Talk:Arab Christians/Archive 8

The Maronite question (for the umpteenth time) and full protection
I will be very short. your changes need prior discussion. I will cancel your changes until we reach a consensus. As I have already explained, the genetic question is not the only one to define an identity. --Syphax98 (talk) 13:23, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

No. First you discuss what you want to discuss in the Talk page and then we decide if my changes should be cancelled. This article defines Arab Christians by their ascendance as its stated in the first sentence of the article and I quote "Arab Christians are Arabs of the Christian faith.[19] Many are descended from ancient Arab Christian clans that did not convert to Islam, such as the Sabaean tribes of Yemen (i.e., Ghassanids, and Banu Judham) who settled in Transjordan and Syria, as well as Arabized Christians". This is not mentioning anything about identity but about genetic ancestry.

Whether another section elaborates on whether some people identify with their genetic ancestry or not that is or should be mentioned in another section of this article which I haven't touched.Chris O&#39; Hare (talk) 13:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The issue has already been discussed in the previous section. You should have intervened there, but you didn't. The decision to exclude Maronites from counting is arbitrary and was made on the basis of personal opinion, since the claimed source makes no distinction between Maronites and other Christians. The page is not just about genetics (this in fact is your personal interpretation), which is not the only one to define what an ethnic group is. There are various factors, including language, history and above all identification. There are several sources that link many Maronite clans to the Ghassanids and to other populations originating in the Arabian Peninsula. Numerous sources define Maronites as Arabs  and we also take note of this. Certainly the Maronite community also has a Syriac identity, but also an Arab identity is undeniable and it would seem to be shared by a good part of the Maronites, and this suffice to include the Maronites among the "Arab Christians". Positions such as Phoenicianism exist and were developed by some intellectuals during the twentieth century. However, these positions are not unique and are not shared by all members of the community, and in fact they have been included in the identity section of this article. --Syphax98 (talk) 14:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I will ask for full protection for this article. Just take a look at the discussion page (and its archive) to notice that for years this article has been at the center of edit wars and nationalist NPOV. Most of the discussions seem to be blogs, and not surprisingly many of those who intervene propose changes that harm the principle of neutrality, being often based on personal and ideological opinions, without providing any encyclopedic source. Most of the changes on this page are of this type. Therefore it is right that this article is protected, to prevent such acts and to guarantee a healthier environment. --Syphax98 (talk) 14:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Your quotes in black and my responses below them

'''The issue has already been discussed in the previous section. You should have intervened there, but you didn't. The decision to exclude Maronites from counting is arbitrary and was made on the basis of personal opinion, since the claimed source makes no distinction between Maronites and other Christians'''

I wasnt aware until now this discussion had taken place and that edit took place. There seems to be Cherry Picking in the infobox edit and that map included about Arab Christians since the "self identified" Arameans in Israel were left out. Since 2014 when Israel allowed them to register as Arameans not all of the approx 35,000 people of Aramean and Maronite heritage (I suppose that number includes the children of the 15-20,000 people of Aramena and Maronite heritage there) not everybody has done so. However the infobox info implies all of them have done so. Im pretty sure the Copts and the Berbers wont appreciate their inclusion in that infobox neither.

'''Who are we to decide that Maronites and Copts are not Arabs? They are Arabic speakers; this is enough to call them Arabs. The Maronites and Copts have played a key role in strengthening Arab identity and culture'''

And who are you to decide that they are? Speaking a language is not the same as ancestry. You wouldnt call Latin American people Spaniards just because they speak Spanish would you? Latin Americans have also strengthened the Spanish culture as well collaborating with them in Music, Movies and Literature but that still doesn't make them Spaniards does it?

'''The page is not just about genetics (this in fact is your personal interpretation), which is not the only one to define what an ethnic group is. There are various factors, including language, history and above all identification'''

There were communities still speaking Western Aramean in what is today modern-day Lebanon up until the mid XVIII according to historians. When the greeks were in Phoenicia, greek became the official language or one of the official languages there, when the Romans came in Latin became the language of a lot of them, when the Crusader went there and later the french were there lots of them spoke French. Since the Arabs have forced their asses into their territory since the 7th century without nobody inviting them, they spoke Arab since then. Since nobody speaks aramean or Phoenician anymore they didnt feel the need to preserve it and kept it liturgical. Since the times of Phoenicia the people of the area have been known to adopt the culture and costumes of the people around them.

They also preserved their Paganism/Ancient Cannanite religion longer than any culture in the whole area and possible all Southern Europe in regions of Mount Lebanon and Baalbek as can be read here https://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/download/16225/7232. Lots of those pagans from Baalbek and Mount Lebanon emigrated to Harran and became the "Sabians of Harran", preserving their religion and beliefs possibly until the 11th century. You can read more about this in https://books.google.se/books?id=7MI-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA274&lpg=PA274&dq=sabians+mount+lebanon&source=bl&ots=oaNVdHWrCJ&sig=ACfU3U3x4H9TLDb5brs3UI7FM864SPyteQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjVgpfEo6fqAhWxw4sKHUIJCk8Q6AEwAHoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=sabians%20mount%20lebanon&f=false and https://books.google.se/books?id=sM8GAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA356&lpg=PA356&dq=sabians+mount+lebanon&source=bl&ots=g-4Uw65Y_7&sig=ACfU3U2HLdzhGVFDMYHJI7BznCINBm0vNA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjVgpfEo6fqAhWxw4sKHUIJCk8Q6AEwCnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=sabians%20mount%20lebanon&f=false

If you look at their history here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maronites#History you can see that they never welcomed the Arabs and fought them constantly. The latest genetic studies also corroborates their non-Arab origin as can be read here https://jwp-nme.public.springernature.app/en/nmiddleeast/article/10.1038/nmiddleeast.2019.58.

You said There are several sources that link many Maronite clans to the Ghassanids and to other populations originating in the Arabian Peninsula.

A 2015 study estimates some 2,500 Lebanese Christians have Muslim ancestry, whereas the majority of Lebanese Christians are direct descendants of the original early Christians a per 3rd sentence with its source in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Lebanon

Numerous sources define Maronites as Arabs

Those two books you added as sources are from 1975 and 1977 when a lot of the latest genetic studies had not been done and published. If you can find me a source of the last 5 years that says all Maronites are Arabs then we can ellaborate.

