Talk:Arabs/Archive 9

Origin of Soutsemitic languages
the southsemtic languages are of african origin. the Sout Semitic article says so, i added a reference and if necessary i will add more references. Don't remove my edit (which has been done in good faith) without discussion and presenting references.

my ref : Smywtbb (talk) 09:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, you did provide a reference to a debated subject which mean that your reference represent one of the points of views and not the actual fact. I edited the article to reflect the debate by keeping your edit but giving it its rightful weight as one of the hypothesizes.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 10:57, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Top infobox
Hey the top infobox is really hard to actually read, and I suggest that a box like format (like in Iranian peoples) should be done. Balakrishnan Koran (talk) 14:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Population figures array awry
When clicking on the little black triangle to arrange the countries by descending population, I get a completely bollocksed order. While the first digit is correct, the algorithm seems to sometimes disregard order of magnitude. Thus, for example, the second country is one with only three-hundred-some Arab speakers, where-as this number of speakers should place it near the bottom. Kdammers (talk) 07:49, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

What is meant by "pure" Arabs ?
Hi, I was just curious, when we say "pure" Arabs, what do we mean exactly ? GoulGoul1 (talk) 15:09, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The accepted definition of "pure" Arabs appears in two places in this article. Search for "pure".  General Ization   Talk   15:12, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

a very disgusting stupidity
There is no panarabism. everybody is arab. everybody got some arab blood. i am Mixed, i am like 98% berber and 2% Arab. I chose my arab side. I identify myself as Arab. Friendly (talk) 15:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I a agree there is no such thing as Arabization or pan-Arabism Arabs and berbers have a mix of blood with one another either big or little does it really matter not really I am a Persian arab 85% arab and I say im Arab and proud :)ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 23:21, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Propaganda article
Why is this article full of lies (or errors)? A lot of person shown is the image ARE NOT arabs. A lot are tadjik, aghan, iranian, etc... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:8A8D:FE80:B55B:4F61:9CDE:CEFC (talk) 08:31, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

This article is a big joke
So much propaganda of trying to force down our throat that half the middle east is "Arabized" despite tons of movement of nomads that happened in the middle east to the north like the Ghassanids and Lakhmids. This article is also very farce in trying to convince us that Arabs are not a proper ethnic group but rather a mumbo jumbo of different people which is totally false. Arabs have always been a clannish people adhering strong to their tribal values and preservation of blood like other nomadic and tribals people. I would love to contribute to make this article better, but i feel like my views would not be agreed upon by everyone. Akmal94 (talk) 06:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Its your words not ours : strong tribal relations. But then you go to the Levant and most people have no tribs !! This isnt about views but reliable sources . You cant really say that a Sudanese and a Lebanese are the same ethnicity. Gassanids controlled modern Jordan and a small portion of Southern Syria and thats not enough to claim that they changed the demography specially that those places (Levant, Egypt....etc) were one of the most populated areas in history and Arabia cant provide enough population to replace the original ones without massacares (and we know that Arabs never made a real one).--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 13:52, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

No hes right Attar Arabs aren't just from the pennusla they were in ethopia and Somalia the rest lived in yemen oman and inside Saudi Arabia Arabs lived in Jordan and the Sinai pennusla theres evidence Arabs mated With black women the greeks say it for 5,000 years and the Lebenese btw originate from Bahrain Phoenicians came from the peninsula The greeks and Sumerians talk about it so do the Assyrian so get your facts right ok??ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pseudo history but Im pretty sure that the Sumerians didnt mention the Arabs since that word originally meant Nomads and the first mention was by the Assyrians some 1200 years after the extinction of Sumer. As for Phoenicia you might wanna check the article of Phoenicia. Sorry to break the news but nobody came from Arabia (it was the other way around). Just bring reliable scholarly works (and not some old account from the 18th century).--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 23:36, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually, you may want to look at a map because the Ghassanid empire basically included all of Syria along with Lebanon which at the time was part of Greater Syria. Many Lebanese christians also carry surnames that descend from the Ghassanids like Ghassan, Khoury and Malouf to show their roots. The Levant was overrun by Bedouins from the south ever since the days of the Assyrian empire who mentioned Arabs as Bedouins, NOT calling them arabs because it meant nomad. People like the Syriacs and Arameans were always low in population which made them a closer knit group during migrations of different people. Even Herdotus mentioned the Phoencians having a possible Arabian ancestry coming in from Bahrain so that would undoubtly make them Arabs as well. My problem with the article is that it is not fair and is jumping to conclusions to paint all levantines and north africans as some kind of "arabized" people without proper proof. Akmal94 (talk) 06:02, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Your information are so old. Actually the proofs exist (just click on them). "Khoury" is the guy who look after the church, its normal to have that surname if you are a Christian in the Levant just like many Moslims have the surname "Khatib" (the guy who give ceremony in the mosque) . Your assumptions are false and unreferenced. Ghassanids were puppets (not an empire) of the Byzantines who disbanded them. I dont know what map you are talking about but the Byzantines will not just hand the Ghassanids the Syrian cities. I also urge you to leave Herodotus to rest and take a look at the newest academic views about the Phoenicians since there was no such a people and thats just a Greek name for Canaanites who inhabited the coast and there is no proof for migration (Read the National Geographic study about the Phoenicians). Syriacs are people who speak the Syriac accent of the Aramaic language and I have no idea where did you get those "info" that they were a minority. Assyrians mentioned an Arab with a thousand Camel who participated in Qarqar battle with an Aramean army of like 60000 and thats it. People are Arabized because they are genetically different and there is no way in hell that the Arabs were able to replace the North Africans and Levantines. You really should start presenting reliable sources from neutral Academics as this discussion is taking a forum character and Wikipedia isnt a forum.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 06:37, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to break it to You Attar but it seems your using a Assyrian propergenda let me teach you something about history Sumerians came from Dilmun meaning there of arab orgin Assyrians like it or not are of arab orgin as well they come from the peninsula you can toss and turn the subject all you wwant The Aramic language was influenced by Arabic you can say whatever you like your comment was irrelevant sorry to break it to you the only reason Christens in Lebanon say there Phoenician cause they have an Identity crisis if lebenase Arabic was an Aramic form do tell why there aren't that much Aramic influence??? just a couple words???ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 15:11, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

you would also know that Assyrians today aren't the same Assyrians they are just Aramaic's who are wannabe assyrians I am of Akkadian origin and I find it offensive of your lack of knowledge when you speak of This so called Assyrian tongue known as Syriac — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArabAmazigh12 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
 * pseudo history and naivety at their best I guess the Germans are Russians since they came from the steppes of Russia (You need to take a look at some genetic and linguistic studies, no people migrated from Arabia. That just old stuff). Im not an Assyrian or a Syriac and Aram is my normal name and not a reference to Arameans. Lol the Sumerians were Arabs. Bring the Archaeologist who said so and stop using Wikipedia as a forum (and stop using my style in argument hahahaha).--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:15, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

lol Genetic studies show j2 and j1 are found in those areas and linguistics there all related from the proto semitic stem I don't even think your from Syria probably just a fake you need to go back to school I studied archology and major in genetics the phoencians assyrians akkadians Arabs all come from a common ancestor lngiustically and genetically for example In Phonecican the word Lb in Arabic 'lb so you and your hahahahahaahah this is my style just sorry to tell you that and Sumerians themselves claim that They came from Dilmun its in the texts maybe you need to go and get a proper education no offense but the lack of history and geneology you know of is very sadArabAmazigh12 (talk) 02:08, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Juris Zarins was a famous german professor he himself said that they migrated from Dilmun and came to Iraq before the flood happened and the Sumemrians said they had kinship to the people of dilmun which is modern day Bahrain maybe you need to come to the british muasem m8 come and talk to me m8 Yohnana who has a degree in archology who would agree with meArabAmazigh12 (talk) 02:14, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

