Jump to content

Talk:Arab Christians/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 9

New National Geographic magazine article about Arab Christians

Very long article, which could be used as a source: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/06/arab-christians/belt-text FunkMonk (talk) 18:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

New Name

Should be considered; Christians of The Arab World Christians of the Middle East

Why "Arab Christians" not "Christian Arabs"?

Is this a grammatical mistake or was it chosen on purpose? I've never heard of a "Christian nation" so that we can qualify it with an attributive adjective. Today there is an Arab nation but not a "Christian nation," unless you people still live in the time when Christendom was around.

Another thing, Carlos Menem is inappropriate to put in the infobox since he was originally Muslim and many believe that he only converted to become a president. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.178.224.178 (talk) 03:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that article should be called Christian Arabs. The question is whether there are any that object. If not, the name could be changed. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 01:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Interesting article about Maronite self-identification

Worth a read, considering the many edit wars on Arab related articles (also check the comments). http://qifanabki.com/2009/10/15/maronites-arabs-phoenicians-klingons/ FunkMonk (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


The Maronites are ethnic Arameans and NOT Arabs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.234.33.210 (talk) 14:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

This Article is Poorly sourced Biased and Purely Pan-Arab Propaganda

Yes my section where i added this concern about the utter bias in this article by arab nationalists (on the discuss this article section) got deleted SUPRISE SUPRISE.who want to write facts as they see even include St Maron who was never an ARab or spoke arabic in this article and make stupid arguements like "Maronite think they are not arab"and the use of the word "occasionaly" is also a farce considering MOST maronites infact nearly all reject Arab infialltion and anyone who tries to point that out in the article finds out that the pan arabists have deleted it.FYI iraqi christians are not arabs stop adding them to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.168.228 (talk) 18:15, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

What you don't seem to understand is that nobody is saying that all Christians in the Middle East are Arabs. You may dispute the actual numbers of Christian Arabs and on who was (or is) and was not (or isn't) a Christian Arab, but this requires reliable sources. Christian Arabs deserve an article because of their unique identity and history. (however, Arabs regardless of religion do share a common culture, tradition, language, history, etc. as in the main article about Arabs) This has nothing to do with Pan-Arabism. I find this controversy bizarre because I myself am a Christian Arab and have yet to find anybody raise this controversy neither from my large Christian Arab family nor from other Christian Arabs I talked to. Also, just because someone is a Roman Catholic, it does not mean they are Romans. Just because someone is Greek Orthodox or Syriac Catholic, it does not mean they are Greek or Syriac. I'm a Roman Catholic Arab, I was baptized in a Roman Catholic Church and received Holy Communion, but do I consider myself a Roman? Of course not. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 02:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

ADD JORDANIAN,PALESTINIAN,SYRIAN christians no problem they openly accept arabism.

Just because someone speaks English doenst make them English. Fairuz's father wasnt even from LEBANON he was Aramaean of the Syriac faith. What YOU dont seem to get that the people who are constantly added to this article Lebanese,Egyptian,Iraqi mostly reject the arab culture or identidy. Even Salma Hayek labels here grandfather who immigrated to Mexico from as an Assyrian not Arab. P.S saint Maron was not a Arab. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.97.232 (talk) 23:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

You have made several assertions and claims, but we can't just delete content because you say so and you expect people to just take your word. Provide reliable sources that- (1) Fairuz's father (who has the common Christian Arab surname Haddad) is an Aramaean. (2) Salma Hayek quote that her grandfather was an Assyrian. You could provide a reliable source for Saint Maron's ethniticity, but it is inconseqential since religious sects are converted to separately from and doesn't consider ethniticity. I don't get your assertion and generalization that: "Lebanese,Egyptian,Iraqi mostly reject the arab culture or identidy" because it is not true. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 18:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

St.Maron wasnt an Arab if your gonna even attempt to make the arguement he is, then you are wasting your time. Haddad is semitic surname its not necessarily arab i know many pakistani and indian muslims who have arabic surnames maybe, by your standards they should be added here. Aramaeans arent arabs!!! Khalil Girbran was not Arab he came from a very isolated Maronite village that spoke Aramaic until the late 1800s. by the time arabic was introducted to bsharri Gibran family had already migrated to America.


"Lebanese,Egyptian,Iraqi CHRISTIANS mostly reject the arab culture or identidy - because its not true" Than your in denial because most of them DO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miss-simworld (talk • contribs) 17:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I sort of agree that Egyptians can be considered not Arabs. But if so, why should the Levant be considered Arabic? Before the Muslim invasion people spoke Aramic in that area. I think the real Arabs are just the ones that live in Gulf countries, who spoke Arabic even before Islam. There are many people who disagree though, so maybe it would be better if the article was change to include 'Arabic Speaking Christians' (talk) 13:17, 23 December 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.173.217.208 (talk)

Cannot agree more. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 18:56, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

btw the area Fairuz's father came from is a town now in TURKEY so this shows how little you actually know to even use her surname as a pathetic defence —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.189.68 (talk) 20:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

MICHEL AFLAQ CONVERTED TO ISLAM

Who ever keeps adding michel aflaq just to prove in some way how christians "invented" arab nationalism you seem to forget Michel Aflaq always related arabism to Islam and that he quote as calling it the greatest acheivements for arabs. Another note HE CONVERTED TO ISLAM there is even a letter in his handwriting where he admit this you cant add converts to Islam in this article. It just goes on to prove how shoddy facts and how poorly researched it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miss-simworld (talk • contribs) 19:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Removal of reliably sourced information

Lanternix, twice you have removed this information, sourced to the book Arab Detroit: from margin to mainstream by Nabeel Abraham and Andrew Shryockon. In the chapter on "Egyptian Copts in Detroit", authored by Richard R. Jones, on page 231, it reads: "While in Egypt, I observed that Copts and Muslims alike, when asked, unioformly insisted that they were Arabs. It is interesting that in the West at least some members of the Coptic immigrant community are beginning to think of themselves as "non-Arab," yet continue to believe that they are Egyptian."

Given that this information is relevant to this article, I would appreciate it being restored. I would also appreciate that you cease deleting it from this article and the article Coptic identity. Please stop deleting reliably sourced information simply because it does not accord with your well-known POV. Thank you. Tiamuttalk 09:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


I will NOT cease removing this information because it is very weak and clearly contradicts every single statement made by prominent Coptic figures in this article. I will also ask for the help of other Coptic Wikipedians to put an end to this nonsense. Egyptians are NOT Arabs, and they have no place in an article about Arab Christians. We have already had this discussion numerous times before, and the closest we came to making a compromise was to make the article about "Arabic-speaking Christians" or "Middle East Christians", in which case I may consider putting my case to rest. Otherwise, I will keep reverting your POV. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 09:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I am aware of your stubborn refusal to entertain viewpoints other than your own. I see you have reverted a third time here. Well congratulations Lanternix. I have no patience or edit warriors who cannot hear what other editors are saying because of their deep emotional investment in a given issue. You win. This article will remain incorrect, incomplete and poorly sourced because of you edit warring ways. Have a good time at it. Tiamuttalk 16:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, you reverted a third time here as well. I refuse to be called stubborn because at least my claims are founded and backed by various statements made by Copts, while your only source so far is made by some American guy based on an "observation" not even a study! Like I said, I am willing to reach a fair compromise by changing the topic into "Arabic-speaking" or "Middle Eastern" if you'd like, but certainly NOT "Arab" because Copts are not Arabs. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 17:58, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

that was my second revert Lanternix. My first edit to introduce the information is not considered a revert. I restored it twice thereaafter, after you deleted it twice. After you deleted it a third time, I did not restore it again. I'm done playing with you at this article and most others. You don't play nice or fair and you have no demonstrable interest in writing NPOV articles. Tiamuttalk 20:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I have made a comment below, regarding the page protection. My problem now is that they word 'Egypt' does not even appear on the page. That fact, on its face, is proof of the article's non-neutrality. It seems to be taking a minority ethnic quirk, as ref'd by others and noted by myself, to non-neutral extremes. Is Egypt Arab, yes. Are there Christians there, yes. Taking that broad-brush view, 'Egypt' should be in the Wiki article, along with anything unique about it. This quirk should be included, rather than the country's mention deleted. That sounds like making a quirk into a 'chip on shoulder'. Then again, Wiki at times seems to deal poorly with these ethnic chips. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 04:21, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Flawed argument. Is Egypt Arab? NO, because that nomenclature was forced about the Egyptians in the 1950's by Nasser. Are there Christians in Egypt? Yes. Are these Christians Arabs, NO, they have absolutely nothing to do with the Arabs. The language argument is flawed as well. This is like calling the Americans English because they speak English, or calling the Austrians Germans because they speak German, or calling the Argentinians Spanish because they speak Spanish. Sorry, but this does not hold anywhere else, and it will not hold for Egyptians. Bottom line, there is no place for Egypt in an article that talks about Arab Christians. If you want to call it Arabic-speaking Christians, or Middle Eastern Christians I shall review my position. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 09:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
The flawed argument is the one that completely disregards that some sources do say that Egypt is an Arab state and that some of the Christians in Egypt identify as Arabs. Your opinion that Egypt and Egyptians are not Arab is noted, but there are sources that disagree with you. Yes there are sources that say that Egyptian Christians are not Arabs, but when we have conflicting accounts we do not just choose one. We show both, who says that they are Arabs and who says that they are not. You are continually insisting on only including your personal POV, that Egyptians are not Arabs (guess what, the user typing this is an Egyptian Arab). That is unacceptable. nableezy - 17:19, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
What is unacceptable is to call Copts Arabs and to force the Arab label upon them while they clearly and blatantly reject it! See what Copts say about their identity on Coptic identity. They say that even calling them "Arabs" is considered offensive! Copts do NOT identify as Arabs, and they are NOT Arabs by any stretch of the imagination. Whether or not you consider yourself Arab is completely irrelevant; you are not even a Copt. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 02:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
What is unacceptable is for you to pretend that you speak for all Copts. You do not. At least two eminently reliable sources have been presented at the Coptic identity page that note that Copts identify as Arab. You buried those sources in the article in a very POV fashion, simply because they don't jive with what you believe. When you are ready to acknowledge that your concpetion of your identity is not th only one on the planet, you can begin NPOV articles. Until then, collaboration with you is impossible. Tiamuttalk 10:42, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
What is unacceptable is for YOU to pretend you know anything about the Copts while you're not even one. What is unacceptable is for YOU to come here and impose your pan-Arabist ideologies on a people that has spent 1400 years fighting Arabs and Arabization. What is unacceptable is for YOU to pretend that sources written by 2 non-Copts are as reliable as many sources written mostly by Copts, ie: people who actually know what they are talking about, not just "outside observers". When YOU are ready to acknowledge that you know pretty much NOTHING about the Copts and how insulting it is to call them Arabs, maybe we will be able to talk. Until then, the Copts will NOT be included in this miserable article. If you don't like my opinion, and if you accuse me of thinking I am the only one who speaks for all Copts, you have statements made by the most prominent Copts you can think of, INSIDE of Egypt, screaming to your face: WE ARE EGYPTIANS! WE ARE NOT ARABS! CALLING US ARABS IS OFFENSIVE! All you need to do is to review the Coptic identity article. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 19:24, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
For the last time, you cannot remove what reliable sources say about the matter just because you think they are wrong. nableezy - 20:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
For the last time, I will NOT tolerate erroneous information on Wikipedia, whether you and other pan-Arabists like it or not. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 06:10, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Is that your final position on this issue, Lanternix? I ask, because if so, you are not committed to editing within Wikipedia guidelines, which are not concerned with the WP:TRUTH (which is subjective), but rather with what reliable sources have to say. We strive to write articles that are WP:NPOV, and not what one user believes to be the truth. If you cannot accept that, we have a huge problem. Tiamuttalk 09:36, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
This is the final position of all Copts, as explained in the Coptic identity article. Bear in mind that we beat this horse to death before, and that the decision was reached to name the article "Arabic-speaking Christians", until you came and reverted all previous consensuses. The only compromise I am offering is to revert back to the earlier consensus of "Arabic-speaking Christians", or alternatively to call the article "Middle Eastern Christians". --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 00:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Page protected

I've protected the page for three days to put an end to the recent edit-warring. I hope the editors involved, including IPs, can reach resolve their differences on this page during that time. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:18, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Since it is protected, could you please delete the duplicated consecutive mention of Marie Keyrouz and Tony Shaloub, as well as the jibberish at the bottom of the Prominent Arab Christians section?

