Talk:Mogadishu

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mogadishu article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Mogadishu was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 19, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
January 18, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Cities: National capitals

	Cities portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
	This article is supported by the project's national capital taskforce.

Somalia Top‑importance

	Somalia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somalia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somalia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SomaliaWikipedia:WikiProject SomaliaTemplate:WikiProject SomaliaWikiProject Somalia articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ajuran

The History section of the article needs a clean up and improvement. It does not discuss the Ajuran sultanate, World War 2, etc. Would anyone like to help me? AcidSnow (talk) 18:01, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Ajuran Sultanate didn't directly rule the city. The Muzaffar Dynasty of the Sultanate of Mogadishu did, and the Ajuran Sultans exacted tribute from the Muzaffars. Middayexpress (talk) 18:44, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think we should divide the History section in to a couple of categories: Earliest History (We should try to see if we can find any skeletons from the region going farther back than the Khoisan), Foundation (Dissuce Somali arrival and we should see if we can find more info on Sarapion such as a foundation century), Persian occupation, Middle Ages (Republic then the Sultanate), Early Modern (Geledi annexation of the city and Italian rule), and finally Modern. I will get work on Sarapion. AcidSnow (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All of that's already pretty much noted. However, the early Persian presence was more of a settlement than an occupation. Middayexpress (talk) 14:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence of a Persian occupation, a mysterious name does not equal foreign rule, just like Persepolis does not originate with a Greek occupation of Persia just because of its Greek name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.74.189 (talk) 23:31, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Persians most certainly had control of Mogadishu. AcidSnow (talk) 00:19, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Persians did have an early presence. That's why the Persian New Year (Nowruz) is observed in parts of the south, and a few old structures built in a Persian style can be found in the same area. The Arba'a Rukun Mosque's mihrab also contains an inscription dated 667 (1268/9 CE), which commemorates the masjid's late founder, one Khusra ibn Mubarak al-Shirazi (Khusrau ibn Muhammed). There are still older trade ties described in ancient Chinese documents, but these don't pertain to Mogadishu specifically. Middayexpress (talk) 14:52, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is absolutely no evidence of a Persian army or dynasty holding sway over Mogadishu, in most of the time-periods of Mogadishu's golden ages, the Persians were ruled by Arabs, Turkic groups and Mongols themselves. Persian Traders, architects and scholars, sure but that's where their presence ends. Somalis had the same seafaring presence in other continents, the difference is nobody is overestimating their influence in those regions for clear cultural reasons rooted in colonial writing and race hierarchies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.8.135.120 (talk) 15:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there's indeed no evidence of any Persian army, dynasty, sultanate, etc. actually holding sway over Mogadishu. What I meant by an early Persian presence was individual traders and Islamic scholars/proselytizers. This is why the structures that the settlers left behind mainly consist of mosques and religious tombs. The actual polity that ruled Benadir during the period was of course the Sultanate of Mogadishu's Muzaffar Dynasty, and prior to that, it was the Sultanate's founding Fakr ad-Din Dynasty. Middayexpress (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, my reply was aimed the user above you that said "most certainly" when its probably at best a fringe source or blatant OR. This is just a case of kicking Somalis out of their own history and heritage by placing undue weight on foreign influences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.8.135.120 (talk) 19:46, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Climate

The temperatures are monthly weather averages and minima/maxima. They are not daily minima/maxima [1]. Middayexpress (talk) 18:00, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As the article and that source show, 23-24C are average night minima for each month, as I said - not monthly 24h averages. Most of the text of the climate section is nonsense. There is no alternating between a chill and heatwaves - it is always hot. There is less than 3 celcius difference between the averages for each month. As with all locations near the equator, there is no spring-summer-autumn-winter sequence. The articles on Singapore, Lagos, Recife etc. don't mention spring because, like, Mogadishu, they don't have such seasons. Jim Michael (talk) 23:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see what you're saying. The climate is fairly hot year round. Average temperatures per month vary by 3 °C (5.4 °F), which corresponds with a hyperoceanic and subtype truly hyperoceanic continentality type [2]. I've made this clearer. Middayexpress (talk) 14:20, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mogadishu has gotten much colder than 60's.[3] My bad, Midday, I meant something else. AcidSnow (talk) 03:50, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If Mogadishu's current weather is 16°C/62°F how is the lowest temprate recorded 20°C/68°? AcidSnow (talk) 12:39, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know exactly why Mogadishu's weather is messed up? I am unable to explain why. AcidSnow (talk) 23:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sultanates

The lead does not accurately depict the history of Mogadishu. It makes it seem like an Arab colony. It does not even mention the Sultanates and how it was a republic before that. The same can be said about the history section which disscuse relavent stuff as well. I will make improvements in the coming days. AcidSnow (talk) 03:46, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've noted the Sultanates in the lede. The kingdom history is fine, as it already notes the Sultanate of Mogadishu, Ajuran Sultanate and Geledi Sultanate. Middayexpress (talk) 15:56, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will update it by tomorrow. AcidSnow (talk) 20:49, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; I just fixed it. Middayexpress (talk) 17:48, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lol see my take page to see what I mean. A large portion of the cities history is not mentioned. AcidSnow (talk) 18:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be referring there to early Kharijite disciples, which isn't the same thing as the Sultanate of Mogadishu. Middayexpress (talk) 19:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even know what that is....... AcidSnow (talk) 19:09, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's what the 694 date refers to. Middayexpress (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hijab

A girl of that age (prepubescent) wearing hijab is not normal nor representative of Somali girls of that age nor of Muslim girls of that age in general. A pubescent Somali girl or woman wearing a hijab is representative of Somali females in general, and that is why must be put instead. The Holy Quran requires that only girls who reach puberty wear the hijab. The prophet Muhammad PBUH said "After a young woman reaches the age of puberty, nothing should be seen of her except her face and hands". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.200.10.224 (talk) 22:19, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Qur'an does not actually mandate the hijab; it just requires modest attire. Many, if not most, Somali girls also do wear the hijab (please see hijab by country). Middayexpress (talk) 17:46, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What I pointed out to, above and which is not the norm, are prepubescent girls who wear or more precisely are dressed by their parents in the hijab, like the prepubescent Somali girl in the picture, and not Somali and Muslim girls wearing the hijab who reached puberty - which is the norm. That is why that picture is not representative of prepubescent Somali and Muslim girls and is thus misleading. This is the reason as a devout Muslim I object to and take offense. That is why the picture should be replaced showing pubescent girls and women wearing the hijab, because it is the norm of most Somali and Muslim pubescent girls and women, regardless of country and culture.

