Talk:Arabs/Archive 1

message: There is a "user page" with basically the same content but reworded and Ibrahim for the patriarch's name. If a contributory wants to take the user name Arab, I have no problem with that, but let's not confuse a user page with an article page. Ed Poor, Wednesday, April 10, 2002
The following text was moved from user:Arab because it seems more like it applies to the Arab article than to a Wikipedia contributor. Ed Poor
Arab (noun) - descibes a person of Arabic descent. 
Historically, an Arab is descendant from one of two sons of the Prophet Ibrahim. The other son's linage is claimed by the Jews
::The word "Historically" is innapropriate here, as no verifiable "historical" data is available. To be precise, Arabs originate from Arabia. According to both the Koran and the Torah, Abraham or Ibrahim was born in the city of Ur (now part of Iraq). He travelled to Canaan where he had two sons: Isaac and Ishmael. According to the Torah, Isaac begat Jacob, who begat the entire nation of Israel. According to the Koran, Ishmael lived on, but his legacy was unclear until 2,000 years later, when the prophet Muhammed was told by Allah that there existed a prehistoric, but dormant religion known as Islam. This religion was told to Muhammed...and the rest is history.Loomis51 23:52, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a passage descibing the arbatriness of national boarders of certain nations, and the similarities in groups that are seperated by a national border.  I cleaned up the syntax because it sounded very akward and confusing.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg 09:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: User:Arab

message: The Berber peoples of North Africa, for example, though often called Arabs by Westerners, are language of the country in which they live as a result of the Arab expansion.
:Never have I heard anyone refer to the Berbers as being Arabs. Should this be removed?
-----
There is a difference between someone who is of pure Berber stock, and someone who's ancestry is a mixture of Arabs and Berbers.  The vast majority of the Magrib is of the latter category and consider themselves Arabs as do other Arabs.  In any case I believe that the three categories on Arab geneology given in the articl are a little faulty.  See my note below. :)
----
CCC Clarification. Arab people have a great affinity to their language, and they classify themselves according to their shared language. A Berber's (Amazigh's) first language is not Arabic, hence they are not Arab. Disregarding the intermingling & mixing of the two groups their are many studies that show that Berber & Arabs do share common ancesters. The confusing part is the word Caucasian, people forget that the majority of genetic research do not seperate Caucasian from Semitic. So when you read research that says Berber are significantly Caucasian it would read the same way for an Arab. Many people disregard old Berber tribal oral traditions that state they have an origin in Yemen. Many just say that all those tribes invented those stories to join the elite groups, but this shows the little knowledge they have of Berber tribal societies that pride themselves and their autonomy throughout history. And strangely enough DNA tests place Berber most closely to Yemeni Arabs. Long ago Yemen did not speak Arabic and would have traveled to North Africa thousands of years before Islam & Arabic, hence they (Yemeni) were not Arab yet. When the second wave of Yemeni people went to North Africa bearing Islam and Arabic they met their cousins the Berbers (non-Arabs). But they shared an understanding of common heritage. This is in general and does not negate the historical facts of Europene blood entering here and there, nor does it negate the fact of pure black african entering from the south. But essencially they & Arabs & Phonecians have much in common. by BB
--------
Another misconception is the notion that Arabs started with Ishmael. When in actuality Arabs started much more before Ishmael. They started not long after Noah & Shem. Ishmael was not an Arab by blood & learned Arabic from the tribes he lived with who had been speaking Arabic as it was already well established. Ishmael then intermarried with Arabs and so did his children and on & on, then merging with the Arab people, to a point its hard to tell who is an Ishmaeli Arab from a Pure one. by BB
:Nobody knows what Ishmael or Abraham spoke in what language. There was a proto arabic language. They might even spoke Aramaic or Canaanite language ( similar to arabic as evidenced in Tel Merdoukh library (Ebla 2300 BC)( names like Ishamel and David were in the Ebla library)
how do you know he learned arabic and what did he speak before that, how do you there was arabic language? there is no evidence of arabic language and arabs before 1600 BC, Is there?
what is your evidence. Did the Coco ( Bird on the window) tell you that or did you see it in  a revelation?
slow down
------
Racially, an Arab is a person of Arabic descent, whose original ancestry comes from the Arabian Peninsula. Arabs are a Semitic people, who trace their ancestry from the ancient patriarch Abraham.
:I don't see how this makes sense. The Arabs are racially very mixed, as they're descended from a mixture of conquored/assilimated peoples and millions of slaves from throughout the Old World.
::This applies better to the Islamic faith, which claims its founders were descended from Ishmael. --Tydaj 00:12, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Berbers, semitic, white?

