User talk:Sayf-Al-Dawla

November 2021
Hello, I'm M.Bitton. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Algeria have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 19:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi M. Bitton, you recently cancelled my edit on the basis that it was "my POV". The definition in the Arab World entry literaly reads : The linguistic and political denotation inherent in the term Arab is generally dominant over genealogical considerations, which is what I stated in my edit summary : the understanding of "arab world" being more political than it is ethnic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayf-Al-Dawla (talk • contribs) 19:27, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) The article is not about the Arab world and 2) that's not what you did by adding "so-called" to it to make your own point. Would you add the same thing to the fictitious "Berber world"? M.Bitton (talk) 19:31, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The way it reads now, without "so-called" corresponds to that definition. Politically and, mostly, linguistically, even with its ethnic Berber population, Algeria is part of the Arab World. Largoplazo (talk) 20:33, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was waiting for their reply (with regard to the "Berber world"), because looking at this edit of theirs (left for now), I'm starting to wonder where they are going with this. M.Bitton (talk) 20:50, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I would like to answer your last message concerning the edits I've done. First of all, "Berber world" doesn't sound the same as "Arab world" nowadays. I dont see any real political & religious ideology behind it (Except for some groups like Kabyles in Algeria) as it is for Arab World which is clearly political and organized by Middle East countries. Furthermore, the second one (Arab world) is intrusive as all historical intruders (Ottoman, Spanish, Romans...) who tried to somehow dispossess Berbers from their own traditions.


 * About Ibn Tumart edit, It was a wrong translation, popular as he was, and deeply influenced by Arabic tradition, Ibn Tumart was nonetheless Berber. You can check the page "Ibn Tumart" in Enclopedy of Islam, the author literally says : son père appartenait aux Harg̲h̲a, et sa mère aux Masakkāla, deux fractions du groupe tribal des Maṣmūda, et il ne fait pas de doute qu’il fut un pur Berbère contrairement aux diverses généalogies s̲h̲arīfīennes qui lui furent attribuées. (See, J. F. P. Hopkins, "Ibn Tumart", in EI2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayf-Al-Dawla (talk • contribs) 12:56, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Whether Ibn Tumart was Berber or not is irrelevant. The fact that he's known as "Abu Abd Allah Muhammad Ibn Tumart" and not as "Abu Abd Allah Amghar Ibn Tumart" (your change) is what matters here. I suggest you self-revert. Also, please try to keep this discussion in one place. M.Bitton (talk) 13:04, 20 November 2021 (UTC)