there are no statistics. As mater of fact the majority of them resides in neighboring Oman. I provided a source specigically mentions that there are 5% of the population of Ethiopian/east African origin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kendite (talk • contribs) 01:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Another thing a tribesman does not need to live in a rural area. 85% of the population is of a tribal origin and play a major rule in shaping the political map of the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kendite (talk • contribs) 10:46, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, your link was on Al-Akhdam, not Ethiopians. It also does not indicate that 5% of Yemen's population is of Ethiopian origin. What it does say, among other things, is that "the popular notion that the Akhdam are descendants of Ethiopian oppressors appears to be a myth, said Hamud al-Awdi, a professor of sociology at Sana University." The fact is, Al-Akhdam are thought to be either descendants of Nilotic Sudanese who arrived with the Abyssinian army when it occupied Yemen (hence, why they are sometimes mislabeled "Ethiopian"), or of Veddoid/Negrito origin. Veddoid seems most likely here based on their short stature, Negrito-like physical appearance, and especially their high incidence of the sickle cell trait (which Abyssinians don't have). This is already explained on the Akhdam article. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 14:56, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry i gave you the wrong link , here is another link it says they are about 5%.

You are right it could be a myth but it is still not clear and they look African for the most past. The lineage between them and south Asians groups could be a result of intermarriage.

Never mind me i think you are right but about the 5% here is the link for that . Thank you

The link says that Al-Akhdam constitute 5% of Yemen's population, not Ethiopians. The Akhdam do have facial features, stature and general appearance quite unlike both Abyssinians and other Yemenis, but fairly similar to Negritos (who aren't from Africa). But anyway, glad to hear this is resolved. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 22:06, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

By the way, the Tihama indeed share some ties with populations in the Horn (and the Nile Valley), but perhaps not in the way that you had expected : "The most frequent haplotype in west coastal Yemen is 16126–16362, which is found not only in the Ethiopian highlands but also in Somalia, lower Egypt and at especially high frequency in the Nubians. The Tihama share some West Eurasian haplotypes with Africans, eg J and K with Ethiopians, Somali, and Egyptians." Middayexpress (talk) 23:23, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah it needs a lot of work to tell the difference between a Shanquela and a massai or whatever but i'm pretty sure it would be much easier to tell the difference between Sadiq al-Ahmar and al-Akhdam, who are "somewhat" different according to you! yeah i do remember you now but the new york times article does not say anything about them being nilotic or whatever and non of your links work. the discussion is not about akhdam (who are not slaves) is about your edits and the sources provided in the article, the sources are discussing Yemen's history and are not making any of the nonsense you are showing me here. I will add a link to Slavery in Ethiopia and you can make whatever distinctions you want there. I don't understand these numbers and i can't tell how they are relevant. Those slaves came from a territory that is part of Ethiopia, they are part of Ethiopia's native population therefore, there is nothing wrong or misleading about calling the slaves Ethiopians regardless of their tribal or ethnic affiliation. --يوسف حسين (talk) 23:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured you'd remember me now :) You quite frankly have strange notions on who the Yemeni people are, going as far as to insinuate that the Tihama are from the Horn region. The Akhdam, though, admittedly aren't typical (not sure why you felt the need to compare them to that one politician, though). If we are disussing the Al-Akhdham now it's because you brought them up. You claimed above that "large numbers of black slaves were brought from the horn of africa, they and all Tihami Arabs who intermarried with them are called al-Akhdam" -- an absurd statement on a number of levels, which the link in any event doesn't assert. Bottom line, the phrase "blacks from East Africa" is too open-ended and vague. It may give readers the wrong impression that those field slaves were something other than the Shanqella/Nilotes they in reality were (as Yemeni DNA itself readily shows). This is certain since you yourself originally insisted as much. Unless you deliberately want readers to believe that those slaves were Habesha et al. -- the latter of whom are Afro-Asiatic groups, just like most Yemenis -- the exact identity of those field slaves must be specified. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 00:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

No i do not a Yemeni is anyone who holds that country citizenship. What i said above is the truth, large number of slaves came from ethiopia, i don't know their ethnic affiliation but they certainly came from there. There are noticeable differences between northern highland population and the people of Tihama, the highlanders and the zaydi imams look down to them and did not consider them arabs. i compared al-akhdam to the head of the largest tribal confederation in yemen because you said that the al-akhdam and tihamis are "somewhat" different which is totally false. the highlanders make the majority of Yemen's population. I do not know what "Yemeni DNA" shows this source right here says the following  : Often the Akhdam were dismissively described as from ethiopia (men al-habash) . and this source says  ; according to popular belief, akhdam origin date back to Ethiopians who arrive to southern Arabia in the sixth century and this source makes a similar statement: According to the most popular account, they are the descendants of Ethiopian invaders from the sixth century, forced ever since into the performance of menial jobs, such as sweeping and shoe-making...The Akhdam are Arabic-speaking Muslims, same as the rest of the population. They do not belong to any of the three main Arab tribes, however, that make up traditional Yemeni society. i looked up their DNA links and all i found was blogs. As i said, the sources do not distinguish so you can add a link to Slavery in Ethiopia in the article.--يوسف حسين (talk) 00:57, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

i just added a link to Slavery in Ethiopia it right here --يوسف حسين (talk) 00:57, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