RE: the ongoing argument: Although I can not bring a ref with me, my experience from living in the area, and a specific instance, lead me to believe that both sides of the debate are valid, as ref’d, and include valid POVs, which exist together and should be in Wikipedia. I do not see them as mutually exclusive, as some apparently do. Maybe I might explain it this way…

Looking from the outside in (Egypt being an Arab country), an Egyptian of Christian faith is an Arab Christian. Looking from the inside out, a Coptic Christian Egyptian may tend to see himself as Egyptian and Christian, rather than Arab and Christian; this is because he was Egyptian (Pharaohic) and Christian before the Moslem Arabs arrived and Islam became the majority. This also holds somewhat true for the Greek-Church Egyptians, who have a similar long-history root, as well as for Holy Land Arab Christians, who tend toward the view: ‘We’ve been Christian since Jesus himself walked down Main Street.’ Prior to my knowledge of this apparent dichotomy, I would have accepted Taimut’s view without question, but… I once met a new co-worker in the main office, who I had just heard speaking Arabic. When I said, ‘Oh, you’re Arab’, he replied, ‘No, I’m Egyptian.’ He went on to explain his Coptic roots and point of view, which I have tried to enunciate above. Hope this helps. Regards, CasualObserver'48 (talk) 03:51, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm a Holy Land Christian, CasualObserver48. Arab people and the Arabic language actually do predate Islam. (See the article on the Ghassanids, or even older, the Qedarites as examples). In any case, while I'm aware that some Palestinian Christians or Egyptian Christians may not identify as Arab, a lot of us do. And our POV, which is also represneted in reliable sources, should also be represented in this encyclopedia, per NPOV. Tiamuttalk 23:22, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Wrong. Copts do NOT say they are Arabs. Go read Coptic identity, where Copts say that even calling them "Arabs" is offensive. While some Palestinian Christians may be confused as to their identity (Greek Orthodox? Arab Christian? Palestinian? Israeli?), we Copts know that we are Egyptians and only Egyptians; nothing else. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 02:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm not confused about anything, though you seem to confuse your personal POV with the WP:truth too often for you to abide by NPOV. One's religion can be Greek Orthodox, Arab Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Melkite, or any other number of designations. That does not prevent them from identifying ethnically, culturally, or racially as Arab or Palestinian. Tiamuttalk 10:46, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I made the requested deletions. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:30, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


It's very simple, Copts are not Arabs. Copts are Egyptians. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 09:19, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I think the page should just be changed to 'Arabic Speaking Christians' and avoid this whole conflict. Many people outside Egypt consider all Egyptians Arabs, but Arabic Speaking at least satisfies both sides! 'Arabic Speaking Christians' please! Just to avoid conflicts. But there are Arab Christians in the North and Latin America, should they be counted under the Arabic Speaking Christians even though they do not speak it anymore? They are still Arabs, like Lebanese, and Palestinians for example. [talk] 14:25, 24 December 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.249.24.222 (talk)

Christians of the Arab World or Christian people in the Arab World would be more fitting and it would please both sides.Miss-simworld (talk) 06:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Arab Christians exist (and have existed since Biblical times, there is a biblical account of Arab conversion to Christianity and witnessed by St. Peter in the book of Acts) and there should be an article about them. This is a sub-article of the article about Arabs. Arab Christians are a type of Arabs. The controversy will be settled with facts and reliable sources, not with euphemisms that consider the Arab identity as something bad, negative, or even loathsome, instead of positive or something to be proud of. Even some Armenians do not reject Arab language or culture, despite identifying as Armenians. The goal of this article is to include Arab Christians and Christians that identify as Arab. If you think someone is not an Arab or does not identify as Arab, then you avoid controversy with a reliable source, not with "because I say so". --74.102.159.149 (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


Arab christians exist in Syria,Jordan and Palestine ONLY. these are the only three countries where the christian populations their embrace that identity. Not in Lebanon,Egypt and Iraq. Infact one of the main reasons the Lebanese christians and muslims are divided is over this issue. Now you are saying Armenians consider themselves Arabs? LOL just because the ones who live in Syria and Lebanon can speak arabic for pratical purposes that doesnt mean they call themselves arabs. This concludes your ignorance. Many Kurdish people in Iraq and Syria understand Arabic for that same purpose even though they are a seperate ethnic group. Why dont we add them based on the Pan-arab logic? you speak arabic your arab. How about Berbers? or Circassians? Arab Christians and Christians that identify as Arab, than why is why Lebanon added when most dont identify as arab? you are admitting yourself this article is purely POV and with a factual equivalence to Crap.Miss-simworld (talk) 10:27, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

WHAT A SHOCKER MY COMMENTS (FACTS) I GAVE ON THIS PAGE NOT EVEN THE ARTICLE WAS DELETED...YET AGAIN

I give feedback when someone falsely made claims that majority of Mizrahi Jews (im not jewish btw just someone who has done their research and has actually encountred ppl from that community) use the term arab jews. which is false. they dont. They see it as an oxymoron. Then when the argument tried to turned that they suffer persecution from the "European Jews (ashkenazim)" i corectly stated that this claim is incredibly exaggerated and that Mizrahi jews were actually the victim of Arab nationalism and its racism against and i even recalled about Nasser expelling all the Egyptian jews out of egypt in 1950s (the ones that were left). Yet suprise suprise again my statement was deleted, its clear there is an agenda going on here. This article is really a joke its so clear that whoever is behind the protection of the bias sources or editing of this article is a pan-arab nationalists and this artilce is protected by nasserists who want to inforce the arab identidy on to whomever they see fit and shut up any other opinion or alternate than their own. Even if it is proven factual.


Hello. I am an Arab Christian and I have nothing against Jews, I wanted to ask how are Jews related to an article under the name 'Arab Christians'? Maybe that 'Jews expelled by Nasser should be attached to Nasser's article, or the History of Mizrahi Jews. Plus it was stated many times that Egyptians aren't Arabs. I myself I am against biased editing and nationalists, but do Mizrahi Jews really have anything to deal with 'Arab' Christians? Thank you.

It proves that this entire article is biased and is being re-edited and created by arab nationialists Very nice i take it you are probally the person who deleted my debate which prove that that the term arab jew or even christian is limited. Well arab christian the topic came up when someone tried to bring up the arab jews (i.e releate to arabism blah blah) are call themselves arabs which i proved is false. Now these jews just like christians in egypt and lebanon iraq speak arabic but did not call themselves arabs. This is something arab nationalists are very sensitive about the fact those who they try to force the label on reject it. There history of racism against other minorities isnt something they like to reveal either.

Iraqi Christians

Iraqi christians are not arabs! even the muslims in iraq recognize this,they are considered a seperate ethnic group like Kurdish people read Assyrian people this article is contradicting and purely POV to even suggest such. Also read Chaldean Christians. To call them arabs would like calling kurds arabs even the Iraqi goverment recognize this.Miss-simworld (talk) 06:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

same issue again

This article it seems is always being attacked by Assyrians and copts who are claiming the political narrative, however as mentioned by myself and other editors the political narrative is weak, because for every Lebanese/Copt who does not identify as an Arab there is a Lebanese/Copt who does. Therefore to resolve this issue I proposed a year ago to change the title to "Arabic Christians and Arabic-speaking Christians" and there was a consensus on this, until somebody came and reverted it.

Miss-simworld proposed changing the title to "Christians of the Arab world" Is this acceptable to everyone; if not then what alternative title can we use to maintain the integrity of this article, because Arabic singers and writers are being deleted.George Al-Shami (talk) 23:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

"Christians of the Arab world" is a bad title, since it would include non-Arabs, which is outside the article scope. FunkMonk (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Good point FunkMonk.George Al-Shami (talk) 00:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

That is the whole point,funkmonk since the label arab is disputed and people here so desperate to prove with incredible POV that its all just an imganiation than the article needs to explains some may live in a Arabized country and consider themself and arab while a large chunk of the population there might not. Assyrians have never been arabs ,Copts have never arabs and to lebanese christians most of them see themselves as meditterean. If you want to include only arabs in the article then take them out otherwise you contradict yourself.

Then again, the problem is that some Copts and many Lebanese Christians do identify as Christians, so no matter what, an article about Arab Christians would have to mention them in some way, in spite of not all of them identifying as Arabs. We just don't know the percentage, but this is already mentioned in the article, so I don't see what all the fuzz is about. FunkMonk (talk) 07:49, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

Arab Christians → Arab Christians and Arabic-speaking Christians — Editors are deleting Arabic singers and writers without providing any source that disproves their personal "Arab" identity; the opposing editors are citing sources that claim to speak for all Egyptian and Lebanese Christians.George Al-Shami (talk) 00:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Survey

There already is an article on Christianity in the Middle East. Tiamuttalk 10:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment I won't oppose the page move, because I'm hopeful that such widespread agreement will mean that the page will finally be free of disruptive deletions and point-making additions. However, I have to say that the title is not ideal. Some Christians who do not identify as Arab and live in the diaspora do not speak Arabic either, and so may not be covered by the "Arabic-speaking Christians" descriptor. Conversely, the title comes off as somewhat redundant, given that most Arab Christians are Arabic speakers. In any case, like I said, I'm not going to derail an emerging consensus and I must praise the efforts of those who are working so hard to come to some sort of resolution of this issue. Tiamuttalk 10:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, instead I support any of Miss simworlds three suggestions: Christians of the Middle east, Christians of the Arab world or Christian people of the Arab world". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Yet again, you fail to notice that that is a subject different to that which this article is about. Your first proposal is covered under "Christianity in the Middle East" (I know, since I helped start the article), second and third would cover all Christians in the Arab world, regardless of ethnicity and language, which is completely irrelevant to this article. 23:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
There already is an article on Christianity in the Middle East.Tiamuttalk 20:53, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
"Christians of the Middle east" is not the same thing as "Christianity in the Middle East", one is focused on people, the other on religion. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
With all due respect SD, requesting a name change of that article to Christians and Christianity in the Middle East would easily make coverage of the people more explcit (if it is not already). Having a separate article on Christians in the Middle East or Christians in the Arab world would be redundant. Tiamuttalk 10:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
There already is an article on Christianity in the Middle East. This article is about Arab Christians, i.e. people who identify as Arab and Christian. I'm starting to think a rename isn't the solution here at all. Some people seem to want to deny that there is such a thing as an Arab Christian identity. Well sorry, but it so happens there are millions of people who identify as such. And there are hundreds of sources to attest to that. Tiamuttalk 20:53, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Tiamut, if this article is only for Arab Christians, then a huge part of the numbers of Syria in the infobox should be removed because a huge part of them are Assyrians, Syriacs or Armenians, in Lebanon a huge part are Maronites and Armenians. In Egypt they are all Copts. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
SD, I recognize that some Christians in the Arab world do not identify as Arab Christians which is why I am not voting oppose to the proposal to change this to Arab Christians and Arab-speaking Christians. What concerns me here, is that there seems to be a resistance to the idea that there are in fact some Assyrians, Syriacs, Copts, Maronites, and even Armenians who identity as Arab, on linguistic, cultural or other grounds. I knwo this to be true from my personal experience and it is attested to in reliable sources. As I said, I'm hopeful that the name change will help alleviate of the concerns of people who feel that discussing these groups under the title Arab Christians alone is misleading. But I'm also hoping that instead of relying on what we believe to be true, we will spend mroe time researching and respecting what reliable surces have to say, despite ur respective opinions on the matter. Tiamuttalk 11:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment tiamut that is your POV and you know it, Your not intresting in creating a factual and impartial article just some pan-arab propaganda piece this is what i cant stand.

Ofcourse there are christians who identify with arab but there are MANY more who dont and this article at first blantantly tried to deny that there wernt.I dont usually have to say this but here I am of Egyptian(1/4) Syrian (1/4) and Lebanese (1/2) descent and I can tell you other than the syrian side of my family. Most of those communities dont identify with arab. It's usually just the Syrian,Jordanian and Palestinian christians who take that stance. Adding the total populations of a entire country whose population could be split of the issue as people who identify as arab based on your personal belief that they are is POV and un encyclopedic. Some are going as far to add people who are of Armenian or Assyrian etc descent. even most muslim egyptians know most dont the copts there dont identify with arabism and Lebanon has always been split with the muslims over the arab identity issue. This article SHOULD be about christian people who live in the Arab world,ones who speak arabic,ones who identify with being yes and the ones dont and why that may be (from a neutral perspective) and their history. Not on go on ranting on how they are wrong and they are living in denial of being arabs and that everything else is just lies because these people arabs and nothing else etc , this is pure POV . Miss-simworld (talk) 21:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Saying "most" doesn't cut it. The problem here is that there are no statistics that show how many of the Copts and Maronites that do not or do identify as Arabs, therefore we can't exclude them arbitrarily. The majority of them might identify as non-Arabs, or the silent majority might identify as Arabs, doesn't matter, the point is that no one in the world knows. FunkMonk (talk) 23:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Commentstastically speaking there is no written evidence but it's common knowledge to anyone who is from those backgrounds infact just encountering those people . I am not endorsing that to be written from one spectrum like tiamut does in wikipedia nor my POV but a impartial explaination from different perspectives.Funkmonk i'm not a maronite, I'm Orthodox this is often a false stereotype that its only maronites who take that view of rejecting arabism, as i've stated in the article with Antun Saadeh being an example. I am supporting a more balanced approach than the staunch pro-arabist POV than before. I believe laternix provided some credible sources for Egyptian argument against

it too but it got deleted. Miss-simworld (talk) 00:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Miss-simworld hold on a second, you are unfairly attacking Tiamut, nothing this editor said was POV, not true. Miss-simworld respectfully I don't want to sound rude or condescending, but judging from a lot of the edits you made to the article there are many things you do not know. For instance in one edit you claim that the Muslim rulers did not give religious minorities freedom and that this is POV. Miss-simworld at Wikipedia we have to present the facts and not come up with are own ideas and beliefs. As a historian and as a Christian I can tell you that when the Muslims invaded and conquered Syria they did give the Christians freedom to worship their religion and build churches; this is a historical fact backed up every source you can find on this topic. The Muslims invaders WERE the Minority so in order to gain the trust of the Christian majority Syria they had to give them freedoms (now this is political) to make sure that the Christian majority doesn't rebel against the minority Muslim rulers. Over the years the Muslims rulers did start discriminating against the Jews and Christians, but they had freedoms other religious minorities elsewhere would have dreamed of. I don't want to turn this into a lecture, but when the Jews were expelled from the Iberian peninsula in 1492 AD the Jews mostly immigrated to the Muslim world, because they knew over there they would have the freedom to worship. Once again any book you pick up will corroborate what I said.