You made me laugh you said that this is old stuff history proved people migrated from Arabia just like how berbers originally migrated from Syria 10,0000 years ago we can tell using carbon dating and other ways Arabians btw are Phonecicans Southern Arabians Arabs Assyrians and akkadins they are all children of the Arabian peninsula just like how North Indians and Kurds and Persians are related genetically and linguistically only difference is that the Indians over time married with the dravdiansArabAmazigh12 (talk) 03:17, 24 October 2015 (UTC)ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 03:15, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Facepalm Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of Semitic languages identifies an Early Bronze Age origin of Semitic in the Near East.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 03:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

lawl bro evidence shows people go through language shifts look at the azerbajini they use to be Iranian speaking people now they are Turkic speaking people history shows us that the sumerians shifted there language to akkadian they mated with akkadians thus created a new hybrid semitic stockArabAmazigh12 (talk) 05:55, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about ! this isnt the apricity so stop using it as a forum Wikipedia is not a forum.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 07:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Attar, you sound biased and haven't provided sources yourself that Levantines are all Arabized. Do you not know how many people in Lebanon are either of Armenian, Kurdish or Greek decent? That is mostly the chrisitan bulk of Lebanese chrisitans in the country after Arab chrsitan. now would you say these people are arabized despite not seeing themselves as Arabs in the first place? As for the ghassanids expanding into Lebanon, take a look at this map please; http://photos.geni.com/p13/29/4d/7d/f4/53444839a259b0d3/mapzoom2_medium.jpg

It includes much of Lebanon like Mount Hermon. You also say the Byzantine empire were against Ghassanid's and other Arabs but this is not true, Jabalah ibn-al-Aiham, a Ghassanid King was allowed to form his own government and court under the blessings of the Byzantines who were against other bedouins in crossing into their territory. This is coming from the Royal house of Ghassan's website. http://www.royalhouseofghassan.org/history/ Also if you want to jump to genetics, then you must of heard of Pierre Zalloua and his genetic study done on Lebanese men back when it was sponsered by the national geographic? According to his reports, only 30% of people can actually trace their ancestry to the so called Phoneicans.

"The study, by an eminent Middle Eastern geneticist, found that a common genetic signature — identified as that of the Phoenicians — is present in up to 30% of males spread across Lebanon's disparate communities." http://www.natureasia.com/en/nmiddleeast/article/10.1038/nmiddleeast.2013.46

So what exactly would that make the rest of the population? I'd leave that to you. Finally, its very possible for the bulk population of the Levant to be replaced by a new one, I mean Palestine was once Greek inhabbited for a while correct? that's where the name Philistne comes from to refer to sea raiding greeks. If Natives in North America got replaced, than it is very possible for Arabs to do the same to the Levant. Akmal94 (talk) 07:08, 27 October 2015 (UTC)


 * You seem not to understand Wikipedia. PLEASE Read here Verifiability
 * So in short, that map and the so called royal house site worth nothing here. They are NOT an academic authority. Its just a random site and there is no legitimate rroyal house.. only people wishing they are part of that house. That map was a joke to say the least. Identical to modern political borders between syria and turkey WOW
 * I provided no sources cause they are already in the articles such as Lebanese people. But if anyone tried to insert pseudo history counting on random websites then be sure that the sources will be pasted immediately and the myths removed.
 * Native Americans were replaced by genoside and sickness and no such a thing happened in the Levant or Egypt and please read something about Palestine. It was never a land of Greeks. There is a difference between Greek rule and the land becoming Greek
 * Zalloua said 30% Phoenician but didnt say 70% Arab and its not up to YOU to figure it out.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 07:45, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know enough about the genetic makeup of the Arab world to comment here. Arab is a pan-ethnicity where language, culture, shared space and history are the major binding factors that constitute Arab identity. That's not to say there are many Arabs (minority, plurality or even majority) who are descended from Arabian tribes. However, Attar-Aram is correct in that this conversation is pointless unless editors could bring reliable sources to back their arguments. Attar-Aram has brought sources backing his argument, but Akmal and ArabAmazigh have not. See WP:Original research and WP:Reliable sources. If RS are not produced, this conversation should come to an end. Wikipedia is not a forum. --Al Ameer (talk) 15:19, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

ArabAmazigh12 is either a fraudster or completely incompetent, haven't figured out which. I've found it pointless to try to discuss things rationally with them, and have taken to simply reverting the mess they're making on WP. This discussion is probably a waste of your time too. — kwami (talk) 06:53, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey Kwami let me tell you something I am not a fraud your the fraud Dyari let me tell you something ive made 2 Articles on here ive contributed to Wikipedia so don't test me ok thanksArabAmazigh12 (talk) 18:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I love how you call me incompetent its to funny kwami you don't know nothing of me Im not here to be called names so watch yourself don't start problems Wikipedia's gudielines state so btw don't ever revert what I put on the Assyrian page again or I wil report you for false information try me just try me and as for Arabs being pan ethinic they are one culture just like the turks are today and the Hispanics etc no one is of one heritage so please stop bsing thanks!!!ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 18:25, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

This is full of shit
I don't know how such a wrong informations and such an ignorance can be on wikipedia ? too much of using arabization without having any idea about the history of Arabs ? Arabs were in levant from long time ago not only in the desert of Syria as you ignorantly written ? the commander of Byzantine army in Levant in the war against Muslims were an Arab and that shows that Arabs have been there long time ago and they were majority, despite the Nabataeans , Gassasina and many the other families that have been going to Levant .. and yeah by the language (Aramaic, Arabic and other semitic languages) it were almost the same , and the whole semitic people were almost speaking the same language , they spoke Aramaic , they spoke old arabic and then they turn to Arabic , Semitic were talking each other language and choosing the most developed language during the history , So , do some research about that

The gallery of personalities from the infobox
I invite everybody to post their opinions at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ethnic_groups Hahun (talk) 11:39, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * RfC can be found here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 02:19, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

A proposal
There's a lot of argument on the talk page about Arab vs Arabized, whatever. Right now "Arabs" is being used to mean "Arabic speaking people in MENA" more or less. We link to Arabians as being different from "Arabs", but Arabians redirects here. "Arabs" is not a purely artificial term at all, it has historical and genetic basis. In the sense it is used today it is very broad, particularly with regard to Berbers and Christian Arabs who identify as Aramean/Assyrian/etc. I also think the article "Arab identity" needs to be created. --Monochrome _ Monitor  19:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what your proposal for this article is, exactly. Eperoton (talk) 20:56, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Arabs
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Arabs's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Cruciani2004": From Haplogroup E-M215 (Y-DNA):  From Y-DNA haplogroups by populations of Near East:  

Reference named "Cruciani2007": From Haplogroup E-M215 (Y-DNA):  From Palestinians: Also see Supplementary Data 

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:49, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Genetics for ethnic groups RfC
For editors interested, there's an RfC currently being held: Should sections on genetics be removed from pages on ethnic groups?. This has been set up to determine the appropriateness of sections such as the "genetics" section in this article. I'd encourage any contributors to voice their opinions there. -- Katan gais (talk) 20:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Yemeni Arab
Seriously since when Southern Arabia was not Arab ? ppl need to get their facts straight, Herodotus and ancient historian referred to southern Arabia and saba civilization as Arabes , if that not enough then Yemeni kings inscriptions , referred to themselves MLKN ARBN ( king of Arab ) , what is the hard thing to understand ? How in hell they weren't Arab when ancient Greco-Roman historian referred to them as Arabes ( Arab ). Wikipedia need to seriously stop mixing politics with history.

Both Hippolytus and Uranius mention three distinct peoples in Arabia during the first half of the third century: the "Saraceni", the "Taeni" and the "Arabes", guess who were the Arabes ? Nabataean, Hejaz , southern Arabia.

God Wikipedia is so much anti Arab — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assaf122 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Somalia
Somalis are not ethnic Arabs, but they identify more with Arabs than Africans due to religious and trade ties with Arabs.

In Somalia there are only 30,000 Arabs in the country.

Libanguled (talk) 01:09, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Somalis are instead of Hamitic ancestral origin . That they aren't ethnically Arab is not particularly meaningful, though, since the Arab world is chiefly comprised of Arabized populations. Most Maghrebis and Egyptians are of related Hamitic stock, and many Near Easterners are descended from various local Semitic speaking populations rather than from the peninsular Arabs. All speak languages from the Afro-Asiatic (Hamitic-Semitic) family. Anyway, the table is on the population of the various Arab states, not on peninsular Arabs only. Soupforone (talk) 02:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Somalis are not Arabs. The reliable source of CIA Factbook says there are only 30,000 Arabs in Somalia. Somalis being Arab is a false claim with no reliable source backing it. If Somalis where Arabs then the reliable source of CIA Factbook would not say out of the 10 million people in Somalia there are only 30,000 Arabs in it.