message: such as the Maronite Christian Arabic-speakers of Lebanon, or the Arabic-speaking Copts of Egypt, or Arabic-speaking Jews, reject this definition, wishing to identify not with a group defined by language but with a narrower one defined by religion or shared communal history.
Huh? First of all, the classification of "Arab" is not based on language (at least, not anymore...there was a period when this kind of Arab Nationalism was popular during the Ottomon period, but not anymore). Second, only an extreme fringe of Civil War-period Maronites reject the label of "Arab". I myself am a "Maronite Christian Arabic-speaker of Lebanon" and I take offence at such a claim. The only real, modern definition of an Arab is someone who is a citizen of an Arab League nation. --Jad 13:03, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There are three factors which play varying degrees in determining whether someone is considered Arab or not:
# Political: whether they live in a country which is a member of the Arab League.
# Linguistic: whether their mother tongue is Arabic.
# Genealogical: whether they can trace their ancestry back to the original inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula.
The relative importance of these factors is estimated differently by different groups.  The third factor was the original definition used in medieval times, but is usually no longer considered to be particularly significant. - Mustafaa 20:18, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition of Arab

message: Strange is that the scholars generally were no Arabs and this applies both to the scientists in Islam and in science. And if there is an Arab under them, then he is Arabised. Nevertheless the owner of CHARIA (Islamic legislation) came from their middle. And this comes because the Arabs are ignorant and have had never knowledge. Even those whom Arab grammar products has made expatriate. First Sibawayh were from the Persian realm and then Al-Zajaaj, these two were AJAM (everyone who is no Arab). The expatriate have made grammar for the Arabs and learned them the Arab language, art, laws and educate science. The most which Al-Hadith after to products have told of origin no Arabs. Then the Islamic scholars were not almost all Arabs. The Arabs could not write, note and not to express. And all those scientists who and have explained products have noted Islamic leathers and Arab grammar and have kept no Arabs of origin. Science was conducted by the Persian scientists, whereas the Arabs for competing with were concerning the power. The Arabs have ternauwernood interfered with science. The industry was carried out by the Arabised. When the Arabs devastate Egypt and the power there got, the Egyptians have kept themselves busy with science and Egypt was the country of science and industry. To these Arabised which kept themselves busy with science were: SAAD ADDIEN ATAFTAZI, IBN ALKHTIEB, NASR ADDIEN ATTUSIE. The work of other Arabiseds has been destroyed. (the original text)
hai, mustafaa, why you delite this frenquenly ? he is an arab according to you. and i didn't brought it from my books, it was in the almuqaddimah of the great arab historian. who can he be an great arab historian if we cannot use his works? ,i'll translate other works
and are you saying that i attempt to revange ? are you feeling dat did anything wrong against me ? .Aziri 12:57, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Most of the scholars were AJAM (every body who was not Arab)

message: A user using the IP 24.203.49.123 keeps adding a section every few days calling for genocide on Arabs .  Is there anyway we can block this guy because the stuff he's saying crosses over the line of just POV and into the area of genocidal death threats.Heraclius 21:25, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If he shows up again, I'll block him. - Mustafaa 23:21, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Please change the article to use Template:OtherUses instead of Template:otheruses it currently uses. The OtherUses template has information about the contents of the article.
 