Anyways with regards tot he current discussion, like I said before Miss-simworld your experience is POV and so is MY experience, but over here you cannot substitute your experience as fact. For instance you said that you don't know any Leb who refers to themselves as "Arab" well guess what in my experience around 50% of Leb maronites and Greek Orthodox refer to themselves as "Arab". I once had in my living room 1 leb maronite tell the other leb maronite that "we Arabs are stupid". LOL :) Anyways the point being is that your experience is different from my experience and that is why experience is NOT suitable for an encyclopedic article. What is suitable is objective facts from scholarly sources, because their work is all verified before it gets published. Let's bring in the example of Fairuz, you have mentioned, and all of us here know this, that Her father is Assyrian and she married a Greek Orthodox, ya habibiti we are not disputing that! The problem is that you are saying that because her father is Assyrian she does does not identify or is not an "Arab Christian", but you don't know that and neither do we and most importantly like I said before ethnicity alone is not always the deciding factor in terms of personal identity . Fairuz either identifies or does not identify herself as an Arab Christian. So like Funkmonk said, since we have no way of finding that out (unless she states it to the press or says in her memoirs) we cannot assume what she is or what she isn't. Now you and a number of editors have correctly pointed out that there are some Leb Christians and copts who don't identify as "Arab Christians' and a number of editors including myself have conceded this point and that is why I am adding "Arabic-speaking Christians" to include those who don't identify as "Arab Christians", because the two categories are very close the only difference is the question of identify/background and personal beliefs. , it's nice to see people like you are interested in this subject , but please read more books/magazines about this. For instance Funkmonk cited a national geographic article (I actually have that issue and I read it many times) the NG reporters went to Lebanon and when speaking to them they would use the term "Arab Christian" and guess what the reporter never mentions the leb maronites ever being offended by the term. I apologize for the lenght of this response. George Al-Shami (talk) 05:41, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

  • Comment

Who said to bring up my personal experience in the article? I am not saying anything about identity but here the thing with Fairuz, under the arab mentality nationality is passed through the father right? by that standard Fairuz IS an assyrian and not an Arab. If a Kurd were to marry a Arab would that make them arab too? Many Lebanese christians who are reffered to as arabs by a westerners would probally look the other way not because they identify with being arab because they know it's a quick generalizion people make and it can be forgiven from that side since they know no better, the national geographic thing had nothing to do with arabs,ofcorse they wouldnt spoilt the mood by draggin up that topic. so it was more to do with trying to unify the country through the fact that a common ancestors are shared among Lebanese of all religions,if anything arabism splits that country up. I encounter it myself. C'mon I may think that feasible if you didnt say 50% of maronites?,lol which maronites the ones who join the LCP? it's rarest for them and no this isnt my POV but historic fact maronites (per say generalization) are isolationists, they rather everything stay just in Lebanon and everything just be in Lebanon, to them (perhaps understandbly) Arabism itself posed a great threat into their survival in that area as a minority and the stability of their country. Orthodox christians who were originally a poor sect centuries ago ( a bit like the shia of today were in Lebanon),engaged more with the Arab world , and did trading & interaction more with the muslims ,whereas maronites lived in isolation in the mountains.from the Orthodox perspective pro-arabism and pro-syrian (many orthodox wanted syria nad Lebanon to join again ) was popular & seemed logical until after the 1958 crisis and the 75 civil war, this is perhaps what pushed the communities there against the edge against arabism. It was maronites who were being attacked it was ALL christian sects.Im not intentionally attacking anyone here, just demanding this article be freed from a clearly biased perspective. to say Islamic invaders treated non muslims equally or didnt persecute anyone i dont if that could be classified as POV or blantant lies. The were numerous laws and sanctions made against christians The word INVADER should be highlighted for you to understand this isnt a positive connotation. Historians should stop glorifying islamic invasions as if what they did was a positive thing. People who have to pay a hefty tax to be "allowed" to practice their faith in their own land are not being respected but enslaved. These laws were brought about to pressure people into embracing islam since the wouldnt be able to afford to stay a christian or they didnt want to live under the humilting conditions. read the article Dhimma this is what non muslims were under islamic rule, the relationship between muslims and non muslims wasnt that of peace or equality but ruler and subject. This is also another myth that muslims respected the jews whereas christians abused them. Infact this is why in Lebanon the highest period of immigration was seen perhaps not even during the civil war for the christians but during the Ottoman era. Yes the christian world is guilty of grave anti-semitism against Jews, but so is the Islamic world. Banu Qaynuqa,Battle of Ahzab,1066 Granada massacre,In Moroccan Fez in 1033, 6000 Jews were massacred, there are more cases this is for Jews alone. It's just not focused upon and islamists or arabist historians continue to spread the false pretense that they respected non muslims and everyone lived in peace...yeah right. george the islamic rule was so tolerant to non muslims that why Arabia is now 100% moslem? despite the holocaust you still find Jews in Europe, there are next to no jews left in Arab world ironically it was so called secular arab nationalsim that pushed the remaineder out in 1940s to 1950s. a good example of what a tolerant muslim rulerwas perhaps the King of Morocco who improved living conditions and civil rights for jews , before that just like the rest of north africa they were treated very badly. He also was the only leader at the time in North africa who refused to give in the moroccan jewish population to nazis while they were occupying morocco unlike the rest of the maghreb. This is a tolerant ruler not an religious invader who wants to spread his faith by the sword. btw it was a Lebanese christian who even coined the popularized term Dhimmitude.

It is irrelevant which of your parents are what, as long as you identify as Arab. Arab is a very inclusive term. FunkMonk (talk) 11:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Yah it does because In the Arab world you follow the fathers line even her mother's line you can question but her father ...,lets say if a kurd were to identify as arab would that make him arab? or an armenian? No. Miss-simworld ‎ (talk) 06:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

How do you think arabization works? Likewise, some Syriac Christians have been Kurdified and some Armenians and Greeks have been Turkified (basically the bulk of Turkey's population of Turks), regardless of ancestry. FunkMonk (talk) 08:10, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Exactly FunkMonk you know a lot about this, since you're an anthroplogist. good point. Miss-simworld ‎ here's another point.. identities ARE not static. You can be born in one place and immigrate to another place where you adopt a whole new identity. It's like A-B-C , 1,2,3 it's so easy....It's called immigration. Imagine you are born in Hungary and then you immigrate to Scotland and then you acquire UK citizenship and many years down the line you start identifying with Scottish tradtions; even though you are born a Hungarian, you become somewhat Scottish depending on how well you assimilate or love Scotland. For some they immigrate there and after 50 years, there are still Hungarian and 0% Scottish, but the point is Miss-simworld ‎, that IDENTITY IS NOT TIED TO ETHNICITY!. Here read about this person Jules Dassin he was born an American Jew, but he left his country because he was blacklisted, and he went to Europe where he married a Greek woman, and became so enchanted witht he country that he started identifying himself as a Greek. Miss-simworld ‎ in today's globalized world a lot of people have overlapping indenties. For instance let's go over your identities 1) Christian 2) Let's choose a city that your parents are from in Lebanon, let's say you are from Beirut.. Identity #2 , Beiruti, or Zahlawi 3)Egyptian 4)Coptic 5) English (this is either possible or not possible depending only on you Miss-simworld ‎ 6) Mediterranean 7) Francophile 8) etc..the list can go on and on. 9) Easterner 10) Westerner 11) North African..and on and on. Take a look at Jordan, the majority of that country consists of Palestinians, but depending on the person, some identity as 1) 100% Jordanian 2) Palestinian Jordanina 3) 100% Palestinian 4)Jordanian Bedouin, or 5) Bedouin...even if they have Jordanian citizenship. Now you see identities can overlap without any connection to ethnicity. Look, let's come up with another example..there are a lot of Black African countries that were colonized by the French. Now a Black who speaks fluent French considers himself French..even though he IS NOT from French enthnicty....he can't call himself French even though his native language is French? You see where I'am going with this..

Now I know what you were talking about when you spoke about following the father's linage in the ARab world (that is generally true), but guess what Miss-simworld ‎ even though the Arab world is patriarchal that's not always the case. For instnce I read about a man who was born in Lebanon to a Pakistani father and a Lebanese mother. He lives in Lebanon but does not have Lebanese citizenship, because his father is Pakistani..Well guess what the guy said in the article that he considers himself to be 100% Lebanese. George Al-Shami (talk) 08:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Now you are blending with Islamification and Arabization, the Greeks who were turkified did so when they became muslims.This is why arabism and islamism is so closely linked. Infact when Arabs invaded or conqured lands not only did they try to spread their religion but arabized the natives there. The one place they failed to do this was in Iran. Today in this era Assyrians,Armenians and Kurds as a whole do not embrace that identity,even under pressure through the baathist regime they did not. Infact this Arab identity is something that is less than 100 years old created by Ideologists from Arabia then expanded by Syrian Christians who try to add the secular fact to it. Funkmonk you have a point but the thing is the Kurdish population of Iraq have not been Arabfied (mostly not) or the Armenian populations of Syria or Lebanon who migrated after the genocide,been Arabified. despite the fact these communities, may converse daily and in practice use the Arabic language. When Fairuz's father Wadi migrated to Lebanon in the 1920s or 30s , it was not identified as a arab country infact it did not have independence yet. Even when Lebanon was granted it's independence upon the National Pact between the muslims and christians it was agreed Lebanon's will have an arab face but not identity. Lebanon did not get an official arab identity until 1990 after the Taef and through pressure. Fairuz has always had a reserved personality, all the songs she sung about the arab world were mostly chosen,written and composed by the Rahbani Brothers, known for their Leftist sympathies.Its probally them who at the time (like many orthodox back them) who were expressing their views and identity.Like I said things changed in Lebanon, sadly for the worse.

George,The thing with Lebanon is due to Citizenship law, its not to do with the father being pakistani but his father not being Lebanese. Lebanese law means only a Lebanese father can pass nationality to their child. Its a sexist many people want to change but the whole sectarian thing gets put into perspective like always. This is exactly what i mean by a patriarchal to a point you have a singer who is born and raised in Morocco with a Moroccan mother and Iraqi father probally only been to iraq a few times is constantly reffered to as Iraqi and from Iraq. Nationality and Identity IS passed through the father in the Arab world thats how it works.very few countries make exceptions. ''Yasmina'' (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The point was not that Fairuz has been "arabized", the point was that in reality, it doens't matter in what sense you're an Arab, as long as you identify as one. You'll find millions of Arabs who don't have any Arab ancestry in North Africa and the Levant. This works for individuals too. I'm half Lebanese, I don't speak Arabic, there is no guarantee that my father actually has Arab ancestry, but I can still identify as Arab, if that's what I want. FunkMonk (talk) 11:17, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
''Yasmina'' wait a minute on one hand you say that identity is controlled by the government and then you say that no matter what pressure the baathist government puts on kurds, they still identify as kurds; therefore identity cannot possibly be controlled by the government ''Yasmina'' lol. you are coming up with contradicting views.George Al-Shami (talk) 21:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

to Funkmonk, well i am half lebanese too through my dad and this where we differ cos i dont consider myself an Arab not really. That is my personal choice, but it is a common one. The thing is with Lebanon this is what splits the country the whole topic of are Lebanese arabs? where should lebanon stant? yada yada yada.., the Arab world obsession with forcing it down it's throat puts many ppl of. On another note my mother is of Syrian-Egyptian yet she see as herself as Arab but only through her syrian dad and not through her egyptian mother. very few Egyptian christians well copts you will find call themselves arabs,only Egyptian. In generalization it varies on country.