Somalis are not ethnic Arabs. It is meaningful to state the fact that Somalis are not Arabs. Why are you deleting this fact Soupforone ?

The CIA also indicates that "although almost all Algerians are Berber in origin (not Arab), only a minority identify themselves as Berber". Thus, what it actually means by "Arab" here is "Arabized". More importantly, per the Charter of the Arab League, "the League of Arab States shall be composed of the: independent Arab States that have signed this Pact". Non-Arab states are only eligible for observer status. So yes, all of the League's 22 member states are Arab states. Soupforone (talk) 03:02, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Soupforone, Why are you deleting from the article the fact that the CIA Factbook says there are only 30,000 Arabs in Somalia? Let the readers decide which source to believe the CIA or the Arab Charter. It is important to present both views on the article page. Libanguled (talk) 19:36, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

With respect, that is a non-equivalence. The Charter of the Arab League officially establishes what is or is not an Arab state, and that includes all 22 member Arab League states. The CIA obviously does not and would not suggest otherwise. Also, most of the Arab world is actually Arabized, not just one or two constituent territories. Soupforone (talk) 03:23, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with Libanguled. Even if the Arab League charter classifies all Somalis as Arabs, per WP:NPOV we have to reflect all significant viewpoints, and the CIA Factbook is a standard reference. Eperoton (talk) 03:49, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I already fixed it, and for all of the Arab states. Soupforone (talk)

Thank you Soupforone for including all significant viewpoints in the article page. Libanguled (talk) 04:31, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

The CIA is well aware that the League of Arab States consists of Arab states. It did not and obviously would never suggest otherwise, so no need to thank me. It is a non-equivalence. Soupforone (talk) 04:41, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

First sentence
The first sentence defines Arabs as a panethnicity based upon the use of a shared language. The source used is " Ghazi Omar Tadmouri (17 March 2011). "Genetic Disorders in Arabs" (PDF). Centre for Arab Genomic Studies. Retrieved 4 December 2013." In other words: One of the (at the current time in the world) more uniquely important identities to the current state of affairs of geopolitics and economics, claimed or ascribed to well over a billion people, listed in the first sentence on the most basic and general article on one of the highest traffic websites on earth uses a random, is a 3rd rate medical journal... one that explicitly publishes medical research related to the people who identify or identified by the label in question... and authored by a person who (by extension) performs medical research on/for those same people.... with vested interests/self involvement at every level (Authorship and publication)

To be perfectly honest I dont think that an Arab medical researcher whose article was published for an audience of other Arab medical researchers, intended for its impact in the Arab medical world, is qualified to define a highly important term like the meaning of the "Arab Identity" especially in the sense of the type of basic "common sense premise" that all scientific research papers present in their first few sentences of the abstract or introductory sections.

Just because someone holds an MD or PhD does not mean that they are qualified to talk about a subject that is the province of historians, political scientists, ethnic researchers, etc. Furthermore, its typically a bad idea to use the offhand, common sense, "taken for granted" assumptions of a member of a particular group as the basis for defining the fundamental bounds/characteristics of that group in a general and POV-free way.

TL;DR: get a freaking a textbook reference. Are you serious? COME ON! Present a few examples. This is the FIRST SENTENCE OF THE DAMN ARTICLE. You might as well have used TIME CUBE as a reference. 108.233.86.84 (talk) 07:12, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it seems an ip fiddled with the phrase. I've pointed it instead to that on Arab world. Soupforone (talk)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 one external links on Arabs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620004217/http://www.fearab.org.ar:80/inmigracion_sirio_libanesa_en_argentina.php to http://www.fearab.org.ar/inmigracion_sirio_libanesa_en_argentina.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060601221810/http://www.aaiusa.org/arab-americans/22/demographics to http://www.aaiusa.org/arab-americans/22/demographics
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6BNNjndve?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cia.gov%2Flibrary%2Fpublications%2Fthe-world-factbook%2Fgeos%2Fag.html to https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ag.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620004217/http://www.fearab.org.ar:80/inmigracion_sirio_libanesa_en_argentina.php to http://www.fearab.org.ar/inmigracion_sirio_libanesa_en_argentina.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216032153/http://www.tabasaran.com:80/modules.php?name=News to http://www.tabasaran.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=171
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070629171538/http://info.bahai.org/article-1-6-0-5.html to http://info.bahai.org/article-1-6-0-5.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761570797/himyarites.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100403085410/http://www.aaiusa.org/arab-americans/22/demographics to http://www.aaiusa.org/arab-americans/22/demographics
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060509170538/http://www.arableagueonline.org/las/index.jsp to http://www.arableagueonline.org/las/index.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:48, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Semitic people
Please take a look at the article on "Semitic people". It's an obsolete term. Doug Weller talk 20:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Please look at the archives of Talk:Semitic people. That article is a circular reference and a poor one at that.--Monochrome _ <small style="font: 13px Courier New">Monitor  23:16, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Wealth and other activities
There is nothing on this article about their luxurious lifestyles, architecture, technology and even about gasoline business and terrorism. Why? Wikipedia is about neutrality. --79.75.63.99 (talk) 18:04, 9 December 2016 (UTC)


 * You seem to be very confused between shallow media stereotypes and the realities of the daily lives the great majority of Arabs. AnonMoos (talk) 14:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Sufism
Sufism is the mystical aspect of Islam rather than a sect or denomination. It is nonetheless widely adhered to in the Arab world. Soupforone (talk) 04:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you want to add it to the side of the Arab Muslim sects.? If that's what you want, it is an Islamic doctrine, but according to the Sufi vision is not a doctrine, but it is one of the three pillars of religion (Islam, faith, charity). But you can add it.--HailesG (talk) 05:34, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I was alluding to the religion parameter in the infoxbox. Soupforone (talk) 16:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Geography
Parts of North Africa??. If we want political definition, the result will be (They primarily inhabit north Africa well as parts of Western Asia, because in West Asia, there are non-Arab countries: Armeniad, Azerbaijand, Cyprusd, Georgiad, Iran, Israel, Turkey. While all the North African countries is an Arab: Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, and Western Sahara.--HailesG (talk) 07:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The demographic compromise is satisfactory. However, the notes in the table are also irrelevant since the preambulatory stuff on Arabization was meant to explain/preface them. Anyway, the political definition is that the Arab world consists of the 22 territories in the Arab League, so a link to the latter works fine. Soupforone (talk) 16:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Flag
Most of the ethnic groups don't have the flag in the infoxbox, such as the Berbers, this flag does not represent a lot of Arabs, many Arabs consider the Arab League is unhelpful. look at ethnic flag, This Flag of the Arab Revolt represents Arab nationalism However, it should not be in the infoxbox.--HailesG (talk) 02:26, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The Arab League flag is about as relevant as the Arab League population figure, which is also in the infobox. Soupforone (talk) 04:18, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not talking about Arab League population flag, I mean this |flag =!!, like the Egyptians living in Egypt and Flag of Egypt represents all Egyptians, however that does not exist in the infobox.--HailesG (talk) 04:43, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

There isn't any such thing as a flag of all Arabs. The 1917 Arab revolt flag is the closest approximation in some ways, but it lacks any official status etc... AnonMoos (talk) 15:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)


 * AnonMoos I know well, I didn't say that it represents the Arabs but Arab nationalism.--HailesG (talk) 02:25, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

HailesG, the flag parameter in the infobox is apparently earmarked for an ethnic flag. However, it also indicates that the parameter should be used with caution since most ethnic groups do not have a strongly associated flag; so I see your point. Soupforone (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Arab People
Why did you delete this text (also known as the Arab People), many ethnicities have this definition, such as the Jews, Kurds and others...--HailesG (talk) 17:38, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The phrasing that Arabs, also known as Arab people, are a people... is redundant per WP:REDUNDANCY-- Keep redundancy to a minimum in the first sentence. Use the first sentence of the article to provide relevant information that is not already given by the title of the article. Ergo, no need to repeat Arab and people. Soupforone (talk) 03:14, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Ethnic groups or not
Is "Arab" categorized by race, language, culture, dress, color skin or nationality? The second question is, when could someone consider him/her self as an Arab?

