Talk:Arabs

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 May 2024

remove text as there is an insane ampount! 64.189.18.28 (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

 Not done It's unclear what part you want to have removed. Aintabli (talk) 04:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Edit proposal

I would sincerely ask that you directly, clearly and unambiguously emphasize the Semitic origin in the first paragraph. Thanks. Bagyblazha (talk) 15:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

The style of your request suggests that it's not simply about adding information but about taking a contentious stand on the matter, which Wikipedia doesn't do. Largoplazo (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Excuse me, but what is disputed? In the article about Russians, it says that they are Slavic, Turks are Turkish, Spaniards are Romance... Bagyblazha (talk) 18:26, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I didn't say anything is disputed. Largoplazo (talk) 23:48, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

For that matter, I just removed "Romance" from the first sentence of Spaniards, as "Romance" isn't normally used to characterize peoples. We don't even have an article on "Romance peoples", that link led to Romance languages. Largoplazo (talk) 23:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

This whole article is a disgraceful mess.

I tried to fix it but there is too much that can be done by one person. The main problem in the article is that the editors are mixing up actual Arabs - those who speak variants of Arabic or proto-Arabic - with speakers of the Old South Arabian languages, such as the Sabaeans. The Arabs are less related to the Sabaeans than they are to the Canaanite groups such as Hebrews and Edomites. "Arabian" doesn't mean "of Arabs", it just means "from Arabia".

This whole article is pretty laughable and extremely poor quality. It gives a very misleading view of the relationship between the Semitic peoples and their languages. The Mummy (talk) 12:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Are you looking it this as a matter of genetics? The article explains up front that it's covering Arabs as an ethnic group. As the Ethnicity article holds, "An ethnicity or ethnic group is a group of people who identify with each other on the basis of perceived shared attributes that distinguish them from other groups." In other words, it's a distinct classification from a purely genetic one. Largoplazo (talk) 12:46, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

No, it has little to do do with genetics and more to do with actual ethno-linguistics. The speakers of the Old South Arabian languages and those who spoke (and speak) Arabic didn't consider themselves the same people and there is literally no evidence that they did. The Sabaean, for instance, are not ethnic "Arabs" when it comes to genetics, linguistics or cultural affiliation and even Hebrews and Aramaeans are more related (ethno-linguistically speaking) to Arabs. "Arab" and "Arabian" in this context are two different things.

Old South Arabian is a subgroup of the South Semitic language group and Arabic is a subgroup of Central Semitic, as are Hebrew and Aramaic. If we are going to claim that more distant ethno-linguistic groups are "Arabs" we might as well claim that Hebrews are too, as they are more closely related as an ethno-linguistic group to actual Arabs. The Mummy (talk) 10:07, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

This is good information! Do you have sources relating to the topic? It sounds like it ought to be included. Zanahary (talk) 07:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Almost every other article on an ethnicity defines or characterizes said ethnicity by genetics though.

Japanese for example. Maxwatermelon (talk) 16:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Even if that was a fact (I haven't checked), how is it relevant to this article? M.Bitton (talk) 17:50, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

It seems irrelevant to me. It’s very likely that scholarship on Japanese ethnicity is different from scholarship on Arab ethnicity in this regard. @The Mummy do you have any recommended reading on the complication of the term “Arab” and its historicity? Zanahary (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Or, better: please add some content to this article about it! Zanahary (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

From the fact that many ethnicities are entirely determined by genetic unity, it doesn't follow that all of them are. Largoplazo (talk) 19:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Lakhmid Kingdom map

This map is misleading as it draws the territorial area of the Lakhmids using the borders of modern political subdivisions. Somebody probably made it using mapchart.net or another similar utility. It should be deleted or replaced with something higher quality. Raccoon Enthusiast (talk) 16:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Wrong information

This is just generalizing on entire groups of people with different cultures and ancestries that they are all Arabs. This article like Persians is entirely misleading. There are Arabic speaking people in Bahrain of Iranian Ancestry and most Kuwaitis are Iranian of origin, further more Egyptians and North Africans in generally have completely different genetics (same with Morocans most of which are Amazigh) and history and dialects of Arabic influenced by their older languages. The ethnic Arabs are those with high level of J1 Haplogroup such as Yemen and Saudi, and that's it. Actual Arabs are a minority everywhere else. Mrox2 (talk) 16:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

You appear to be conflating ethnicity with haplogroups. Largoplazo (talk) 17:22, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

I understand the distinction you're drawing, but ethnicity is about more than just language. It's a complex combination of shared cultural practices, language, history, and sometimes genetic ancestry. My point is that labeling entire populations as "Arabs" based solely on the fact that they speak Arabic today ignores the diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds of these groups.

For example, many people in Bahrain and Kuwait, despite speaking Arabic, retain distinct Persian cultural and ancestral ties—our cuisine, music, language, and traditions have been preserved over time. Similarly, North Africans, like the Amazigh, have their own rich history and culture, which predates the introduction of Arabic. These differences are often reflected in local dialects, influenced by older languages and cultures.

Haplogroups, while not the sole determinant of ethnicity, are helpful in understanding deep ancestral origins, especially when discussing the relatively small populations of ethnic Arabs (e.g., in Yemen and parts of Saudi Arabia) compared to the broader Arabic-speaking world.

According to Cambridge, Ethnicity is a noun that refers to a large group of people who have the same national, racial, or cultural origins, or the state of belonging to such a group - we share none of that with Syrians or Egyptians, we don't speak the same dialect, our culture is entirely different, and we never ever felt like we belong to such groups, they look nothing like us, have different dialects, have different cultures, and our history is entirely different.

Last but not least; I was brainwashed to identify as Arab as a child in school (how is that consensual?) and did so for some time, and then we got older and realize we're all not Arabs. So whatever you say or write, we will always remain as such. I am proud of being able to speak Arabic (Bahraini-which is heavily influenced by Persian), but that's were our similarities end, many words in our dialect are not even understood by Egyptians and co. I also speak English, and Persian, both Bushehri and Iranian/Tehrani,so what am I then?

Moreover, attributing the contributions of scholars like Khwarizmi and Razi to Arab culture is factually incorrect. Mrox2 (talk) 19:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Map

The map in the lede is a bit misleading. Rather than grading on amount of Arabs on each country, it should be done on the percentage of the population being Arab. Kowal2701 (talk) 12:43, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

The percentages are not mentioned in the article. M.Bitton (talk) 12:49, 13 October 2024 (UTC)