That edit was quite pov; the passage in the source doesn't even mention Ethiopia specifically but rather East Africa generally. Remarkable. The actual affinities and provenance of the Al-Akhdam were also already explained to you Kendite: "Al-Akhdam are thought to be either descendants of Nilotic Sudanese who arrived with the Abyssinian army when it occupied Yemen (hence, why they are sometimes mislabeled "Ethiopian"), or of Veddoid/Negrito origin. Veddoid seems most likely here based on their short stature, Negrito-like physical appearance, and especially their high incidence of the sickle cell trait (which Abyssinians don't have). This is already explained on the Akhdam article." That's actual biology, not speculation/wishful-thinking . Just like the Maasai/Shanqalla affinities of the Yemeni's extraneous DNA. Middayexpress (talk) 01:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Wrong again, the source explicitly mentions Ethiopia . the link you provided is detailing al-akhdam origin but did not exclude the possibility that they might be of Ethiopian origin, and most importantly did not say slaves were not imported from Africa to Yemen. He said al-akhdam are not slaves which is true they are more like an outcast class, slaves however came from Ethiopia.--يوسف حسين (talk) 01:32, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Nah, you're mistaken. The passage in question on cultivation of the palms only mentions East Africa in general. The study also clearly states that the Al-Akhdam aren't derived from the Horn's Afro-Asiatic peoples since they have very high frequencies of the sickle cell trait, which is of course absent from said Afro-Asiatic peoples. It's almost as though you personally wish that the Akhdam were Abyssinians. But alas, their biology and physical features are completley different. Middayexpress (talk) 01:51, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

No here is what it says :" the sultan who promoted the massive cultivation of palms by the black slaves from Ethiopia" read it again please. . No i do not wish anything i'm just sticking to what the sources are saying, that the slaves are Ethiopians, according to many sources --يوسف حسين (talk) 02:19, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes Kendite, I'm already well aware that field slaves were shipped from Ethiopia (by Ethiopian rulers, no less). And those field slaves (as opposed to concubines) were specifically Shanqella/Barya. That said, it's by now unfortunately quite clear that you do wish those slaves were Afro-Asiatic Ethiopians. Hence, your reluctance to accept the fact that the overwhelming majority of field slaves both within Ethiopia and those shipped abroad were Shanqella/bariya (which literally means "slave", as the link above notes). This historic reality is preserved in the general Yemeni population's own genes; it's not mere speculation. Middayexpress (talk) 02:59, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I've had a look again at the first link, and it does mention Ethiopia. However, it's clearly referring to the Shanqella/Barya, as this link notes. Middayexpress (talk) 02:06, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your source does not mention Yemen!--يوسف حسين (talk) 02:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

It discusses the institution of slavery in Ethiopia, where the slaves were shipped from to begin with. Middayexpress (talk) 02:59, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

ok i don't even know why i spent so much time on this. i will mention that they came from ethiopia, and than add their ethnic affiliation as you wrote it.--يوسف حسين (talk) 03:16, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Besides, this is one theory and it's not yet a proven fact. I do not know if it is widely accepted in the scientific community. Not a lot of genetic studies were conducted in Yemen--يوسف حسين (talk) 01:34, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

That's the observed incidence of the sickle cell trait, not a theory. Middayexpress (talk) 01:51, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

More on the high frequencies of the sickle cell trait among the Achdam, and what this means: "A study found they were more apt to have sickle-cell anemia, a characteristic attributed also to the Veddoids of South Asia" . Middayexpress (talk) 02:59, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Your use of multiple accounts

It has been found that you have been using one or more accounts abusively or have edited logged out to avoid scrutiny. Please review the policy on acceptable alternate accounts. In short, alternate accounts or people to support you should not be used for the purposes of deceiving others into seeing more support for your position. It is not acceptable to use two accounts on the same article, or the same topic area, unless they are publically and plainly disclosed on both your and the other account's userpage.

Your other account(s) have been blocked indefinitely. This is your only warning. If you repeat this behaviour you will blocked from editing without further notice. Thank you.