Kindly leave a response if any here. That said, the norm refers to what is common. Many, if not most, Somali girls indeed wear the hijab, not just adolescents and women. Again, please see hijab by country for the sartorial traditions in various nations (they aren't all the same, though there are general similarities), and hijab for what Islamic scripture stipulates on this. Middayexpress (talk) 22:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Middayexpress is right that what is representative is what is the norm in Somalia (or Mogadishu, more specifically), not anything to do with what the Quran says. The article is about Mogadishu, after all. It would be useful to see a source that confirms it is indeed the norm, however. Cordless Larry (talk) 00:34, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See hijab by country. Middayexpress (talk) 01:27, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, the Hijab wasn't common until recently. AcidSnow (talk) 01:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had in mind an external source, not a Wikipedia article, but that article isn't that helpful anyway. It says "Unmarried or young women, however, do not always cover their heads". Does that mean that a small minority don't cover their heads, or a large minority, or a majority. It would just be good to know whether the average Somali girl wears the hijab. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a source, which confirms that since the war, most girls in Somalia wear the hijab. I think that's sufficient to demonstrate that the image is representative of Somali girls. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:59, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose views I oppose on theological grounds, is made inadvertantly right on this. A girl at that age (prepubescent) does not decide on her own whether to wear a hijab or not, her parents force her to do so, which is not normal nor sanctioned in Islam, just like female gential circumcision (also common to the region and the continent) is also not and is as morally offensive. As a Muslim I am offended, because this is not Islam. Furthermore the photo demostrates the suppression of girls and children, which disturbingly the original loader and user of this photo fails to understand and inadvertantly promotes it as normal. That is why it needs to be removed and replaced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.200.8.25 (talk) 11:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're missing the point of the article. It's to describe Mogadishu, its people, etc. If girls in Mogadishu wear the hijab, then there's no reason for the article not to include this. You mention FGM. I agree that FGM is also a problem, but that doesn't stop us having an article about it on Wikipedia. The idea is to describe the world, not make judgements on it. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:54, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

31, again, the Qur'an does not mandate the hijab; it just requires modest attire. Please see hijab for the actual theology on this. Middayexpress (talk) 17:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The user who originally uploaded the photo, is constantly avoiding the problem here by constantly circumventing the issue by falsely pointing to the Quran, when he/she know that the Quran does not sanction this and is not part of the tenets of Islam and is in violation of it. The photo of a prebuscent girl forced to wear a hijab and who looks no older the seven and cannot reall make up her mind on this at her age is a gross sign of misogyny and oppression of prebuscent girls and is in violation of the Quran – and furthermore immoral to be paraded in Wikipedia, which he/she brushes it off as a "cultural custom". The user just doesn’t get it. It is as immoral and objectionable as female gential mutiliaton which is also branded as a "cultural custom". That is why this photo must be removed and replaced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.200.8.25 (talk) 21:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see that this picture has caused a great deal of controversy, I will ask for its removal, because like FGM, little girls wearing hijab is also problematic and highly controversial. The impression should not be given that this is condoned by Wikipedia. Preferably alternative non-controversial photos should be used instead. Mortianna (talk) 22:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually ip/Mortianna, I uploaded both files. Your objections are also not based on scripture or policy, but rather your own odd perceptions. You hypothesize that the girl (who is actually eight years old, not seven) was supposedly "forced" to wear the hijab. Unfortunately, one cannot argue with such speculation. Islam, by the way, is the state religion in Somalia per the Provision Constitution [4]. This makes your argument all the more bizarre. At any rate, I direct you again to hijab by country to see what are the actual sartorial norms in different Muslim majority countries. They are not all the same, as you mistakenly presume. Middayexpress (talk) 22:07, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the IP you are referring to, and it is not my “odd perception” nor a “bizarre” argument, but a thoroughly reasonable and ethical one. But I beg to differ on your personal points of views on the hijab and I seriously doubt that an eight year old girl chooses to wear one on her own free will, just as no one would willing choose FGM. This is the source of the controversy, what I read in the talk page. And controversial it obviously is. I was merely suggesting an alternative proposal when I came across this. Mortianna (talk) 22:31, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. And I have not shared my opinion, nor will I. What I've actually done is link you to the hijab and hijab by country pages, as well as the Provisional Constitution of Somalia [5] to show you what are the actual sartorial norms in Somalia. Not all Muslim majority countries have the same exact such traditions. Middayexpress (talk) 22:51, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Administrative Boundaries

Where is the land area figure coming from in the infobox for the administrative area of the city? The page for the Banaadir region says that there is no local government for the city, so it's effectively coextensive with the regional government. The Italian wiki page for the region gives it an area of 370 square kilometers. The weird thing is that the Italian wiki page for the city gives the area as 637 square kilometers. So, what's the land area of the local government that covers Mogadishu/Banaadir? 1,657 sq km, 637 sq km, or 370 sq km? --Criticalthinker (talk) 05:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Banaadir is indeed coextensive with the city; the Mayor is thus also the Governor of the Banaadir administration. The urban area is per Demographia. As the city infrastruture is rapidly growing, the urban area is as well. As of 2015, the urban area occupies 35 square miles or 91 km² [6]. Middayexpress (talk) 17:27, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so that's the spatial measurement of the urban area. But, the primary number in infoboxes for cities are administrative measurements. How large does the local government boundaries measure? --Criticalthinker (talk) 07:40, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox settlement has separate parameters for the urban area and metropolitan area. Middayexpress (talk) 21:45, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm asking very simply if you or anyone else that reads this page know what the administrative boundaries of the region/city are? This is the primary number on city pages. While urban and metropolitan ares can be measured differently depending on which country you're in, an administrative area measurement goes where "area_total_km2 = " is in the template. --Criticalthinker (talk) 06:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Demographia just notes the urban area. Middayexpress (talk) 17:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article Picture