Now, if today some of those Maronites decide to identify themselves as Arabs good for them but you should include a note next to saying (including 1 million Maronites) note:the majority or perhaps half of the Maronites today dont identify as Arabs but as of Phoenician-Aramean descent), the same note should be included next to the Copts and the Berbers.Chris O&#39; Hare (talk) 14:45, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * First: the count of Christian Arabs in Israel is supported by a government source which in fact excludes those who have registered as Arameans. This is simply a fact. As for the Berbers who wont appreciate their inclusion in that infobox, well, I can confirm that I myself am a Berber, originally from Morocco and I am proud to be, yet this does not lead me to be offended, because I leave my opinions out of Wikipedia. Here we evaluate the sources. Opinions remain only opinions. The cited source does not distinguish between Berbers and Arabs, therefore to point out to the reader that the count also includes Berbers is necessary. For Copts, the same argument as the Maronites would apply. And in fact the quote in brackets probably needs to be changed.- Second: language is one of the main factors that define Arabic identity.   If we do not consider Latin Americans as Spaniards it is because there are no sources that consider them as such. Third: I know the history of the Middle East very well, and yes, the Aramaic language was not spoken only in Mount Lebanon, but in vast areas of the Levant. The Aramaic language is still spoken in the Ma'aloula area and the speakers are members of the most varied religions (most of them are Muslims and Orthodox and Melkite Christians). Aramaic was spoken in almost all the Levant and Mesopotamia, not only in Mount Lebanon. Regarding the genetic issue, the majority of modern Levantines, Egyptians and North African Arabs of all religions (therefore not only Maronites and Copts) are largely descended from indigenous peoples who have embraced the Arab identity over the centuries, however no one has ever faced the problem of considering them Arab or not. Therefore according to your own reasoning not only the Maronites would be excluded from the Arabs, but all the populations of the Levant, of Egypt and of North Africa, including Muslims. The Arab identity is not tied to concepts related to genetics. Also I point out that this is not a blog, so try to keep a language suitable for an encyclopedia. Comments like Arabs have forced their asses into their territory since the 7th century without nobody inviting them are not tolerated. To participate in this project you have to do it with objectivity and respect. Fourth: do you have sources attesting that the majority or perhaps half of the Maronites dont identify as Arabs but as of Phoenician-Aramean descent? No you haven't provided any, so yours remains an opinion. However I agree on including Maronites in brackets (before requesting full protection of the page, I will include a note stating the inclusion of Maronites). I want to point out that Arab immigration to the Levant dates back many centuries before the arrival of Islam, and in large areas Arab Christian communities such as the Ghassanids had been established for centuries. The article you quoted me talks about Muslim conquest of the Levant, which however does not exclude that over the centuries the Maronites have embraced an Arab identity. --Syphax98 (talk) 16:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * In reference to what has been pointed out in a previous discussion, I have fixed the data linked to Iraqi Christians. --Syphax98 (talk) 17:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

'''the count of Christian Arabs in Israel is supported by a government source which in fact excludes those who have registered as Arameans. This is simply a fact.'''

What fact is that you are talking about? The number of "Arab-Christians" that are considered of non-Arab origin in Israel or the actual number of people that have already registered as Aramean? Because the second number is much lower than the first one so far, perhaps eventually it will catch up though.

Here we evaluate the sources

Fair enough. Well if you scroll down the page you will find plenty of sources on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Christians#Lebanon About 350,000 of Christians in Lebanon are Orthodox and Melkites, while the most dominant group are Maronites with about 1 million population, whose Arab identity is somewhat disputed.[77] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Christians#Assyrians In 2001, a coalition of Assyrian-Chaldean and Maronite church organizations, wrote to the Arab-American Institute, to reprimand them for claiming that Assyrians were Arabs. They asked the Arab-American Institute "to cease and desist from portraying Assyrians and Maronites of past and present as Arabs, and from speaking on behalf of Assyrians and Maronites."[112][114] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Christians#Maronites It's generalized that Muslims focus more on the Arab identity of Lebanese history and culture whereas Christians focus on the pre-arabized & non-Arab spectrum of the Lebanese identity and rather refrain from the Arab specification.[126]

Have you evaluated those before you made your changes in the infobox? I suppose you choose to focus or cherry pick the sources that perhaps you yourself added into the infobox or just choose to look into those instead of scroll down the page?

'''language is one of the main factors that define Arabic identity. [7] [8] [9] If we do not consider Latin Americans as Spaniards it is because there are no sources that consider them as such.'''

You keep on focus on the language thing which is the only thing (besides the mix of cultural elements into their culture) that they have in common with the arabs. Maronites and Lebanese Christians do not share a common history with the arabs. Do they share the history of Canaan with the Arabs?, Do they share the same history of Hellenism and the Roman and Byzantine times and in the same way with the Arabs? Did the Crusades took place in their Arabian desert and lands of the Arabs? Do the Lebanese Christians share the same traditional architecture? Go and look at pictures of traditional Lebanese architecture and compare it to Arab Architecture. Do they share the same democratic government and freedom of press? Do they share the exact same genetics?

'''Comments like Arabs have forced their asses into their territory since the 7th century without nobody inviting them are not tolerated. To participate in this project you have to do it with objectivity and respect.'''

Im actually being as objective as anyone can be with my comment. This is the Talk Page of wikipedia where there are no rules that prevent me from expressing my thoughts the way I choose to.

'''do you have sources attesting that the majority or perhaps half of the Maronites dont identify as Arabs but as of Phoenician-Aramean descent? No you haven't provided any, so yours remains an opinion.'''