Arabs is an ethnic group. A group of people where the majority of them share the same language, traditions, history, and maybe the same set of religion structure if you may add that as well.

Middle east.123

North Africa.1
 * Maghrebis in Maghreb (c. 110 million), including Berbers in Mauritania, Morocco (including Western Sahara), Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya (c. 30 million).

Berbers are an ethnic group yes but there's a big difference between Berber groups so that makes them a panethnicity.??--RabeaMalah (talk) 11:45, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

An ethnic group is a category of people who identify with each other based on similarities, such as common ancestral, language, social, cultural or national experiences. I don't know why you are objecting to this?.--RabeaMalah (talk) 08:44, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * RabeaMalah, if by ethnic group you mean the Gulf Bedouins, then they indeed constitute an ethnic group since they share a common ancestral origin (Berbers do as well for the same reason). However, it's more nuanced vis-a-vis other Arab world populations since they are instead of heterogeneous ancestral heritage, but are culturally and linguistically affiliated. This is why I think panethnicity is felicitous. Aṭlas, RabeaMalah makes a good point about how an ethnic group shares a common ancestry, culture and language. What parameter, then, do you think would work best? Soupforone (talk) 17:52, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Arabs are an assemblies of people of different ancestors origin and religious background and historical identities. So any one can become an arab simply by adopting arab culture, speaking arabic... RabeaMalah, you just Show me that you want only to impose your point of view as you did in the arabic wikipedia claiming that "Arabs are an ethnic group par excellence" and removing this reference (War of Visions: Conflict of Identities in the Sudan), and you want to apply this in the english wikipedia. I'm totally agree with soupforone's definition of panethnicity and ethnicity and I think it's appropriate to leave page as it is. --Aṭlas (talk) 19:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * , if by ethnic group you mean the Gulf Bedouins, If those living in Arab countries are the zombie race, other Arab world populations.. they Berbers, Kurds, Turks, Iranians, Azeris, Yezidis, Circassians, Shabaks, Turcomans, Romani, Chechens, Kawliya, Mhallami, Samaritans, Why don't they tell themselves they are Arabs and they have a culture and language practice in the Arab world. Go and ask any habitat in the Arab world said to him, What is your race will answer you is Arab, Anyway the Arabs know this well, not you or any user defines the human race, finally you're on Wikipedia everyone does what he wants...




 * 1) People of different ancestors origin and religious background and historical identities. (this is your opinion), sorry if you're a scientist in the area of race and humanity, this is something else.
 * 2) any one can become an arab simply by adopting arab culture, speaking arabic. ok ok i was born in Geneva, Switzerland, their first language is French, my culture is Swiss, my Nationality is Swiss but my father and mother from Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and Morocco, so Am I the Swiss or Arab?.
 * 3) You just Show me that you want only to impose your point of view as you did in the arabic wikipedia, No I don't want this, before I do anything in Arabic Wikipedia has been a discussion on this.


 * Definition of Ethnic group and the List of contemporary ethnic groups in Wikipedia is a category of people who identify with each other based on similarities, such as common ancestral, language, social, cultural or national experiences.


 * French people are an ethnic group in Wikipedia?? but the Maghrebis and Africans number about 10 million, and that other ethnic groups
 * Turkish people are a Turkic ethnic group in Wikipedia? but there ethnic groups include Albanians, Arabs, Assyrians, Azeris, Bosniaks, Circassians, Georgians, Lazs, Persians, Pomaks (Bulgarians), Yazidis and Roma.. The Kurds, a distinct ethnic group, are the largest non-Turkic ethnicity, around 18–25 percent of the population.--HailesG (talk) 07:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Panethnicity is a political neologism used to group together related ethnic groups. The term was coined in 1992 by Yen Espiritu to refer to the group of Asian Americans.

Also there is a very large explanation about Arab identity is unmatched in all ethnic groups in Wikipedia--HailesG (talk) 07:57, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Please do not alter the panethnicity/ethnicity parameter without consensus. Anyway, as I and Aṭlas explained above, the claim that Arabs are a Semitic ethnic group native to the Arabian peninsula is only true for the local Bedouins and their urban congeners. Most other populations in the Arab world instead descend from other, (non-Arabic) Afro-Asiatic-speaking ancestral groups that adopted Arabic language and genealogies with the spread of Islam. This is why the Arabian ancestral component is still primarily concentrated in the Arabian peninsula among the Bedouin. Ergo, Arabs are a panethnicity; a confederation of genealogically affiliated ethnic groups. On the other hand, French, Turks, Persians, Albanians, Georgians, Kurds, Roma, etc. are each ethnic groups since their native constituents share recent ancestral heritage. Soupforone (talk) 17:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)


 * seriously!! you look at the haplogroup. In each country, city, village, town and family are different races, there is not a specific race for all races at the end we are all human beings from Adam and Eve. I am an Arab from Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt, Morocco. I know myself as an Arab from my grandfather and my father, an Arab is belong to the same culture, religion, language, background, nationalism etc. I will stay repeat the definition of Ethnic group is a category of people who identify with each other based on similarities, such as common ancestral, language, social, cultural or national experiences. So this definition applies perfectly to the Arabs. Arabs belonging to Y-Chromosome → Haplogroup J (Y-DNA) J1 J1, Haplogroup J-M172 J2, Haplogroup E-M215 (Y-DNA) E1b1b.


 * Colleague Aṭlas told you that he doesn't know much about ethnic group--HailesG (talk) 12:46, 26 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I understand, but notice that it also indicates that ethnic groups, derived from the same historical founder population, often continue to speak related languages and share a similar gene pool. As such, the various populations of the Arab world are technically more of a confederation of different ethnic groups than a singular entity. Anyway, you do have a point with the haplogroups since both the J and E1b1b clades have been found in ancient and modern samples in the area. Soupforone (talk) 15:45, 26 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Actually your answer is unconvincing and warranted, Arabs aren't panethnicity, the Americans are the only Panethnicity, because in the United States there are all ethnicities of the world. This applies to the Americans, Mexicans, Peruvians, Argentines, Dominicans and Spaniards. So I reject totally this term which is only present in the (Arabs article) in the English Wikipedia.


 * derived from the same historical founder population!: Arabs come from the Arabian peninsula and the Badiyat al Sham (Syrian desert)
 * Often continue to speak related languages!: Are the Arabs speak Indian? if you mean the dialects all languages of the world have dialects, in every city in the Arab world there is the dialect but we understand all the dialects.
 * Share a similar gene pool!: Arabs several groups such as the Berber groups and Kurds communities each group within them, and they do not understand each other. (I have friends Berbers from Morocco and Algeria, and Kurds from Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Iran — their culture, their language, and their backgrounds are different from each other even the forms are different from each).
 * haplogroups since both the J and E1b1b clades have been found in ancient and modern samples in the area!: all haplogroups have been found in ancient and modern samples, what's New?. Some of the Arab groups have genes non-Arab I agree, but Arab is the dominant, simply there are not ethnic group has a pure genes 100 %. See for example: Genetic history of Europe--HailesG (talk) 22:59, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Well, Berbers are linguistically, culturally and genetically closely related, so inapt example. For the panethnicity, please see here ; Aṭlas is quite right. Also, note that not all territories in Western Asia are Arab states. Soupforone (talk) 17:52, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * How do you accuse all Arab World are Arabized??? I want someone else to talk, you have ethnic tendencies against Arabs??. You bring me the sources of your butt, but I brought a lot of sources, but you ignore this. It is clear that this talk has become personal. You reject any source and ignore. You are convinced only in your thoughts according to the sources you bring.


 * All North African countries member of the Arab League and the Arab Maghreb Union


 * I feel in the forum and not in Wikipedia, the most of your answers are not convincing, are just personal thoughts. I can bring you a million source prove my words but you will ignore all because you have a personal reason.


