Talk:Lebanese people

Shakira's father William Mebarak Chadid is Lebanese-Maronite Catholic
Shakira's father William Mebarak Chadid is Lebanese-Maronite Catholic. Maronites are Lebanese Christians and have nothing in common with Macedonians. Can someone remove this provocative misleading information. (I am a new user and cannot make changes) Thanks in advance.

JhgasndsmofvedMaronite (talk) 03:32, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Argentina Dead links
This article dont have evidences of Argentina, also the 1.5 millon is very high —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.113.164.174 (talk) 23:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Elissa
Why isn't Elissa mentioned in this article? Or not in any of the pictures? She is one of the most influential people of Lebanese descent and has had such an extraordinary impact on the Middle East, some might refer her to the equivalent of a modern day Fairuz. Perhaps this article needs to be revised more thoroughly and carefully on NOTABLE Lebanese people. Myriam Fares is NOT a notable Lebanese person, she might be considered a casual performer or artist and not an internationally successful artist. (Thamerr) (talk) 00:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Religion
I believe there are some mistakes in the religion section mainly in the percentage distribution. It is not true that that 30% are muslim shias. Please check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Lebanon these numbers seem to be more accurate with a reference. Also check http://www.arab.de/arabinfo/lebanon.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.81.159.11 (talk) 13:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I am agianst the idea of putting the percentages of the sects in Lebanon and it is enough to put the Religions.. any one with me?--Karim666 (talk) 20:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, since there are no real reliable numbers to base it on. (talk) 22:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)(talk) 20:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * removed it all because it is just comparison no concrete data. --Karim666 (talk) 10:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

The section is a piece of crap again. What is so good about showing off who has more percentage? And why claim stuff about Druze?--Karim666 (talk) 22:08, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

History
Lebanses People are decendants of Phoencians whom were Caananites from north Canaan. They colonized much of the Mediterranean. They were semitic. They were first conquered by Assyrians and assimilated into Assyrian culture. This was later repeated by Romans, Greeks, and Arabs.


 * This table is very misleading. How can there be 7 million lebanese in Brazil, when the latest brazilian census shows that only 1.5 million people are arabs and other ethnic minoroties. maybe there is a large lebanese community in brazil, but they consider themselves brazilian not lebanese because of the long time they have been there for. Also none of these figures in the table have sources. lebanese Australians are 167,000 according to the 2001 census, and in america they are 440,000. In canada they are 140,000. In lebanon, lebanese are not 3.8 million. There are 200,000 palestians, and a large number of syrian workers still live in Lebanon.

You should sign your post.

"How can there be 7 million lebanese in Brazil, when the latest brazilian census shows that only 1.5 million people are arabs and other ethnic minoroties."

Why can't there be? It depends on the country but census is not really accurate. A lot, maybe the majority of Lebanese people overseas do identify as Arab but not ALL Lebanese people identify as Arab. Brazil is a melting plot of different ethncites and races.

" maybe there is a large lebanese community in brazil, but they consider themselves brazilian not lebanese because of the long time they have been there for."

No they consider themselves Brazilians because that is there nationality. It doesn't matter if the person was born in Lebanon and emigrated to Brazil, if he gets naturalized in Brazil his new nationality is Brazilian and will be called as such if he wishes.Secret killer (talk) 22:10, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

non-Arab Middle East Christians
I think people discussing here should have a look at the doings of some anti-Arab Christian activists at the Assyrian-related articles. They even designed a totally inaccurate and propagandist Syriacs box, mentioning Maronites and Melkites as "Syriacs", thus non-Arabs, which I proposed for deletion here. Pylambert 23:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Wrong.. Maronites and Melkites are Syriac in tradition ,language, and culture. i.e. the Maronite Syriac catholic church and the Melkite syriac orthodox church. the Arab identity has been forced upon them ages ago. Due to the taef agreement, the Arab identity was forced upon non-arab ethnic groups. --Jadraad (talk) 12:08, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Phoenicians
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/feature2/online_extra.html "Today's Lebanese, the Phoenicians, and the Canaanites before them are all the same people." http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/feature2/index.html

- Habib

Not really. Phoenicianism was used for propaganda against Arabism. and both are wrong they are both the brainchild of fascist and ultra-nationalist movements. Lebanese are a mix o several ethnic groups. Genetic heritage should not be confused with the cultural heritage. Lebanese cultural heritage spans many ethnic groups, From Greeks, Syriacs , Arabs, Armenians and Druze...--Jadraad (talk) 12:13, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Re-created this article
Since there are articles on Palestinians, Egyptians, Berbers and Emiratis, I went ahead and re-made this article.Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 02:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Old identity controversies
Let me get one thing of my chest, 'cause I see an edit war coming up on this article. I'm not editting this page with a specific POV. I'm the one that introduced much of the current content. I damn well made sure it wasn't skewed to either an Arabist or a Phoenicianist slant. I merely stated both sides, and let the sources do the arguing for themselves.

Not once have I stated that either view is right. But an annonymos user is already reverting to a version, deleting more content, sources and sections that have been added since his/her last visit, stating that the Arabist perspective is the right one, and that Phoenicianist perspective has been "discredited as having no historical or genetic basis" (itself a calim which the user has not backed up with a source, and which in fact is demolished by the DNA section of this very article).

Now, I'm not arguing that the Phoenicianist view is right, but we have to acknowledge that the article shouldn't reflect any bias against or in favour of Arabism. It would be just as wrong to say that the Phoenicianist view is the only correct one, that the Arabist view is wrong, and that no Arab ethnic identity exits in Lebanon. I believe it is in the best interest of the article that neither side is given the opportunity to assert that it is right, to the error of the other. Both should be allowed to make their case without coming to a conclusion in the article itself. Al-Andalus (talk) 21:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The Lebanese being a distinct ethnic and national group, as was written by you in the introduction, is a view shared by a very small minority and is discredited in scholarly circles. The article should be neutral and calling the Lebanese anything other than Arabis Phoenicianist POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.180.41 (talk) 21:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Lets have some sources that demonstrate that. I'll help you add it to the article. By the way, you'll get to know that most people on here would call me an Arabist before anything else. It's not about being right, but being neutral. Just like it is reasonable for us to edit out Phoenicianist infallibility that they are correct, neither can we insert Arabist infallibility. Above that, to altogether delete the view of Phoenicianism, when its not even asserting itself as the correct perspective (unlike you are doing with the Arabis one) is not NPOV. Al-Andalus (talk) 21:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The Lebanese, contrary to what you claim and insist to keep in the introduction, are not a distinct "Arabic-speaking people". Genealogically, they are identical to other Levantines. The Phoenicianist view is already represented, and the introduction should be encyclopedia material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.180.41 (talk) 22:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Most Arabs are not Levantines. That's part of the problem with your argument. Other Levantines are equally non-Arab as the Lebanese (the Palestinians and most Syrians and Jordanians). Together they are Levantines. In that view, I guess Egyptians are non-Arab because they are not Levantines, NOT because they are Egyptians and unrelated to Arabians. Meanwhile, a Saudi might not be an Arab because he too is not a Levantine. But wait, it's only the Saudi that should be an Arab without qualifiers. You're making your argument based on the premise that Levantines are Arabs, which renders it as a fallicious argument. Lebanese are Levantines, Levantines are Arabs, therefore the Lebanese are Arabs. That's essentially your argument. I'm not saying your conclusion is wrong, I'm saying your argument to get to that conclusion is not valid by logical reasoning.