Back in 2000 they asked the younger population of Byblos how did they identify and about 65% said they identified as Phoenicians. In places like Tyre where its almost fully muslim, the number of people who stated this were very low. Im pretty sure in most Christian Lebanese towns you will get a number close to 65% of people who identify as Phoenician as well or a mix. In general, I assume that because only 20-25% in Lebanon is Maronite you will get around those same numbers in general in Lebanon. with the other 15% probably saying they are a mix of Arab and Phoenician or perhaps Greek and Phoenician. Source- http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Opinion/Commentary/1999/Apr-28/106807-how-lebanese-teenagers-view-themselves.ashxChris O&#39; Hare (talk) 20:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * First: Do not link wikipedia articles. I've already read them all. You also show that you don't know what Wikipedia is not, since it can't be used as a primary source. The sources we take into consideration must be external and encyclopedic. Second: every Arab country has its own history. The Arab world is vast and includes dozens of countries. Christian communities in Lebanon share history with non-Christian communities. The Arab world is not limited to the Arabian Peninsula, but it is well known that since the Middle Ages it has included Mesopotamia, Syria and North Africa. The crusades involved all the peoples of the region and the historical Roman, Hellenistic, Byzantine heritage etc. it is shared by all religious communities in the Middle East, not only by Maronites. Traditional Lebanese and Levantine architecture is shared by all religious communities as well. As for genetics, I have already answered you. There are no significant differences between Lebanese Christians and Muslims. Furthermore, the democracy level of a country has nothing to do with ethnic and cultural identity. Since when have freedom of expression and democracy been the prerogatives of a specific ethnic-religious group? Are you joking? Do you realize the absurdity of your claims? (and you also stated all this without providing any encyclopedic source). Third: your comment was not objective at all, but expressed hatred and intolerance, therefore I invite you to desist from continuing in this direction. Here we are to build an encyclopedia. The aim of the project is not to provide free speech, but to discuss the changes and the nature of the articles. To remedy your shortcomings, take a look at this:Talk page guidelines and I advise you to think carefully about this aspect (otherwise you may be incompatible with this project). Ideological frustrations can be expressed on personal blogs or in one of the many forums in the rest of the internet, not here. Fourth: yours are guesses, nothing else. The article does not prove that were Maronites the ones who identified as Phoenicians, but just the younger inhabitants of Byblos and the article does not exclude that the Phoenician identity can also be shared by Muslims, Orthodox, Melkites, etc. --Syphax98 (talk) 22:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I propose a solution. I will insert notes that include wikilinks for further information regarding the issue of identity for both Maronites and Copts. As for self-identified Israeli Arameans, I will remove the reference in brackets. I hope the discussion ends here. --Syphax98 (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

'''First: Do not link wikipedia articles. I've already read them all. You also show that you don't know what Wikipedia is not, since it can't be used as a primary source. The sources we take into consideration must be external and encyclopedic.'''

I know what Wikipedia is not. I included you the wikilinks along with the statements there so that you click on it and see that is well sourced. The sources are there, put some effort and see them and dont waste my time spoon feeding you stuff. You keep talking about sources and are very demanding about them when you yourself have not provided a single one for your own statements. You on the other hand have requested a source for almost every single statement I have said even if some of those are about common knowledge of the history of the region. If I say "Im a editor in wikipedia" you say "you need a source for that". I have provided plenty of sources that you seem to have chosen to disregard and chosen to instead to ask me for more sources for the "unsourced" common history knowledge statements. And if you are indeed asking me for those more sources genuinely and not for the purpose of being disruptive, which can get you reported as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disruptive_editing#Examples_of_disruptive_editing, then you might actually not be knowledgeable enough about this topic to be making edits in it as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Competence_is_required#What_is_meant_by_%22Competence_is_required%22?.

'''Second: every Arab country has its own history. The Arab world is vast and includes dozens of countries. Christian communities in Lebanon share history with non-Christian communities. ...The crusades involved all the peoples of the region and the historical Roman, Hellenistic, Byzantine heritage etc. it is shared by all religious communities in the Middle East, not only by Maronites.'''

But not in the same way. The Maronites supported and fought in the Crusades losing many lives. (Do you need a source for that to confirm your incompetence on the topic?). History can happen in an area shared by different communities and those communities be affected or act in the events in differents manners. The muslim "Lebanese" like the druze "Lebanese" have fought each other through the ages and taking different sides through the events of their same region up until this very same day.

'''As for genetics, I have already answered you. There are no significant differences between Lebanese Christians and Muslims. '''

I can ask you for a source for that but I dont need to since you are probably basing it on the biased misleading statements of Pierre "the peacemaker" Zelloua who is trying to unite a nation based on "common haplogroups" observed in the different communities. J2 has a lot of different subclades, and the ones present on the Maronites at higher rate are not the same J2 subclades present in the Lebanese muslim or the other parts of the Arabian peninsula. The G2 subclades and the L-M subclades are also different in the Christian and Muslim communities of Lebanon. Perhaps you should read carefully those studies like I have instead of taking someone's statements about it even if that person has been part of those studies to see if he is telling half-truths about the studies due perhaps conflict of interest.

"all Jews (Sephardi and Ashkenazi) cluster in one branch; Druze from Mount Lebanon and Druze from Mount Carmel are depicted on a private branch; and Lebanese Christians form a private branch with the Christian populations of Armenia and Cyprus placing the Lebanese Muslims as an outer group. Lebanese Muslims are extended towards Syrians, Palestinians, and Jordanians, which are close to Saudis and Bedouins" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3585000/ Graphic clusters here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=3585000_pgen.1003316.g002.jpg

"Lebanese Christians are today genetically similar to local people who lived during the Roman period which preceded the Crusades by more than four centuries". https://www.cell.com/ajhg/supplemental/S0002-9297(19)30111-9 '''Third: your comment was not objective at all, but expressed hatred and intolerance, therefore I invite you to desist from continuing in this direction. Here we are to build an encyclopedia.... Ideological frustrations can be expressed on personal blogs or in one of the many forums in the rest of the internet, not here.'''

When I said the Arabs forced their asses into the area in 7th century without nobody inviting them I am stating a fact related to the topic at hand. This is not an ideology or about hatred. This is a fact stated in my own words. I am not insulting the Arabs nor discriminating them, nor calling them names. But there is nothing more intolerant and ideological than a conquest or an invasion. Anything that is forced or without consent has nothing respectful about it.

'''Fourth: yours are guesses, nothing else. The article does not prove that were Maronites the ones who identified as Phoenicians, but just the younger inhabitants of Byblos and the article does not exclude that the Phoenician identity can also be shared by Muslims, Orthodox, Melkites, etc.'''

What the article has shown is that in cities and towns that are predominately Maronite (or Christian in general) with Byblos being one case where the majority of its inhabitants are Maronites, the inhabitans indentify more with the Phoenician identify. In towns and districts where the majority of its inhabitans are Muslims, such as Tyre, their inhabitants identify more with the Arab identity. Its simple, dont complicate it more than it should be or misinterprete what the source is saying.

'''I propose a solution. I will insert notes that include wikilinks for further information regarding the issue of identity for both Maronites and Copts. As for self-identified Israeli Arameans, I will remove the reference in brackets. I hope the discussion ends here.'''