 * (I'm going to change panethnicity to ethnic groups with sources to prove this, if you stayed ignored my discussion and resources)--HailesG (talk) 03:05, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Most (not all) populations in the Arab world are indeed Arabized. The Tadmouri biocultural analysis above explains why this is :
 * The term “Arabs” indicates a panethnicity of peoples of various ancestral origins, religious backgrounds, and historic identities. It is possible to define the geographical area inhabited by Arabs using one of the two following approaches:
 * ''(1) The linguistic approach is a relaxed definition and it includes all populations speaking the Arabic language and living in a vast area extending from south of Iran in the east to Morocco in the west including parts in the south-east of Asia Minor, East, and West Africa.
 * (2) The political definition of Arabs is more conservative as it only includes those populations residing in 23 Arab States, namely: Algeria, Bahrain, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Yemen.

Ergo, that all North African territories are Arab League member states, whereas only some West Asian territories are, does not invitiate that the various populations in the Arab world constitute a panethnicity. For the rest, please see Aṭlas' explanation and the civility policy. Soupforone (talk) 03:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * All the world knows that the Arabs are an ethnic group, i can bring you a million source prove this, but I am convinced that you will not agree because you have a solid ideas.--HailesG (talk) 03:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Also see the Charter of the Arab League. Soupforone (talk) 03:51, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Arabs have settled all over the area that extends from the Atlantic Ocean to the Arabian Gulf. If you believe there are genetically pure people in this whole area you are totally wrong, even the Arabs of the Gulf have mixed with other people throughout the Islamic Golden ages. Yet, Modern People in thos area do see themselves as Arabs despite their Mixed Origins, apart from some other peoples and Minorities that Also inhabit this area (Syriacs, Turkman, Berber, Armenians). No ones tells or determines who is who, as long as the Arabs themselves see that the people in this whole area are a single race or a single race with mixed background, then that's it--User: (talk) 06:54, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

That was actually not my assertion. What I indicated was that Arabs are a confederation of different ethnic groups (a panethnicity) with similar genealogical traditions rather than a single ethnic group with one foundational genetic heritage. You basically just acknowledged the same thing. Please also note that the populations of the Arab world are distinct from the Arabid race. Soupforone (talk) 15:44, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Comment Arabs indeed constitute an ethnic group, just as Berbers, Kurds, Turkmens and Armenians do. This should not be controversial. I understand Soupforone's argument about the modern-day Arabs' mixed ancestry. This is also not controversial. However, Arab tribes migrated in mass waves from the Arabian Peninsula throughout the Fertile Crescent in pre-Islamic and post-Islamic times, and throughout the Nile Valley and North Africa in the decades and centuries after Islam. Some remained ethnically isolated or supplanted non-Arabs, some intermarried with the non-Arab population, while at the same time many non-Arabs became culturally Arabized over the centuries or during the 20th-century. It's true that if you asked this question 100 or 200 years ago, an Arab would be defined as a member of an Arab tribe or a settled person who descended from an Arab tribe. However, since the late 19th or early-mid 20th century, the Arab is defined as someone whose mother tongue is Arabic and, more importantly, self-identifies as an Arab. It's also not strange for an Arab to have multiple identities that take into account regional or national affiliations such as Egyptians. Today the people of the Arab world who are not Berbers, Kurds, Turkmens, Armenians, Assyrians, Nubians, Copts, Beja, etc, would be considered ethnic Arabs. It should also be noted that Berbers and Kurds themselves are ancestrally-mixed but that doesn't negate the fact that they constitute their own ethnic group, which as stated by others above, is determined by shared language, self-identification, and common socio-cultural experiences and values. --Al Ameer (talk) 21:00, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Arabs are an ethnic group?? the answer is yes, but how? because the ethnic group is a human population whose members identify with each other, usually on the basis of a presumed common genealogy or ancestry. ethnic group are also usually united by common cultural, behavioural, linguistic, or religious practices or a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent. Watch this video. See the Arabs genetics. There are genes non-Arab among Arabs, but Arab genes is dominant / All ethnic groups have mixed genes. Conclusion: ethnic group such as the family, bearing its name, culture, language, background, descent or ancestry.--HailesG (talk) 21:33, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


 * HailesG, please do not duplicate/copy and paste the y-dna material. It is already summarized under the genetics area; the internal link-thrus to Y-DNA haplogroups by populations of Near East and Y-DNA haplogroups by populations of North Africa show the population-specific frequencies. Moreover, please note that per WP:TC, fixed tags should not be retagged. Please also be aware that the existence of haplogroup J in a population does not necessarily imply recent Arabian influence. For instance, in Northeast Africa, the clade appears to have had a more ancient presence since by far its highest local frequencies (~80%) have been found among certain isolated Omotic-speaking groups in southern Ethiopia, who have had little-to-no interaction with Muslim proselytizers/Bedouins. Soupforone (talk) 16:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Al-Ameer, indeed; an ethnic macrocosm. This is why Egyptians and Bahrainis, although both Arab world populations, are also obviously different ethnic groups. Ergo, it is really more of a traditional confederation than anything. Soupforone (talk) 16:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Soupforone, this is why Kabyles and Tuaregs, although both are a Berber, are also obviously different ethnic groups. it is really is your only thought in the world. Why did you choose the comparison between Bahrainis and Egyptians? Why not the Egyptians and the Palestinians. Egyptian and Palestinian Arabs, are linguistically, culturally and genetically closely related. In Palestine the most common Haplogroup is J and E1B1B. (55.2%) are J, (20.3%) are E1B1B, (8.4%) are R1b, (6.3%) are I, (7%) are G, (1.4%), (1.4%) are R1a and T. In Egypt the most common Haplogroup is E1B1B and J.  E1b1b (36.7%), J (32%), R1b (4.1%), E1b1a (2.8%) and I (0.7%). However all this is not important, What is important is like what is said  ethnic group, which as stated by others above, is determined by shared language, self-identification, and common socio-cultural experiences and values.. Wikipedia itself definition that too (Ethnic group) and please don't ignore my comments?? (ethnic group is a human population whose members identify with each other, usually on the basis of a presumed common genealogy or ancestry. ethnic group are also usually united by common cultural, behavioural, linguistic, or religious practices or a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent. Watch this video. There are genes non-Arab among Arabs, but Arab genes is dominant / All ethnic groups have mixed genes) In brief, I am an Arab ethnic just like you're Berber ethnic. (Please understand). Otherwise we will resort to administrators in order to end this and go to vote.--HailesG (talk) 19:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Without getting too caught up in genetics and shared ancestries (because few ethnic groups are "pure" or homogenous), the Arabs do form an ethnic group of their own due to shared language, history and self-identity just as Berbers, Turkmens and Kurds do. The latter groups are all quite ancestrally and culturally diverse, just as Arabs are. You are asserting that "it is really more of a traditional confederation than anything" but this is your opinion, and indeed an educated opinion. However, it is not your assertion to make. It's for the Arabic-speaking people who self-identify as Arabs to make. We should not get sucked into a debate about what constitutes an ethnic group. Let this be determined by a consensus of the sources and the Arab people's view of self. --Al Ameer (talk) 20:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm also absolutely convinced that ethnic group are: a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent. Not by homogenous nor genetics: My sister and I had the analysis of the DNA, there was a big difference between us but we belong to the same family. Look at this bullshit!! → See here and here --HailesG (talk) 21:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Family relations are hardly comparable. Anyway, "people" is an adequate compromise; I'm alright with that. Soupforone (talk) 03:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Soupforone, I want to tell you even the brothers of their genes is not 100% identical. People only until the talk ends.--HailesG (talk) 17:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Al Ameer, ethnic groups do indeed share genealogical tradition, language and history. Another key criterion of an ethnic group (as indicated on that wiki; not my opinion) is that they share a similar gene pool. This is the situation with Berbers, but not with all of the diverse populations of the Arab world. Anyway, your point is understood. Soupforone (talk) 03:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Arab isn't an ethnic group. The equivalent of Arab is the situation with the Romance people, we group people together based on a linguistic association that was left with Latin and the Romans. People from the MENA region have very distinct cultures, very distint looks, very distinct problems, etc. I say this as an Arabo-Syrianist of Lebanese background.