Article Picture has a Facebook page watermark, not very encyclopedia-like — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.50.132.79 (talk) 04:31, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to merge Italian Mogadishu into Mogadishu

Please discuss a request to merge Italian Mogadishu into Mogadishu at Talk:Italian Mogadishu if you care. — AjaxSmack 01:01, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Mogadishu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:10, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mogadishu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:51, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seychelles

Why is one of the four sentences of the first paragraph about how it's the closest foreign city to Seychelles? It seems like an overwhelmingly minor piece of trivia. To be the fourth sentence in the opening is very strange. 69.113.166.178 (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Founders of Mogadishu

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Expanded the antiquity section of Mogadishu.

Mogadishu was founded in the second century by proto-Somalis. I've provided multiple references for it and removed the false historical revisionism of Mogadishu being founded in medieval times.

Lesacrick you are making troubles with your disruptive nationalistic edits that will only lead to losing your privilege to edit. you have made many wrong edits, I have explained to you in my talk page and I can give you an example which –sorry– shows that you are pushing for nationalistic POV. You changed Arab architecture to Somali architecture, when the source says clearly Arab architecture.[7] "This portion of the city is constructed from locally available coral blocks, bleached white and built in traditional Arab architecture with archways, latticework’s, and ornate wooden doors and shutters."--SharabSalam (talk) 05:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pure slandering. I thought a troll came in and changed everything. I removed the older revert. Thought it was the original. You have completely misunderstood me and I am not a Somali, so me being nationalist of a country I do not belong to wouldn't make any sense.

The references I have published when I expanded the section is not wrong. You're an Arab trying to remove the historical facts of ancient Mogadishu. If anyone is being a nationalist is you and your edits should be monitored. I am simply expanding the pages and you're removing it so don't talk about damaging Wikipedia.

You have literally removed sourced information from the section for what reason? It's hard to argue with someone who is pushing for nationalistic POVs in Wikipedia.--SharabSalam (talk) 05:45, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I am not Somali so how am I being nationalist? Also, about the sourced information I have removed well guess what? The same guy who edited that page also removed the previous sources I am trying to bring up so don't be a hypocrite.

I am also proving the origins of Mogadishu is much longer and established multiple references. The sources I removed were weak sources. Does not explain how the city was founded. I know history so I know what I am doing. Do not cause disruptive editing again, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lesacrick (talk • contribs) 05:48, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The colonial era

Can we add more information from the colonial era. How many towns existed, how the tribes of the people who lived there and so on Jamal el layl (talk) 20:00, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Zanj and Mogadishu's founding.

I will ask people here to be wary of including outdated information and old scholarship. It's important to update your information instead of reciting old outdate info, misconceptions and erroneous conclusions. Furthermore i would say that you need to weigh the sources with the evidence.

With that said i want to make clear on a few corrections

Mogadishu as a trading city and settlement predates Arab and Persian arrival: This is not only supported in textual evidence but also archeological evidence which all suggests Mogadishu was founded on indigenous trade with artisan of the hinterland. See: [8] and [9]

There is no ethnographical descriptions of foreigners ruling mogadishu, Infact mogadishu and benediri ports have been consistenly described by various writers to be inhabited by black berbers which was an exonym for Somalis, with the exception of Merka which was explicitly called Hawiye capital. The Sultan of Mogadishu was described by Ibn Batuta of speaking Benadiri dialect and being black berber. As well as Portugese writers in the 16th century connecting the inhabitants in the city to that of Somali led Adal sultanate and describing them in the same manner as the inhabitants there with Somali cultural attires. This is all well sourced on the wiki page. As well as Ibn Khaldun in the 13th century describing them with Somali ethongraphical descriptions as tall black berbers berbers and wealthy merchants that were nomads in character. See ^[1]

Assimilation: The immigrants to mogadishu did not come as colonizer or ruler but as religous proselytizers, traders, merchants, architects. What they left behind in mogadishu is a clear reflection of that, being mainly religous tombs or mosques etc. Rather they were assimilated by the native Somali inhabitants of Mogadishu who in actuality is the bulk of Benadiris called Gibil Madow and they come from various Hawiye and Raxanweyn clan lineages. See ^[2] This is reflected by the very fact they speak the same dialect as the Somali surounding clans Af-benadir rather than persian or Arabic and overtime either formed a clan structure or were assimilated into Somali clans. They together with Somalis contributed to the rich cultural life of the city. It's also a point to note Somalis also had the same seafaring presence and settlements in other regions in Arab states and Asia. Founded mosques and spread religion, founded communties along the way much the same way.