I propose that you either leave it as it was which excluded ALL the population communities whose Arab identity is questioned and mentioned those communities in brackets and their numbers. Or include ALL the communities whose Arab identities are questioned but mention those communities in the brackets with their numbers. Which means NOT taking away nor including any specific communities and not removing the bracket of the self-identified Israeli ArameansChris O&#39; Hare (talk) 19:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * First: I don't have time to spare either, so I'll be short. I have provided sources, if you didn't want to read them, that's not my problem. My requests were completely legitimate since almost all the external sources you provided me were related to paganism in the Levant (which had very little to do with the topic we are discussing). Second: I see that the invitation to leave politics aside you have ignored it. And then your opinion on a historical event does not interest us, just talk about the article. Third: Excluding these communities from the count of Christian Arabs cannot be done, since there are sources that consider them as such. The notes refer to specific details on the issue of identity. However I welcome part of the second option, even if I haven't understood it all (explain better please). For Israeli Aramaeans, we have to decide well what to do. What is your proposal? Fourth: I point out that all those sources that you have linked to me now, you can integrate them in the Wikipedia articles. --Syphax98 (talk) 00:02, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

First: I don't have time to spare either, so I'll be short.

There is a difference between wasting time spoon feeding info and not wanting to elaborate to reach consensus. You need to communicate and explain your views; it is less helpful for you to voice an opinion on something and not explain why you hold it as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#How_to_use_article_talk_pages

I have provided sources, if you didn't want to read them, that's not my problem.

You mean the three languages sources? I read them but those very same sources you provided actually contradict your own statement that "speaking the arabic language is the only criteria for having an Arab identity". The language sources you provided provided are telling you that ethnicity is also part of any identity and that there are "pure arabs" by descent and "arabized arabs" by conquest and language.

The first one actually says "In each of these countries there may be different ethnic groups whose mother tongue is not Arabic. Members of these groups may also speak Arabic, but they might not identify themselves as Arabs. For example, in both Chad and Iraq, members of non-Arab ethnic groups use Arabic as a lingua franca to communicate". https://teachmideast.org/articles/arab-middle-eastern-and-muslim-whats-the-difference/

The third one says "Who is an Arab? The answer varies according to the person giving the reply". Then says "Perhaps the most historically accurate answer is that most often given by Christians and Jews: the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael. But not all Arabs are Ishmaelites.The earliest Arabians, according to the Bible, were the descendants of Joktan, who lived five generations after the flood". Then it goes an enlists the Cannanites and Phoenicians as descendants of Ham, the Arameans as descendants of Aram and the Assyrians as the descendants of Asshur showing that they are clearly differents ethnic groups based on biblical genealogy. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1974/04/discovery/who-is-an-arab?lang=eng

Even the wiki article on Arab Identify says "Arab identity can be described as consisting of many interconnected parts" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_identity#Categories and things like historical unity, ethnicity, self-concept and other are part of those parts. Perhaps you should review that article before you start including Arab identity to whoever you please and excluse whoever you please.

My requests were completely legitimate since almost all the external sources you provided me were related to paganism in the Levant (which had very little to do with the topic we are discussing).

Again you have chosen to disregard or ignore the other sources provided by me which makes you a disruptive user as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disruptive_editing#Examples_of_disruptive_editing. You also kept asking me to cite that the sky is blue which also makes you disruptive user as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:You_don%27t_need_to_cite_that_the_sky_is_blue

And then your opinion on a historical event does not interest us, just talk about the article.

Mentioning common knowledge that are facts about the matter at hand that can help us reach consensus are not opinions and should interest you. Turning facts into opinions is a form of negationism and the reversed version of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:You_don%27t_need_to_cite_that_the_sky_is_blue

Excluding these communities from the count of Christian Arabs cannot be done, since there are sources that consider them as such

You mean the 1976 and 1977 sources and the quotes of two Christian arabists from Lebanon that you cherry picked and keep using? Those are outdated, unscientific and biased sources.

Things like ancestry and ethnicity are determined by scientific and genetic studies not opinions of political nor religious personalities. And when it comes to science, updated sources are prefered as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Age_matters not unscientific books from the mid 1970s

The self-concept and decision to self-identify themselves as Arabs of two christian maronite religious and political personalities also does not necessarily reflect the self-concept of the majority of the population of Christian towns in Lebanon as has been shown in the source http://www.dailystar.com.lb/Opinion/Commentary/1999/Apr-28/106807-how-lebanese-teenagers-view-themselves.ashx which you have chosen to misinterpret and twist as part perhaps of your disruptive ways.

I also see the outlandish unproven views of historian Kamal Salibi all over Wikipedia as a legitimate opposing view of the Phoenician origin and identity of Lebanese Christians, which quote him saying: "between ancient Phoenicia and the Lebanon of medieval and modern times, there is no demonstrable historical connection" in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenicianism#Differing_views_and_criticism

Another good one is "There are even voices aiming to link Maronites with Arabs by bloodline. For example, according to Kamal Salibi some Maronites may have been descended from an Arabian tribe, who immigrated thousands of years ago from the southern Arabian Peninsula. Salibi maintains, "It is very possible that the Maronites, as a community of Arabian origin, were among the last Arabian Christian tribes to arrive in Syria before Islam" in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Christians#Lebanon

"Phoeniciansm is deeply disputed by some scholars, who have on occasion tried to convince these claims are false and to embrace and accept the Arab identity instead" also sourced to Salibi

Kamal Salibi is a notable historian that unfortunately has come up with outlandish theories that have not been accepted and even caused him embarrassment in the past. To Salibi everything seems to come from the southern Arabian Peninsula, including Israel and the Bible not just the Maronites. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamal_Salibi#Arabian_Judah_theory. According to Salibi, Jerusalem was located in southern Arabia (today Saudi Arabia) before the Babylonian exile instead of in Canaan and the Bible was written there. These two thesis were rejected due to his methodological errors and lack of archaeology that proves it. He still became a sensation and a well-liked friend of the Arabs.

Funny that I dont see his works mentioned or him being quoted extensively in none of the articles about the origins and identity of the Jews and the legitimacy of the state of Israel. Could it be because his theories have not been proven by science, archaeology nor non-biased historical documentation? If that is the case why is he being quoted all over the articles regarding the Maronites and Lebanese Christians here in Wikipedia?

What is your proposal?