GoulGoul1 (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

and As far as ethnicity is concerned, Arabs share the same culture and genealogical traits more than the French do. The languages in France include Breton, Corsican, Basque, Alsacian, and French. Yet, the majority in each of these groups identify as French. Actually, Arabs share more genetics than those people, and therefore it makes perfect sense to consider them one group. Other users have clarified this already with I do not know of any ethnic group that did not have an "exchange of genetics" with other ethnic groups. Cheers. Amr ibn Kulthoum (talk) 01:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * GoulGoul1 We are talking about the Arabs not about Assyrians. There's nothing like Arabo-Syrianist, Arabo-Phoenician or Arabo-Canaanite. There are very few people in Lebanon like you, but the reality of community do not support you. I'm also a Lebanese and my mother are Maronite. Constitution of Lebanon Lebanon is Arab in its identity and in its affiliation. . Regards--HailesG (talk) 02:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * HailesG Where did I ever mention the Assyrians ? I mean Syrianist as in Syria, the country. I'm not talking about pre Islamic populations. That's how I call my ideology. Pan Arabism and Lebanism/Phoenicianism tend to be extreme ideologies which are both non satisfying. (as far as I'm concerned) I'm not anti-Arab. GoulGoul1 (talk) 03:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Amr ibn Kulthoum French is a nation, a nationality. Arabs is just a word which bases itself on a linguistic association. A better comparison would be the one I already gave, the one with the Romance peoples or the Germanic distribution. Do I regard myself as an Arab? Of course, more so because of personal familial reasons. Do I consider it a part of my heritage ? Of course, like I consider the pre Islamic one to be a part of my heritage. Do I think it has to have any political implications ? (ex : pan Arab Ummah) No, I don’t. Do I care more about other peoples from the MENA region compared to someone from Cyprus or Iran ? No, I don’t. Either case, what you said is quite dishonest. There’s a clear, very clear difference between someone from Sudan, Morocco and the Lebanon. I’m myself diaspora, so I actually get to ”taste” different populations from different parts of the world. We clearly don’t have the same culture. The cuisine is clearly different, the dances are clearly different, even by linguistic standards I have a hard time understanding a North African person. Is “culture” some buzzword that is added to make the list look longer ?GoulGoul1 (talk) 03:15, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Please read the entire talk and you will understand what we mean, we want an end to the talk that he became a nuisance for me, a month ago and we repeat the same thing, so you can create a new section.--HailesG (talk) 03:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm also tired of this conversation, this is why I'm not a pan Arabist anymore.GoulGoul1 (talk) 04:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

It is actually because the Arabic language and culture spread so recently (i.e., only a few centuries ago with Islam) that the populations in the Arab world share closer cultural and genealogical traditions. However, there is far more genetic diversity in the Arab world because the populations descend from various, different pre-Arabian groups. For instance, far southern peninsula groups like the Mahra, who have the highest frequencies of the paternal haplogroup J, yet they don't speak Arabic. This is perhaps not all that strange since the Proto-Arabic language itself is only attested from the 9th century onwards, which is several millenia after the earliest inscriptions in ancient Egyptian, Sumerian and Babylonian. Soupforone (talk) 04:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * There were several languages in the Peninsula besides the Arabic ones... And the Arabs and Arabic language weren't necessarily limited to the Peninsula in pre Islamic times. Either case, Arabic spread faster and at different times depending of the region we're talking about. Semitic speaking regions achieved a quite quick shift compared to let's say Egypt. Even in the case of North Africa in areas like Morocco I think more than 10 % of the population is Berber speaking.GoulGoul1 (talk) 04:59, 11 December 2016 (UTC)::Again, please create a new section because you started talking about other peoples in the talk, and this is opposed to the idea of talk. (There is no official count the number of Berbers in Morocco or Algeria, but there are sources claim to make up 30 to 40% of the population of Morocco).--HailesG (talk) 06:31, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

GoulGoul1, indeed. Soupforone (talk) 16:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Turks, Germans, French, Portuguese, and other European peoples for you are an ethnic groups??. In Wikipedia yes they are an ethnic groups, you said to :Another key criterion of an ethnic group (as indicated on that wiki; not my opinion) is that they share a similar gene pool.  Do you think the Arabs don't share a similar gene pool?. Majority of Arab genes are J and E1b1b far from the origin of the gene.--HailesG (talk) 07:46, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The fact that I can show you several people IRL who would get a heart attack if they were to be associated with some people from the MENA region is enough indications that an internet discussion about this subject is useless. Genes or not, people don't associate with each other on the basis of having a related language. You have more chances of convincing them they're related through Sunni Islam than over a confused ideology.GoulGoul1 (talk) 16:06, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * GoulGoul1 My father and mother have different genes, me and my sister as well, that means we're not a family?. (Even among families there are different genes). For me an Ethnic group are a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent. There is a difference between the ethnic group and race, ethnicity is often assumed to be somewhat more of a cultural identity of a group, often based on shared ancestry, language and cultural tradition, while race is assumed to be strictly a biological classification, based on DNA and bone structure.--HailesG (talk) 01:28, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * But ... we're not the same people. (I know the differenc between ethncitiy and race) Your comparison with family is at best an insult. We are not the same ethnic group. We never were. You have a better argument of unity by arguing for the revival of an Islamic Caliphate than your current argument. You claim we have a common cultural background. Then go ahead, tell us what is this common cultural background. Honestly, I don't know how I can explain the evident. Like I already said, I met several North Africans, Egyptians, etc. and I clearly feel no link with these people. They have a distinct culture of their own, with their own cuisine, sayings, etc. that are clearly distinct from mine the same way that Iran and Turkey are distinct. I may share linguistical ties but as far as I'm concerned, I don't see why this should entail in any consequence. If you argued that Lebanon and Western Syria are very similar to each other, then I would agree. (and believe it or not, some Lebs, especially Maronites, reject such a notion)GoulGoul1 (talk) 05:08, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

HailesG, most of the E1b1b subclades and many of the J subclades that are present in the Arab world areas outside of the Arabian peninsula have an ancient presence. These haplogroups have been found in Neolithic fossils in the Near East. Thus, they aren't necessarily due to the recent spread with Islam of the Arabic language and culture. Soupforone (talk) 17:04, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Soupforone You did not respond to a question. Your answer is very far from my question, please re-read the question. I said far from the origin of the gene, tell me why these peoples are an ethnic groups and the Arabs isn't an ethnic group, take a look at the map, this shows that an ethnic group is not need to be identical genes 100%. All the peoples of the world have mixed genes. I don't care about genes.--HailesG (talk) 00:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

HailesG, I already answered your ethnic group and family question. Population genetics is not the same thing as personal genomics. Of course you and your relatives will have some different genes - all humans do. Nonetheless, your immediate kin will obviously be your nearest genetic relations. Your grandparents will be close to you too, but not as close as your parents. This is because your grandparents constitute only one side of your family, whereas you inherited genes from both your parents. Your great-grandparents will be close to you as well, but not as close as your parents and grandparents for the same reason. Individuals within an ethnic group indeed don't have to be (and aren't) completely identical genetically. Nonetheless, if they truly are descended from the same forebears, they too will share an ancestral gene pool. Although this is always the situation, this heritage is just sometimes difficult to quantify due to the existence of an ancient ghost population(s). Soupforone (talk) 04:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Soupforone your point is understood. Again, why the Turkish_people and the French_people an ethnic groups and Arab isn't an ethnic group.--HailesG (talk) 04:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * HailesG Because the MENA region has never been and to this day doesn't consider itself of the same ethnic group. (and I clearly don't think of myself the same person as someone from NA) I don't even understand why you're so obsessed in trying to create a people where it doesn't exist. A political movement from the 19 th century, and which not everyone nec. subscribes to, doesn't suddenly create an ethnicity. GoulGoul1 (talk) 04:50, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * My comment is addressed to Soupforone so stop mixup.--HailesG (talk) 05:10, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * HailesG, please also see my explanation below. Soupforone (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Excuse me for the late responses here. Soupforone, a shared gene pool is one of the criterion for an ethnic group, but not a required one. Our article on ethnic groups lists "common ancestry, language, social, cultural OR national experiences" as the criterion. It is not mandatory that an ethnic group fulfills all of these requirements. In response to GoulGoul, nobody is arguing that the entire MENA region belongs to one ethnic group. There are millions of Berbers, Kurds, Nubians, Turks, Iranians of all stripes, Turkmens, Caucasians of all stripes, and many more. What is being argued here is that the largest ethnic group in this region, i.e. those whose mother tongue and whose grandparents' mother tongue is Arabic, who self-identify as Arab, who feel an affinity, however loose, to the greater Arab national/regional aspirations, who have a shared history and shared origin traditions, also constitute an ethnic because of these and other factors. As I stated earlier, it is not strange for an Arab to have overlapping identities like "Arab, Maghrebi and Tunisian" or "Arab, Druze and Lebanese" for instance. And yes Arab nationalism had an enormous impact on consolidating the Arab identity in the 19th and 20th centuries, but nationalism did the same for Turks, Kurds, Germans, Italians, etc. And yes, there is a rich diversity of culture across the Arab spectrum even if we exclude obvious non-Arabs, but that doesn't preclude a shared Arab identity. In any case, I'm not opposed to referring to Arabs as a "people" as long this applies to other diverse groups of people such as the Berbers, Germans, French, etc. Otherwise, we are singling out the Arabs for invalid reasons. --Al Ameer (talk) 18:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)