Confusing Al-Zanj with Mogadishu in relation to The Caliphates and citing unclear sources for it: Ali Mukhtar and Ali Jimaale make the mistake of mentioning Al-Zanj in connection to Mogadishu and thereby implicating it into Abassid caliphate suzeirinity. such as they do here [10] When this is carefully disputed by Muslim writers and geographers throughout medieval times who exciplitly differentiates the Somali coast from the Swahili coast of Al-Zanj both culturally and physically and refer to it as Bilad Al-Barbar(Land of The Berbers)- These writers make terminological confusions much like how Said S Samatar confused Ibn Batuta in claiming that Sultan came from northern city of Berbera when in actuality he was describing The Sultan's ethnic origins. Berber as an exonym/ethonym is a continumum of the ancient Greek greographers naming of Somalis. Furthermore if you weigh it with whats known, the history of Al-Zanj in Abassid is well documented in contrast to Mogadishu or Barbars history, i.e Zanj Rebillion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ragnimo (talk • contribs) 18:09, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1. I am of the opinion that Mogadishu was a ancient port-city too, but notable sources are needed. It's not a book, it's a thesis. A thesis is usually not a reliable source.
2. The Cambridge history of Africa mentions Abubakar bin Fakhr al-Din being of Arab origin [11] and outlines how Mogadishu in it's early years from the 8th century was inhabited by Arab and later Persian immigrants who later formed a confederation. I.M Lewis a famous historian on Somali history is of the same view.[12].
3. I think you are referring to the Omani-Sultanate of Zanzibar, according to the The Cambridge history of Africa the Banadir coast was ruled from the 17th century up until the 19th century.
4. Ali Mukhtar and Ali Jimale are both scholars in the field of Somali history and are both even Somali. If what they wrote is doubtful or apocryphal then you need the view of a different scholar in the field of Soma li history. Cheers -AlaskaLava (talk) 20:14, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1)Its not a thesis, its an actual study. You can find it in book form here The Origins and Development of Mogadishu AD 1000 to 1850: is valid because its cites archeological finds, lists sources that puts mogadishu at an earlier date before the arrivals and makes mentions of the different sources. Your sources are all outdated one is from 1975 and another 1988 when i gave two newer sources And i included a book See Page 252 Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: A Historical Encyclopedia. That ecoed the same sentiment for the same reasons. And also details the nature of the immigrants arrival and inclusion into the city.

2). And also Fakr Al-Din isn't Arab. Somali geneological traditions is fictional that way and they claim local ancestral saints as coming from Arabia for religious reasons when in reality they were native born. See Page 117 of The Invention of Somalia for an explanation. He is of however of Ajuran descent and is included in the Geledi hagriographical genealogy see Virginia Luling as she states The ancestor of the Geledi Nobles, Cumar Diine,1 was one of four brothers, all men of religion endowed with divine blessing......Another brother was Fakhri Diine (Fakhr-ad-diin), who later became Sultan of Muqdisho.2 The names of the other two are given variously as Shamse Diine (Shams-ad-diin), Umudi Diine, Alahi Diine and Axmed Diine." The Geledi are a Somali sub-clan, part of the Rahanweyn group. And the Geledi nobles referred to there are the Gobroons

3. I wasn't referring to Sultanate of Zanzibar although i made a few edits on it. The Omani rule was nominal as ( only in name) and the local rulers that had real control over Mogadishu and authority was Geledi Sultunate and to some degree Hiraab Imamate. Provided a source for it from Somali studies scholar I'M Lewis and from another Somali scholar as well in my edit.

4). Again its important to weigh the sources against the evidence. A Modern scholar simply stating something is just a mere opinion if it isn't backed up with evidence. Because how do they know Mogadishu was included in Al-Zanj? are they clear about it?. According to The Archaeology of Islam in Sub-Saharan Africa Mogadishu was part of Bilad Barbar according Arab medieval geographers and writers and distinguished it from the swahili coast of Al-Zanj to the south. And also again in page 62 it speaks on how the persian/arab founding tradition is discounted because of archeological epigraphical evidence outright contradicts it.

1). It's a thesis published into a book as you can read it yourself being mentioned in the introduction. As will be shown later in this thesis, in considering the development of Mogadishu, the inland, riverine site of Afgoi, located 30 km west of the present city of Mogadishu, also what are his credentials, he doesn't seem very notable, also if his views contradicts that of more famous Somali historians. Then we'll have to go with the latter. He also mentions Arab inscriptions mentioning immigrants in the 7th century. That contradicts the Cambridge History of Africa and I.M. Lewis. Still the views of other scholars are also needed to reach a consensus. Do you perhaps have other sources?

2). That is about the major Somali clans who have a mythological descent linking them to Arabia,but that does not mean all the inhabitants of Somalia are not of immigrant origin. Especially the coastal immigrants who have shaped even the Geledi as mentioned by Virginia Luling. The Darkskins were descendants of the core or founding group of the Geledi; the Lightskins had a separate line of descent, claimed partly Arab origin, and in fact resembled the Arab populations of the old coastal towns. She also mentions the Afarta Timid who were Arab immigrants, who are the men you mention, but she also links Omar Diin to a figure from 16th century this does not coincide with the Fakhr al-Din from the 13th century.

3). I.M Lewis mentions the Geledi ruling Banadir while still acknowledging the Omani suzerainty. Also this is all in the 19th century, but the coast was under Omani-Zanzibar suzerainty from the 17th century.

4). I doubt the authenticity of the Book of Zanj too and remember reading one scholar mentioning it being rather fictitious or fabricated. So I will have to come back to this one. Perhaps we could reach a consensus after I find it again and add the scholar his views or if necessary we reach a consensus and remove the whole paragraph. Cheers -AlaskaLava (talk) 11:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1) Nevermind the fact that its an original thesis turned into a book. The merit of its content is what should evaluated and its credible with sources, but if you persist lets move away from it. I linked you two other sources from legitimate books The Archaeology of Islam in Sub-Saharan Africa and Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: A Historical Encyclopedia all echoing the same thing as the thesis.