Kurds dont really have it great under the baathist goverment due to that choice dont they .George Al-Shami ? not compared to christians who accept Arabism, in exchange of living in a secular society? What defines whether a not a country should be declared Arab? ofcourse its the goverment, Malta is a Catholic country they speak a distant dialect of the Maghrebi Arabic, yet they are not considered an Arab country or Arabs, despite teh fact many of the people have a similar genetic mix that Lebanese people do and (you'll even find maltese with arabic sounding surnames very close to that from lebanon), the reason for this is because the Country have and people have firmly chosen not to be. It would be the same case for Lebanon but it's split between a muslim population who largely want to be part of the Arab world and embrace the Arab identity and a Christian population who largely dont. Thats the dilema. nah george just pointing out some facts, when Fairuz was born and the time at the peak of her career. Lebanon was not an official Arab identified country only an Arab face, and this is what pissed alot of the Muslims there off especially arab nationalists, because Christians wanted a much safer neutral approach perhaps naively,to more specific the Christian dominated goverment at the time wanted to Keep lebanon away from the Arab world or Arabization of Pan-Arabism, for security reasons and for cultural identity. To the most part they were pretty sucessful in doing so until 1990.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 02:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Alright guys I moved the page to Arab Christians and Arabic-Speaking Christians, now it's up to us to make sure that this title does not get altered again.George Al-Shami (talk) 20:09, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm afraid it must be altered once again, though, for "speaking" should be written with a lower-case s. --Benne ['bɛnə] (talk) 20:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
I know I tried to put the lowercase s before, but the system didn't allow me because the title is being used in the search box, how can we fix this?George Al-Shami (talk) 21:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Total population

The values 150,000,000-25,000,000 in the infobox don't make sense.Dsp13 (talk) 16:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. 150,000,000 is ridiculous, that would be half of all "Arabs" --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Analysis of Lebanese Orthodox Christians

Old Article; http://lebop.blogspot.com/2005/11/sunday-blogging-orthodox-dilemma.html Analysis of the Orthodox Christian community by Dr Victorino de la Vega from previous rivalry with Maronites,advocation for Secularism to the fragmentation of the community due to the Syrian occupation and civil war. including lost and disfavourism of past political ideals from SECULAR Arabism to Pan-Syrianism. Pretty mostly accurate examination although the article is a dated piece tho in some respect since this was before Aoun became a Hezbollah ally and the stooge that he is now. It examines past cause and present effects ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 12:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Egyptians are NOT Arabs, again and again

We had this discussion when this article was first started, and we said that Egyptians do NOT self-identify as Arabs. After long discussions, a consensus was reached, whereby the article would emphasize the difference between self-identified Arab Christians, and Christians who - for historical reasons only - speak Arabic. Now that the name of the article was switched back to Arab Christians, there is clearly NO place for the Egyptians in it. Please refer to last year's discussions in the archive page for more about this issue. --Lanternix (talk) 01:27, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Instead of excluding Egypt completely from this article, why don't you propose to change the name of this article into "Arab speaking christians" or "Christians in the Arabian world", so that it does not judge on the issue of being considered as an Arab or not. With your way of thinking, the next steps will be to exclude Lebanon, Syria, Iraq etc from this article, because there are probably people living there as well that don't consider themselves as Arabs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.58.231.48 (talk) 09:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what I suggested initially! I said let's name the article "Arabic-speaking Christians", and it did happen for some time, then someone decided to switch it back to "Arab Christians", which is not acceptable from the point of view of Christians in the region. We can call it Christians in the Middle East if we want to be comprehensive, since there are Christians in the region (Iraq, Syria and North Africa mainly) who do not even speak Arabic as first language. --Lanternix (talk) 16:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
This page continues to create controversy because it tries to paint middle eastern Christians as Arabs. I think the best solution would be to move the page to Christians in the Middle East and have it talk about the different communities and how they have contributed to the middle east. Iraqi (talk) 14:09, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
This page is supposed to be about Christian Arabs, their history, their culture, etc. Instead this page has become POV pushing of not all Christians who speak Arabic are Arabs, this whole article is this claim repeated over and over to infinity. Who cares about Christian Non-Arabs, this pages is NOT supposed to be about anybody else but Christian Arabs. It should talk about the ancient Christian Arab Nabateans and the Ghassanids that predate Islam. By the way, Lanternix should go argue with the Egyptians and Coptics who claim they are Arabs, Lanternix go tell them they are WRONG! in their face! --Qvxz9173 (talk) 19:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

A large number of MUSLIM egyptians do indentify with arabs the copts do not and anyone who says otherwise is either a non christian or a pan-arabist like george al shamie(Syrian) here. They shouldnt included in this article since like the Iraqi chrisitans they culturally and historically reject "arabism" as part of their culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miss-simworld (talk • contribs) 09:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Miss-simworld (talk either you are ignorant or a foolish person, how dare you assume that I am pan-arabist; The problem with your contributions is that none of them are based on facts. Miss-simworld (talk you don't seem to understand that identifying as an "Arab" is not simply based on ethnicity. Give us a source that states that the majority of Lebanese Christians don't identify as "Arabs"; all the Lebanese Christians that I have known identify themselves as Arab and not only that according scholarly research by one of the foremost Lebanese historians, Kamal al- Salibi, the Lebanese immigrated from the Arabian peninsula thousands of years ago. Wikipedia is a place for facts, not your personal opinion! If you have want to prove that the majority of Lebanese Christians do not views themselves as "Arab", then the burden of proof is on you; it is up to you to find a scholarly source that proves that. Since a lot of ignorance has been propagated by you I will take out my book and add scholarly sources about the ethnic origins of Lebanese; just for you Miss-simworld (talk. George Al-Shami (talk) 20:13, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I came here looking for statistics on Christians in the Middle East and because you people are squabbling with one another about Egyptians, this article lacks the statistics and information I need. Please try to get along and make this article useful! --41.232.56.158 (talk) 09:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

the "Arab" christians are ethnic Arameans

Christian Arabs are Christians from the Arab world that are ethnically Aramean (Syriac)

A series of articles written by experts on the subject of the Arab Heritage and their contribution to the world Literature, science and history and on the Arab Christians in particular since the inception of the Arab-Christians in the First Centuries. Some of the Moalakat as well the first translations of the Bible and the Gospel, prayers, liturgy are some examples of the work of the Christians of Arabic Language. We have although to recognize that the ancestors of the Arab-Christians are the Aramean and Syriac-Christians who have worked a larg library of different things and infulenced all if not almost all the Arab-Christian Theology. At the end of the Seventh Century the Arab-Muslims influenced by the world surrounding them and by the Aramaen, Syriac and Arab-Christians as well by the Greek and the latin Philosophs and Teologians started to work their own philosophy,theology, history, literature, science etc that influenced later the modern European world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.234.33.210 (talk) 14:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Sources please. Tiamuttalk 14:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

user Qvxz9173 keeps vandalising and leaving unsourced edits on this page and putting utter POV statements that are bias and beyond a joke to be considered enclycopedic I thought we all agreed this page was to be Neutral displaying both views of Christians about Arabism (for and against)

This is just a small example of the vandalism i am talking about that goes far to name calling;

Christian Arabs are Christians from the Arab world that are ethnic Arabs. Due to controversy by a vocal minority of racists/bigots, there is also the claim of the existence of "Arabic-speaking Christians" that are Christians from the Arab world who reject the Arab identity label. It is also alleged by the racist promoters of the Arab identity controversy that Christian Arabs are not really Arabs, but only identify as such, which is a claim rejected by Christian Arabs. The origins of Christian Arabs and "Arabic-speaking Christians♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

That's certainly not appropriate. Should,be reverted on sight. FunkMonk (talk) 21:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
The issue is that it is an accurate description of what's going on, even if inappropriate. "Miss-simworld" is a fraud along with all the other sock-puppets. Signed, A true Christian Arab. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
"Truth" is subjective. If it isn't cited and neutrally worded, it doesn't belong here. FunkMonk (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Those concerned about vandalism should carefully watch "Miss-simworld" (and this user's sock-puppets, which probably includes Lantermix and many IP address) because they have a long history of vandalising this page (such as deleting content, section blanking, and extreme pov pushing). They are the reason for all these edit wars. I could source the above paragraph, the proof is in the edit history. Some tweaks for neutrality and the above paragraph would be inline with Wikipedia guidelines. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 23:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Who said I was an Arab Christian? I dont remember ever stating this, nope I dont follow that label and my origins isnt the issue here. Thats all it is a Label, You either chose or you dont. I dont and others dont,some do thats their choicem,depends where ur from. Only facists cant accept free will.HAH! im not Lantermix, nice try Yes I have been editing this article for awhile when i saw inaccurate information I made my point stated first and came to a compromise with other editors.so what is your point? Anything Ive added Ive sourced or paraphrased to be more neutral. I dont call Arabs racists or facists in this article unlike you for those who say they are not arabs. same for others here.The issue here is you have been caught red-handed making a stupid POV ranted vandalist statement now you making accusations against me of being a sock puppeteer, how low and pathetic. There is nothing netural about what you stated calling others bigots or racists just because they dont agree with you and you cant accept other views from different spectrums.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 23:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


Let me remind you of a good portion of your vandalism (because it seems you have amnesia):
Unsourced Deletion Vandalism: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23]

Unsourced POV Edits [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35]

Other |Only "Miss-simworld" could insert POV tags |Then adds POV Contents |Then removes POV Tag after adding POV contents

Now, I challenge you to prove that I am the one who keeps vandalising this article. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 02:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

How old are those edits??? I recall dont calling anyone names? nope sorry You loose!!! Try again! St.Maron was not an Arab he had no place in the article. Khalil Gibran learnt Arabic as a 2nd lanugage his first language of his town was Aramaic go learn about the history of Bsharri then come back and speak. Very sad you want to so hard to make this about me when you are the wrong here.GROW UP little child. This was at the time when I (and many other christians) disagreed with the title of the Article and it information, for goodness sake it included Iraqi Christians who are not even recognized as Arabs! werent POV I explained why I edited the following and explained Arab is a mere identification that many on that I am sure dont even identify with being called,armenians were even been included on that list! I have found sources for my section and infact it is the MOST sourced part of this article.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 11:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I didnt even bother to check all the links u provided in stalking edits but it wouldnt suprise me if your using some edits from others as if the are my own.since you falsely excused me of being a sock before because your facist mind cant stand the idea there are other people who do not agree with you. All of what I've added is WELL sourced get over your own paranoia this article had numerous of tags even before I started editing it, the ONLY reason youe even are tagging my section is because YOU personally do not wamt others to read the content ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 11:56, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Challenge? hahahaha you have already lost I posted the paste of the garbage you wrote about Christians (which you admited) who reject the Arab identity, you've already been proven the childish vandal here. ALL my edits now have sources, if some do not please feel free to bring it up and I will provide them since its not that hard to do♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 11:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Your vandalism is available to all to see. Case closed, you fail despite your empty talk. Mizrahi Jews are Arabs. =P --Qvxz9173 (talk) 19:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

The case was closed when YOU admitted to vandalism My empty talk? I've given explaination and sources to any of my arguements all you do is rant and name call those who reject the LABEL that is called ARAB. Your not very smart are you and really cowardly Mizrahi Jews are not Arabs,most would feel ofence being called that. The only jews who have some arabian lineage are the ones from Yemen. Arab Nationalism deeply despised the Jews and rejected them 1/2 of the jews in israeli are mizrahi, i dont see them calling themselves arabs hahahahaha infact the reasn why many Jews were able to live freely in Lebanon and wernt expelled is because the Christian dominated goverment at the time did not appease to pan-arabism. Mizrahi Jews are Jews from the Middle East and most of them including the ones who lived in Arab countries do not consider themselves arabs or use that label.Afghani Jews, Bukhraian, Iranian Jews are Mizrahi, are you going to tell me that they are arabs too? Or how about Assyrians? or Kurds? maybe berbers? This is the problem with many arabists they want to force the label even on people who clearly reject it some would go as far as force arabism onto Assyrians,Kurds and berbers.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 21:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I hope you see why you can't maintain neutrality in editing this article. The thought of there being people that are both Arabs and Christian scares you. The part about "Mizrahi Jews being Arabs" was just bait to launch you into a tirade and you ate it up hook, line, and sinker. I actually feel bad for you. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 18:51, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


No you it wasnt it just proved your further ignorance your the typical (trust me there is indivuality someone as brainwashed as you) racist pan-Arab nationalist fanatic who wants to FORCE the label onto ALL christians and jews even those who reject it and be agressive w futile to those who dont. Even al-jazeera (most pro-arab network that airs in the west) did a piece of how Lebanese Christians reject the Arab identity yet you still wanted to edit that out. Why is that? No it does not scare me and my views on Arabism is irrevelant here, you wanna hear them feel free. I can accept there are christians who use that label but you CANT accept that there are those that dont. I dont care if some other christians (the syrians and palestinians) call themselves arabs its their choice aslong nobody tries to force that label onto me ppl can do what they like My identity is Lebanese,Egyptian and Syrian but not Arab.In Syria its only because the christians there rather live under the baathist regime ruled by the Alawites then end up like copts in Egypt, syrians are endrocinated to believe in Arabism. but Lebanese,Egyptian and Iraqi Christians mostly dont accept arabism and this something that has to be put into the article. hahahaha it must eat you up that most lebanese christians dont consider themselves arabs when Most listed on this page are Lebanese LOL♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 20:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