For a sample use of this template refer to the articles Alabama or Algiers--—The preceding unsigned comment was added by DuKot (talk • contribs) .
:Note that that functionality is now at .  redirects to , and is deprecated.--Srleffler 18:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  OtherUses template 

message: The etymology section is getting very long and there is still more that needs to be said in it. Perhaps it should be moved to a separate article? Kuratowski's Ghost 16:53, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Own article for etymology

message: I see Philip link as a relevant "see also". It gives the reader a better understanding of who is an Arab. Cheers -- Szvest 14:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's unclear if Philip the Arab was an actual Nabatean Arab or just a Roman who lived in that general area. Yuber(talk) 15:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yuber, it is very clear historically that Philip was an Arab. His article indeed is very explicit. -- Szvest 15:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He was the son of Julius Marinus.  Doesn't sound very Arabic to me...Yuber(talk) 15:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yuber, have a look at Hermitage Museum. Also, according to Ancient-times.com, His father was Marinus, an Arab chief of Roman Knightly rank. The name says nothing Yuber. Emile, Edouard, Georges are just names. -- Szvest 16:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some other sources say Marinus was a Roman, so who knows.  He's only called Philip the Arab because of where he was born.  He never referred to himself as an Arab. Yuber(talk) 21:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are wrong Yuber! Arab is not a name of a place, but rather a name of an ethnicity. If he was called Philip the Syrian(after the name of the Roman province where he was born), then there might be a doubt if he was arab or not. And regarding your point about his name doesn't sound arabic, look at the names of most persians, kurds, turks, and muslims in general, they pretty much sound arabic, but they aren't arabs Jidan 16:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philip the Arab 

message: Linguistic: someone whose first language is Arabic (including any of its varieties); this definition covers more than 700 million people. Arabic belongs to the Semitic family of languages.
I seriously doubt that 700 million people speak Arabic (MSA or any of the very different colloquial languages) as a first language. All other articles point to a figure around 200-300 million, and I don't see where the extra ~400-500 million could come from. I will change the figure tonight (UTC-5) without further evidence.
Yom 20:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Arabs 

message: The word "Jewish" is also means a "Jewish People". A person who belogs to the jewish people cannot be belong to the Arab people. In the Israeli ID: a jew who was born in french- in the ID is written only Jewish & not french as people. because the jewish people is a people as any other. For example, my grandfather was born in lybia and he is jewish, however whem he came to Israel he is a jewish an any other. The fact that he is from lybia is really doesn't matter. Therfore he isn't Arab. Another reason is than Jewish means from Judea, and Arab from the Arabian Peninsula. Can person be either from Judea & Arabian Peninsula? 84.228.103.72 09:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Jewish is not necessarily an ethnic term, thought it was originally an ethnic religion. Judaism is a religion; there are Arab Jews still living in Iraq and other Arab countries that are ethnically of the same ancestor as their neighbors, but are of the Jewish faith. Yom 19:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You are not right, my friend was jew & he was leaving in iraq. However he wasn't iraqi he was jew. Even jews who leave in Israel, in their ID it isn't written they are Israelis but Jews. 84.228.25.244 07:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

text: What does your being Jewish with Canadian citizenship have to do with Jews not being Arabs?  A Jew doesn't acquire "Arab citizenship" like one acquires Canadian citizenship.  And further, your argument above admits that Judaism is a race, not merely a religion ("ones religion does not matter unless there is a racist policy involved in dealing with citizenship").  Did you intend that? 70.19.136.66 19:34, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Jew might be a Jordanian citizen, egyptian citizen, but never arabi! if he live in jordan so he jordanian citizen but he doesn't belong to the arab people. 84.228.38.249 10:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Putting aside the Mizrahim and Teimanim, if a Jewish mother bears a daughter with a non-Jewish Arab father, that child is Jewish. If this child in turn bears a child with another non-Jewish Arab father, that child is just as Jewish, yet also Arab. That Arab and Jewish are  mutually exclusive terms is a fallacy. That the identification as such is these day a limited phenomenon (following the cultural cleansing of Arab Jews in Israel subsequent to their absorbtion and continued modern politics) is another kettle of fish altogether. So to say that "culturally, a Jew can be considered an Arab but never ethnically" is untrue. A Jew can be an Arab either in culture, ethnicity, or both, and still remain 100% Jewish. Let go of the political baggage and it'll clear things up for you. Al-Andalus 13:14, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jew cannot be Arab 

