Talk:Phoenicianism

message: More pertinently, anyone who has read the titles on the Further reading list I've added would improve this article by adding a summary of the history of this idea. The fact that it's a mistaken idea does not account for the strength of its historical appeal c. 1920-50 nor the historical context of motivations that led to its invention, which are the two aspects of interest to the educated neutral observer. --Wetman 15:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Article, not the soapbox

message: Much of this article seems to be taken word for word from the www.reference.com 70.16.19.108 (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's called a "mirror" for that very reason. By comparing the page history here you could even tell the date the information was copied. Wikipedia is not the "mirror"; instead, it keeps getting better, bit by bit. --Wetman (talk) 05:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Posts that are signed and by editors who are logged in are generally taken more seriously. The fact that there is no cultural or linguistic connection between modern Lebanese and Phoenicians does not impede impassioned outbursts, which are in themselves a sign that "Phoenicianism" is a phenomenon that can be discussed seriously by adults quoting informed sources. --Wetman (talk) 21:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference(dot)com

message: I (a Jew) happen to be interested in determining the relationships between all of those peoples, who, after all, inhabited the ancient eastern Mediterranean Sea (and one might as well throw in "Israelites", "Hebrews", and "Samaritans" for good measure). As I understand history, Phoenicians were essentially (northern) Canaanites who happened to take to the seas and found various colonies. Jews, as I understand history, somehow emerged from the vicinity (well, the southern Levant) and are related to Hebrews and Israelites (and may be practically the same people), and Samaritans were interlopers. I find it impossible to believe that the peoples involved would remain completely separate without some degree of mixing, trading, intermarrying, etc., etc. Thus, it stands to reason that there are numerous people today of mixed Phoenician/Canaanite/Jewish descent, as well as Jewish/Egyptian, Jewish/Greek, Canaanite/Greek, and so on and so forth, with some Western European as well (after all, there were the Crusades). Have there been any studies into the relationships between the Phoenicians, the Canaanites (if they were, indeed, a separate people), and the Jews/Israelites/Hebrews? 192.12.88.7 (talk) 05:11, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Phoenicians, Canaanites, Jews, Arabs, Greeks, and Egyptians

message: It seems that there are many Youtube references to the language, with adaptations to the famous passage in Plautus. Is Youtube acceptable for wikipedia?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.48.89 (talk) 10:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hardly ever. Some exceptions, the official YouTube page of a linguist might be, or a really good documentary on the page of the television company. Dougweller (talk) 17:15, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linguistic Documents

message: Irish and British interest in Phoenicians should be treated in appropriate articles for their cultural history, not here.  Material was deleted.--Parkwells (talk) 05:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ireland and Britain

message: I had never heard of this... eminent scholar but per her obviously self-created Wikipedia bio she's known for such groundbreaking theories as "the Roman temple complex at Heliopolis was really built by the Phonecians" and for various religious polemics and "bible prophecy" works. She appears to have a degree in fine art or art history and her professional university work is entirely in art history. Her "expertise" on such issues as "Islamic terrorism" stems from personal researches into "falsified mainstream history" prompted by anger over the Lebanese Civil War.
I do not think this person should be cited at all for any purpose and certainly not for puffed up claims about what "historians have noted," etc. TiC (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree we shouldn't use her. See User talk:Demossoft and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara de Baalbek for evidence of COI, although it might not be her. Doug Weller talk 10:56, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Im sorry to burst your history bubble but the substructure of the Temple of Jupiter in the Heliopolis complex is composed of monolithic limestone from local quarries and was in fact built by the Phoenicians. The Corinthian columns were made from porphyry stone and were erected by the Romans but the base of the temple is Phoenician stonework. I am not a historian, but if Kamal Salibi (fiction writer) gets to have a whole section in this article dedicated to his fabrications, then Lina Murr Nehme or any other person with an opinion on the subject of Phoecianism should also be considered a valid reference. Cheers.2601:249:8280:CF70:758A:F775:D12F:43A5 (talk) 23:10, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lina Murr Nehme? Seriously? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Phoenicianism. Please take a moment to review https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Phoenicianism&action=editmy 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  tag to http://www.maronitehistory.org/Maronite_Phoenician_Heritage
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080723111537/http://www.irishlebanese.com/page2.html to http://www.irishlebanese.com/page2.html
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) 03:49, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.190.102.146 (talk) 23:26, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:VERIFY. Doug Weller talk 11:26, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  why, exactly, are you requesting a citation for the claim that lebanon was christian before the muslim conquest? 

message: Although rejected by academics, its a popular belief in Malta that their language is not of Arabic origin but descended from ancient Punic. See: https://culturemalta.org/phoenicianpunic-malta/, https://phoenicia.org/maltese.html. This article debunks the idea that the Maltese are Phoenician but it attests to the widespread belief in the idea: https://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/67128/where_do_the_maltese_come_from. Given that this form of Phoenicianism is a part of Maltese nationalism and popular belief, what do people think about adding a section to this article currently limited to a Lebanese political phenomena? Xophe84 (talk) 12:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maltese Phoenicianism 

message: Criticism section should consider valid references. The article cites Kamal Salibi whose works are merely fiction writings (The Bible Came from Arabia (1985) comes to mind).2601:246:A01:B2F0:DD24:CB0D:C5DD:7946 (talk) 18:44, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citing the likes of Kamal Salibi 

message: Doug Weller reverted some edits because he confused A House of Many Mansions (by Kamal Salibi) with legitimate peer-reviewed research. 
We can disagree on citing Kamal Salibi as a valid source (and other post civil-war Lebanese intellectuals who profit from selling books and should not be confused peer-reviewed research). That does not negate that "Phoenicianism embraces Phoenicia as an alternative cultural foundation by rejecting 850 years of Arabization" is a pan-Arabist political statement and not a valid scientific counter argument. In other words, I would like to see some criticism for actual research such as   this article regarding ancestral continuity in Lebanon and this article (published by Nature) that dates 7,300 years of unique ancestral heritage. We need to shift the debate in that direction. 
Citing the likes of Kamal Salibi (Pan Arabist fiction writer on his brightest day) and Assad Bou Khalil (Conspiracy theory lunatic, just go check his twitter feed don't take my word for it) leaves the debate in opinionated political arguments that lead to nowhere. The subject of Phoenicianism is a highly divisive topic among Lebanese to begin with so lets shift the arguments and counter arguments to a right path. The big elephant(s) in the room is the grotesque propaganda in the criticism section so why don't we start from there. --2601:249:8280:CF70:9E:9CFC:620C:8100 (talk) 20:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casual propaganda in the article