That you either include or exclude ALL of the ethnic communities and mention it in their brackets with the respective numbers. Right now in the infobox some groups are included and others are excluded.Chris O&#39; Hare (talk) 12:03, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * As for your accusations of disruptive editing, I point out that here I am the only one trying to find a solution. More than once I have tried to accept part of your proposals, while you have tried to pursue your personal point of view, and the fact that you have expressed questionable opinions regarding the Islamic conquest of the Levant proves it (I point out that you did not describe the Greek, Roman, Crusader conquest, etc. with the same words). Therefore leave your accusations for you. As for the article we should talk about, as I have already explained to you extensively more than once, the genetic issue is not the only one that determines ethnic identity. For example, Egyptian Muslims also descend for the most part from the ancient Egyptians and have more affinities with the populations of the rest of North Africa and the Horn of Africa than with the populations of the Arabian Peninsula, but this does not exclude that they may have developed over of the centuries also an Arab identity. The same is true of North African Arabs who have a genetic affinity with Berbers, from a genetic point of view. I'll link (I do it for convenience) these wikipedia articles where you can find all the sources you need: DNA history of Egypt, Genetic history of North Africa. Many Maronites not only embraced the Arab identity, but helped shape it in the Nahda. Anyway, you can make changes to the infobox yourself, you don't need to give orders to others, fix what you don't think is good, as long as you keep the Copts and Maronites included in the count. As far as I am concerned, my speeches in this discussion end here. Have a nice day! ;-) --Syphax98 (talk) 18:21, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Please don't remove American Arabs Christians from the infobox anymore. Your motives were senseless. According to your reasoning, you should also remove the Italian Americans from the Italian count because they no longer speak Italian. You should also remove Arab Muslims from the rest of the Arabs, since only a minority of them are descended from the tribes of the Arabian Peninsula. The data was based on a source that included only those who identified themselves as Arabs. This data derived from the American census. Those who did not want to identify themselves as Arabs did not do so. It is curious that you want to include only the sources that you like and that represent your point of view. --Syphax98 (talk) 22:03, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I rewrite what I wrote in the summary: The sources indicate them as Arabs. According to your reasoning, you should also remove American Germans from the German count because they don't speak German. The same goes for Muslim Arabs who also come only partially from the Arab tribes of the Arabian Peninsula. Removal of sources without prior discussion and without consent is not tolerated. As I have already written to you in discussion, for example, the data concerning American Arabs is confirmed by the American census and includes only Christians who have identified themselves as Arabs. This is a community, not a place to forcefully impose your ideas. Did you understand? I am willing to confront you on the talk page. --Syphax98 (talk) 22:29, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I am convinced that I have done everything possible to accommodate your positions by discussing with you here. I made sure to include identity disambiguations in the note. Instead, you limited yourself to erasing the sources you didn't like. Perhaps the problem here is you trying to include only the sources you like, deleting all the others.--Syphax98 (talk) 22:33, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Italian Americans identify with their country of origin hence why they are included there. Every diaspora from every country of the Middle East has its respective numbers and pages- Egyptian Americans and Egyptian diaspora, Lebanese Americans and Lebanese Diaspora and so. There is also the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_diaspora page for those numbers that you are trying to include here.

You have already pushed the envelope including non-Arab populations in your brackets in the infobox which I thought wasnt completely accurate but decided to settle. Now you want to make the descendants in America of those non-Arab communities Arab too? We settle on including the non-Arab populations on the brackets based on the fact that they speak Arabic and some of them identify as Arabs but the diaspora doesn't speak the language and indentify as Egyptian Americans, Lebanese Americans etc. So what is your basis for including them? The government census sources? See my reply on that below. Italian Americans are included in the Italian count just like the Lebanese Americans and Egyptian Americans are included in the Lebanese and Egyptian count.

You should also remove Arab Muslims from the rest of the Arabs, since only a minority of them are descended from the tribes of the Arabian Peninsula

Do you have a source for that?

'''The data was based on a source that included only those who identified themselves as Arabs. This data derived from the American census. Those who did not want to identify themselves as Arabs did not do so. It is curious that you want to include only the sources that you like and that represent your point of view'''

Government sources about the Lebanese diaspora for example are extremely unreliable and their numbers extremely exaggerated. In Brazil for example I have very reliable sources that say the numbers of Lebanese descendants there are barely 1 million or less for example, however there are lots of articles coming from governmental sources claiming its like 8 million in Brazil. Government sources a lot of times can be biased and propaganda pushing so caution needs to be applied when it comes to them. They can be plain ignorant and discriminatory sometimes. In countries perhaps closer to the countries of origin of their immigrants as in Israel for example, the census has changed since 2014 to include Aramean in the options. In countries far away from their reality such as United States and Brazil this option has not been included due to their ignorance and discriminatory (sometimes unintentional) practicesChris O&#39; Hare (talk) 22:46, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I asked for a third opinion. --Syphax98 (talk) 23:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * While we await a third opinion, I answer you. There is no valid reason not to include these communities here too. The sources are there and I have checked most of them and they seem reliable and identify these communities as Arab. If there is any source that you think is not good, please notify here on the talk page. I repeat that the inclusion of these communities in brackets is due to the fact that there is a heterogeneity of identity among the members of these communities: some feel Arab and others don't. Therefore it is necessary to act in this way, indicating in the notes more details for the identity issue. The principle of neutrality does not allow us to benefit only one of the visions. The fact that you consider them "non-Arab" is your opinion not shared by everyone, which you want to impose forcefully. Furthermore, I never said that these communities were included only because they are Arabic-speaking. I said that language is one of the parameters that define an ethnic and cultural identity, not the only one. As for the genetic component of the Arab Muslim communities I have already linked you two wikipedia articles where you can find all the sources you want, but you have ignored them. Then I wanted to point out one important thing: if you consider the American census ignorant and discriminatory, well, this is not a problem of the Wikipedia community, but it is your problem. Here we don't do politics and we don't impose any ideological vision. We analyze the sources. And the source that concerned the American Christian Arabs is based on the American census, which guarantees every single American citizen to identify himself in the categories he prefers. --Syphax98 (talk) 18:15, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I repeat that the inclusion of these communities in brackets is due to the fact that there is a heterogeneity of identity among the members of these communities: some feel Arab and others don't

There are two problems here:

1) The first is that you are including all the numbers everywhere in every bracket, both in the Middle Eastern countries and now in the countries in the Americas. All of them, those that do identify and those that dont all put together in those numbers. Are you telling me you are being exact in doing so? If you dont have exact numbers on who identifies with it and who doesnt, shouldn't you then leave it alone? Either that, or do some extensive research, do the hard work and come up with the exact numbers of those who do identify with the Arab identity (even more so in the Americas since they dont speak Arabic) and put those only and and back it up with sources instead of just including everybody in there. Dont take the lazy easy way out.