You'll have to go from a different angle. We need sources. As I said, I'll help you edit it in. Just bring down your temper. Al-Andalus (talk) 22:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm from Brazil, and I know some Brazilians of Lebanese descent, and they usually say they are of "Arab descent". I never heard somebody here claiming "Phoenician" ancestry. This is odd, because if Lebanese are mainly descended from ancient Phoenician settlers, which they are, it is not important, because Lebanese culture is Arabic, as Arabic as any other Arab country.

The Phoenician influence there does not exist anymore. It's like claiming a Indigenous inhabitant of Mexico is not Hispanic because he does not have a Spanish ancestry. But this Indigenous Mexican speaks Spanish and has the same culture that other Mexicans of Spanish descent have.

The Indigenous Mexican is as Hispanic as the Spanish-Mexican.

As far as I know, Lebanese see themselves as Arabs, both Christians and Muslims. If they are mainly of ancient Phoenician ancestry, this is not important. A Phoenician identity does not exist anymore.

It's like claiming Italians still see themselves as Roman citizens, not Europeans. Or claim Portuguese still see themselves as Lusitanian citizens, not Europeans.

This is pathetic.

Just notice the war between Lebanese and Jews going on there. If Lebanese did not saw themselves as Arabs, they would not be fighting with the Israelis. Opinoso (talk) 15:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Lebanese are not at war with the Jews, but Israelis. And of course they would still be fighting Israelis if they kept occupying their land. As for this article, I still think it should be merged into the Lebanese demographics article, since Lebanese are by no means an ethnic group. But in contrast to for example Palestinians, there is not much to say about Lebanese as a "people", because they have never acted like one, and an article about the achievements of such a "people" will inevitably focus too much on the Maronites (who the state was created for), who are only a minority of Lebanese today. This can already be seen with the heavy focus on Phoenicianism, which represents only a fraction of the Maronites. Look at the infobox. Only one out of 7 is a non-Maronite, and several are from diaspora, with little to no ties to the modern state of Lebanon. Heck, they/their ancestors most likely migrated from the region before the Lebanese state was even created. FunkMonk (talk) 11:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * :::Many Muslims consider themselves Arabs but most Christians (who are the majority of Lebanese in the world) do not. The ones fighting the Israelis are those who call themselves, "The Party of God," and guess what? The party of God is 100% Shiite Muslim. Many Lebanese consider Syria and the Palestinians as enemies, worse then Israel. Did you know that?

Needless to say, I am Lebanese and not Arab. I do not consider myself Arab and most people I know do not consider themselves Arabs. But of course if you ask a certain Muslim he may tell you that he is an Arab like all of his brothers as a Muslim is a Muslim, and they are part of their own nation.

The article is about Lebanese people (which are Maronites) for the most part. Maronites made Lebanon and Lebanon is only Lebanon because of the Maronites. If you had groups like Hezbollah 60 years ago it would be an Arab nation like any other nation, because Islam is a nation in itself.

I find it insulting that Michel Aoun and Moussa al-Sadr are on the front page of this article. This article is not about terrorism or politics.

I don't know who wrote that, "Phoenician influence doesn't exist..." well whoever did, perhaps you should visit Lebanon or understand Lebanese people more? Perhaps you never been to Lebanon or any other Arab nation? If you did you would understand that Lebanese culture is completely different then Arab culture and that Lebanese people are not the same genes as the Arabs. Studies (most notably National Geographic of recent years) have shown that Lebanese people are Phoenician and did not come from Arab lands.
 * --Eternalsleeper (talk) 16:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The majority of Lebanese around the world are not Lebanese citizens, and could hardly be said to be Lebanese in the modern sense, since most of them emigrated before there was even a state called Lebanon and a word called "Lebanese", back when Mount Lebanon was simply a region of Syria. In fact, these people were labeled as "Syrians" when they arrived in the new world. Calling them "Lebanese" would be like calling all non-Israeli Jews "Israelis". Therefore, they would be irrelevant to an article about Lebanese in the "citizens of Lebanon" sense of the word, and this article is about them.

Maronites are only a fraction of the Christians in Lebanon (and yet another fraction of these identify as Phoenicians only), and the Greek Orthodox and Greek Catholics generally identify as Arabs.

As for the Lebanese relations to Israel, Lebanese are notorious for their ideological inconsistency, so if some Maronite factions were supported by Israel during the civil war (which was mostly out of desperacy), it wouldn't necessarily have relevance today. Remember, back when the Maronites were much stronger in Lebanon, Lebanon still went to war with Israel, in 1948, for example.

Those Lebanese who consider Palestinians and Syrians worse enemies than Israel (a small minority) are the likes of the Guardians Of The Cedars and the Lebanese Forces. Not a bad word about them, as I'm sure you sympathize with them. But probably more than half of the Lebanese support Michel Aoun, who is allied to Hizballah and Syria, did you know that? I bet they're all just traitors to you.

I find it insulting that the info box is filled with expatriates and people who are only partially Lebanese, instead of actual Lebanese citizens.

Lastly, almost all Arabs in the world are simply arabised, Lebanese are not unique at all, so being Arab is simply about self-identification today, actual ethnic origin and genetics are irrelevant if you do consider yourself as an Arab. FunkMonk (talk) 17:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * We must get one thing corrected between us here. As stated in the article (which I did not take part in creating or editing) Lebanese Christians (Mainly Maronites) outnumber Muslims (both Shiites, Sunnites, and Durzi) by 3-1. Unfortunately Islam has seen some empires such as the Ottomans who massacred and discriminated against not Muslim minorities (such as Christians). I have lived in Mexico City (home of 400,000 Lebanese descendants) and guess what, not a single mosque except in Chiapas state nor a halal grocer. Why do you think that is? Even here in Montreal there are over 80,000 Maronites (most of whom are 1st and 2nd generation).

You are making an observation that has no reference when you say "50% of Lebanon is with Aoun" or "only a fraction of a fraction" of Christians consider themselves Phoeniciains. Hmm, ironic, I know tons of Free Patriotic Movement supporters and Lebnanese Forces, Kataeb who mostly consider themselves Phoenicians before Arabs- even some Muslims. I don't know why you are turning this article political, because its not about politics. Aoun this and Aoun that, Geagea this and Geagea that. These are two men responsible for bringing Lebanon to destruction (amongst others).

It is easy for a Muslim to embrace Arabism as Islam is Arabism, while Christianity and Maronites are of a complete different culture and a complete different faith. If you knew Lebanon and you knew Lebanese you would know that Maronite culture (which is the majority of Christians and consists of 25-28% of the current Lebanese population) you must admit it is not the same as Arabist culture which you would find in Syria or Jordan.

If there were no Maronites there would be no Lebanon. Maronites are Lebanon, this article is clear proof that without Maronites, Lebanon would simply be another country in the Middle East. If it were not for St. Maroun you wouldn't even know what a Cedar tree looks like. It is a real shame they were driven out by Islamic conquerers (Ottomans) and other violence which has dragged Lebanon into war such as the Palestinian and Israeli problems.

Just because Lebanese were born to Lebanese (or ethnic Phoenicians) in a different country (perhaps someone you like, Nabih Berri, Moussa al-Sadr??) it doesn't take away the fact they are considered today as Lebanese people of Lebanese blood. The only ones I have ever seen eager to undermine these people such as Michael Debakey, Ralph Nader, Shakira as Lebanese are NON Lebanese Muslims (Such as Palestinian for instance) Most Lebanese are proud of them.


 * --Eternalsleeper (talk) 23:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really disputing anything you say, and this isn't about politics. My main problem is that this article focuses too much on expatriates, with little to no connection to the modern state of Lebanon.