 * You think I didn't understand to what you were referring to ? I wasn't even talking about Berbers, Kurds or anything else. I was talking specifically about people who speak an Arabic language. Like I already explained, I see Arab the same way I see Romanic or Germanic, it's part of the local Levantine culture but I don't think it has any consequence in regards of any supposed MENA nation or that it should entail me adopting certain positions because of it. If I support the Palestinian cause, I support it as a local Levantine. Not because I'm of muslim background or because of any political ideology. Now, to answer your other points. You claim we have a shared history ? Our history didn't begin with an Islamic Caliphate neither did it end with it. That's the maximum extant of our shared history. You claim we have shared traditions ? Like what? Seriously. You can't seriously expect me to take this affirmation that ALL the 23 members of the Arab somehow are all similar. Of course, we share things with our neighbours, if we were to comapre the Levant to let's say, Iraq. But homogenizing the way you're doing it is clearly wrong. Like I already said it, identity issues which relate to other MENA people is their problem, not mine. I don't oppose Arabism/Arab as part of the identity of my region. In regards of the nationalist movements of the 19 th century, the only relevant zones were limited to the Mashriq. Finally, your comparison with the French, German, etc. is a bad one. A better equivalent would be to categorize all speakers of Romance, Germanic, etc. languages as people of the same ethnic group.GoulGoul1 (talk) 18:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think we're too far apart in our view, but the major flaw with your equivalence to the Romantic/Latin situation is that those people don't identify as part of a greater Romantic nation, while native Arabic speaking people across the Arab world do view themselves as Arabs (even if in addition to their national identity). Just like you and I, who are Levantines/Lebanese/Palestinian, also identify as Arabs, there are millions of people in Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, etc who identify as Arabs and are considered Arabs by the state and an abundance, perhaps even a consensus, of Arab and Western sources. --Al Ameer (talk) 20:51, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, the ethnic group wiki indeed indicates that common ancestry, language, social, cultural or national experiences are criteria. A shared gene pool is inherent in that common ancestry. However, unlike the similar genealogical traditions, common ancestry happens to be the one aspect that is generally not a given across the Arab world. Other aspects that differ are the various pre-Islamic histories, cultures and native languages. Nonetheless, most if not all the Arab League states do have constitutional clauses stipulating that they are Arab territories, so at least there is some political consistency. Soupforone (talk) 03:37, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * How is it a flaw ? The idea of the Arab nation bases itself on nothing more than linguistical considerations and the idea that some supposed unity was lost (something which never existed in the first place) Most Europeans of Romance background consider the Romans to be the "father" somehow of their modern day nation and did have a considerable influence on who they are today. That's how I see myself in regards of my region and that's the most realistic approach towards the national question in regards of our future. I don't see how somehow identifying as an Arab in Morocco suddenly makes him "ethnically similar" to me considering that I barely can understand a Moroccan or have any clue about anything whatsoever of Morocco besides Islamic history from the Umayyad period. See it this way, in Syria, the second biggest party is the SSNP. Who do you think composes this party ? Levantine Arabic speakers. How do you explain that people can adopt such positions that clearly go against the pan Arabists beliefs ? It's not like they were composed only of people from Ma'loula or something of this sort. (Not that Saadeh was anti-Arab, but he had a different view of what is a nation.) Also, how do you explain that the least pan Arab forces who actively tried to destroy the movement is now in major control of the Arab league ? GoulGoul1 (talk) 03:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you are opposed to the idea of ethnic group?, if the Arabs themselves agree on this, this strange, Arabs worldwide classified as they are an ethnic group, Arabs are mixed genes yes, this is true not only Arabs but all the peoples of the world, Arabs are a race not true, but an ethnic group yes it is, Arab states define their territories and their peoples that they are an Arab, according to their constitutions (except, North African countries, especially Morocco and Algeria because there is a large presence of the Berbers) also the Governments of the world, CIA classified as Arabs are an ethnic group. Eventually, all humans related to each other.--HailesG (talk) 06:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Please if you're Lebanese or Syrian, go there and say that they are not Arabs, Your problem is bigger than this issue, related to Arabism, Arab nationalism and your identity.--HailesG (talk) 07:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Clearly I'm talking to a wall. Either way, even if I decided I agree with your ideas, you still have several thousands of people you would have to convince in real life that they're somehow indistinguishable from all other arabic languages speakers. Clearly, if we arrive to a consensus on the Internet, this consensus hasn't been achieved in real life.GoulGoul1 (talk) 16:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * me,, and , We agree that Arabs are an ethnic group, from the people of the Arab world who are not Berbers, Kurds, Turkmens, Armenians, Assyrians, Nubians, Copts, Beja, etc, would be considered ethnic Arabs. It should also be noted that Berbers and Kurds themselves are ancestrally-mixed but that doesn't negate the fact that they constitute their own ethnic group, which as stated by others above, is determined by shared language, self-identification, and common socio-cultural experiences and values. We're not saying that Arab genes are pure. I don't care about the gene that's ridiculous, we're all human beings from Adam and Eve.--HailesG (talk) 16:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