2) The other problem that mainly concerns the numbers of the Arab Christian diaspora in the Americas, made up mostly of Lebanese descendants in all of those countries, is that the number of Lebanese descendants in the diaspora vary greatly, especially when it comes to the numbers in countries of Latin America. This is not my opinion or ideology. You can read it here in these independent non-governmental studies from the French institute of the Near East, from the Moise A. Khayrallah Center for Lebanese Diaspora Studies of the University of North Carolina and from the Annuario Pontificio and compare it with the numbers you are putting there in the infobox:

https://books.openedition.org/ifpo/13224?lang=en#:~:text=International%20Migration%20and%20the%20Lebanese%20Diaspora,-%C3%89ric%20Verdeil%20et&text=Estimates%20vary%20widely%20but%20a,Lebanese%20abroad%20is%20often%20cited.

https://lebanesestudies.news.chass.ncsu.edu/2015/02/04/methods-of-finding-population-statistics-of-lebanese-migration-throughout-the-world/

This corroborates more or less with the numbers of the Annuario Pontificio of 2017 as can be read here https://web.archive.org/web/20181024215818/http://www.cnewa.org/source-images/Roberson-eastcath-statistics/eastcatholic-stat17.pdf

I myself have done extensive research on this topic and I can tell you that the numbers are even lower when you do the actual calculations of the numbers of immigrants from Lebanon that entered each of the countries in the Americas during 1880-1920 (even adding the numbers from the 2nd wave after the Lebanese Civil War, although most of those went to US, Canada, Europe and Australia and over 45% of those were Muslims) and use growth population calculation to achieve today's realistic numbers of descendants in each of those countries.

'''Furthermore, I never said that these communities were included only because they are Arabic-speaking. I said that language is one of the parameters that define an ethnic and cultural identity, not the only one.'''

So explain to me please on what basis you are adding the mainly descendants of Christian Lebanese number of Brazil, Argentina and US of "Arab Christians" if they dont speak the language and identify with their country of origin not in terms of ethnicity?. Because the Arab American Institute says so? Have you read the sources that talk about how 2 decades ago the Maronites and the Assyrians wrote and protested to the Arab American Institute to stop them from referring to them as Arabs?

https://www.meforum.org/558/iraqi-assyrians-barometer-of-pluralism

http://www.aina.org/releases/caamletter.htm

As for the genetic component of the Arab Muslim communities I have already linked you two wikipedia articles where you can find all the sources you want, but you have ignored them

Which ones are those? I didnt get those. Please resend them to me as I dont see them anywhere.

if you consider the American census ignorant and discriminatory, well, this is not a problem of the Wikipedia community

At least the numbers you included in the US bracket are not as wild as the ones in Brazil and Argentina which are way out of range according to the independent studies I provided sources for. And it is not me that consider it discriminatory or ignorant, its the Maronite and the Assyrian communities that say so as I have shown you in these two sources

https://www.meforum.org/558/iraqi-assyrians-barometer-of-pluralism

http://www.aina.org/releases/caamletter.htmChris O&#39; Hare (talk) 16:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

The sources are there and I have checked most of them and they seem reliable and identify these communities as Arab

Says someone that thinks two books from 1976 and 1977 and two quotes from non-biased political and religious leaders with a political agenda are reliable sources and used them to include the non-arab communities in the infobox?

You keep showing your inability to asses the reliability of sources and your lack of homework and research on this topic and therefore your incompetence as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Competence_is_required#What_is_meant_by_%22Competence_is_required%22?

Is Aramcoworld a reliable source for the number of Lebanese descendants in Brazil? https://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/200505/the.arabs.of.brazil.htm

Are these sources for the Argentinian numbers realiable (the last one doesnt even work)?

https://www.worldstatesmen.org/Argentina.html (doesnt say anything about the numbers you put in the infobox)

https://web.archive.org/web/20100606073714/http://www.islamhoy.org/principal/Latinoamerica/argentina/ciarla.htm (talks about the Muslims in Argentina and says nothing about Christians)

http://www.fearab.org.ar/inmigracion_sirio_libanesa_en_argentina.php (link doesnt work)

I also see that you decided to calculate the 63% out the numbers that the Arab American Institute is pushing which are wildly overestimated and biased instead of calculating the 63% of the actual numbers from the American Census as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Americans#Arab_Population_by_State to come up with your number in the US numbers bracket. You keep defending the American Census but then use the non-reliable biased number from the Arab American Institute instead for your calculation.

I have no proposal for you and you will be reported if you dont revert your edit and stop your disruptive ways. My discussion ends hereChris O&#39; Hare (talk) 17:34, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no valid reason to remove numbers and sources from the infobox. I repeat: if you find some source that you think is not good, warn on the talk page. Otherwise the discussion ends here for me too (unless third opinions arrive). --Syphax98 (talk) 22:54, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Request for comment
The issue is related to the sources and numbers that were canceled by Chris O' Hare without obtaining consent to do so. Should those numbers and sources remain in the infobox? --Syphax98 (talk) 02:00, 11 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment – Improper Rfc statement; should be withdrawn. Please reformulate your request in a neutral way, ideally as a question with two choices, if possible, and without referring to anything outside of this Rfc. For example: "Should the Infobox say that '2 + 2 = 4', or '2 + 2 = four'?" As worded, this Rfc violates various principles, and sounds more like the continuation of a dispute by other means, with the thumb heavily on the scales. My instinct is just to close it right now as fatally flawed, but I'll see if there are other thoughts about that. I would strongly discourage you from continuing this Rfc in its present form, and request that you withdraw it (see WP:RFCEND, point #1) and start another one, properly formulated. Mathglot (talk) 19:20, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I've requested technical closure of this Rfc at WP:ANRFC. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 19:31, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I've closed and delisted the RfC as requested, but I've also reverted the disputed edit pending talk page consensus. I have no opinion on what's right to do here, I'm just restoring the status quo ante.—S Marshall T/C 22:19, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