2) Your possiting an argument i didn't make. Never said that some inhabitants are not of immigrant origin. What i am saying is that Fakr Al-Din in particular was not of Arab origin, nor Was Umar Dini of Adal. And he is claimed by the core founding Geledi by the way and and the fact they claim Umar Dini a figure from the 16th century gives more support that they are just just mythological and fictional. and that Fakr Al-Din is of Ajuran descent. The claim of Arab origin is based on that fiction. All ethnic Somali clans trace descent from quraishi/arab patriarchs, although they were local saints and not men that came from the outside. The fact that there are Darkskin and Lightskin Geledis gives more proof to what i said earlier that the immigrants by and large were assimilated by native Somalis. The Darkskin ones being the majority of Reer Benadiris and claiming Somali pastoral or clan origins particularly ajuuran and raxanweyn lineages as said here : while the Moorshe for instance regard themselves as an offshot of the Ajuran, a pastoral group believed to have ruled the southern interior during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. According to current oral traditions, five of the eight Bandawow sub-lineages also have pastoral origins (Reese 2008). So the Benadiri do actually not constitute a clan at all – that is, they do not all claim to be descendants from the same ancestor

The point i was making is that the immmigrants and their assimilation/inclusion don't change the Somali ethnic origins and rulership of the city. The Gibil Cads are well are part of the society as well as the Gibil Madows Virginia Luling puts it. And its important to understand this nuance. Then saying its an Arab/Persian federation which isn't really accurate at all. Again this book explains this well Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: A Historical Encyclopedia

3). I'M Lewis updated a book clarifies Omanis precense in Mogadishu as well does"Abdullahi, Abdurahman" book which i sourced. Firstly Geledi was an equally competting regional power that infact exterted tribute from Omanis at one point but also by the very fact that the Zanzibari had to ask for permission to build a fort and not only that Geledi was the ones being adhered to and answered to by the citizens of Mogadishu which I'M Lewis detailed. When the Italians wanted to make annexation of benadiri , the deal was made null and void as it says here. The city, however, like the rest of the Benadir coast, was not under Zanzibari control but under Bimal rule, therefore making the Italian-Zanzibar agreement null and void. The Italians faced stiff resistance from many parts of the Benadir coast, and its inland regions and the slave trade of the Somali merchants would remain unchallenged for years to come (The End of slavery in Africa By Suzanne Miers, Richard L. Roberts) and they had to bypass and make deal with Geledi instead in the end. These are important facts and disputes this idea that it was an actual direct colony or some sort by Zanzibaris. They had no actually authority, which is why many modern sources clarifies by saying nominally as in only in name. Not including this is misleading and omits important details and it's just simply not true for numerous reasons. As is the inclusion of the pictures being made.

4). That book is allegedly based on folk tales and oral traditions written in the 19th century. Usually for oral traditions to be considered it has to be collaborated with other early textual evidence or some archeological evidence. It's pseudohistory and posits numerous fallacious claims such as bantus Zhenghi people proceeding Somalis when there is no proof for it. And most modern scholars refute this. Not much different from racist colonialist notions of Africa Hamitic' hypothesis and defunct notions of Somali conquest of the horn displacing oromos , which is also now overturned.

I will clean up Mogadishu wikipage shortly. If there is anything more, write to me through the talk page so we can reach a concensus.

I have already started cleaning up the page. Its ridiculous that such fringe theories are being entertained on an important country/city article. I have also created a new section about the foundational origins of Mogadishu and its Sultanate. The blanket statement that it was founded by Arabs and that the first Sultan was Arab can all be traced back to a single 19th century document called the Kitab Al-Zunuj, which has been discredited by modern scholars as unreliable. More importantly, it contradicts ancient sources on the pre-existing civilizations that flourished on the Somali coast, and which were the predecessors of Mogadishu and other cities. The Persian and Arab founding ¨myths" are also an outdated colonial reflection of African capabilities to create their own historical states and civilizations. None of the contemporary Ummayyad and Abbasid historians of the time, nor modern experts that research about that period ever include Mogadishu or the Somali coast in the realms of the caliphates. --GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 20:50, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for cleaning up the Mogadishu page. I made a few edits but he apparently reverted them back. Then i became busy with other things and left it. There seems to be a growing number of Arab nationalists that are vandalizing Somali related wikpages if you look at the talk page and histories. Last year there was one Arab nationalist who's edits was corrected and checked by another well intended editor as you can see on a seperate discussion above. This guy who added these fringe theories is most likely an cad cad with an arab nationalist agenda. Because he included pictures of an Cad figure and tries to make Mogadishu seem as Arab as possible giving it undue weight. He included a random author on researchgate that was rehashing outdated racist colonial material which is not a valid source. You will even find Arab nationalist authors on researchgate even trying to make Axum into a South Arabian enclave despite modern scholars and archeological evidence contradicting that. Sites like those can be a platform for propaganda.

Kitab Al-Zanj he sourced has been said to be a policitcally motivated propaganda piece filled with fabrications written in the 19th century with made up narratives spanning from Zhengi people existing in Somalia , to arab foundings, al-zanj which is also suggested that it also included things to justify slavery during colonial interruption and also probably fabricated to create some sort of arab claim on Mogadishu. Where they got this information from also remains to be unanswered. Non of these caliphates ever wrote about mogadishu in that way or having control of it. How come other sources from the coast never mentions these details? And Somali coastal cities was never referred to as Al-zanj at any point by early muslim writers and they differentiated them from the swahilis in the South. Even those who wrote about them like Al-drisi in 1154 mentions barbars living in the shabelle mogadishus area farming Somali crops like Sorghum. Same with the 9th century Arab historian Al-Masudi (see Page 11) who wrote about the powerful Pagan Somali kingdom in Juba-Tana and at no point was Benadiri enclaves dislocated from the interior. The devolopment/founding of the coastal cities were directly tied to the hinterland river valleys and farms and the same inhabitants from the interior and migrants from the North would populate and rule the coastal cities. The genealogy/traditions of clans and the dominant Gibil Madow Xamari clans groups and the benediri dialect spoken reflect this.

There is a lot of ideological driven views rooted in colonialist thinking that made it be considered in the first place despite the lack of evidence and utter ridicilousness of the claims it makes.