The al-jazeera video (the basis of a lot of your unattributable original sythises of ideas/claims) talks about sectarian divisions in Lebanon, nowhere in it say that Lebanese Christians reject the Arab identity. When someone says they are Syryani (سرياني : Syriac), they mean religion. Maronite Christianity is a type of Syriac Christianity. No ethnic group calls themselves Syriac (the people are Arameans). Your problem is reality. Most Lebanese Christians (other then Armenians or other ethnic group) identify as Arab. I know this from personal experience. Lebanese is a national identity, a Lebanese Arab is not the same as a Lebanese Armenian. This is just the way it is, and editing wikipedia to say whatever, will not change reality. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 06:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I have never heard a Lebanese Christian say I am a Lebanese arab christian or a Lebanese Arab. never heard my father say or his family or any other Lebanese christian state themself as such. this is something you will only hear generally muslims say because that is a self-identification that they feel a strong attachment too, where historically Christians in Lebanon haven't. This is a major issue that divides the Lebanese people. What a fantasist you are... Actually many Maronites recognize Syriac as their ethnic identity. Most Lebanese Christians DONT identify as Arab. Go on a Lebanese forum or facebook or whatever talk to christians about Arabism they will rip you to shreds because it is very unpopular in the christian community. We recognize it as a cheap cover of Islamism historically speaking in Lebanon that is all it has shown itself to be apart from destroying the country to make it a battlefield to fight other people's war and trying to supress Lebanon's native identity and historic past from other civilizations. This is hard hitting fact that an arabist racist bully like you needs to get into your head, infact Lebanese Christians fought several wars to fight Pan-Arab infiltration in their country or let its empty causes use their country as a battlefied or terrorist cesspool. Yes it does even the commentator notes that the Christians disagrees with it. You obviously didnt watch the whole episode.It talks about split identity in the country.Go check my other sources one includes about how Muslims schools focus on the Arab identity and history whereas Christian schools dont. Or read the article Lebanon: the Arab's village idiot by Dr.Joseph Hitti that is what most Christians in Lebanon think of Arabism, the Arab identity of Lebanon was something the Muslims and Arabs demanded as part of the Taef in 1990 and christians only accepted it mainly because there forces had been exhausted either from internal conflict and intimidation by the Syrian goverrment. Arabs have done nothing but try and force Arabism down christian's throat and in return many if not Most Christians deeply resent Arab nationalism dido for copts ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 13:40, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

You never heard a Christian Lebanese say they're Christian Arab? Disregarding the politics, here is one clear example: "I, the Maronite Christian Lebanese Arab, grandson of Patriarch Estefan Doueihy..." at this link [36]. Maybe I should add this to the article. In the al-jazeera video, it is not clear what exactly the "something" he disagree with is. It is up to interpretation what was meant, which constitutes original research. Arab does not equal Muslim. There were Christian Arabs before there were Muslims. If Arab = Muslim, then how is it possible for an Arab to speak against Islam? Such as here: [37]. It's funny that you want the Lebanese not only to be divided along sects, but to create all sorts of non-existant ethnicities such as Phoenician, Syriac, Aramaic, Caananite, etc. Basically, everything else other than Arab. ...And were the pre-Islam Christian Arabs forcing Arabism down their own throats? --Qvxz9173 (talk) 11:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Your last sentence proves my point nobody before Islam pushed Arabism down anyone's throat because Pan-Arabism is a form of Islamism.Sunni nasserist groups in Lebanon gave a perfect example of that from the civil war era many of which ex-members are now found in Saudi Hariri's future group.There were Christian Arabs before Islam in Arabia but lets see how many are left in Arabia now? NONE. some either escaped or became muslims. I believe (my view) that all Lebanese people are Lebanese ONLY nothing else. The only way for Lebanon to ever have a united secular front is under Lebanese nationalist secular goverment and the Identity of Lebanon be made LEBANESE not Arab. Then lebanon will be at peace and so will the Lebanese people and a Independent country not a be a ceaspool for Arab's wars or Khaleeji/Saudi playground . Pan-Arabism only served animosity towards Christians in Lebanon and their security by urging many muslims to chose the Arab Cause over that of their own country which sadly many did. only divides the Lebanese people and use lebanon a tip to fight the Arab-Israeli war. It has caused so much pain and suffering in Lebanon (which i wont discuss here too long of a topic) and Christians that what happen in 1990 was a further example of humilition of the Christian community.it also wants to hide the fact lebanese people are descended from the Phoneicians,Greeks,Canaanites,Persians etc just not to piss the arabs off.Never in a daily bases would you hear a Lebanese christian (not a Celebrity) say that. You are Not Lebanese so you are NO position to speak for Lebanese Christians. Do you know how many christians Marada represents? hahahahaha Only Zgharta this is another isolated Maronite settlement where trust me you will find next to no Christians who identify as Arab. They are as Maronite Nationalist as they come but with closer ties with Syria.You might hear Lebanese Forces MP say he is an arab too but trust me its only to appease Hariri and the Future movement they are not saying that on behalf of Christians but just to impress ex-nasserists who are now funded by saudis ironically the same ppl not so long ago they were fighting. In Lebanon many of the Politicians and singers since 1990 have to pretend in public they to say they are arabs blah blah blah merely out of appeasement they dont represent the average Lebanese people otherwise they would get boycotted or wont be sucessful in a predominately Arab world, who have some of obsession with with pushing that identity onto to ALL Lebanese and anyone who disagrees they demonize or get agressive with.Do you know the family who head Marada the The Frangieh family are actually descended from a European Crusader family that settled in Lebanon centuries ago they are not Arabists and this MP is just one man who clearly is saying that to appease Muslim MPs to his favour.I never said Arab equal what a small minded person you I said Pan-Arabism= Islamism the fact an MP in the Lebanese goverment. god bless lebanon god bless the lebanese people and the PROUD culture of Lebanon that belongs to no one else but the Lebanese.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 18:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Honey ♥Yasmina♥, you're allowing your emotional opinions regarding Lebanese Christians get the best of you. It's obvious you care deeply about this subject, but that does not mean you pass your opinion as fact. Read your last paragraph objectively, seriously, it is laced with nothing but your opinion. You keep stating over and over that only Syrians and Palestinians identify as "Arab", but you have yet to provide a credible source to back that up. By the way Phoenicia.org is not a credible source, the person behind this site has an interest in the subject, but his personal site is not verified by any academic.

Moreover you keep introducing your false opinion as fact, the Syrian government did not force any movement down anybody's throat. Let me remind you that in 1961 it was Syrians officers who marched in capital buildings and ceded from the United Arab Republic, which in part was a very powerful rejection of pan-arabism. Also you need to read about pan-nasserism, because a lot of the so-called Arabist movement was really Nasser, his views and designs on the rest of the Arab countries. You still have a lot to read about this. For example when Syria was liberated from French Colonialism in 1947, the name of the country was the "Republic of Syria", but after the Nasserist taekeover of 1958 and the Pan-Arabism that was mostly spread through "Radio Cairo" (lol..where does Radio Cairo come from ♥Yasmina♥?) the official name of Syria got changed to "Syrian Arab Republic". Arabism is not something that can be forced down on anybody. The Syrian gov't starting officially promoting arabism after 1961, but you have individuals like Michel Aflaq that embraced Arabism before the gov't took its cause; you see this disproves your opinion that people who identify as "Arabs" do so because of the government. Aflaq formulated his ideology when he was in studying in Paris. ♥Yasmina♥ you are only 1 individual you don't speak for the whole Leb Christian community. Moreover, as I mentioned before, identity is a very complicated issue, therefore it is not wise to keep turning into a black and white issue (there is a lot of grey] Furthermore Christians who identify as "Arabs" do so for a whole host of reasons, and not simply because of the arabist movement.George Al-Shami (talk) 18:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I doubt the Kabyle people who are fighting for basic cultural rights and preservation of their heritage would agree with that. The sad thing is Arab nationalism has produced alot of racial discrimination, national heritages(non-arab parts) be overlooked and the greatest dictators in the region slowly it has evolved to pan-Islamism. This isnt my emotional opinion it what many have already hypothesized and believe.George the reason why Lebanon had ruled of adjusting the admentant that made lebanon for the arab identity was for 3 reasons 1) the muslims wanted it 2)Syrian army were in the parliment at the time 3) Pressure from the other arab states. What Lebanese christians say is we are lebanese only. Actually George I have provided sources to back up my points I dont claim to speak for EVERY leb christian just what the norm of the community is Are you questioning whether or not Syrian or Palestinian chrisitans identify as Arab? because I wasnt there is no arguement there. It can be, look at Egypt for example thanks to Nasser over night (figurative) speaking the Arab identity and this notion meant thousands of years of Egyptian heritage be overlooked and he turned egypt into a Police state silencing free thought and independent thinking, thanks to that Egypt has slowly decayed since the revolution and moved closer into Islamism. Nasser is responsible more than anyone to what happened to Egypt. He culturally betrayed the proud Egyptian identity in exchange for an colonial arab one. It would be like a African dictator taking charge of french speaking country naming it The FRENCH republic of XXX-XXX' George 1961 the Al-assad family (Who is good for Syria & syrian people but not for Lebanon or Lebanese) where not in power they came to power in 1970 they have played a role however I never stated the main players in . Even so since 1967 syria had been noting into interfering into Lebanon's affairs. that is another discussion I wont go into it but there is a reason why most the anti-syrian politicans are christians in Lebanon, anyway this is not the topic here.I do agree to NPOV edititn and sourcing certain statements and NO vandalism ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with every single word Yasmina has said. Remember the good old days when you guys were all fighting against me and only me? Now you're culminating more and more opponents who clearly disagree with your POV and your attempts to force pan-Arabism who are NOT Arab and who clearly reject pan-Arabism in every single way possible. We will not allow falsification of history and facts. God bless Lebanon and God bless Egypt, neither of which were never Arab and neither of which will ever be. --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 20:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Christianity in Lebanon article

I am going to do some pasting and paraphrasing into the Christianity in Lebanon article which is need of more updating and work. [User:Miss-simworld|♥Yasmina♥]] (talk) 22:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Possible copyvio - Youtube links

The Youtube links are to a documentary, what's the evidence that this isn't copyright violation? Dougweller (talk) 15:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

It's only one link but for several sources. How is it copyright violation if not the whole episode is pasted here and its a valid source? It's from Al-Jazeera's official channel on youtube and it's only link used is (part 4) of the documentary used but citations for several references and it's Well noted in the article to from al-jazeera the episode article its very important for the reference for that that section for quotations.

Thanks. Sorry, I missed the fact that it was produced by Al-Jazeera. Ignore me. :-) Dougweller (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

No SOCKS allowed!

Please guys, do not resort to using socks or Anon IP to remove or revert any content from the article page (with or without consensus), it's not cool. The article is now protected (as in FULLY protected) until further notice, please do not try to make a point again or there will be consequences for those involved (per Wikipedia:Disruptive editing), this includes WP:3RR. Regards. --Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 20:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

What original research means

Original research is the making of claims (controversial) that are not sourced or are not found in a source. It is the stating of an editor's controversial claim as fact. Also, the discussion on this talk page should be kept to a minimum and should focus on improving this article.

Claim in Article: "In Lebanon many Maronites and other Lebanese Christians sects,feel a stronger link and cultural identification with Phoenicians and show pride in the belief that their ancestry is linked to the Phoenicians." [38]

Does the source say this?:

Myths seem to be an indispensible part of the creation of the modern state. In the Middle East, most of the countries were created either by the forceful inclusion of small entities and principalities, or as the result of the disintegration of multi-national, multi-religious empires.
And Lebanon was no exception.
"There was no entity called Lebanon before the French set foot in the region in 1920"
As a result of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the subsequent scramble by the victors of World War One to divide up the territories between themselves, Syria and Lebanon were placed under French control.
Except there was no entity called Lebanon before the French set foot in the region in 1920.
There was a Mount Lebanon and the majority of its inhabitants were Maronite Christians - an eastern Catholic denomination. So a viable state had to be built around, and for the benefit of, those inhabitants.
The fact that they were allies and co-religionists of France helped their cause.
But a myth had to be created all the same, as the new country of Lebanon was both the result of the disintegration of an empire and the forceful inclusion of at least three small regions into a centralised state.
Maronite influence
The myth, of course, was the distinctiveness, uniqueness and superiority of the Maronite sect, its mythical past in Mount Lebanon and even its different ancestry to its neighbours.
Maronites were Christians, Phoenicians, Mediterranean and liberal. Their neighbours were Muslim, Arab, Middle Eastern and illiberal.
And from these ideas the Phalange party was formed. The Phalangists started out as a paramilitary youth organisation modelled along 1930s German National Socialist lines, as observed by the party's founder Pierre Gemayel.