, this was closed for technical reasons. It does not mean that your preferred content is rejected (or accepted); it just means the Rfc wasn't properly formatted. You are free to create another Rfc, properly worded, if you wish. If you have any doubts about how to do that, the wording can be worked on, before formalizing it as an Rfc. Just write below in plain English, what you want your Rfc question to be, and then we can talk it out. Once the wording looks appropriate, you can introduce it as an Rfc again. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 00:30, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Maronites and Copts
The current infobox data cannot be accepted in my opinion. There are no valid reasons for deciding to exclude Copts and Maronites from the Arab Christian community. I rewrite what I said in a previous discussion. Ideological positions such as Phoenicianism and Pharaonism are extremely minority. They do not represent the identity of the whole community. Wikipedia cannot afford to give rise to minority and ideological political positions (which may or may not be shared) because it does not fall within the principles of neutrality. Who are we to decide that Maronites and Copts are not Arabs? They are Arabic speakers; this is enough to call them Arabs. The Maronites and Copts have played a key role in strengthening Arab identity and culture. Just think of Fairuz. I know many Maronites and Christian Egyptians and many of them consider themselves Christian Arabs. I mention you some statements and references taken from Wikipedia: This is a statement of a Maronite MP: "I, the Maronite Christian Lebanese Arab, grandson of Patriarch Estefan Doueihy, declare my pride to be a part of our people’s resistance in the South. Can one renounce what guarantees his rights?" Deacon Soubhi Makhoul, administrator for the Maronite Exarchate in Jerusalem, has said "The Maronites are Arabs, we are part of the Arab world. And although it’s important to revive our language and maintain our heritage, the church is very outspoken against the campaign of these people.” The genetic issue matters little. Most Arabs, both Muslim and Christian, both in the Mashrek and in the Maghreb are descended for the most part from Arabized indigenous people. Why should we, for example, consider as Arabs the Muslim Egyptians, but not the Copts.  I propose to modify the infobox, including the references to the various confessions in brackets. Any other opinions? --Syphax98 (talk) 10:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Almost a month has passed, and since the issue has been raised several times and no one has expressed opinions contrary to my proposal, I will fix the source and check the sources. --Syphax98 (talk) 11:21, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This is not a fix, but change of long-standing consensus Talk:Arab_Christians/Archive_7. Reverted.GreyShark (dibra) 16:31, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Numbers
The number of christians are significantly wrong. 15% of egypt’s population is christian, yet it says they’re only 300k. Why do we exclude the other Christians? Ehoah88880 (talk) 10:38, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Nobody should have written 300,000. But let's indeed find better quality sources than the existing ones., can we reverse the removal of six references, and watch out against adding more WP:PRIMARY or WP:BIAS sources? Let's try to have the best available data, leaving aside newspaper talk. If Pew Research says 4.7% in 2020, then that's clearly not 10—15 million+. The historic trend is going lower Arab-West Report, p.7-8. Wakari07 (talk) 16:50, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile, I reverted the edits on the ground that, as far as I understand, Copts do not self-identify as Arabs. Wakari07 (talk) 19:04, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No consent for removing Copts and Maronites. Copts do not self-identify as Arabs? This is an ideological point of view, since many Copts do. --Syphax98 (talk) 17:51, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , you mean: no consent for adding Copts and Maronites. Restoring last stable version from 25 November. Wakari07 (talk) 18:47, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you consider Irish people who speak English as English people? I don't think so. Wakari07 (talk) 18:57, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

We need to reach a consensus, certain greek orthodox and melkite communities dont consider themselves arab aswell, this is confusing and only a consensus will fix this issue. JJNito197 (talk) 19:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Arabs
Three points to discuss here:

(1) The start of the article "Arab Christians are Arabs..." Note that our Arabs article says “More recently, the term has come to refer to those who originate from an Arab country, whose native language is Arabic.”

(2) We say “Although sometimes classified as "Arab Christians", the largest Middle Eastern Christian groups of Maronites and Copts often claim non-Arab ethnicity” And we exclude them in the infobox. This sentence seems to make the article about nationalism.

(3) We say (and I have removed here for discussion as the most awkward of the lot) ”Some are descended from ancient Arab Christian clans that did not convert to Islam, such as the Sabaean tribes of Yemen (Ghassanids, Banu Judham etc.) and the Nabataeans who settled in Transjordan and Syria. Others are descended from Arabized Christians, such as the Antiochian Greek Christians.” The former makes up a small minority of the population groups which we show in the infobox, the vast majority of which, despite the exclusion of the Maronites, are "Levantine Christians". To then describe these people as "descended from Arabized Christians" seems circular in nature (it’s basically saying “Some Arabized Christians are descended from Arabized Christians”). The Levantine Christians (being what this article is mostly about) are largely Arabic speaking people consider themselves to have been Christians since the beginnings of the Church. Many of them use Greek, the original language of the church, as their formal liturgical language, but due to the way nationalism evolved they do not consider themselves Greek but Arab.

This article is fundamentally entwined with the challenges that bedevil our article Arabs; the identity is complex and hard to define, and frequently mistaken for "ethnic Arabs", which is basically a synonym for “Arabic-speaking people who consider themselves part of the Arab community” but has absolutely nothing to do with “race” for which it is often mistaken. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:36, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * See the preface of this book which explains the subtleties well:

Onceinawhile (talk) 08:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I have added a table that should help readers understand this better, focused on the primary indigenous churches of the Middle East (note that none of these are in the Maghreb or the Arabian Peninsula; they are all centered in the Levant and Iraq).
 * A key point to bring out somewhere is that whilst the Coptic and Syriac churches have their formal liturgies in those languages, there are almost no fluent speakers of those languages, so presumably the mother tongue of most of their adherents is Arabic.
 * An interesting observation, which would be good to add in if sourceable, is that the main Arabic-speaking Christians who consider themselves Arab are those from the Greek churches, and that is perhaps primarily because the Greek identity never managed to get a foothold in the Levant (despite the Turkish-speaking Greek Christians in the old Ottoman Empire having since become part of the Greek population). Onceinawhile (talk) 00:16, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Two excellent additional sources:
 * AUTHENTIC ARABS, AUTHENTIC CHRISTIANS: ANTIOCHIAN ORTHODOX AND THE MOBILIZATION OF CULTURAL IDENTITY, 2010, Matthew W. Stiffler, PhD Thesis

Noble and Treiger's introduction is particularly helpful: "On the eve of the Islamic conquests in the seventh century CE, Christians formed a majority or a plurality in most areas of the Middle East. They spoke and wrote a variety of languages, including Greek, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Georgian, Middle Persian, and Sogdian. Arabic, too, was spoken by those Arab tribes and sedentary populations in Arabia, Palestine, Syria, and Iraq who had converted to the Christian faith in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries. In the course of the seventh century, an estimated half of the world’s Christians found themselves under Islamic rule.1 The Islamic conquests set in motion two processes affecting these Christian communities: the process of Arabization, causing them gradually to adopt Arabic as a spoken, literary, and liturgical language (often alongside their ancestral tongues) and the much slower, yet persistent process of Islamization. To the degree that they underwent Arabization but not Islamization, Middle Eastern Christians are Arab Christians, though those of them who do not consider themselves to be of Arab descent, such as the Copts of Egypt or the Maronites of Lebanon, often reject the term."

