Talk:Ghassanids

message: Can someone please verify the families mentioned as Ghassanid? Skatewalk 16:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: None of your claims are backed by anything but oral tradition. In fact, highly questionable oral tradition. It is highly unlikely that only Christian families descend from the Ghassanids, and that the families/tribes you listed are descended solely from Ghassanids over a millennium in the past. Your claims seem more Christian Arab political propaganda than historical facts. I have removed the entire section listing the tribes; all future repostings will also be deleted pending provision of reliable sources. SaSH172 (talk) 13:33, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Ghassanid families today

message: I removed links in the last paragraph that are related to families since none of them actually links to where it is supposed to (one took me to a city in Cuba and another to a prominent Saudi Businessman!). Please do no put the   just anywhere.
yemenites arent arabs! Michael 23:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, what? Yuber(talk) 23:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

text: @68.232.69.64 That's a medieval legend. --YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 18:06, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faulty links 

message: This sentence should not be re-added without a reliable source that explicitly backs up the claim:
:...and the Holy Land where they intermarried with Hellenized Roman settlers and Greek-speaking Early Christian communities.
Otherwise, WP:V allows it to be removed. Moreover, a sentence in the lead is supposed to summarize stuff that comes later in the article (WP:LEAD), but this fact about intermarriage just seems to come out of the blue. If a source can be found, then I still think it should be moved into the body of the article. nadav (talk) 23:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Improper lead sentence

message: Didn't the vast majority of Ghassanids later convert to Islam. So why does the article seem to focus on Christian families as being the only Ghassanids today?
And I am deleting that section since it clearly contradicts with what is earlier in the text, and is completely unsources. I also had the chance to phone a couple of elders from the Hawayek family who disagreed with the Ghassanid conotation. One denied they are an "Arab" family (instead prefering "Phonecian").
If this is related to Ghassanid Christianity, please put in a seperate religious section as opposed to one of the Arab civilisation. Otherwise bring valid sources.
Pink Princess (talk) 20:40, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That is good, but how does that relate in any way to my point? Is there any proof that any of that ridiculously long list of Syrian and Lebanese families decend from Ghassanid families. There are no sources whatsoever, and the two elders I spoken to disagree with that label - one barely understood what Ghassanids were. If it is based on an oral source, then it is automatically disputed right here, if there is written, sourced proof, then could you kindly bring it. Also don't write in capitals, that platform of writing usually connotates you shouting, which makes you out to be more of an angry teen troll than a valid contributor. I am removing the section yet again, and will keep doing so until you provide valid proof for that claim past what seems most like historic revisionism aimed at reinforcing the Arab pride of those particular families. I am Arab myself, and I greatly respect our great civilisations like the Ghassanids and all their greatness. However, it is insulting to our history to copy those idiot Persian and Assyrian Nationalists by making such ludacris claims and claiming the entirity of the greatness of the Ghassanids just for a few families based on tribalism or religious sectarianism. We are better than that and the Ghassanid's memory should not be disrepected like so. Sallam Akhi. SaSH (talk) 13:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghassanids and Islam 

message: This article should describe the historically-known Ghassanids. If appropriate sources can be found to verify the various oral traditions for their origins and their descendants and cultural heirs, these could be described in the article - as oral tradition. Until appropriate sources are produced, I would suggest a bold edit to remove the inadequately-sourced comments. I don't think that one or two vanity publications are suitable sources for this nor for anything else much, nor are blogs, and nor - with all due respect - is your family tradition. Bury is a respectable source, but definitely out of date. I hope this helps. Richard Keatinge (talk) 23:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your thoughts, I agree completely. Sadly, such biased original research, and and the desire to associate oneself with bygone ancient kingdoms and empires are sadly endemic features of Middle-Eastern cultures and historical narratives. I will attempt to remove all unsurced materials, or those citing blatantly unreliable sources. SaSH172 (talk) 12:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oral tradition and contested sources 

message: Please change "were a group of descended from Azd" to "were a group of Arabs descended from the Azd tribe"
Consensus reached here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mark_Arsten#Ghassanid_Page_Protection
Thanks.
SaSH172 (talk) 02:46, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:05, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. SaSH172 (talk) 04:51, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 9 February 2014 

message: The aticle claims that the majority did not accept Islam, joining the Melkite and Syriac comminities in the Levant. The citation is source 2, though quickly reading through it, not such claim is written in the source. I suspect misuse of sources. Can someone please corroborate these claims by providing the page number where the claims are made? Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.237.137 (talk) 22:49, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: After a quick search I discovered, Pg. 469 specifically talks about Ghassanids joining Melkite Syriac communities, hope that answers your question. Lazyfoxx (talk) 23:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Whenever the book discusses Ghassanids, it also discusses that the majority did not accept Islam, it also makes a point that Jabala "king of all Byzantine Arabs" treated the "Muslim ambassadors well but did not accept Islam as some Muslim historians claim".  It also discusses that at the time of the Muslim conquest Ghassanids were divided with some being Chalcedonian Christian and some being Monophysite Christian.  It states that the remnants of the Ghassanids were dispersed throughout the Levant and Asia Minor where those that remained Christian joined Melkite / Syriac communities. Lazyfoxx (talk) 21:42, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghassanids and Islam 2 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ghassanids. 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/20160120083356/http://www.royalhouseofghassan.org:80/history/ to http://www.royalhouseofghassan.org/history/
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) 10:25, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Ok, the picture says that this is the tower of Al-Harith ibn Jabalah, but that picture is of Qasr al-Hayr al-Gharbi (what remains in situ), and Qasr al-Hayr al-Gharbi  was built by Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik? What is correct here? Huldra (talk) 23:51, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  picture? 

message: Information about someone supposedly living in California is supported with Arabic website citations. Even if this is true, and I say it is dubious, it is just trivia.
Declanscottp (talk) 02:21, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing poorly sourced trivia