message: It's always been my understanding that, in 711, Spain was invaded by Arabs (and Arabized Berbers, and individuals of mixed Arab and Berber ancestry) with a minority of black African "slaves and mercenaries". The Moors article, however, turns this on its head, asserting that "The Moors of Africa were the primary military force [in the invasion of Iberia]. When the Arabs arrived, the main part of the battle had been completed already," and that "In 756, Al-Andalus proclaimed itself an independent state. Thus, its only links to the Arabs would be the Islamic faith and the Arabic language." It also states that "Dr. Yosef A.A. ben-Jochannan author of 'Africa: Mother of Western Civilization' goes on to prove this group is from Ethiopic origins that migrated to northwest and northeast regions of Africa, and the only thing Arabic about the Moors was the fact that they were Moslem." Previously, it contained the tendentious quote: "Moorish culture was African in origin, bright in achievement, and powerful in its influence on the rest of Europe.", taken from here (which is also the source of much of the current article’s plagiarism). Aside from this, the current totalitarian of the article, Elohimgenius (who claims to be a Moor himself), has made up the term "European Moor". Is this person (and his work that is the current Moors article) misinformed or am I? I thought that perhaps those of you who frequent the Arabs page would be knowledgeable enough to determine whether the Moors article needs to be changed, and whether some intervention is necessary, or not. --Jugbo 21:51, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Race can be a complicated topic with this issue as there are modern perspectives (Euro-American, African American, and Mideastern/North African/Arab-Berber) and ancient ones. Mostly, it is believed that the Muslims (Moors is just a derivative of the term Muslim) of Spain were largely of Berber extraction, but led largely by the Arabs who had recently conquered them and then Caliphs ruled Spain. There were, what we'd call today 'black' rulers of Spain though, notably the Almoravides. The Arab-Berbers did view sub-Saharan people as different from themselves, but weren't strict when it came to mixed people or intermarriage (as neither were Northern Europeans until the modern era really). An interesting book on the subject is one by Bernard Lewis (can't stand the guy mostly, but he's written a few books that aren't bad) called 'Race and Slavery in the Middle East'. He uses native sources so European misinterpretation and race is not a problem when he discusses the region (including North Africa). Mostly, non-Muslim blacks were viewed as alien similar to Slavs, while Muslims who were sub-Saharan varied in their level of acceptance in society. The Berbers generally regard sub-Saharan people as different, but this again varies. The Tuareg are clearly largely of sub-Saharan background for example. The rendering you are referring to sounds like some of the Afro-centric stuff written on the subject, which takes the opposite position of the old white supremacist views that sought to portray all important peoples of the past as Northern European in appearance (including Jesus the Levantine Jew). In my opinion, both extreme positions are inaccurate and genetic tests show who the Berbers and Arabs are related to and the African component is substantial in some places, but overall I'd say North Africa is not African culturally so much as Southwest Asian, if we're comparing to areas outside of North Africa that is. Ultimately, one has to keep in mind that continents don't equal one culture or people. Eurasia is a vast supercontinent with massive diversity and China and India border each other with the Nepalese and Tibetans overlapping a little. Similarly, I'd say the Maghrib is more or less an extension of the modern Middle East, while Mauretanian, Sudan, East Africa show a high degree of overlap. Having been to the region and known many people from the region and studied the area in grad school, these would be my conclusions. Tombseye 00:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moors 

