Category talk:Arabic languages

Note on dialects
I suggested a new sub-category "Arabic dialects" to be consistent with others in Category:Dialects by language, but another user commented as follows on my talk page: "This is by no means a cut and dried affair since these varieties of Arabic are distinguished as languages by multiple sources. I am aware that Arabic sources tend to call them 'dialects', but many sources call them languages and the majority of them have separate ISO 639-3 codes. Wikipedia has compromised the name of the article as Varieties of Arabic.  I see no need whatsoever for two categories:  Arabic Languages and Arabic Dialects.  'Arabic Languages' is quite sufficient for the matter.  --Taivo (talk) 23:58, 1 July 2011 (UTC)"

How about renaming it to Category:Varieties of Arabic to match the lead article, and to be consistent with Category:Varieties of Greek in the same head category? Then Category:Arabic language should become its head category instead of a sub-cat. I think this would be much clearer. - Fayenatic (talk) 09:48, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "Varieties of Arabic" would be better than "Dialects" since it matches the lead article. However, one needs to be careful about which things are placed in Varieties and which things remain in "Arabic languages", because there is a difference.  The varieties of Arabic outside the modern Arab world, where Modern Standard Arabic serves as a communicative superstrate, should not be subsumed since their mutual intelligibility with other Arabic varieties is probably near zero.  These include Ancient North Arabic, the Central Asian varieties, Siculo-Arabic, Anadalusian Arabic, Maltese, etc.  A couple others probably fit in this category as well.  Also, Juba Arabic is not a variety of Arabic, but is a creole.  It can be included in Arabic languages, but not varieties.  --Taivo (talk) 13:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, the latter was easily fixed by using an existing category and adding it to this hierarchy. However, I've since realised that Arabic languages is not just a confusing category name but a technical term that has its own article too and would also need to be kept, as a head category. Maybe the rest should be left as they are. - Fayenatic (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Gulf Arabic language article needs protection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Arabic

This is gobbledygook! أبو خالد إبن المهندس (talk) 12:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry thats wierd, when I checked it before it was a vandalised version of the article going on about it being the Persian Gulf etc. Now it seems to be back to normal! أبو خالد إبن المهندس (talk) 12:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Not weird at all. Some of us watch that article for the very reason that you are concerned about it and when we see vandalism, we correct it.  --Taivo (talk) 13:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)