Yet again, most of the people in the new world who are labeled as Lebanese today were people who migrated there before the Lebanese state was even created, before there even was a Lebanese people. Therefore, they shouldn't be overrepresented in this article. It should be mentioned that most people around the world descending from the region which is now the state of Lebanon were Maronite Christians, that they outnumber Muslims, and so on and so on, but they really aren't "Lebanese", but simply people from Mount Lebanon in then Ottoman Syria.

That most Lebanese Christians support Aoun is not the same as them denying Phoienicianness. I don't deny the Phoenician connection either, I simply know that you don't have to be of a specific ancestry to be an Arab, as long as you speak Arabic as your first language and identify as an Arab. Many Lebanese do this, in spite of them not actually being descendants of actual Arabs. Many Lebanese Sunnis are descendants of Muslim Europeans who were settled there by the Ottomans, and stuff like that.

Who mentioned Geagea? Aoun was mentioned because we started talking about Lebanese Christians being pro-Israeli. I simply pointed out that Aoun wouldn't have such a big following if that was true (same with the first Arab wars against Israel, which were attended by a Maronite controlled Lebanon). Not even the March 14 alliance are pro-Israeli.

There is no one Arabic culture, it is different from country to country, even within the "core" Arab states. I know many Lebanese obviously, both in Lebanon and expatriates (though not some who are older than the state itself, and yet have never set a foot there, like most "Lebanese" in the new world), and of course their culture ranges. But what is more important, the culture of people who actually live in Lebanon, or the culture of people who left the region before Lebanon even existed? What the heck does a person like Michael E. DeBakey, born in 1908 in America, have to do with the modern state and people of Lebanon?

Lebanon was the country of the Maronites. We have to look at the facts today, not write how we want it to be. And the cedar tree was arguably made famous by the Phoenicians themselves, so I'm not sure it makes much of a difference to its famousness that it's featured on a flag. There are other species of cedar, you know, not just in Lebanon.

As for your last point, again, there's a difference between being born outside Lebanon and then coming back to live there as a citizen, and being born outside Lebanon before anyone thought of the country, and not even maintaining ties with the country afterwardas, like it is with most of the people who emigrated from Mount Lebanon prior to the establishment of the Lebanese state. Such people are hardly relevant to the state of Lebanon or the Lebanese people this article is about. FunkMonk (talk) 11:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * If so many Christian Lebanese do not see themselves as Arabs, how do you explain most of the descendants around the world, including Shakira, see themselves as of "Arab descent"?? As I already say, in Brazil the diaspora see their ancestors as Arabs, not Phoenicians.

Moreover, this "Phoenician" thing must be a recent trend, probably came out with recent prejudice against Arabs. Because those who immigrated around the world in the last century did see themselves as Arabs, despite their Christian faith.

Both Christians and Muslims from Lebanon are Arabs, because both groups speak Arabic and have exactly the same ancestry, as genetic resources show. If because of a recent trend, Christians do not see themselves as Arabs anymore, they keep being Arabs, like it ot not. Those who claim Lebanese are "pure" Phoenicians, it is impossible, because after hundreds of years under Arab domination, it's impossible to indigenous Phoenicians not have mixed with the Arabs. Nobody stay along with another people for centuries and do not mix with them.

Lebanese are mainly of Phoenician ancestry, but they also share some ancestry with other Arabs. And "race" it's not an important fact to classify peoples. Just because Lebanese are not mainly Arabs in ancestry, it does not make them non-Arabs. The fact is that Lebanese culture if mainly Arab (its language, food, dance, music), no matter if the population is not "pure" Arab, or is mainly Phoenician. The culture there is mainly Arab, including the language, so they are Arabs, that's the point.

Some English people still do not see themselves as completly "Europeans" (some decades ago, this was stronger, but it is still visible in their attitudes, like not accepiting to change their Libra currency to Euro, and other examples). So what? If some English still do not see themselves as a complete part of Europe, it makes them non-Europeans? Of course not. Like it or not, the English are Europeans.

The same applies to a Mexican who does not see himself as Latin-American or a Congolese who does not see himself as African. The fact is that they are, because they are born in a region that is part of Latin America or Africa, like it or not.

Lebanese are Arabs, everybody see them as Arabs, their culture is Arab, etc. Despite this nonsense trend of "Phoenician" ancestry they are Arabs. It's pathetic to compare the situations, but the Nazi Germany also came out with that ancient "Germanic" feeling to separate the "Germanic" Germans from "Jewish" Germans. They got their Germanic ancestors, from 2 thousands years ago, and started to create a new trend of "Germanic blood" there. The same applies to the new "Phoenician" trend in Lebanon.

Both Germanic and Phoenician are ancient civilizations, who do not exist anymore. Claiming an ancient ancestry to separate related people who live in the same territory is ridiculous. Opinoso (talk) 20:10, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll have to disagree with you there. The thing is, the most important criterion for being an Arab is identifying as one. Actual ethnic Arabs, like Saudis, would be Arabs regardless, since well, they are ethnic Arabs, but for arabised populations, people who adopted Arabic culture and language after the Islamic conquests, it's a different story, since they would actually have a choice. So the question should not be whether that choice is valid or not, but about what people actually choose.


 * Another important point is that "Arab" isn't mutually exclusive with other ethnic designations, since the modern definition of Arab is so broad, and as long as criteria such as language, culture and stuff like that are fulfilled, Arab ancestry becomes irrelevant. Therefore, you could theoretically be an actual modern day Phoenician who identifies as an Arab, which would make you an Arab. Arab is similar to the term "Latino" today. A Mexican who speaks Spanish, has a latinised culture, doesn't necessarily have to have ancestry form any Latin-European countries to be considered a "Latino", as long as he identifies as one.


 * So no, Lebanese Christians do not keep on being Arabs, except for in the linguistic sense, if they stop identifying as Arabs. The point that they are Arabs because of their geographic origin is also wrong, since Lebanon and the rest of the Levant isn't part of the Arabian peninsula. On genetic studies, such have shown that 10% of Lebanese Christians have South Arabian ancestry, whereas 30% of Muslims do. That's hardly enough to call either of them "Arab" following that alone. Other factors have to play in. So arabised populatons aren't ethnic Arabs by default. FunkMonk (talk) 20:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

"The Indigenous Mexican is as Hispanic as the Spanish-Mexican"

No he is not. Hispanic is an ethnicity that exist only in the USA and if the Indigenous Mexican is as Hispanic as the Spanish-Mexican, then the Indigenous American is as British as the British- American, which would be wrong. Spanish doesn't make a person Hispanic like speaking English doesn't make a person British.Secret killer (talk) 23:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

this articles about lebanese people not lebanese politics
Please do not add pictures of moussa al-sadr and michel aoun. Nobody outside of Lebanon (or of course, Iran) has heard of these two people. Rafic Hariri was a multi billionaire so I did not remove his photo, though I don't mind if someone else replaces him with a more notable and recognized face.


 * Please discuss before removing pictures, the images will be reverted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.133.11.134 (talk) 18:46, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The removal of the pictures is okay.. since world famous is better than unknown..--Jadraad (talk) 12:15, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Who is Lebanese?
This article is currently about both the citizens of the modern state of Lebanon and the descendants of people who moved away from the Syrian region of Mount Lebanon during Ottoman rule in the 1800s and early 1900s, who represent most of the people mentioned here as "Lebanese" expatriates. These people moved away before there was a state called Lebanon, and before anyone started calling themselves "Lebanese". Again, the best analogy would be to call all non-Israeli Jews in the world "Israeli", which is incorrect, of course.