This is why I marked the section as original research (claims that are not supported by the source provided). Original research is not anything that's obvious and uncontroversial or clearly reflects what a source says. Unsourced statements should be marked as needing a source. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 01:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

After that long story of yours, I still don't understand what you're objecting to in this article??? What exactly is that original research you don't like? --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 02:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
The claim in article doesn't clearly reflect what is in the source, the source says that it is myth and goes to explain this myth as the claim that the maronites were this, while their neighbors were the opposite. and that myth was one of the ideas that founded the Phalange party. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 02:38, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


Al-Jazeera's POV states it's a myth by the Phalange party however it also states how they feel a belonging to the Phoenician idenity that backs up the claim. The problem is Lanternix, Qvxz9173 being the aggressive Pan-Arabist racist he has shown himself to be merely doesnt like that passage any that dispute Arab identitiy or the fact many Christians dont identitfy as Arabs he wants to be deleted. He has realized since silly sock claims pathetically accused me off have now been proven false he is resorting any means possible to have section deleted., dont worry he wants more sources he will get them ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 13:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Here is on that will be going int to the article very soon a whole book that was dedicated to the subject♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 14:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=0d1SnaKLQ9QC&pg=PA36&lpg=PA36&dq=Maronites+and+Phoenicianism&source=bl&ots=WnKO0psjqM&sig=yB1CN6LDofTukRZLO8eZkc22pbA&hl=en&ei=okV9S8C0Koay0gTIk5jLBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CBYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Phoenician%20identity&f=false

Of course it's logical that the heavily pan-Arabist/pan-Islamist/pro-terrorist Al-Jazeera would disagree with these facts and refer to them as "claims". HOWEVER, the article clearly says that a lot of Lebanese Christians believe in that, and this is what counts. It's not like Al-Jazeera has to agree with facts in order for these facts to be included in Wikipedia!! Lebanese Christians are NOT Arabs and do NOT feel Arab, and that what really matters. By the way, there was some genetic study I read a long time ago about the origins of the Lebanese people and how few genes they shared with the Arabs. Not sure if you know about that study Yasmina? --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 17:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The book I posted as source doesnt talk about genectics (2004 before study) it does documate the Issue of the Lebanese Identity and backs my section. yep i did if i can find the source i will add it but the genetics part and identity are two separate things. Exactly my point! well lanternix the studies of Lebanese genetics is very new and the study is something that is just recent led by Pierre Zalloua it shows that Lebanese people are genetically mixed with variations of civilizations (Romans,Persians,Greeks,Turks etc) the one that stands out the most I guess to many people lebanese is the Phoenicians. The Arab nationality is something the Muslims feel closer ties to due to sectarian reasons than christians I have posted other sources that back that up.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 17:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

To say Lebanon didnt exist before 1920 is like saying Palestine didnt exist this is an arguement Arabists and syrian nationalists make up but the truth it there was an entity called Lebanon had been for centuries before the french mandate it was called Mount Lebanon Mutasarrifate the rest would become part of greater Lebanon this partly is what led to Muslim getting higher numbers over the decades.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

It is clear that reasoning with you on something as clear as this would be pointless, so I'm going to consider other options. It is clear that the claim in the Wikipedia article is clear original research that is not found in or supported by the al-Jazeera source. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 21:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I've just posted a source that is whole information book dedicated to the subject of the struggle of the Lebanese identity and backs my statements of how it splits the country since the Muslims tend to follow the arab specification and the christians favour more Lebanese nationalism (i.e phoenicianism), so you cannot use this crap original sources to disguise your own bias Qvxz9173 and your obessesion to force the arab label on all christians.you called people who disagreed with you childish names, falsely accused me and Lanternix of being socks,pathetically even tried so say i was pretending to be a christian and now you want to talk about reason? you dont know the meaning of the word.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 23:10, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

You're throwing a book at someone and then claiming it backs you up? How about a specific quote from the book that supports that claim in the Wikipedia article. Recall that it was I who was the reasonable party who asked for sources to back up your controversial claims stated as fact which you never provided. However, your long history of vandalism will cause someone to say enough and take a stand which I did. I will remind you that you made the most edits to this article and refuse to reach concenses with anybody. I will remind Lanternix that he said that if the article included "Arabic-speaking Christians" he will keep Egypt in the article and now goes back on his word? ...."HOWEVER, the article clearly says that a lot of Lebanese Christians believe in that", no it does not, read it again. "however it also states how they feel a belonging to the Phoenician idenity", no it does not, it says the myth was used to found a party in 1930s (80 years ago). How does this show who if anybody believes this myth today? I will go through that book later and show you how it does not support what you claim. Just like the al-Jazeera article. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 23:42, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Look who is lying and twisting the facts now!!! Lanternix clearly said: [If you want to start a new article about "Arabic-speaking Christians", I will be happy to help a section there about Egypt]! He did NOT agree on including both "Arab Christians" and "Arabic-speaking Christians" in the same article! I would like to take this opportunity to remind you that the article was initially called "Arabic-speaking Christians" and everybody was happy until some dude decided to move it to "Arab Christians". I wouldn't be surprised if you're the same guy under a different username! --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 00:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


User:Qvxz9173 Your claims against me have been proven false and now you are trying to use another cheap trick. Phalange never stated they had exclusive claim to the Phoencianism since that movement existed long their creation, and it's Muslims who decided to label themselves arabs nobody else.Al jazeera was obviously trying to cite sectarian tensions and demonize christians for not using the Arab label. but sami put them in their place :) It's not a myth the Genetic study carried out recently proves that Lebanon is a largely mixed population of various civilizations (very little arab) and only pan-arabists want to refute otherwise and state Lebanon only belongs to Arabs.Get that through your heads Lebanon is LEBANESE nothing else and belongs to the Lebanese people. Arabism in Lebanon is only a form of colionalism that has been adopted mainly by muslims due to sectarian ties.It's al-jazeera (the pan-arab channel) POV that states it as a myth. Even everyday in the University that carries out the study you find Lebanese lining up everday to carry out the tests to prove they are arabs? NAH! lol they go I really want to find out if I have the Phoencian gene this was even on Al-Jazeera. Dont worry you live in a pan-arab dream. You think arguing against my sources will change the truth it wont. The book itself covers the topic,section has enough quotes and the sentence merely a paraphrase. You obvious cant read can you? The book does back up my section not just that the other sources that I have posted too. But being a racist pan-arabist you want to silent it out. You were the vandal here not me the book is written by an impartial party who studied historicaly (although is not a geneticist) the case of the split Lebanese identity and how many Lebanese adopted a revival of the phoenician affinity with the last century.It goes back before the creation of the Phalange which was in the 1930s and Phalange is more of a secular Christian natioanlist movement than Phoencinist so Al-Jazeera is obviously showing its own pan-arab bias by lying since even in 1915 there was a Club created by Christians called The Phoenician Club also other mostly Christian parties in Lebanon adopt the disfavourism of pan-arabism from the National Liberal Party,Tanzim,Marada and Guardians of the Cedars(which is offically a secular party) even the SSNP which now is corrupt but while under Antun Saadeh were against Arabism in Lebanon although didnt support Phoenicianism either. It's not just Phalange♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 01:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I find the book you cited above (and claiming to be backing you up) to be very interesting and contains a lot of good information. Since, as you say "is written by an impartial party". I think you wouldn't have any issues with some excerpts from the same book you have cited above or the use of any of these in paraphrased form to be included in this article:
  • "The writings of Maronite clergy in the 19th century demonstrate that the Maronite Church did not advocate the Phoenician identity of is flock" Page 15
  • "The ancient inhabitants of Lebanon did not call themselves Phoenicians. This term is of Greek origin... The Phoenicians actually called themselves Canaanites and their land Canaan, at least until the 1st century AD as documented in the New Testament where it is written that Jesus reached the borders of Tyre and Sidon and cured there a Canaanite woman. ...These Canaanite-Phoenicians were also ofted identified according to the city to which they belonged: Sidonites, Tyrians, Gibites and so forth, reflecting the fact that their cities never gained political unity but rather remained independent city-states." Page 2
  • "Philip Hitti was a very important factor in the dissemination of the Phoenician myth of origin in Lebanon. ...Students in the Lebanese educational system learned about their country's historical legacy through his books that were always translated into Arabic. His work on Arab civilization and Islam reflected his worldview..." Page 78
  • "Most of the annexed population, however, could not and would not recognize this identity as their own. Moreover, the Phoenician identity was stil an alien concept even for a large number of inhabitants of Mount Lebanon." Page 110
  • "The Phoenician narrative never developed into an integrated ideology led by key thinkers. There were, however, a few Lebanese who stood out more than others in their support of the Phoenician view of the past. ...For social and political reasons, these three writers developed different interpretations of the Lebanese identity; the following discussion sheds light not only on their different views but also on the dissemeination of the Phoenicianism in Lebanon and its many hues." Page 141
  • "Nevertheless, it is Charles Corm who became most strongly identified with the Phoenician myth of origin, despite the fact he was neither the most original nor the most articulate "Phoenician."" Page 141
  • "...in 1934 Charles Corn left a life of business to completely immerse himself in literary and artistic activity with the prime purpose of spreading Phoenicianism in Lebanon." Page 141
  • "On the other hand, Tawfig 'Awad, a staunch supported of the Maronite-Christian identity of Lebanon, and the Greek Orthodox Gébran Tueni, one of the most vociferous pro-Arab voices in Beirut, shared similar disapproving views about the Phoenician character of the pavilion. Finally, and despite his controversial Phoenician tendencies, Corm was assigned as the commisioner, his plans [for the World Fair] were approved and the Lebanese pavilion went on its way." Page 155
  • "Despite the fact that he [Charles Corm] was the most outspoken francophone Phoenician in Beirut, his Phoenician views had little impact on the Lebanese society as a whole. Indeed, large segments of the Beirut population were bilingual, but most still preferred to communicate in Arabic and elaborating in French about the Phoenician identity limited the possiblity of its dissemination." p159
  • "After all, until the mid-1930s, the most prominent advocates of the Phoenician identity were Lebanese who graduated from French schools, most notably USJ, and who wrote poetry prose and essays in French about this identity" Page 169
  • "Phoenicianism as the national, non-Arab, identity of Lebanon continued to be articulated by a select group of Christians in Beirut and in the Mountain." Page 245
  • "There is no doubt that the French assisted in all possible means to disseminate Phoenicianism in Lebanon; many Lebanese critics of the Phoenician identity have bitterly noted this fact." p245
  • "Indeed, viewing Phoenicianism as an alternative identity to Arabism is restricted to a small group in post-civil-war Lebanon." Page 250 --Qvxz9173 (talk) 07:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Where does it state that the Majority of Lebanese Christians identify as Arabs? Oohhhh this must a hard look for you. You are so desperate to cling on to the pretense that Lebanese Christians are proud arabs or support Arabism when the evidence so far show otherwise. Gerban Tueni was NOT pro-Arab but pro-Lebanon his father was SSNP (anti- phoenician and anti-arabist) he was actually very close with the Kataeb people and Maronites, go read the mainsfesto of the SSNP which states they are against Arabism also Tueni was killed by Arabists for alledgelly being against arabism' and their stupid ideology and being a traitor in their warped minds. this book was published before he was murdered by Arabist terrorists. More proof that this is a cheap disguise for Islamism.Also go see what he said about the Palestinians staying Lebanon in 2000 he was pro-Lebanon nothing else. It's another example of the great achievements that a racist ideology like taking one of Lebanon's greatest politicians to the grave. LOL you chosen mostly half quotes.I've explained the author is NOT a geneticist and the book was published in 2004 before the genetic study,funny you only decide post the patial THEORIES of the author and not historic recollections. But it does back the claim that Lebanon is split over identity this is a major reason that splits the Lebanese community. I dont believe in Phoenicianism but I like most my compatriots reject the racist arabism that has aimed only to dominate my people.

page 128

The Congress triggered a fierce squabble of journals and newspapers in Beirut for and against the demands of the Muslim leadership and their declaration that Lebanon was an Arab country, indistinguishable from its Arab neighbours.

Christian and Muslim candidates were divided along Phoenician and Arab lines.Increasing the already mounting tensions between the two communities.

page 129

It was more a Christian statement that Lebanon the historical right of being a Political and cultural seperate entity .♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 08:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

This book purpose was to explain THEORIES on the split Lebanese Identity (which i am sorry does exist).

old article by a Lebanese Christian scholar from 2001 http://www.meforum.org/18/are-christian-enclaves-the-solution I cant find preview pages but a book that does rebunk the narrative of Arabists from the Maronite perspective which is often overlooked is; Lebanese Christian Nationalism: The Rise and Fall of an Ethnic Resistance by Walid Phares.