shared language, not satisfied considering the big disglosia problem in the MENA region and that people have to resort to non Semitic languages to be able to speak between each other. "self-identification" the Arab legacy constitutes a cultural which added itself upon pre exisisting ones, the same way the Romans and Germanic tribes did with other situations. I don't see this as an ethnicity. "socio-cultural" How is the social situation in Tunisia comparable to the one in Lebanon ? Lebanon is a multi sectarian society, we have our own problems. Culturally speaking, we don't listen to NA music or have any sort of relationship from which we experience NA culture. In fact, you'll notice this among NA nationalists, they'll always claim that Arabism is heavily dominated by the East becaue the cultural input is only one way. Cuisine ? Different. Dances ? Different. Spoken language ? Different. etc.GoulGoul1 (talk) 20:17, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * HailesG, there is no globally consistent governmental scheme for Arabs. The only such consistency, and the one that actually matters most, is that of the Arab territories themselves . Anyway, I think GoulGoul1's Romance languages analogy is apt since, before the recent spread of the Arabic language and culture with Islam, most native populations in the Arab world spoke other Afroasiatic languages and had different cultural traditions. People therefore seems most neutral. Soupforone (talk) 16:42, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Soupforone Stop running away from some of the comments, you just take what you want to comment that's what you're doing from the beginning, when I say government, I mean ethnic classification for States, for your source I mean the states themselves, not nationalities.--HailesG (talk) 17:17, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * The article on ethnic group indicates that any of those shared characteristics (language, ancestry, socio-cultural experience, etc) could constitute an ethnic group, not necessarily all of them. And GoulGoul's analogy is certainly not apt, because Romanians, Italians and Frenchmen all see each other as quite distinct from one another and their languages are not dialects, but distinct languages with a shared Latin root. Most French people are not going to identify as both French and Roman, while you will find millions of Egyptians and Syrians who identify as both Egyptian/Syrian and Arab.
 * You are conflating politics and pan-Arabism with Arab ethnicity and this discussion. You may not see any similarity with a Tunisian and that's fine, but a Tunisian who says he's Arab and a Syrian who says he's Arab, are both Arabs. One of them may eat couscous and the other hummus, but they still identify as Arab and speak Arabic as their mother tongue, ergo they're both Arabs. Nobody is arguing that the Arabs are not a diverse people. Certainly they are. A person from Nazareth has plenty of differences with someone from Gaza, and may even find difficulty in understanding his dialect, but they're both still Palestinians and both still Arab. We're not imposing an identity on a people. --Al Ameer (talk) 19:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I still don't see how this supports your original assertion, namely : How is a Tunisian and a Syrian of the same ethnic stock ? Also, what's your opinion on the disglosia situation in the MENA region ? How come I have an easier time talking with a Maghrebi in English than I do in Arabic ? Also, can you tell me why the SNPP is the second biggest party in Syria after the Ba'ath ? Most importantly : Why do pan Arabists get so heated up when we say that there'a a problem with the linguistical situation in the MENA region ? Why are they so threatened when we (and even experts) claim that something is wrong ?GoulGoul1 (talk) 20:03, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I feel like I've said what needs to be said. I don't know if a Syrian and a Tunisian are of the same ethnic "stock". "Stock" implies a shared ancestry and there may not be a shared ancestry between a Syrian and a Tunisian. Shared ancestry is not a strong point in deciding the Arab ethnicity since few Arabs truly know their ancestral roots anyway, and those who do often make up some connection to an Arab tribe. Shared language and self-identification, and to an certain extent, shared socio-cultural experience and nationalism, form the pillars of Arab ethnicity. What about diglossia? People in every village in the Galilee have their own little dialect, let alone people from entirely different subregions of the Arab world. Furthermore, I already stated that it's not strange for Arabs to embrace overlapping identities. I'm not getting dragged into a political discussion about the SSNP and the Ba'ath. I know plenty about both, but what does that have to do with this article? Again, you have the notion that this is a discussion about pan-Arabism and regionalism, when it is not. With respect, by doing this you are distracting from the subject matter and wasting time. --Al Ameer (talk) 20:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Al Ameer, I realize that common ancestry is one criterion. It is the first enumerated because it is the most important one of all. This is why, for example, when an individual is ethnically of z stock, what is meant is that this person has actual z ancestors. Thus, an ethnically Egyptian person would have actual ancient Egyptian forebears. If a person is not ethnically of z stock, he/she does not ancestrally belong to the z ethnic group. He/she has instead been acculturated into that population (i.e., Arabized in this situation). That is the crux of it. Soupforone (talk) 03:14, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, but a millenia of cultural Arabization, including through the 20th century doesn't invalidate the Arab ethnicity in Egypt. The majority of Egyptians have been speaking Arabic as their mother tongue since the period before Saladin. Most identify as Arabs, even if second to an Egyptian identity, and have been the center of Arab politics and culture for centuries. Unless I'm mistaken, having shared ancestry (significant as it is and historical tribal Arab/native mixing aside) isn't the "make or break" characteristic of ethnicity. --Al Ameer (talk) 04:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Those are valid points. The thing is, the Arabian language/culture, although now well-established, is but one of various foreign traditions that have held sway over the centuries in the Nile Valley. It was preceded by the Romans, the Sasanian/Persian dynasty, and other polities. At one time, during the Ptolemaic Kingdom, Greek was actually the official language of the Egyptian state. Nonetheless, Egyptians have remained ethnically connected to the predynastic Egyptians through it all. So although a population may come to share a common culture or language, without shared ancestors, it is really more of a culture group than an ethnic group. Soupforone (talk) 15:11, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * However, the Egyptians are an ethnic group in Wikipedia, the Turkish people one of most peoples mixed with Eastern and Western peoples during the reign of the Ottoman Empire, but are also an ethnic group in Wikipedia. Germans are a Germanic ethnic group native to Central Europe, who share a common German ancestry, culture and history. German is the shared mother tongue of a substantial majority of ethnic Germans, Italians are a nation and ethnic group native to Italy who share a common Italian culture, ancestry and speak the Italian language as a mother tongue, they also have a great mixture with the European peoples and other peoples. I don't understand why you go away!?, already answered your ethnic group (a shared gene pool is one of the criterion for an ethnic group, but not a required one. Our article on ethnic groups lists "common ancestry, language, social, cultural OR national experiences" as the criterion. It is not mandatory that an ethnic group fulfills all of these requirements.) List of contemporary ethnic groups→ There has been constant debate over the classification of ethnic groups. Membership of an ethnic group tends to be associated with shared cultural heritage, ancestry, history, homeland, language or dialect, the term culture specifically including aspects such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, etc. By the nature of the concept, ethnic groups tend to be divided into ethnic subgroups, which may themselves be or not be identified as independent ethnic groups depending on the source consulted).--HailesG (talk) 16:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

HailesG: Turkish, German and Italian individuals will genetically coalesce with other members of their respective ethnic groups, regardless of what haplogroup each person bears. The reason for this is because, as kinsmen, the individuals share actual recent ancestors. Also note that sharing a common gene pool obviously means sharing common ancestors. After all, an individual inherits his/her genes from his/her actual forebears. Soupforone (talk) 04:02, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * You are again ignored the entire comment and looked at it in your way that sharing a common gene pool, and we're all on Wikipedia tell you that a shared gene pool is one of the criterion for an ethnic group, but not a required one. Common ancestry, language, social, cultural or national experiences" as the criterion. The Germans and Italians are an ethnic group in Wikipedia by who share a common culture, ancestry and speak the language as a mother tongue they didn't say that a shared gene pool. The issue is simple if you don't take it in your own way.--HailesG (talk) 19:04, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, I did not suggest that a shared gene pool (and thus, common ancestry) was the only ethnic group criterion. I asserted that common ancestry was the most important one. Also, a person will obviously share a gene pool with his/her own actual ancestors (see ancestor). Soupforone (talk) 21:39, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm tired of this debate, every day make up an excuse, I feel like I'm talking about the Arab-Israeli conflict, before he had no problem with the ancestors now has. I'll leave it to you.--HailesG (talk) 21:55, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I think we both understand each other's points, but we're not reaching any conclusion. Instead, we're more or less repeating the same arguments. An ethnic group doesn't have to fulfill the shared ancestry requirement, even though there is a high degree of shared genes between the Arab people due to Arabian tribal migrations and intermarriage. You say the Arabs were preceded by other rulers, but the Arabs, their language and many of their customs have remained until the present day; it's the "Arab Republic of Egypt", the "Syrian Arab Republic", the "Arab Maghreb Union", not the Roman or Persian. It's the Arab identity that has persisted. Anyway, to avoid continuing this back-and-forth that appears to be leading nowhere, we should move to an RfC, or start bringing in sources to determine what the scholarly and/or popular consensus is, if there is one. Thoughts? --Al Ameer (talk) 00:12, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Al Ameer, I understand. Just to be clear, though, those republics have only be called as such since the 20th century Pan-Arabism era. Much of the genetic affinities that exist between populations in the Arab world also predate the recent spread of the Arabic language and culture with Islam. The ancient Egyptians who built the pyramids were already biologically related to the pre-Islamic Arabs of the Gulf, but spoke a separate Afroasiatic language and had a different culture. It's actually these foundational roots that have persisted despite various later periods of foreign influence, as is evident with the extant Coptic language and culture. Anyway, you're right. This back and forth is pointless; let's give ethnic group a try. Common ancestry is the most important criterion therein, and since it is implied in the shared genealogical traditions, this could perhaps work. Soupforone (talk) 05:24, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * And this is exactly why I don't take Wikipedia articles in regards of history or politics seriously. Honestly, the idea of an ethnic group that is all over the MENA region incredible, it's just incredible. I have a question to our pan Arabists on this article, how do you explain that there are loads and loads of people who fit in your ethnic category but would deny ever being related ethnically speaking to other Arabic speakers ? Being the same ethnic group implies we see each other as the same, I don't see myself the same as someone from another region if there's a clear ethnic or cultural difference or just based on linguistic considerations. Anyway, enjoy your "win" because that's the extant of where your fantasies will lay, on a Wiki article. Just don't be surprised when real life calls back and things don't work like you imagined them and there's a very simple reason to this : extreme ideologues tend to replace reality with their ideology. I already said what I had to say so I'm not going to repeat it at this point.GoulGoul1 (talk) 00:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)