So my question is, could these people even be labeled as Lebanese in the modern sense, and is it justified to call them that here? Should they be so prominently featured in the info box that they vastly outnumber actual Lebanese citizens? FunkMonk (talk) 17:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * :::Shakira, Casey Kasem, Ralph Nader, Michael Debakey, all are eligible for automatic Lebanese citizenship (if they wanted). Carlos Helu has made several visits to Lebanon to visit his family. All they would have to do is go to the Lebanese embassy and register their parents marriage and their birth. I don't know why it is insulting, this article is about Lebanese people. Lebanese people are Maronite and Christian peoples. Even though they are not citizens of the modern state of Lebanon their first generation descendants of Lebanese people.

The world knows Lebanese people because of great people like those in the info box. Unfortunately most Lebanese accomplishments have been completed on foreign passports. Should we add pictures of Nasrallah (AN Islamist warlord), Samir Geagea (A warlord), Walid Joumblatt (A warlord), or Michel Aoun (a warlord) instead? I would find that even more insulting, as they are all embarrassments to Lebanon. What does it matter if they are born in Lebanon or born abroad, they are still Lebanese. Lebanese is an ethnicity not necessarily only a nationality. Those born in the British Mandate of Palestine still consider themselves Palestinians or Israelis despite the fact neither country ever existed at that time. Why would you be offended by the Lebanese diaspora?


 * --Eternalsleeper (talk) 23:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Are they eligible for Lebanese citizenship? It was talked about on another page, and as of now, it seems unclear if it would be the case, if the parents were never Lebanese citizens themselves. Lebanon is not Israel. You have to remember that Lebanon was simply a region in Syria back when the ancestors of most of those people moved away from there, and that no one considered themselves "Lebanese" back then. Why mention politicians again? Why not pick some of the many artists, writers, musicians, and so on who are actual citizens of Lebanon? Is Lebanon only inhabited by politicians? Some of the expatriates could be featured, but they sure shouldn't represent 5 out of 7 of the people in the infobox. As for Lebanese constituting an ethnic group, in what sense of the word would that be? Some Lebanese sects could be labeled ethno-religious at best, but Lebanese as a whole sure aren't an ethnic group. FunkMonk (talk) 11:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Are you claiming a person who immigrated from nowadays Lebanon 1 day before it separated from Syria and became a country is not a Lebanese? But a person who immigrated 1 day after Lebanon became a country is Lebanese? What make them different? Just because one had a piace of paper saying he was Lebanese, and the other didn't?


 * Nonsense again. Opinoso (talk) 20:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Why is it nonsense? It's a legal question. One would be a Lebanese citizen, and, if male, their children, and their male children's children, even those not born in Lebanon, could attain Lebanese citizenship. The other would not have Lebanese citizenship, and it's questionable if their descendants could ever attain it. Lebanese citizenship is not gained by living in Lebanon for any period of time, or being born there. People can be born there, and live there whole lives there, and never get Lebanese citizenship. The only way to get it is if your father is Lebanese.
 * Now, if you're arguing that Lebanese is an ethnicity or something that people identify themselves with, and not just a legal classification, that's a valid argument. However, I'm not sure which this article deals with. Perhaps this article is more about "People of Lebanese descent" than "Lebanese people". ← George [ talk  ] 20:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * In terms of Lebanese citizenship, as far as I know, if you are born outside Lebanon to a Lebanese father you are automatically eligible for citizenship after you register your fathers marriage/birth at the local embassy. Therefore, even if ones father is not born in Lebanon but his grandfather is (and he still has a Lebanese living father) citizenship can be passed down by registering first his fathers birth, then his own birth. There is no time limit or age cap when it comes to registering ones birth at the Lebanese embassy. For those born before Lebanon was created as a sovereign state the Lebanese embassy maintains records and birth registries. For instance, my grandfather was born in 1928 in Koura yet I still got the family registry paper that states his name and my grandmothers name (from Lebanon). I have heard some elements of this automatic citizensihp law changed under Syrian occupation of Lebanon but I am still certain if you have a Lebanese father you are eligible to automatically becoming a Lebanese citizen. There is currently a project called,"I am Lebanese" in Brazil which seeks to register all the Lebanese born in Brazil.
 * --Eternalsleeper (talk) 22:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Lebanon was semi-autonomous from 1920 and onwards, so people born after that year, including your grandfather, would technically be Lebanese citizens, but a significant portion of the expatriates were born and left before this year, so it might not, and probably doesn't, apply to them and their descendants. FunkMonk (talk) 23:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Pictures
Musa al Sadr is Lebanese. Stop removing his picture and large amounts of text in the process. Also, if Maronites are 35% of the population, what does it leave Greek Orthodox, Melkites, Armenians, etc.? The Greek Orthodox alone make 8-10% of the population. Monkaa (talk) 08:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Is Musa al-Sadr Lebanese by citizenship, birth, or ancestry? If it's by ancestry (if his father was Lebanese), he's fine to include. The paragraph on Pheonicianism has absolutely no place. It's extreme POV pushing to make the second paragraph on the "Lebanese people" be about some extremist view held by a minority of Lebanese. Also, the topic is discussed later in the article. Maronites probably aren't 35% of the population, though Christians are estimated to be 40% of the population. It's probably better to just lump them all together if groups other than the Maronites make up more than 5% of the population, or break them down as well. ← George [ talk  ] 08:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Musa al-Sadr's father was Lebanese, as is his whole family. He is Lebanese by ancestry and by citizenship. As for the paragraph on Phoenicianism, I assume you're talking about Phoenicianists when you mention a "minority of Lebanese", but it is important to clarify that the notion that the Lebanese are a distinct people and ethnicity is discredited by most Lebanese because most of the article, including the introduction and the name of the article itself, implies that the Lebanese are a people, similar to the French or the Armenians for example. And yes, Christians are about 40% of the population, so putting the Maronites at 35% would leave the others at 5%. The Greek Orthodox are 8-10% of the population, the Melkites 5-6% and the rest, including the Armenians, are almost 4% of the population. That would put the Maronites at 20% or 25$% maximum. Better to just mention Christians. Monkaa (talk) 10:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The images are still problematic, and not very representative of the population of modern day Lebanon. We should have a discussion of who exactly should be in the infobox, and the number of people included. If we have a representative from the largest sects, then one expatriate will be enough. Then we can have one picture, like on the Arab article, so there won't be too much edit warring over what people to include. FunkMonk (talk) 13:05, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:MusaalSadr.JPG
The image Image:MusaalSadr.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --00:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Carlos Ghosn
I have noticed that Carlos Ghosn is not mentioned in this article. due to his accomplishments I think should be mentioned in this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Ghosn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.154.115.112 (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Fairuz
Don't you think it is more appropriate to have Fairuz's picture up there instead of Nada Al Hage? Yazan (talk) 06:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * We need an overhaul of the infobox image an a detailed discussion, as was done on the Arab article. Current bunch seems totally random. FunkMonk (talk) 17:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Seconded!--Alousybum (talk) 07:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Fake history & Folk Anthropology
This article is highly biased: rough demographic estimates (e.g. 7 millions Brazilians of Lebanese descent??) and historical assumptions (the Phoenician myth) are presented as "facts". Amateurish "genetic" surveys conducted by sub-par researchers are presented as "validations" of "oral traditions" and folk history! Not a word about the profound Greek, Roman and South Arabian (Qahtani) influences on Lebanese culture, or the strong historical bonds linking Eastern Lebanon (the Beqaa Valley) to Southwestern Syria or South Lebanon (Jabal Aamel) to Galilee. This article is a fraud. And a very biased one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moorehaus (talk • contribs) 19:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, Lebanese are not an ethnic group by any stretch of the imagination, so a lot of this article really needs to be removed. It really needs to focus on modern Lebanese, not myth. There was no Lebanese "nation" prior to the 20th century. What there was would be synonymous with Maronite. FunkMonk (talk) 17:27, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

How is an estimate of 7 million Brazilians of Lebanese decent being biased? Your argument is really non convincing. We have sources, so were is yours?Secret killer (talk) 19:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Christian Lebanese identify themself as "Syriac-Maronite"
Christian Lebanese identify themself as "Syriac-Maronite" They are most members of the Syriac Orthodox Church or members of the Syriac Maroite Church, there language i originally "Syriac-Aramaic" this is a dialekt of Aramaic.