Are you disputing your own source? [39]. [40] "The majority of Lebanese Christians identifying as Christian Arabs" is not the issue at present (despite me believing it to be the case). The issue is conducting original research and not paraphrasing what a reliable source says correctly or stating your opinion as fact and just picking some random source just to claim you provided a source. It is also cherry picking on your part. All excerpts I provided above can be found above and the book you cited supports that Phoenicianism was imposed by the French, that it was a myth, and at the present it is only restricted to a small group. Your source says so, now the source is no good because it contains things you disagree with? I will look at your other link later, which I've heard of before an there is another source that disputes it. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 09:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Imposed by the French? no it states the french preffered Lebanon would be granted a non-arab identity seprate from the Arab world. Sources need to paraphrased otherwise it's shoddy writing and plagiarism. Phoenicianism is something that was started by Christians to counterweight Arabism.The book writes that Phoenicianism is very popular among the diaspora of Lebanese (which are mostly chrisitan and most Lebanese people).You are a very simple minded to say Phoenicianist nationalism is restricted to small group of people (during a period) assumes they identify as Arabs.Infact Lebanese Nationalism is very popular among Christians. I have stated this book was published in 2004 before the genectic study into the Phoenicians in Lebanese by Pierre Zalloua.You can also say Arab nationalism is something imposed by Arabian colionalizers and saudis!!! All theories and arguements but not necessarily fact. Even though Arabism has shown itself to be a racist ideology with the obession of dominating others and persucting minorities, that itself has shown itself to be a fact. There is also a theory by Pan-Arabists (very stupid one proven false) that the phoenicians were descended from Yemen and were the original arabs, this is how far some have gone to Arabize Lebanon by falsifying facts. The issue isnt about the origins of Phoenicianism it's about the division of the Lebanese identity and Arabism vs Non Arabism plays a huge part in this. Cherry pick is what you did.Ofcourse I am not disputing the source just correcting a minor error that Gebran Tueni was NOT an Arabist infact they murdered him and this written before his murder by Arabist terrorists well his father was Anti-Phoenician and at one point pro-syrian but not really pro-Arab. As I've clarrified with counter statements from the book it's theories and not certified facts that tries to explore the conflict of identity in Lebanese society. a better one is The conscience of Lebanon by Mordecai Nisan that really gets in deph more rigidly the real problems of this ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 11:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:
Sorry, it's totally confusing about what exactly is disputed here. If there is a question of original research or whatever, can I please the source, the information intended to be added, and the part from the source which supports that. The above discussion doesn't help an outside editor to engage in this and assess it based on policy. --Asdfg12345 03:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)—Asdfg12345 03:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I was away doing other things. The dispute is whether this (in quotes) "In Lebanon many Maronites and other Lebanese Christians sects,feel a stronger link and cultural identification with Phoenicians and show pride in the belief that their ancestry is linked to the Phoenicians." is supported by this [41]. I say no and that it is unattributed original research. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 20:21, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the case (and personally I couldn't care less, as I am an English atheist who has never previously given a moment's thought to this matter, and never will again), the dispute is a question of facts and the interpretation of facts. It is nothing to do with "original research", so I am going to remove that tag. Mowsbury (talk) 17:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
The issue of original research is in reference to many parts of that section (the above is just 1 item) with a section containing conclusions not found in the sources provided. If it is about fact: what fact is being disputed? My issue is that there is a claim or assertion that is not attributable to a reliable source. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 20:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Arab Christians

There is a long standing dispute on Arab identity concerning Arab Christians. The dispute also involves who is or isn't an Arab Christian or identifies as such, their numbers, what the article should be called, history, among other issues. Some users insist on conducting original research that is not supported by reliable sources or passing their opinion as fact. —Qvxz9173 (via posting script) 07:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC) My opinion:

  • Keep the current title
  • Although the whole Phoenicians issue contains a lot of myths, many Maronites and some non-Christian Lebanese believe that they are decendants of the Phoenicians. So the part that says "In Lebanon many Maronites and other Lebanese Christians sects,feel a stronger link and cultural identification with Phoenicians and show pride in the belief that their ancestry is linked to the Phoenicians." is probably correct. Sole Soul (talk) 08:55, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment, but attribution is needed such as a prominent Lebanese Christian who is not on the fringe and isn't a member of the Guardians of the Cedars group. I could find many Lebanese Christians who feel a stronger link to being Arab including Maronites. It could also be said that many Lebanese identify as Arab, but that would be weasel worlds: WP:WEASEL should be avoided. "I, the Maronite Christian Lebanese Arab, grandson of Patriarch Estefan Doueihy, declare my pride to be a part of our people’s resistance in the South. Can one renounce what guarantees his rights?” --Qvxz9173 (talk) 20:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)


Very few Maronites feel attachment to Arabism historically they have always looked West and have often been accused of being isolationists. Kataeb isnt the Guardians but they were part of the Lebanese Front which was the Christian (although they are secular) block of Lebanon which during the time of war and before the Taef was FORCED onto Lebanon majority of Christians supported.Marada is not an Arabist movement and any goverment official who states that is only doing so to appease the Muslims and Arab world since the Taef inforced the Arab identity in Lebanon.I explained this before. May Murr isnt an Arabist she never has been and she comes one of the most prominent Orhthodox families in Lebanon. Gebran Teuni was murdered by Arabists.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 02:58, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Also the SSNP has added and they are known for their enmity with the Lebanese Front groups yet they also reject arabism. Also read this https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/le.html♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 03:35, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


Because he is attempting to contradict the text and section by adding pieces that has no place there,I explained to him but he is still determined to vandalize the section. If he wants to argue the authenticate of Phoenciniansm than do it in that article this about the rejection ARABISM. ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 02:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Edits

This is sourced and the edit is unjustified and May Murr is not in the source Deletion of a sourced statement Deletion of a sourced statement POV Edit Arab to Arabist Addition of content should be checked against source Should be checked for consistency against source Should be checked Should be checked Should be checked Possible Synthesis of Sources Link to cedarguards.org (possible reliability issue) (WP:SYN) "Phoenician Cultural Revival Movement" --Qvxz9173 (talk) 23:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Remember this is not a forum, you're clutering up this talk page. The above is to keep track of all your edits for my benefit and others. Some, if not most of your edits should be reverted, but I have better things to do than to get into some pointless edit war (all you're doing is making wikipedia look bad in writing such a factually inaccurate and biased article). --Qvxz9173 (talk) 00:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


Post war Lebanon is Lebanon after the Taef Agreement. That is the meaning. like I keep stating your a very simple minded person. dont worry I knew my edits which I did source and were actually reveleant to the article would put your pan-arab knickers in a twist. May Murr is considered the leading poetess of the Lebanese nationalist movement [source has now been added]. The statements you put were purseposely put out of context to deflect from the article using which is part of a huge chunk of information and were half quotes used only to discredit the claim of Phoenicianism however the section isnt abotu rejecting phoenicisim but the rejection of Arabism. You want to put discredits on that go to the Phoenicianism article. ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 00:17, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

If you are complaining about then I will respond.I am not the one who keeps complaining or accused people falsely of being socks.I have the right to give an explaination when questioned.It's your own bias that discredit my sources. ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 01:00, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

0001

[42] Where in the following source does it say that May Murr was a notable figure in promotion of Phoenicianism: [43]. This is what the source says: "The Phoenician narrative never developed into an integrated ideology led by key thinkers. There were, however, a few Lebanese who stood out more than others in their support of the Phoenician view of the past. ...For social and political reasons, these three writers developed different interpretations of the Lebanese identity; the following discussion sheds light not only on their different views but also on the dissemeination of the Phoenicianism in Lebanon and its many hues." Page 141 Read the names the source provides --Qvxz9173 (talk) 07:00, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

0002

[44] Where in the following sources: [45] or [46] does it say "Phoenician genetic marker was found in all sects in Lebanon (including Maronites) and that it was equally distributed among sects,showing a common genetic link among most Lebanese. The study also showed that Lebanese people from the coast of Lebanon and Syria were more likely to carry the Phoenician gene". However, the source does say what was removed: "The research team analyzed the Y chromosome of 1,330 men from historic Phoenician trading centers in the Mediterranean regions of Syria, Palestine, Tunisia, Morocco, Cyprus, and Malta." and "Groves also cautions that one should not interpret the findings as suggesting the Phoenicians were restricted to a certain place." and "The researchers estimate that as many as one in 17 men from the Mediterranean may have Phoenician ancestry." --Qvxz9173 (talk) 07:30, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Seriously even 3rd parties who you whined at to look at the sources and section, told you there was no problem now you continue to still bark months later? Ive stated this before If you want to argue over the authenicity of Phoenicianism than go do that in the Phoenicianism article, This section is about the REJECTION of Arabism.I will not waste much time arguing with you since I've learned that arguing with brainwashed fanatic racist arabists is futile. May Murr was one of the key writers to inspire the Phoenician movement in Lebanon read some of poems, she was also one of the ideological thinkers that inspired the Guardians of the Cedars.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 10:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

You FAILED to provide where in [47] states May Murr was a promonent promoter of Phoenicianism. Second, this is WP:SYN since [48] provides only three names. This is not a forum, provide what is being asked for, otherwise I conclude your edit is vandalism and POV pushing. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 18:04, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

What forum? the official website of a Political movement is NOT a forum. It's you that is vandalizing I doubt you even know who May Murr was or else you wouldnt even dare make this false complaint and its your arabist racist POV wont give up. http://books.google.co.uk/books?lr=&cd=1&id=RH5tAAAAMAAJ&dq=inauthor%3A%22Claremont+Research+and+Publications%22&q=May+Murr#search_anchor http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1bgCAzR5V68C&pg=PA20&dq=May+Murr+Lebanon&lr=&cd=6#v=onepage&q=May%20Murr%20&f=false

You have obviously never heard of May Murr, since your NOT Lebanese have you read any of her work? The One Who Restored the Empire of the World to the Phoenicians? or Lebanon and Phoenicia? seriously have you not heard of her or something? or just looking for attention? Also She was part of the Guardians of the Cedars like Said Aql a right wing PHOENICIANIST Lebanese nationalist movement.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 01:12, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

0003

[49] Revert of lower portion of this edit is explained above 0002. The source [50] states the following: "Myths seem to be an indispensible part of the creation of the modern state... And Lebanon was no exception... The myth, of course, was the distinctiveness, uniqueness and superiority of the Maronite sect, its mythical past in Mount Lebanon and even its different ancestry to its neighbours [being part of this myth]." --Qvxz9173 (talk) 02:27, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

This Wikipedia talk page is not a forum. Directly answer the issues presented with reliable sources and not with empty talk or random sources that just happen to contain key words but do not back you up at all. Your 2 links above are of no use. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 02:27, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

You didnt answer me Have you even heard of May Murr? if you did you would know she is NOT a Maronite. Said Aql is recognized as one of Lebanon's greatest poets and philosophers. You know how this is your whining about POV when your only adding the POV of a station itself that is unsourced in their claims only to attack (quite clearly) the Christians of Lebanon as racists. Al-Jazeera is a Pan-Arab nationalist station of course they will deny the existance of Lebanon and it's run by Islamist Khaleeji muslims ofcourse they are going to try and demonize the Lebanese christians who they sent billions in weapons for Arabs to fight against, it's the station's own bias and POV however the SCIENTIFIC study Pierre Zalloua has proven truths to the Phoenician traces in Lebanon. As I stated before the books who call it a myth were written before the study.Seriously if you want to reject the authencity of Phoenicianism do it on the Pheonicianism article that section is about the . However Al-Jazeera acknowledges despite it's common pan-arab rhetoric that christians feel indifferent to the arab label so that should be added not it's hateful ranting against christians.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 02:52, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

0004

[51] Already responded to why a good portion of this should reverted above (see sections 0001-0003) (but will emphasize you can't just delete sourced attributed content just because you disagree with it). Your source [52] was added with paraphrase. Your two links [53] and [54] have been removed because it is nothing more than a May Murr keyword search with no substance. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 04:38, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

It is irrelevant who May Murr is, she is not one of the 3 mentioned in the source (the 3 who stood out the most in their promotion of Phoenicianism) in this source: Read the names the source provides. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 04:51, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not Paraphraseed CIA web book clearly states that it's subjective to use the Arab term with christians since many consider themselves Phoenicians instead wikipedia is not against paraprhasing infact it's encouraged isntead of copying and pasting which is borderline plagiarism. You are adding UN-HiSTOrICAL WP:Soapbox by Al-Jazeera against Christians it's their POV demonizing a community merely for rejectinng Arabism.May Murr is mentioned in the book and being linked to the Guardians of the Cedars and the sources I provided stated she is linked with the group. Also it is revlevant who may Murr is since she is well known for her poems that romanticize Phoenicianism. Seriously about the politics of Lebanon concerning the fact the source was from 2004 when Pan-Arab Syria was ruling Lebanon with an iron fist and many of the Christian parties were banned until 2005 ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 05:16, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Yasmina I didn't remove your paragraph, but please don't remove Q's paragraph, because he/she is using the same source you are using.George Al-Shami (talk) 23:08, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
If "miss-simworld" removes my paragraph it would be vandalism because the source actually says what I paraphrased. "Miss-simworld" is just dishonest and "In Lebanon many Maronites and other Lebanese Christians sects,feel a stronger link and cultural identification with Phoenicians and show pride in the belief that their ancestry is linked to the Phoenicians" is unattributed original research that is justified to be replaced with what the source actually says in [55]. There's a limit to how far appeasement works. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 01:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Because it's Al-Jazeera's WP:Soapbox theories and slander against Christians calling them racists for rejecting Arabism and thinking themselves superior to muslims, that POV have no place in the section however the fact it acknowledges that Christians reject Arabism does.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 02:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