Its beyond me how and why modern Somali scholars like that of Ali Mukhtar even refrences that, even when other modern historians discount it for obvious reasons being that archeological and early textual evidence contradicts it. It greatly damages their credibility in my view. Ragnimo (talk) 09:03, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Brett, Michael (1 January 1999). "Ibn Khaldun and the Medieval Maghrib". Ashgate/Variorum. Retrieved 6 April 2018 – via Google Books.
^ https://www.landinfo.no/asset/1091/1/1091_1.pdf

Ajuran , Hirab rule Mogadishu

WanderingGeeljire If your issue is concerning the Ajuran and Hirab then discuss it here stop removing the governors of Mogadishu, the walls of Mogadishu, the Omani presence in the history of Mogadishu and the history of the confederation of Mogadishu or other invaluable information. This also concerns the page History of Mogadishu. Wikipedia is not a place for propaganda Wikipedia:Propaganda, bring forward your scholarly sources regarding Hirab or Ajuran ruling Mogadishu.

The history regarding Abbasid or Ummayads conquering Mogadishu I am willing to agree with and remove, since I remember reading a scholar's view on it being rather dubious, but that is absolutely no reason for you to remove other cited content concerning the Banadir people of Mogadishu or the history of Mogadishu in general. --AlaskaLava (talk) 21:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ty for coming to the talk page AlaskaLava

As already mentioned by (GoldenDragonHorn) None of the contemporary Ummayyad and Abbasid historians of the time, nor modern experts that research about that period ever include Mogadishu or the Somali coast in the realms of the caliphates nor do any historian at that time mention Himayrite colonies on the Somali coast. These are all fallacious claims and fringe theories and have no place on this page.

During the medieval period, Mogadishu was a province of the Ajuran Sultanate. Here: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=X1dDDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA60&dq=mogadishu+province&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjVkK-W8e7sAhVPTsAKHeVQA2QQ6AEwAnoECAUQAg#v=onepage&q=mogadishu%20province&f=false

The Muzaffar dynasty was an Ajuran family that ruled Mogadishu. Here: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3SapTk5iGDkC&pg=PA253&dq=Ajuran+family&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi637On8e7sAhWhuXEKHf2TAH8Q6AEwAHoECAQQAg#v=onepage&q=Ajuran%20family&f=false

The Hiraab Imamate and Geledi Sultanate who were the successor states of Ajuran Sultanate were the local rulers of the Benadir coast while Omani nominally claim the coast: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=X1dDDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA62&dq=hiraab+imamate&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjAv7CM8u7sAhVQWxUIHS08BW4Q6AEwAHoECAYQAg#v=onepage&q=hiraab%20imamate&f=false

Mogadishu confederation is also wrong because Arabs and Persians did not found the city nor did Arab or Persian families ruled the city as local Africans retained political control. These families only had religious influence. It is widely accepted that there were pre-existing African communities that gave them permission to settle and these "families" paid tributes. All found in Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: A Historical Encyclopedia 252.

And Dr. Virginia Luling on her doctoral dissertation The social structure of southern Somali tribes" says this on page 177 https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1317929/

Already at this period the Sultanate of Zanzibar claimed sovereignty over the Benadir ports, but the control exercised was merely nominal. As far as Mogadishu was concerned, it was Yusuf who had the more immediately superior power. The city was then in the hands of the Abgal, and in a state of decay and near-ruin. Two years before, Yusuf' had been called in to mediate in a dispute over the succession to the position of Sheikh; the city was divided into two hostile quarters, which had become in effect rival towns. He had arrived with an army of about 8,000 men, and gave his decision in favour of the chief of the Shingani quarter. This latter's rival, unwilling to accept the decision, but unable to resist Yusuf's superior force, escaped from the city, leaving his section of it to be ruled by a kinsman.

How could Abgal 'pastoralists' who were not residing in the city before these walls were dismantled be governing an entire section of Mogadishu as Luling has explained?

The Geledi Sultan Yusuf was the more powerful man in regards to influence over Mogadishu than the Omanis as well, proving that the Omani presence as stated in the prior edit was truly nominal.

Again quoting Luling on page 187

When Sultan Sayyid Bargash, who had succeeded to the rule of Zanzibar, wanted to build the garesa or palace for his representative in Mogadishu, it was from Amed that he asked for help in inducing the Abgal not to interfere with the project

The Abgals needed to be dissuaded by the Geledi Sultan in order for the Sayyid Barghash to construct his residency inside Mogadishu. WanderingGeeljire (talk) 17:32, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Regarding the Abbasid - Ummayad question a consensus was already reached and the information was removed from the page. Stop removing cited content regarding the history of Mogadishu and adress them here. Your issue was with the Abbasid, Ummayad, Hirab and Ajuran. This is no reason for you to remove other content from the page. As I already explained to you Wikipedia is not a tool for propaganda. Just like for example adding the image [[13]] to the Hiraab Imamate page when the image has absolutely nothing to do with it.

(2) The Muzaffar dynasty was an Ajuran family that ruled Mogadishu:

The source from Abdirahman Abdullahi (Baadiyow) [14] is not WP:Mainstream. Second source you quote is also not from a famous scholar in Somali history [15]. Neither I.M. Lewis, or the Cambridge History of Africa mention anything about the Muzaffar being Ajuran in descent. Even Mohamed Haji Mukhtar in his book argues they were allied to the Ajuran Sultanate and formed a confederacy of which the Ajuran clan was the dominant element and I quote 'The Ajuran was the leading clan of a confederacy including the Muzaffar dynasty of Mogadishu, the Hawiye-affiliated clans, and the Reewin clans.'[16]. Even in the source you mention of Virginia Luling, she agrees that the Ajuran were allied to the Muzaffarid Dynasty and I quote The Ajuran were allied with the Mudaffar dynasty of Sultans in Mogadishu,under whom the city reached its greatest prosperity during the fifteenth century. [[17]]

(3) The source does not specifically mention (the Hirab Imamate) ruling Mogadishu.