message: Hello guys, over all, I did not get it. Arab is a person whose race and ethnicity is Arab or his or her  language is Arabic. For example, I wonder how Egyptians can be called Arab while ethnically they are absolutely not related to Arabic peninsula. Same case with Syrians. I am afraid they are not Arabs. If they are Arab, so who are the people that were living in Yemen? However that I appreciate Syrian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Egyptian culture, I am not sure if they are real Arab. However, being Arab is not necessary a pride or shame. I did not mean this at all. I wanted just to clarify the discussion.
*I think you'll find that the majority opinion out in the world is that an Arab is one who speaks Arabic, is from the middle east and is ( in a circular way ) seen by other Arabs as an Arab. Peripitus (Talk) 21:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, self-identification is key, perhaps it is the most important in identifying who is an Arab and who is not. I don't think anyone who is from the "Middle East" is considered an Arab by others, maybe people from the "Arab world", but then again you have significant non-Arab minorities living there who do not want to be labeled Arab. Also, I don't think there is an answer to "Who are the original/real Arabs." I have heard different theories, one theory is that the South Arabians (Yemenis) are the true Arabs and other Arabs are the decendants of Arabized people (including the prophet Muhammed) (see Adnan). And then another theory, which is completely opposite, in that Yemenis were Arabized by northern Arabs. Anyway, it is not important to get caught up in this, we choose to call ourselves Arabs regardless of our roots, and many will be offended when their Arabness is questioned. --Inahet 23:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly put. I have asked the question of two people I know, a Druze from lebanon and coptic christian from Egypt - both were surprised that some may regard them as not being Arabs. Arguing origins from long ago may lead you to declare that the Australians are mostly european, English are mostly French and the citizens of the Southern USA are Spanish which would be clearly incorrect - Peripitus (Talk) 03:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with this, I don't think it's right to use the term 'Arab' for all of Middle East. Further, I also think the definitions under 'geneological' and 'linguistic' can be debated. For example, someone who lives and was born in Mexico, but technically their origins 10 generations ago are Arab, does that make them Arab also? Or someone who lives in Iran and their first language is arabic, are they also Arabs? Io Katai 06:26, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arab definition 

message: I think we should protect this page. We've had a rash of vandalism lately, including some very offensive vandalism that I heard about from a third party source that posted it elsewhere as an example of the disreputability of Wikipedia. StaticElectric 18:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not enough to protect this article. We can deal w/ it until it becomes necessary. Cheers -- Szvest 18:05, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protection? 

message: * "some Arabs can traced thier names back to Noah." (No comment needed.)
* "The Arabs originally came from Petra" (!!!!)
* ". The term Arabised-arabs is also used for defining the arabs whom spoke other languages than ancient Arabic (semetic languages in the Middle-East such as Phoenician, Assyrian, Akkadian, Aramaic etc. and hametic (Ham son of noah) languages such as Egyptian, Berber or Tamazight and some African languages)." (this reflects some extreme Arab nationalists who pointlessly redefine "Arab" to mean "speaker of any Afroasiatic language")
* "Biblical tradition: in the Biblic context someone who is a descendant of Abraham through his son Ishmael, and his sons Medan and Median." The Bible has no relevance to the question of who is an Arab; it only rarely even uses the term, although Christian and Jewish tradition identifies the Ishmaelites with the Arabs.
* "According to Islamic tradition an Arab is a person descending Isma'il (Ishmael) son of The Prophet Ibrahim (Abraham)." Wrong.  According to Islamic tradition, the northern (musta`riba) Arabs are descended from Ishmael; the southern ones aren't.
Why not just revert this to the last vaguely accurate version? - Mustafaa 13:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What the ????

message: Because it statemeants were unfounded. The bible does not refer to the Arabs as descendants of Ishmael. "Ishmaelites" and "Arabs" are mentioned seperately in the bible without any hint that they are both one in the same. The tradition that identifies the two with each other is a much later one (originating, I  believe, from Iosephus). I have no idea were to the claim that the Medan and Median were forefathers to the Arabs, but it's definetly not the bible. Harvest day fool 17:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Josephus describes the descendents of Ishmael as an Arabian people meaning that they lived in Arabia (Petraea), he doesn't say that they were the Arabian people, there were many ancient nations in Arabia. Kuratowski's Ghost 22:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I took down the "Biblical tradition" part

message: ::They are the Arabs whom directly descendant of Noah through his son Sem through his sons Aram and Arfakhshaath.
::... is used for defining the Arabs who are descendants of Abraham through his son Ishmael through his Son Adnan, and they are known as Adnanite: it is defined to the Arabs who settled in Mecca when Abraham took his Egyptian wife Hagar or (Hajar) and his son Ishmael to Mecca. Ishmael was raised up with his mother Hagar and one noble Arab family who left from Yemen and settled in Mecca after the rainless took part in Yemen at that time). Ishmael learned Arabic language and he spoke it fluently during his life.
I thought Wikipedia was not in the habit of treating holy books as historical sources. These are claims, not facts, and this article needs to reflect that. Tradition may hold these things, and certain aspects of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam may also hold them, but there is no historical evidence that these people ever lived. - Che Nuevara: Join the Revolution 21:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Factual bases