Maronites call themself as maronites because, a syriac monk named "maron" has founted the Syriac Church of Libanon. They dont identify themself a Phoenician, or most do not. The most cal themself Syriac-Maronites or just Syriac People. And "syriacs" are the real name of lebanse chritians. look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maronite_Church —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.195.63.229 (talk) 20:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Infobox picture
It will be practically impossible to have an assemblage of "notable persons" that isn't religiously biased in some way or another (unless we make it all female, that could work out, religion wise, too many of the Lebanese males we have images of are known for being political/religious leaders), so I'm thinking the infobox shouldn't have any images, or maybe something more generic, like a random assemblage of people, maybe a historical one, or a map, or maybe nothing at all. Otherwise it will forever be a subject of edit wars. FunkMonk (talk) 02:24, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * What does the religion of the "notable persons" matter? It seems much more biased to try to elevate less notable people over their more notable counterparts, simply because of their religion. ← George talk 09:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * We could easily get an infobox with only Christians, if not only Maronites. Don't you think that would be a problem? FunkMonk (talk) 10:11, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It depends. We can't have the pictures exactly match every possible way of breaking down the population: half male, half female; a third Christian, a third Sunni, a third Shite; someone who is Druze, someone Armenian; someone pro-Saudi, someone pro-Syrian; an Aounist, a Hezbollah supporter, a supporter of the FPM, a Phalangist, etc. - it just gets silly. I think what makes the most sense is to just show the most well known Lebanese figures - be they Maronite, Druze, Sunni, Shi'a - whatever. Diversity should be a goal for visual characteristic (i.e., black versus white, male versus female). You can't tell someone's religion or political ideology just by looking at a picture of them, so there's no need to try and enforce diverse religious or political affiliations in pictures. ← George talk 11:11, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It gets silly, but Lebanon is a silly country, so one has to be cautious and very politically correct with these things, that's my experience at least. FunkMonk (talk) 20:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Lebanese Armenians
Hello, fellow editors. Why does this article fail to mention the Lebanese Armenians as part of the Lebanese people? There are at least 100,000 Armenians in Lebanon and many Lebanese Armenians in other countries, yet this article does not mention that there are Lebanese who speak Armenian, who follow Armenian Christianity (whether Apostolic, Catholic or Protestant), etc. --Davo88 (talk) 03:16, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree they should be mentioned. Lebanese is a nationality, not ethnicity FunkMonk (talk) 03:18, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I disagree, how can a person of Armenian ancestry be considered Lebanese in origin?...and having an Armenian surname?. Also, if they were considered part of the Lebanese people, they wouldnt be a distinct group of people with a seperate article all for themselves..thats a seperate group sint it...the Armenians are an immigrant group that dont have their origins in Lebanon but in Armenia...This goes for any immigrant group. Most Lebanese may not have identical origins but they still should have much more in common with each other such as surnames and dont have any other sense of cultural background. Also, this aricle should only be about Native Lebanese people born and raised as this is their original homeland not the diaspora which should also be mentioned ofcourse. This would be like calling George Bush or George Washington an English person as their ancestry was English..but as i said it should still be mentioned about the diaspora. Armenia81 (talk) 19:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Armenians have their own seats in the parliament, and are recognised as some of the 18 Lebanese sects, so they're quite Lebanese. Armenians in Lebanon are only ethnic Armenians, not by citizenship. FunkMonk (talk) 19:31, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you on this, but arnt these "people" articles mainly about the native ethnic groups that formed a common national identity. And i agree that these are Lebanese born and raised but with and Armenian ancestry but are still Lebanese, this goes for the Lebanese population in Brazil, these are of lebanese ancestry but are definatly above all Brazilian. It maybe should be mentioned here but i figured that these "People" articles are about them as an "Ethnic group" hence a common ancestry somewhat that formed the nation, the armenians didnt form Lebanon as far as i know. Armenia81 (talk) 00:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Lebanon never formed a nation until the 20th century, and by that time there was a substantial Armenian population in that country. The Armenians of Lebanon thus participated in the founding of Lebanon and even though their original homeland is in Western Armenia, they are as Lebanese as anybody else in that country. Besides, there is no such thing as an ethnic Lebanese.--Davo88 (talk) 05:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Lebanese are not an ethnic group, but a nationality, so again, Armenians should certainly be included. Heck, one Lebanese preident, Emile Lahoud, was half Armenian, so they're pretty integrated. FunkMonk (talk) 16:18, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I understand that they are extremely well intergrated thats not an issue at all, but if they are just seen as lebanese people then why do you need Armenians in Lebanon article...that doesnt make sense if they claim to not have any sense of Armenian ancestral pride or recognition. As i see it this article is the same as most other People articles i the sense that they regonise that they have a common background even if the Lebanese have somewhat differing ancestral origins, Phenoecians, Ancient Roman-Greek and Arabs origins...but most of these people recognise this, the same could eb said for the Spanish or Itlians but they still are seen as having a common ethnic background possible less diverse than the Lebanese but still the idea is the same. Also, if this isnt about ancestral or ethnic Lebanese origins then why do we aknowledge the Lebanese diaspora?..isnt that about a common ancestral tie back to Lebanon.....if this is about just Nationality then why not include all the other minority groups in the article who may hae been there for generations....thats because this isnt about the Lebanese as just a nationality, put it this way, would you get people of non-Armenian descent marching or demonstrating en-mass agaisnt something to do with Armenia..i think it would be minimal. Armenia81 (talk) 21:11, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * They are a sub-group of Lebanese people, therefore they warrant their own article. Just like there's an article about Shia Muslims in Lebanon and similar. FunkMonk (talk) 07:26, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Language
In the spoken language section it says Spoken Traditional is phenocian, i have never heard of anyone speaking that language, and i am lebanese, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.87.42.232 (talk) 03:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

true it never was phoenician.. phoenician died some 2500 years ago ( if not more ).. mostly its syriac..--Jadraad (talk) 12:20, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Appearance
That racial stuff in the Appearence section refers to "The Races of Europe" by Carleton S. Coon from 1939 (!), but the text is written in present tense. Obviously it cannot be of any relevance to the present conditions. I propose to delete it, because I cannot see significant relevance of this information at all. (Maybe I just have a problem with race studies, generally...)

Kind regards. -- RJFF (talk) 16:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Most conspicuously, the first sentence states "The Lebanese are Mediterraneans and Alpines." Without any critical questioning or at historical classification or at least explanation! (Do I have to know what "Alpines" are? I think I skipped Racial studies in school...) Maybe according to historical anthropology they were "Mediterraneans" and "Alpines". But fortunately that has been outdated for a long, long time. I will delete this sentence at once, as it is obviously unacceptable. I do not see how we could discuss this. About the rest of the section, I am looking forward to your suggestions. -- RJFF (talk) 16:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Obviously, there are no objections to my proposal. So I will, hopefully with your accordance, delete the 'Appearance' section, which only references to Carlton Coon's racial studies work. -- RJFF (talk) 12:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Nassim Taleb
Nassim Taleb should be in the picture section, he is the most famous living person born in Lebanon.