This formulation and contextualization of the topic of this article is excellent. Onceinawhile (talk) 00:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello, I am aware of the dispute between Greek Orthodox Palestinians and the Greek dominated clergy in Palestine but i'm not knowledgeable on Syria and Lebanon in this regard, I'm only aware of the 'Antiochian Greek Christians' identity which I was never aware, the Arab identity was firmly rooted. I will note the dispute between the Palestinians but where should I insert it do you think? I was thinking of mentioning Issa Elissa/Falastins dispute with the Church but it would be suitable in the Palestinian subsection? I will read those sources you provided over and make insert relevant edits. Looking forward to your knowledgeable input. Regards JJNito197 (talk) 00:56, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for this. I saw your nomination for GA, so I am here to offer my help.
 * The Arabic-Greek identity piece is fascinating. I once read an excellent explanation of the pivotal moment in the debate, but I have forgotten where. In the meantime, a good recent article is Arabic vs. Greek: the Linguistic Aspect of the Jerusalem Orthodox Church Controversy in Late Ottoman Times and the British Mandate, Arabic and its Alternatives, Konstantinos Papastathis, Pages: 261–286, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004423220_012
 * Onceinawhile (talk) 01:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated for your help, I seem to be the only one invested in this article recently! I will have to dig deep and do some further research on those matters, I will make suitable sub headers for 'Antiochian Orthodox' and 'Jerusalem Ortohodox' and expand in detail further for better understanding of the Arab identity Christian Arabs and Arabized Christians are enmeshed in to the unaware. Kind regards JJNito197 (talk) 01:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, I have added a subheader '‎Embrace of the Arab Identity' can you look over it and make changes if neccessary, it may be too big or lacking in specific details. Regards JJNito197 (talk) 14:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated for your help, I seem to be the only one invested in this article recently! I will have to dig deep and do some further research on those matters, I will make suitable sub headers for 'Antiochian Orthodox' and 'Jerusalem Ortohodox' and expand in detail further for better understanding of the Arab identity Christian Arabs and Arabized Christians are enmeshed in to the unaware. Kind regards JJNito197 (talk) 01:23, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, I have added a subheader '‎Embrace of the Arab Identity' can you look over it and make changes if neccessary, it may be too big or lacking in specific details. Regards JJNito197 (talk) 14:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Assyrians
I see the below has been removed:

I don't like the text because it is sounds quite advocacy-like. But the Assyrians, broadly defined (see Terms for Syriac Christians) should be included in this article as many of them speak Arabic as their first language so fit well under the "question of identity".

Most "Arabs" of the Fertile Crescent are not ethnic Arabs, but only linguistically. Yet this linguistically Arab group is understandably attached to its liturgical language, so therefore most differentiate themselves. It would be interesting to see an opinion poll of Arab identity within this group. Onceinawhile (talk) 16:02, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * See "Today, due to both forced and accepted Arabization, many Chaldeans from Iraq also identify themselves situationally as Arabs." Onceinawhile (talk) 16:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay, I have restored it and I will include a better array of opinions regarding this matter. JJNito197 (talk) 16:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I noticed this edit you made a couple of days ago. How best do you think we should cover Syriac Christians in this article? Onceinawhile (talk) 16:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * These questions are very complex, since there are Christians who are ethnic Arabs, but there is also a wider category of arabophone (Arabic-speaking) Christians. That (wider) category is linguistically defined, and includes both Arab Christians, and other Arabic-speaking Christians who are not ethnic Arabs. This article is currently titled Arab Christians and thus it would be best to focus it on Christians who are ethnic Arabs. Some questions related to complex identities should also be included in this article, such as those that are related to Arabization. Since we do not have a wider article on arabophone (Arabic-speaking) Christians, nor on Arabic Christianity in general, various complex subjects are currently treated mainly in this article, and also in articles like Terms for Syriac Christians, but it seems to me that we are still in the "work in progress" stage of creating, improving and classifying relevant contents, not to mention high sensitivity of all those subjects. Sorabino (talk) 17:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * This source which I believe Sorabino found is excellent: Arabic and the Syriac Christians in Iraq: Three Levels of Loyalty to the Arabist Project (1920–1950), In: Arabic and its Alternatives, Tijmen C. Baarda, p.143–170 : "The Syriac Christians of Iraq, split between different churches but also between native speakers of Arabic and of Aramaic, show various views on the new reality, reflected in various positions expressed by church leaders in publications and educational endeavours. The Chaldeans in al-Najm, with their consistent usage of ṭāʾifa for themselves and for the other Christian groups and umma to refer to Iraq and the Arab world, positioned themselves deliberately as a religious group within the Arab Iraqi nation. The Arab identity of the state was not only acceptable to them, but was even staunchly endorsed. The Arab nationalism they supported did not discriminate according to religion and was therefore also acceptable to them, even if it recognized the special relationship between the Arabic language and Islam. This is in sharp contrast to what we see happening with the Syriac Orthodox, who used the phrase al-umma al-suryāniyya to refer to the Syriac Christians worldwide. Although they positively assessed their presence in Iraq as their waṭan, they did not share the idea that they were part of the same Iraqi-Arab nation with the Chaldeans. For the Assyrians, most of whom part of and represented by the Assyrian Church of the East, it is also clear that those who reached out to their community by publishing or educational efforts saw themselves as part of a nation that was different from the majority in the country. The difference between them and the Syriac Orthodox is that the former generally expressed themselves less favourably – or sometimes outright unfavourably – about the country in which they lived."
 * Onceinawhile (talk) 16:57, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Onceinawhile I have included information from that source and merged Maronites, Chaldeans and Assyrians under the banner of 'Syric Christians' relating to the image next to it. JJNito197 (talk) 17:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)