(4) Regarding Arab settlers in Mogadishu you said These families only had religious influence, that is your own opinion not supported by I.M. Lewis or the Cambridge History of Africa. I already adressed this topic above in the Talk Page. The Cambridge history of Africa mentions Abubakar bin Fakhr al-Din being of Arab origin [18] and outlines how Mogadishu in it's early years from the 8th century was inhabited by Arab and later Persian immigrants who later formed a confederation. I.M Lewis a famous historian on Somali history is of the same view.[19].

(5)Concerning the Omani-Sultanate of Zanzibar, according to the The Cambridge history of Africa the Banadir coast was ruled from the 17th century up until the 19th century.

Moreover the relationship concerning the Geledi and Omani's is already outlined on the page and the friendship between both groups is explained. So removing the images of the governors of Mogadishu or the Omani suzerainty and them bombing the Banadir coast is WP:Propaganda. [20], [21],[22]

So I hope we can reach a consensus, the Abgal presence in Mogadishu can be outlined I agree since Virginia Luling mentions it, but that doesn't have anything to do with them building the Mogadishu walls. That is your complete fabrication.

Futhermore Virginia goes on to describe the inhabitants of Mogadishu and how the Abgal cause the decline in the prosperity of Mogadishu'they were followed by the Abgal, who took possession of the city; with them its decline apparently set in.'

This was probably due basically, however, to loss of trade; it was the time of Portuguese ascendancy in the Indian Ocean, disruption of earlier lines of communication, and hard times for Muslim merchants. The Abgal merely took advantage of the citys weakness to become its overlords.

'The original city population remained, however. They adopted the Somali language, but kept their distinctive way of life, though its standard declined steeply, and continued to marry only among themselves. They remained, as they still are, a light-skinned people quite different in appearance from the Somali'

Cheers --AlaskaLava (talk) 23:59, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Both Lewis and Mohamed Haji Mukhtar are outdated historians who have been discredited by modern scholars so using outdated sources is a weak argument straw and has no place on this page. Abdullahi Abdurahman is a modern historian so are Michael Dumper and ‎Bruce E. Stanley. They are backed by the majority of modern historians relating to these subjects. It doesn't mean anything if Lewis doesn't support these modern claims that are supported by the majority of modern historians.

M. Lewis the one you keep using even suggests Muzzafar dynasty were related to Ajuran, if not an Ajuran stock: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=XVgrDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT56&dq=Ajuran+related&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj0pd-dnO_sAhWHIMAKHSMZARwQ6AEwBHoECAUQAg#v=onepage&q=Ajuran%20related&f=false

Even Mohamed Haji Mukhtar stated Ajuran controlled the shores of the Indian ocean from Mareeg to the Kenyan frontier so your own source testifies Ajuran ruled the coastal strips including Mogadishu which is located between Mareeg and Kenyan frontier: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DPwOsOcNy5YC&pg=PA35&dq=Ajuran+coast&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwipgfzTnu_sAhX4QUEAHWqsADQQ6AEwAHoECAYQAg#v=onepage&q=Ajuran%20coast&f=false

Mogadishu came under the Hiraab Imamate rule after the fall of Ajuran and the Yaquubi Dynasty resided in Mogadishu that were leading the Hiraab state. They were independent for two centuries before facing internal problems in the late 19th century which was the reason why they were weakened. Go read 'The Shaping of Somali society by Lee Cassanelli'.

Failure to acknowledge that Luling very clearly stated that Abgal had control over the city yet you are pretending like this wall is designed to keep them out. If you wanted to be honest you could have stated that there were in fact Abgaals inside the wall instead of out

The Omani governors pictures can be readded sure but extra context from Luling which I provided above would make it more holistic instead of misleading.

Abgal were explicitly stated as being in control of Mogadishu and became the overlords, no other clan was stated as such, you seem to be dancing around this but the original population prior to them isn't relevant as they were not mentioned during this early modern period as being in control

Here straight from the British Parliament's Accounts and Papers Volume 70 recognizing the Geledi tribute levied on the Omani 'governor' of Brava/Barawe https://books.google.ca/books?id=nDlcAAAAQAAJ&pg=RA3-PA13&dq=abobokur+yusuf&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiSx6zkpu_sAhUkU98KHUxBBSAQ6AEwAHoECAAQAg#v=onepage&q=abobokur%20yusuf&f=false

The Chief of this and the other tribes behind Brava , Marka , and Mogdisho is Ahmed Yusuf, who resides at Galhed, one day 's march or less from the latter town . Two days further inland is Dafert, a large town governed by Aweka Haji, his brother. These are the
principal towns of the Ruhwaina. At four, five, and six hours respectively from Marka lie the towns of Gulveen , Bulo , Marerta, and Addormo, governed by Abobokur Yusuf, another brother, who, though nominally under the orders of the first -named Chief, levies black -mail on his own account, and negotiates with the Governors of Marka and Brava direct. He resides with about 2 ,000 soldiers , principally slaves, at Bulo Marerta ; the towns of Gulveen , which he often visits, and Addormo being occupied by Somalis growing produce, cattlc , & c ., and doing a large trade with Marka.
This Abobokur Yusuf was accustomed to send messengers to Brava for tribute , and he drew from thence about 2, 000 dollars per annum . But he also occasionally wrote direct to the late Mr. Heale for money , and on one occasion , if not more frequently,
obtained large sums from him.

WanderingGeeljire (talk) 20:48, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Its absurd that even after an entire new section was created that addresses both the old founding myths and the current view on the origins of Somali cities, that AlaskaLava decided without discussing to reinsert fringe theories and 'nominal' claims about Somali cities. Which is tantamount to adding Ottoman 'nominal' claims to Morrocan cities, or Italian cities or Indian cities, or any other periphery state that the Ottoman Empire sailed through, tried to conquer or once 'bombarded'.