Lebanese people in France
There are 250,000 Lebanese people living in France, which is just as many as Canada. How come this is not listed under the section "Regions with significant populations"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.161.19.179 (talk) 04:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2014
Billy1948 (talk) 12:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)edit

If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ". Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 12:44, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2015
sources left out and poor grammar

Musa1921 (talk) 11:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 11:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2015
Musa1921 (talk) 12:59, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Lebanese people in Kuwait
According to this recent stat published by Kuwait government, the Lebanese in Kuwait are 41,775 as of May 2013 and not 10,000 as listed. Please have this updated. Link http://www.alraimedia.com/Articles.aspx?id=412118 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.72.109.90 (talk) 10:57, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Lebanese people. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lp.gov.lb/Archive/english/presarvisit.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hamline.edu/cla/academics/international_studies/diaspora2002/Lebanese/Paper.htm#_Toc29610718

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2016
I would like to add a "citation needed" tag after Shias (27%), Sunnis (27%), Maronites (21%), Greek Orthodox (8%), Melkites (5%), Druze (5%), and Protestants (1%). There has been no official census on religions in many years so I'm interested to see where that data comes from. Not a Suit (talk) 15:17, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Citation 39 in the "Religion" section supports the content. I cited it in the lead to avoid further uncertainty. DRAGON BOOSTER   ★  09:35, 6 December 2016 (UTC).

Phoenician
This article actually a nonsense, phoenicianism present strongly. The cultural and linguistic heritage of the Lebanese people is a blend of both indigenous Caananite/Phoenician elements and the foreign cultures that have come to rule the land and its people over the course of thousands of years. (Actually there is no relationship of the Lebanese people with the Canaanites and Phoenicians. Lebanese people linguistic and cultural are Arab such as Palestinians Syrians and Jordanians). In a 2013 interview the lead investigator, Pierre Zalloua... Who supports him and what is the Phoenician gene? if he meant that haplogroup J2 so the peoples of the world Phoenicians also. Briefly genetics section a few and poor sources & most by Pierre Zalloua.--Marlo Jonesa (talk) 03:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The link is certainly exaggerated in some circles, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. Changing your language doesn't change your genes, and Middle Eastern people who speak Arabic are not uniform genetically at all. But claiming Lebanese are Phoenicians is nonsense, of course. Just like modern Scandinavians aren't somehow Vikings. FunkMonk (talk) 15:32, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * All peoples mixed genes, but to describe very modern people as ancient peoples such as the Phoenician this nonsense.--Marlo Jonesa (talk) 21:50, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, that's pretty much what I said, no? Many Lebanese don't identify as ethnic Arabs, and that is a valid point here too. FunkMonk (talk) 22:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, but we don't have to share their opinion on Wikipedia, mainly Christians particularly Maronites, identify themselves as Phoenician rather than Arab, that all the peoples of the Middle East are modern peoples.--Marlo Jonesa (talk) 22:39, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * If those opinions are dealt with in reliable sources, then yes, we have to present them. Maronites don't necessarily all identify as Phoenicians, they just don't identify as Arabs (though some might). FunkMonk (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Identity in Lebanon is very complicated, especially when it comes to the Maronites, there Maronites who reject Arab identity and there are those who accepted, so if we said that most of the Maronites reject Arab identity It will be exaggerated, but according to The Taif Agreement Lebanon has been identified and the result is Lebanon is Arab in its identity and in its affiliation. I do not think that Maronites have a big problem with the Arab identity, because we find most of the heads of Lebanon are Maronites, as well as the current president of Lebanon Michel Aoun is a Maronite and in his speech he said I would like to thank the Arab brothers for... But I'll try to work on the article in order to be neutral and acceptable to all 1.--Marlo Jonesa (talk) 23:23, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Both Phoenicianism and Arabism are extreme forms of ideology. One concentrates on a BC civilization while the other concentrates on a post Islamic one. To say that Levantine peoples don't have any link to their pre Islamic history is an extremist claim (that is usually made by Arab nationalists, or they just make other weird claims in general) And just to be clear, even among non Maronites you will find some people who will reject being called Arabs. And even among people who do identify with some trend of Arabism (like me), they tend also to try to even it out by respecting the whole of the region's history. Either case, just putting in my opinion in here.GoulGoul1 (talk) 00:06, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Removed infobox

 * 1) The CIA mentioned references ethnic groups in Lebanon
 * Lebanon
 * People and Society
 * Ethnic groups: Arab 95%, Armenian 4%, other 1%.
 * 1) The Wikipedia mentioned references Population numbers in Lebanon
 * Lebanon (People living in Lebanon) and not in the diaspora: (Jewish diaspora) sentence which makes no sense
 * 1) Judaism isn't an ethnicity but an ethnic religion and conversion requires assimilation into the Jewish people. The Lebanese Jews are traditionally a Sephardi (particularly Mizrahi) community living mostly in and around Beirut but also in Sidon and Baalbek. Less than 100 Jews live in Lebanon today. See (History of the Jews in Lebanon).
 * 2) South European (not ethnicity but a geographical area), Greeks, Italians, I know Lebanon well, but I did not know that there is this big figure.
 * 3) North African is also not an ethnicity but a geographical area. Ethnic groups in North Africa: Baggara (Arab), Berbers, Copts, Egyptians (Arab), Fur, Haratin, Maghrebis (Arab), Moors (Arab-Berber), Nubians, Sudanese (Arab), Tuareg ,Toubou and Zaghawa.
 * I've removed the infobox to prevent editorial wars. It happened several times  and recently  So I hope that the current version will remain to prevent future editorial wars.--Canbel (talk) 16:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for beginning this discussion. FYI, I will be reverting your bold edits removing various 'bar boxes.' This is primarilly because, regardless of the content, it appears to have been well-sourced material that you removed. Also, although your concern to prevent 'editorial wars' is commendable, there do not seem to have actually been any (the diffs you link to seem to be usual editing, not edit warring). In any case, we do not, in general circumstances, remove sourced material just to prevent disruption, unless the material itself is disruptive- that's why we have various administrative noticeboards which are intended to deal with problematic behaviour in articles. I will be leaving a similar message on article talkpages where you have started other discussions. It is for sure that a discussion should be had on whether to keep 's material; but, tbh, it is arguable that just removing it without a prior discussion was not the best move. Cheers, &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  19:10, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for starting the RfC: it's a progressive move. However; as per WP:RFC,, which has not really happened yet. As such, I've temporarilly removed it, until we can get a discussion going, and establish the precise question we want resolved, and why. Cheers! &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  10:34, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lebanese people. 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/20101112211835/http://www.libano.org.br/olibano_geografia.htm to http://www.libano.org.br/olibano_geografia.htm
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5uDKJ2T9z?url=http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/18/23/34792376.xls to http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/18/23/34792376.xls
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=%2FDocuments%2FWorkingDocs%2FDoc06%2FEDOC11006.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hamline.edu/cla/academics/international_studies/diaspora2002/Lebanese/Paper.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120324131937/http://dro.dur.ac.uk/96/1/59DMEP.pdf to http://dro.dur.ac.uk/96/1/59DMEP.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:39, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lebanese people. 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/20090210091440/http://www.walidphares.com/artman/publish/article_58.shtml to http://www.walidphares.com/artman/publish/article_58.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:46, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Controversy again!
What does this mean? I can bring dozens of sources to prove that the Lebanese are Phoenicians, Canaanites or even Pharaonites. Previously there was a discussion about the Lebanese are Phoenicians there were many sources, but the consensus was to be removed. This issue is particularly sensitive to the Lebanese identity. There was a civil war and a struggle for identity, so it is preferable for the Lebanese to remain Lebanese.--Sarah Canbel (talk) 15:39, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * By the way that you are talking about Canaanite-related population, all the Arabic peoples have a relationship with the Canaanites because the Arabs are also Semites, Jews, Assyrians, etc.--Sarah Canbel (talk) 15:43, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Lebanese people. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket%2FXcelerate%2FShowPage&c=Page&cid=1007029394365&a=KCountryProfile&aid=1018721190906
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101112211835/http://www.libano.org.br/olibano_geografia.htm to http://www.libano.org.br/olibano_geografia.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090210091440/http://www.walidphares.com/artman/publish/article_58.shtml to http://www.walidphares.com/artman/publish/article_58.shtml
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=%2FDocuments%2FWorkingDocs%2FDoc06%2FEDOC11006.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hamline.edu/cla/academics/international_studies/diaspora2002/Lebanese/Paper.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130411201000/http://www.barcodenation.co.uk/identity-blog/2009/02/religious-affiliation-can-be-removed-from-lebanese-id-cards/ to http://www.barcodenation.co.uk/identity-blog/2009/02/religious-affiliation-can-be-removed-from-lebanese-id-cards/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:41, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Lebanese people. 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/20081204024559/http://www.uschamber.com/portal/lebanon/investment_overview to http://www.uschamber.com/portal/lebanon/investment_overview
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081116084516/http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2001/525/in3.htm to http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2001/525/in3.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216003559/http://www.globalpolitician.com/25247-lebanon to http://www.globalpolitician.com/25247-lebanon
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150512161002/http://maroniteinstitute.org/MARI/JMS/july00/The_Struggle.htm to http://maroniteinstitute.org/MARI/JMS/july00/The_Struggle.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:21, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Weird information about Lebanese People
If you check the page "Lebanese People" you will see how it describe it as in religions groups, not as cultural behaviour! Do we (Lebanese people) want to be described like that? How we can change the perspective of our image!