0005

[56] This edit is basically vandalism. This user failed to address and unable to address the lower part of this edit (see 0002 above) and therefore it is POV pushing of original research. Two paragraphs of cited material have been removed = content deletion vandalism. These links are just a keyword search with no substance (same links as above reinserted). [57][58]. Essentially a bad faith edit. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 01:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


It's not vandalism you just dont like it or the entire content in that section and are doing what you can to undermine it or have it removed , Who on earth are you to talk about pushing POV or vandalism. hey, Remember this? [59] [60] [61] [62] I urge editors and admins to see what you wrote on the article in February to see what a hypocrite you are and more importantly the real vandal here pushing for their own POV, also we all know you just the title changed back to only arab christians. I've explained why it was removed yet you keep complaining not even answering back to what I wrote that it's outdated or irrelevant. I hate edit wars but you seem to be doing whatever you can to needlessly continue one. ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 06:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't need to respond to empty talk. I could pick anything from 0001 - 0005 and show you don't have a basis for it, such as (from 0002) Where in the following sources: [63] or [64] does it say "Phoenician genetic marker was found in all sects in Lebanon (including Maronites) and that it was equally distributed among sects,showing a common genetic link among most Lebanese." If you were truly honest and not a person with an agenda you will provide a concise direct response that settles it (unlikely) or just admit it is wp:or not found in the sources. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 07:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

It's quite clear you are after a needless edit war just to indemtidate others so the name will be changed back to Arab Christians only. dont even try and hide it. You sound like a malfunctioned bot who clearly is repeating the same things over again. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7791389.stm Yes writing that Lebanese (regardless their sect) share a common genetic roots (which is true) is part of an Agenda.You dont respond since you dont have an answer, you expect me to either write that the subject is fictitious or to copy and paste which is WP:Plagiarism.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 08:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


Your also deleted sources which state Lebanese Christians DO relate with being called Phoencians than Arab however put the [65] here is another one that you cant refute http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7791389.stm but funny you used un-historical WP:Soapbox claims by Al Jazeera that Lebanon was a made up creation by France, what does these lies claiming Lebanon is a fictious creation have to do with rejecting Arabism? It's not me with the agenda. ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 08:31, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

(1) Providing quoted content from sources is not Plagiarism. Your new source [66] says "...the study has revealed that while one in 17 people across the Mediterranean carry the Phoenician gene, in Lebanon almost a third [not most as your claim states] of the population have Phoenician roots. Dr Zalloua says in Lebanon the Phoenician signature is distributed equally among different groups [both Christians and Muslims] and that the overall genetic make-up of the Lebanese is proving to be similar across various backgrounds." [not that Phoenician DNA is common to most Lebanese] (2) The two links/sources in 0002: [67] or [68] do not support what you have in 0002 and appears you just added them without reading them. (3) Provide a source for "The study also showed that Lebanese people from the coast of Lebanon and Syria were more likely to carry the Phoenician gene" (this is not even found in the new source you provided). (4) Prove that I deleted valid sources. (5) WP:SOAPBOX is not applicable and the Al-Jazeera source was provided by you, I'm just paraphrasing what it actually says. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 19:14, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Are you saying the CIA is not a realiable source, dont make me laugh. You still havent said anything about these edits, how on earth do you think you are in the position to talk about Civility or Vandalism considering you've done this? [69] [70] [71] [72] Not paraphrasing anything and copying and pasting ONLY sources is Plagiarism and shoddy editing. So what if other people in the Mediterranean have Phoenician ancestors why is that relevant to the section? The BBC link also shows a man stating he is proud if were to find out that he has Phoenician ancestors, wanna refute that aswell. So this backs up the part about pride Although I know arabists really cringe of the thought of how proud Lebanese are of the Phoenicians. Again you've shown yourself yet again to be a simpleminded person I never said a majority of Lebanese I said majority of the Lebanese sects (that isnt the same thing) do you know how many Sects live in Lebanon? the source clearly states their is a common genetic link via the Phoenicians between Lebanese of different faiths. Dont worry I dont blame you for not understanding this your a simple minded person after all. You keep only attacking this section which is actually the most and best sourced part in the entire of the article because being a radical Arabist who wants to force that label onto all Christians (as your previous edits of vandalism indicates). i provided to Al-Jazeera source to indicate that even a radical Arab station like Al-Jazeera acknowledges that christians differentiate from the Arab label, however note that I only used the quotes from people who participated in the documentary and not wrote what Al-Jazeera who clearly was only out to demonize Christians and their false history WP:Soapbox and [ what Al-Jazeera wrote and you added on why Christians reject Arabism and the history of Lebanon. Was purely opinionated and false.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 09:30, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

(1) I kept CIA Source and added paraphrase. (2) This is not a forum about me. (3) Being proud of the possibility of having a distant Phoenician male ancestor not noteworthy. (4) You said (in 0002): "showing a common genetic link among most Lebanese", What is this common genetic link that most Lebanese have? (I refer you back to (1) in my previous paragraph) (5) Your sources in (2) from my previous paragraph are paraphrased as saying as such, you added these sources and they should be paraphrased correctly. (6) The Phoenician culture, pagan religion, and language no longer exist so how is "In Lebanon many Maronites and other Lebanese Christians sects, feel a stronger link and cultural identification with Phoenicians" possibly true with the density and pervasiveness of the Arabic culture and language in Lebanon? --Qvxz9173 (talk) 20:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

You didnt answer what did you have to say about those edits you wrote in the article? name calling groups of people? Why are you only concerned with this section when CLEARLY it's the most well sourced section in the entire article.There is very little Arabic Culture(Define this?) in Lebanon, that element is something the Muslims emphasis more on , language does not define the ethnic identity of a people. Before Islam majority of the Arabs were Pagans, are telling me Arab culture is dead too? CIA source was needlessly paraphrased. When it clearly states many Christians in Lebanon see themselves rather as Phoenicians than Arab. I am sorry If you dont like to hear this but this is true. I do not see myself as an Arab and never will. I dont see myself as a Phoenician either but I feel closer to that than I would ever Arab and many Christians feel the same in fact most.Christians prior the civil war stated the identity of Lebanon was Mediterranean and it's identity was Phoenician not arab only in face to please the Muslims, infact it was Muslims who demanded the Arab identity inflicted on Lebanon and Christians who fought against this. Even Joumblatt admitted the reason he fought Christians in Lebanon was in the name of Arabism, now if you knew what he did to Christins along with his allies in the name of Arabism than maybe you would begin to understand why most ordniary Lebanese are either apathetic or despise arab nationalism. To us it's what Zionism means to the Palestinians. I wrote in belief that their ancestors are the Phoenicians this indicates the subjectivity in It. I explained this to you before very few Christians in Lebanon have anything but antipathy for Arabism (since all it has aimed was to push them out of power and the country) in Lebanon regardless what their DNA may be they Phoenicians are an element of pride for Lebanese (especially Christians). Lebanese Genetics are mixed (but with very very little arab genes) the study showed that the Lebanese people DO share a common links. To say the Phoenician culture does not exist in Lebanon is simply not true the Phoenicians were great merchants and travelers this is the reason why millions of lebanese (apart from the wars incited by the Arab world) have travelled the World because the Phoenician culture did not die entirely. Many of our festivals play great tribute to the Legacy other civilizations (like the Romans) not only the Phoenicians have left in Lebanon. Hopefully one day Lebanon will be free to breathe more without being intemidated by Arabist bullying and pseudo-racism.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 07:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC) ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 07:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

0006

[73] You can't delete sourced content just because you disagree with it (especially if they were the same source that YOU provided) The full quoted paragraphs (which you lenghtened further) by E. Sakr are too long and need to be shortened and summarized. If people want to read these paragraphs from the interview they could click on the reference. Already explained the May Murr part in 0001 above. Why do you reject breaking that huge section in parts so it's easier to read? Provide a quote from these sources of where Lebanese Christians feel a stronger link and cultural identification with the Phoenicians? [74][75][76][77]. Also, read WP:TALK guidelines before even thinking about responding. The part about genetics should be kept only in the genetic studies section and shouldn't be used to lengthen the rejection of "arab identity" section. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 20:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

You obviously cant read, here
note: many Christian Lebanese do not identify themselves as Arab but rather as descendents of the ancient Canaanites and prefer to be called Phoenicians
[78]
While Christian schools tend to focus more heavily on the Phoenician past, which the Christian community here identifies with, the Muslim schools teach more about Lebanon under the Arabs. is this hard for you to understand?
Why do Arabists get so offended by Lebanese showing pride in their Pheonician past, does it intemidate you are something?
May Murr was a co-founder of the Guardians of the Cedars which is a Phoenicinist meovement (i've already provided sources for this) and many Murr is a phoenicianist poet.Stating Christians see themselves as superior to Muslims or that feeling identification with Phoenicians is a western plot claims by Al-Jazeera and the existance of Lebanon a myth and created by france. Is unhistorical POV and fictious.
Saying Lebanon did not exist prior 1920 isnt just POV it's historically false.
Etienne Sakr was a Key member on the Christian side and leader during the war he fought it , he lived through it, each word he states explains why there is a strong antipathy and dissosation from the Christian side regarding Arabism.
Stating that Lebanese have been arrested just for saying Lebanon is not Arab or the fact when he was fighting during the war with the Christians that the Arabs tried to push them out of their country is something very revelant to the article and tha the Arabization to him is the Islamization of Lebanon. It's giving an example of a viewpoint in why perhaps many Lebanese chrisitnas dissociate with the Arab label and have enemity with it.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 21:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Learn to indent. None of your quotes support that Lebanese Christians CULTURALLY identify with Phoenicians or have a stronger link with them than any other identity. Phoenician past is history. The Al Jazeera source was used to support your erroneous original research claims, but when its paraphrased correctly, you removed it. Which May Murr source you already provided, you talking about these May Murr keyword searches [79] [80]? I told you, they are of no use. Your personal opinions do not belong on this talk page and are of no use to this article. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 22:05, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Why dont you just admit you want this article changed back again to only Arab Christians, Why dont you want to acknowledge many Christians do not use this label? thats all it is, a label, I accept that there are Christians who use it why cant you accept there are those who dont especially in Lebanon and Egypt. You have no right to forcefully label all Lebanese as Arabs in an article or call us racists for chosing and being proud of own ethnic identity? seriously grow up. May Murr was a Co-founder of the Guardians[81] and leading Phoencianist you dont want her added because she was an ORTHODOX christian like myself and dispells the myth that it's only a Maronite thing. Atleast be honest.the book sources suplentary indicate her connection also to the Guardians and her views that the Lebanese are descended by the Phoenicians. What is your problem with Lebanese showing recogntion of the Phoenician legacy in Lebanon, Why dont you Arabs (or Arabists) understand, Lebanon doesnt and belong to you or Syria. It belongs only to the Lebanese people. It's culture, it's history and achievements and most importantly pride. Yes they do and you are clearly in serious denial, it's not just part of our history even now the Phoenician legacy is evident in how Lebanese travel the world and are reknown commerce workers.Did you not understand the BBC source well enough or how about the CIA? the fact is Al-Jazeera stating Lebanon did exist prior is false not even POV purely false. My personal opinions? what about his [82] [83] [84] [85] btw it's funny you talk about whats not in the article when added the guy from marada is a promminent Maronite lol this is your pov trying to increase the legitmacy of the source.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 22:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I refer you back to 0001 you provided same link again. The rest is just your opinion which is of no use to this article. There's no point in constantly reposting these 4 links of my old edits (2nd one being nothing more than a correction of a spelling mistake) --Qvxz9173 (talk) 00:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Reffering to Christians who dont accept Arabism or the label as a racist biggoted vocal minority who pretend not be arabs is not spelling correction it's inflamotory and disgustingly POV and what's more shocking you added this to the article yet you think you are in position to even dare question the credibility of my section?.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

You use this ":" to indent. Not a Spelling Correction?. I was not referring to legitimate Arabic-speaking Christians who do not identify as Arab. Now stop violating WP:TALK guidelines and explain your recent ongoing edits. --Qvxz9173 (talk) 19:22, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

You still added it too the article unacceptable abusive insults and language please dont even bother denying it we know who you were reffering too, the evidence is there you clearly have issues dont hide behind wiki rules falsely when you clearly have broken them yourself.♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 23:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC) ♥Yasmina♥ (talk) 23:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arab_Christians/Archive_5&oldid=1143536769"