message: I reverted this recently added culture section as it doesn't say much, and what little it does say is WP:POV.  There's already a "See Also" link to Arabic culture (though that article could use some work and expansion). OhNoitsJamie Talk 05:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Culture section

message: Inahet, what evidence do you have of a Mesopotamian origin of South Arabian civilization? I am almost 100% certain that this is not the case. South Arabian civilizations began to flourish ca. 800 BC, and definitely not 3000 BC, which is why I removed the part about "one of the oldest civilizations in the Near East," since many pre-800 BC civilizations existed there. I kept the "many" wording for descent, but it does require a citation. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 20:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't even know what you're talking about, I'm not the one who added that content. :D --Inahet 20:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know you aren't the original source of that content, but you reverted an edit of mine reinserting it. Perhaps you were only trying to reinsert the "Many" part for Arab origin beliefs, but you also inserted the above information. See this diff. If that was an accident, though, then there's nothing to discuss. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 20:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I really don't know how that happened, I think I was multi-tasking at the same time and didn't realize how long the page was open before submitting my edit. Also to clarify, I changed "most" to "many." --Inahet 21:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: South Arabian Civilization

message: :"Keeping the surname is an important part of Arabic culture"
Umm, don't most Arabic-speaking cultures use patronymics rather than surnames? This sentence looks, on the face of it, like obvious nonsense. Rhialto 07:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Surname?

message: I have started writing off to see if I can find an editor to write Arab psychology. Simesa 03:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, I think Arab Culture would be more appropriate. Jidan 11:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I asked the American University of Beirut, but none of the faculty was interested in writing such an article.  They had two concerns: first, the subject is too broad to be able to prove assertions, and second, that whatever is written would quickly become politicized.  Finally, "little empirical research" has been done.  I guess this is one of those areas where an article would be impractical.  They did thank me for asking. Simesa 17:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Arab psychology? Do we have articles w/ X psychology? -- Szvest - Wiki me up ® 17:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are articles on sports psychology, poker psychology and Filipino psychology.  The article on Generation X is largely cultural psychology.  Still, this would be something of a new area.  Frankly, Arab cultural psychology is an extremely important topic, and it is a mystery to most of the English-language readers of Wikipedia.  But I guess you can't cram a college doctorate into one article. Simesa 17:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

text: By the way, there's a business course called The Massey Triad (see Morris Massey) that says (among many other things) "What you are is where you were when you were age 10."  So to see how someone thinks, look at where they were and what happened when they were age 10.  The culture at that time in that place therefore becomes extremely important. Simesa 17:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The important thing is the usage of notable references and sources. I don't think a topic about Arab psychology got enough of those. -- Szvest - Wiki me up ® 17:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

text: That would be very interesting. Jidan 23:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article on [[Arab cultural psychology]] 

message: Shouldn't this article have an image of about 5 Arab people, like the articles about Portuguese people, Swedish people and so on to let people know how Arabs look like? --Escondites talk 19:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images of Arab people? 

message: Clearly we see Arab is not a race as the people who run around Darfur are called Arabs but are 100% African. drop the POV,--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 21:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sudans Arabs

message: Shouldn't the part about "tracing lineage back to Noah or Adam" be removed? From a non-religious standpoint there's no evidence these religious characters have even existed. If it really needs to stay, it should be weaselized with "some arabs claim to be able to trace..." or similar. 惑乱 分からん 11:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lineage? 

message: Surely this can not be correct: "...who built up one of the oldest centres of civilisation in the Near East beginning around 800 BC."  Didn't the Summerians and other fertile crescent peoples have "centres of civilisation" well before 800 b.c.?  Like at least 3000 b.c.?  Aren't they also in the Near East?  So is the statement from the article wrong?  S. Randall 17:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Little Late? 