Lebanese people are: Well educated, well travelled, fun to be around with, they love food and they make the most delicious food in the world, and they always succeed outside Lebanon.

Don't you agree? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebaneseincanada (talk • contribs) 18:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * We follow the reliable sources. Do you have suggestions for things to add perhaps? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:59, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 July 2018
Under the listing of Lebaneese religious groups, Druze appears to be under Islam. (This is not correct-however, I do not know enough to be certain.) Druze should be in its own category. 2600:8803:5A00:7690:299E:7316:ED42:AA5A (talk) 19:41, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: the page explains that Druze are a quasi-Muslim group considered Muslims by the Lebanese government. Danski454 (talk) 09:43, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Lebanese genetics
The wording that was previously used regarding the study of Behar et al of 2010 is the correct one. If you use the wording you have changed it to, its interpreted as if the Druze cluster closer to the Lebanese than the Jews, which is not the case. The previous wording "Lebanese cluster the closest to Jews of any Arab population except the Druze" clearly expresses the point the study is trying to make, which is that the Druze cluster closer to the Jews, with the Lebanese coming in 2nd.

Regarding the Canaanite origin corroboration part, I do agree its a bit fuzzy depending on how its interpreted. I think what its being tried to be said there is that the fact that the Jews cluster the closest to the Lebanese out of all the Levantine/Arab populations, its a indicator that the Jews where originally of Canaanite stock or assimilated to the Canaanite population thus springing out of it after mixing with it first. I dont think its trying to affirm that there has been doubt about whether the Lebanese were of Canaanite stock and that this study finally confirms it due to the genetic similarities of the Lebanese with the Jews, but the other way around, since there are or were debates in the past as to whether Jews were of Mesopotamian or Canaanite stock originallyMarc Frier (talk) 14:28, 26 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Hello, saw the recent change, yes this was the issue mainly the fact that you could interpret the Canaanite DNA as being only validated through Jewish DNA samples which one could ascertain without viewing source. I also specified 'the Jews' first as pertaining to the previous 'sephardic jew' study. However the following paragraph and study (2013) states that the religious differences were just layers on top and that means Lebanese jews were, in a effect, just Lebanese, making the earlier (2010) source redundant. This is problematic however when the native jews/arabs/inhabitants, who had assimilated into countries in the middle east for hundreds of years, became just 'jews'.


 * Without specifiying the ethnic origins (ie sephardic-jew) it gives creedance to the wider, 'birth-right' which insinuates the right to be in the region (including greater Israel) for all jews, which is deduced from the absorbed native (levantine) population- and maybe trace dna from Ashekenazi, but not direct - which is why these studies are inherently problematic.


 * It also brings up the biblical question of how the Isrealites supposedly destroyed the Canaanites in its entirety:


 * In the bible - “Thus Joshua struck all the land, the hill country and the Negev and the lowland and the slopes and all their kings. He left no survivor, but he utterly destroyed all who breathed, just as the Lord, the God of Israel, had commanded…. He left nothing undone of all that the Lord had commanded Moses.” (Joshua. 10:40, 11:15)


 * If they (jews) are related to the canaanites, can they be related to isrealites also? If the answer is yes then why not claim it (greater israel) ? Why claim Palestine when can you claim all, parts of Lebanon & Syria?
 * These are questions to be asked even for the littlest of edits. JJNito97  16:37, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

The Lucotte study focused on the comparisson between the Y haplogroup frequencies between the Sephardic Jews, Lebanese and Palestinians whereas the Behard study of 2010 seemed to have made no distinction between the origin of the jews and include all (Ashkenazi, Sephardic and Mizrachi). I decided to put them in the same paragraph previously but then decided to revert my edit to avoid the confusion you are refereing to but you decided to put them back together perhaps.

The religious differences as layers on top of an already genetically differentiated cannanite/phoenician population quote used by Zoulloa I would try to keep it focused on the Phoenician origins of all the Lebanese (whereas they are Christian, Muslim, Druze, etc) debate since the Lebanese Jews argument merits another analysis in my opinion.

The argument as whereas all Jews should be labeled as "just jews" no matter where in the Levant they came from originally (if they came from the Northern (aka Phoenicia) or Southern part of Canaan (aka previous Kingdom of Israel and Judea) with the destruction and exile created by the Romans is an interesting debate although a different one. There were probably a decent amount of Jews living in the northern part of Phoenicia in ancient times and even some conversions of Phoenicians to judaism could have also taken place before the exile caused by the Romans. However ultimately it doesnt matter since genetics have proven that perhaps the Jews indeed sprung out of the Canaanites that decided to go for monotheism instead of worshiping Baal and Moloch. However those that decided to do so settled mainly in the south of Canaan since ancient times. It is perhaps one of the reasons why King Hiram built the Temple for Solomon, perhaps they saw the newly converted Canaanites still as genetic brothers and respected their decision.

Whereas all modern Jews descend from the original Israelites of Canaan its something that genetics have already answered I believe. Although some Ashkenazi lineages do contain R1a from Eastern Europe (perhaps 10%?) supporting perhaps that some of them where Khazars that converted I think that their assimilation to the Jewish population eventually turned them ethnically jews due to the mixing that eventually took place with the Ashkenazi that did descend from the original Israelites and jews.

Lastly, regarding the Biblical quote, its clearly talking about the Southern part of Canaan since Negev is mentioned. So perhaps a lot of Canaanites from the South of Canaan where wiped out and perhaps the intention was for the Israelites to exterminate the Cannanites of the southern part only. After the Kingdom of Israel was founded I have not read of any conflict between their Kingdom and Phoenicia or at least an attempt from the Isrealites to conquer Phoenicia and whipe out the Phoenicians. On the contrary, for a good while the two had peaceful relationships and their kings intermarried and the conflicts mainly occurred between the Israelites of the north and the Jews of Judea from the South. So now 3,000 years later claiming that Lebanon and parts of Syria belongs to Israel due to whatever biblical quote is pure dogshit since none of that was ever attempted to be conquered by the Kingdom of Israel in the past. Marc Frier (talk) 19:23, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2020
Change: Lebanese, regardless of the region or religion sect, are not Arab. Recent studies show that the majority of the Lebanese person's genetic makeup today is shared with that the Phoenician and Canaanites people, the ancestors of the Lebanese people.

To:

A Lebanese person's genetic makeup today is much closer with the Arabs of the Levant, therefore making them Arab. Many who claim Lebanese are not Arab are forgetting the last 1000 years of history during the time of the Islamic caliphates where there was a mix of people living in Lebanon. It is disingenuous to claim that Lebanese people are not Arabs and have ties to a more ancient people (i.e. Phoenician and Canaanites), because that would be true of all humans on this earth. Your race is determined by your genetic makeup and the similarities you have to people in the last few hundred years. The Phoenician and Canaanites do not exist in this modern day so you cannot be anything other than Arab. Lebanese is not a race and was merely a term coined in the early 20th century. Typhi1 (talk) 02:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Goldsztajn (talk) 07:24, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Haber et al 2020 study and more
1st) The study doesnt say "Major genetic changes", it just says "a genetic change occurred" Rewording or adding words that the study does not say is OR and disruptive editing

2nd) Summaries of the studies and the sources are enough, there is no need to add speculative parts of studies like "the source might possibly be sea peoples". This is speculative so adding it and emphasizing it with italics as to make it seem like a conclusive fact is disruptive editing

3rd) This study makes a generalization when it talks about the "evidence" for the "Hellenistic mix" on the "whole Lebanese population". The South Asian mix is actually present only in Lebanese Muslims. I will elaborate on this and expand further based on the different genetic studies that have been done to which I provide the links:

Y haplogroup LM22 also called L1 which is a very rare haplogroup almost inexistent in the world and is found in Lebanon. 6.25% of Christian Lebanese present its subclade L-M22/L-M317 also called L1b which is a very very rare haplogroup subclade, which is NOT present in India nor anywhere in Southeast Asia as opposed to 1.25% of Lebanese Muslims that present it. So 80% of the rare LM22/L-M317 in Lebanon is concentrated in the Lebanese Christians, possibly mainly in the Maronites. This L1b is also present in 4.5% of Northeast Italians (Venice area as mentioned here http://www.mexitalians.com/ancestors.html). L1b is present also in 20% of Mountain Jews of the Caucasus who claim descent from the Ten Lost Tribes and 5% on average in many of the indigenous group of the Caucasus. When it comes to this haplogroup subclade it can be said for certain that it came from the Caucasus/Anatolia and settled in Canaan thousands of years ago not during the Greek conquest of the Levant/Hellenization period. Its location/spread its presented in green in this map https://paulbrooker.posthaven.com/y-haplogroup-l-not-the-r1b-sub-clade-or-mtdna-resource-page

Now 3.15% of Lebanese Muslims as opposed to 0.20% of Christian Lebanese carry its different subclade L-M22/L-M27 or L1a which is found in around 15% of Indians and in extensive amounts in the Arabian Peninsula. Its location/spread its presented in pink in this map https://paulbrooker.posthaven.com/y-haplogroup-l-not-the-r1b-sub-clade-or-mtdna-resource-page

So if you take a haplogroup like LM22 and dont divide it into its respective subclades when you put up the numbers people can interpret this as if 6% of Lebanese Christians and 3% of Lebanese Muslims carry LM22 when in reality the LM22 haplogroups they carry are different due to their subclades and are carried in different places by different groups of people. Mr. Zoulloa didnt test these specific subclades in his earlier studies such as this one https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2427286/. However he did test in his latest ones such as https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3062011/ and made a point about it although he goes on and says that the two haplogroups are closely related when they are really not and goes on and say to the public there are no major genetic differences between the religious groups when the frequencies of this ancient and rare haplogroup does show it.

The same can be done with all the other major haplogroups of J2 and G and this is to expand on what the Haber et al 2011 study means when it says quote "Major differences between Lebanese groups were found among the less frequent haplogroups":

Haplogroup J2 is present in 26% of Lebanese (34% of the Maronites carry it, 25% of the Greek Orthodox and 25% of the Muslims). However out the 26% total there is about 6% that is not just J2 or J-M172 but is made up of the specific subclade J-M67 (previously called J2f) and its further subclade J-M92 as can be seen here https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707643663. 80% of the Lebanese that have these haplogroups subclades are Christians as can be seen in one of the first studies done by Mr. Zoulloa here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2427286/. So the Christians present a much much higher percentage, possibly 80% or more, of the subclades J2/JM67 (previously called J2f) and its further subclade J2/M92 than Lebanese Muslims. It is found in super high proportions in the Caucasus, 10% of Cretans, 10% of North Central Italians and 5% of Jews. You can see here https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0002929707643663-gr2.jpg that the location and pattern of distribution of J2/J-M67 and J2/J-M92 is very different that the location and pattern of distribution of the plain J2 or J-M172. Mr. Zoulloa rarely mentions this anymore for unknown reasons.

Haplogroup G (mainly G-L30) is present in 6-8% of Lebanese, the highest percentage in the region. 30% of the Lebanese Melkite Catholics have it as opposed to 6% Lebanese Muslims, 6% orthodox and 7% Maronites as can be seen in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_G_(Y-DNA)_by_country#Lebanon, so the Lebanese Melkites possibly contain the highest concentration of G in the world outside the Caucasus. Haplogroup G is present in 15% of Cypriots, 10% of Cretans, 10-15% of Jews, and in extensive amounts in the Caucasus. Haplogroup G is found at much lower frequencies in the Arabian peninsula and outside the mentioned groups except some places in Iberia and Italy where it can go to 8-10%. I havent read Mr. Zoulloa make this observation in his studies.

If a Christian Lebanese tests at 23andme he will see that almost all the Y haplogroups of its Christian Lebanese matches (ESPECIALLY IN THE DIASPORA, which none of the studies have focused and where the majority of the Lebanese Christian descendants ARE) will be L-M22/L-M317, J-M67 and J-M92 (specific subclades of J2 or J-M172) and G-L30. All of these are very rare and ancient Canaanite/Phoenician haplogroups that are by far mainly present in the Christian Lebanese not the Lebanese Muslims and also found mainly in the indigenous groups of the Caucasus, in Jews (specially Mountain Jews of the Caucasus who claim descent from the Ten Lost Tribes) and in Northern Italy (mainly Venice and Genoa, which perhaps partly supports a theory out there that claims the Phoenicians or Christian Phoenicians migrated into and had some part in founding Venice at some point, which is can be supported by other things but thats another story).

These specific haplogroups/subclades and their statistics can be seen in various sources/studies, contradicting the "Zoulloa unifying message" that is out there claiming that the Lebanese Christians and Lebanese Muslims share the same amount of Phoenician DNA which is incorrect if we look at the SUBCLADES not just the MAJOR haplogroups and we look a the Haber 2013 and Haber 2019 AUTOSOMAL studies.Chris O&#39; Hare (talk) 01:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)