message: Hmmm - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Arab&curid=2185&diff=111231440&oldid=111162304
This appears incorrect. someone who has better knowledge of the subject should check into it. thuglasT|C 04:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits?

message: Hi, I'm the smartest person on wikipedia, and I say this is the correct definition of Arab:
In everyday life, an Arab is anyone, most of whose ancestors between 6th century BC and the 6th century AD spoke Arabic.  Because this language originated in Jordan, Syria and Saudi Arabia, Arabs are of Middle Eastern or West Asian origin. Iseebias
السلام It is hard to learn new things if you r too smart. Appreciate the locality of your info due to your دين and  دنيا and reality . فَلَنَقُصَّنَّ عَلَيْهِم بِعِلْمٍ وَمَا كُنَّا غَآئِبِينَ --HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 12:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Correct definition

message: People of Lebanese, Syrian, Palestinian, Jordanian and Egyptian origins in Latin America outnumber those in areas listed. Like someone said before there are more Lebanese in Brazil than in Lebanon. Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Argentina, Ecuador, all  have substantial populations. Most other countries also have some "Arabs". They should be listed or talked about. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.193.224.36 (talk) 17:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Says who? Prove it - besides, this may be a very sketchy link based on the fact that prior to the Reconquista, there was a lot of Arab and Spanish mixing. When the Spanish colonized south America, they would have brought this blood with them, but I think the word descendent should be reserved for those who claim arab ancestry. Other wise, whether you look at it from a science or a religious point of view, we all have blood relations, few nations have not met other than for war. Tourskin 22:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Arab" descendents in Latin America outnumber those in USA, Turkey, Iran, Australia 

message: vandalism people. Arabs are not dirty crusaders. Tourskin 02:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No....but some of them are dirty Jihadies  Invasion10 05:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: This page needs it, the definition of arab is being vandalized in a very racist way.Tourskin 02:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protection 

message: Syria and Iraq should not be listed as ethnic Arabs but cultural Arabs. Maybe they should be placed on both Cultural and ethnic. Palestine and Egypt should be listed also under cultural.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 168.122.241.180 (talk) 03:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently you do not know no thing about Syria and Iraq. Read about Iraqi and Syrian families the majorities are of Arab descended although some are mixed. Also Iraq and Syria especially southern Iraq and Syria are of well-known Arab tribes--Aziz1005 15:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syria and Iraq are also cultural Arabs 

message: i think that yemen should not be regarded as a complete arab nation, that is an old myth. Their language even has alot of pre-arab words, more than any others in eastern arab countries. I also think that jordan and syria should be regarded as completly arabs (except the kurdish populatin in syria ofcourse). These three countries actually have the most pure ethnic arabs. Yemen does not at all. It was a major hub, it was not arab before the islamic explosion and there is alot of african blood there. Where saudi arabia has retained its arab identity except in in mecca and medina. jordanians too. For whoever says that syrians have crusader blood. They dont have that much really. They have lighter skin because of turkish and kurdish mixture. Western iraq is also very ethnically arab. Please change!
How can Jordan be completely Arab when the majority of Jordanians are of Palestinian descent. Jordan, Syria and Iraw should be considered to have both ethnic and cultural Arabs.
Ok,they are naturalized after the israeli conflict. But almost all of the population when the state was made were ethnic arabs around 95%.
Syria is very arab except the kurdish parts and the latakia. As most of the arab immigrated there after the islamic expansion, more than they did to any other country.
==  syria gets it's arab roots pre Islam through yemen ( ghassanid) and the second after the Islamic expantion.
==POv
the two major tribes that arabs can claim to come from are either the adnan or qatan.
: I also think that jordan and syria should be regarded as completly arabs (except the kurdish populatin in syria ofcourse). These three countries actually have the most pure ethnic arabs. - this statement is far from being right. In fact Syrians are the least arabs of all middle east. They are extremelly light skinned and it is accepted that they are of mix Arab, Aramean, Assyrian, and Greek ansestry. Chaldean 14:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syria and Jordan