The Omanis, were for most of the 15th to 18th centuries under Portuguese and Persian colonization, while Somali cities fended off Portuguese domination and remained independent. Yes, the Portuguese bombed Mogadishu and Barawa too, but that doesn't mean we can now add a Portuguese Mogadishu section, no that would be undue weight, and is uncharacteristic to how history is treated about every city or country, why should Mogadishu be different? It shouldn't.

The removal of decorative images of so-called governors, who didn't actually govern anything according to several sources, is not propaganda, its simple historic fact. These so-called governors were in-fact 'custom officers'. This combined with Sayyid Barghash having to ask for permission from the Geledi Sultan to build a fort in the city shows that beyond 'claiming' they had no control or impact on the day to day of the city, which was in-fact in the hands of the local Mogadishans and the Geledi Sultan.

Mogadishu on the other hand, was really controlled by the Sultan of the Geledi, and minor ports were in the hands of members of other clans. The only representatives of the Sultan of Zanzibar were customs officers, who collected the income of a trade which had been much less influenced by new demands and forces than that of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. -- The Cambridge History of Africa, Volume 5 - Page 88

As for the medieval 'Arab/Persian' origins this issue has also been addressed with several RECENT sources that highlight the Arab and Persian founding myths were once a popular answer to the origins of Somali cities, but have since been considered outdated. Ross E. Dunn makes it clear that these cities were in-fact African owned and founded, while the Arabs and Persians were nothing more than immigrants that were given permission to stay after fleeing their war-torn kingdoms and regions. What you're doing is placing undue weight on a single origin myth and have weaved a non-neutral POV narrative that completely takes the Somali people out of their own history, despite archaeological evidence, medieval accounts and modern scholars all contradicting this point of view.

Neither Mogadishu nor any other town on the coast could be described as alien enclaves of Arabs or Persians, ethnically isolated from the mainland populations. On the contrary, these were African towns, inhabited largely by people of African descent, whether Somali or Bantu-speaking stock. - The Adventures of Ibn Battuta: A Muslim Traveler of the Fourteenth Century Page 124 by Ross E Dunn

and another recent source:

Despite the tradition that Muslim immigrants “founded” the Benadir ports, it is now widely accepted that there were pre-existing communities here with African leadership who welcomed these exiles, although the Arab traders had to gain permission to stay, and they had to settle in particular quarters of the town. -- Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: A Historical Encyclopedia Page 252 by Michael Dumper, Bruce E. Stanley

Its ironic that you keep mentioning I.M Lewis, when he is in-fact referenced in the article and his POV is also highlighted. The current ethnicity section is written in a neutral POV and with a updated view on African Studies, especially Somali Studies and the origins of its many old cities, some of which predated Islam, making the Arab Muslim founding myth a logical fallacy.

The Cambridge History of Africa is also not the end all and be all for African scholarship, but even if we were to treat it as such, you will still not come to the same non-neutral POV that you have attempted to create in this article, for in that same Cambridge source, we have passages such as this:

Pre-islamic immigration of Arabs from Himyar in southern Arabia, their founding of most of the more important towns of the coast from Mogadishu to Mombasa, and also Kilwa, together with their subsequent conversion to Islam, is uncorroborated by other sources, and unsupported by archaeological evidence, and must be dismissed as unhistorical. - Page 198

and this:

The traditional view that the Galla preceded the Somali in the Horn is no longer valid. It is rather the Somali who are referred to in the accounts of early Arab geographers. In fact, there was a basic continuity in the use of the term Berber since the first century of the Christian era to describe the land and the people of the Horn. The Periplus, Claudius Ptolemy, and Cosmas Indicopleustes employed it in much the same way as the Arab geographers did after the ninth century. There seems to be no doubt that the Arab geographers had particularly the Somali in mind when they spoke of the 'Black Berbers' of the Horn; and the earlier use of the term by Greek writers may very well indicate a more ancient occupancy of the Horn by the same stock of people.

The contacts between the Near and the Middle East on the one hand, and the African side of the Gulf of Aden on the other, were very old and regular; and the earliest advent of Islam in these regions must have certainly occurred within the first century of the Muslim era. The inhabitants of the Horn at that time seem to have been the ancestors of the present-day Somali. Their most important coastal settlements were Zeila and Berbera on the Gulf of Aden, and Mogadishu, Merca and Brava on the Benadir coast. Each of these settlements apparently owed its growth and development to regular stream of merchants from Arabia, and from the countries around the Persian Gulf, who visited these places and who later started to live in them. - Page 135

I also find it strange that you refer to Abdirahman Abdullahi's source as not being WP:Mainstream when he is in-fact with a reputable peer-reviewed Publisher of African non-fiction / journals[23]. Using Wikipedia guidelines to wrongfully dismiss credible sources is not a sign of someone trying to engage in a good-faith discussion, but even then we could use a different source that points out the same fact:

An Ajuran family, Mudaffar, established a dynasty in the city, thus linking the two entities together; for the next 350 years. - Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: A Historical Encyclopedia Page 253 by Michael Dumper, Bruce E. Stanley

As I said in a different talk page; if the POVs of the sources you are using are being highlighted, and if those same sources also take a position that the Somali people were most likely the first inhabitants and founders of those same coastal cities, why are you engaging in an Edit war and trying to silence the neutral POV that takes a broader look at the founding origins? Multiple editors have pointed out the undue weight you have placed on fringe theories and brief historic episodes in both Somali articles. This is disruptive editing. --GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 03:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add a few points adressin what Askalava said . First things first. I already created a talk page to discuss these things up above and told you that i would edit them out and you should reply back to me if there is anything else or for us to reach a consensus. You didn't answer me back and i left it. And then others made additions. They removed them because they have been discredited by modern scholars and are considered outdated views that conflict with sources and archeological evidence

Also as @GoldenDragonHorn pointed out adding Arab and Persian fringe theories into the mix disqualifies it on wikipedia because because it's undue weight. There are several different sources we have listed

1) The Archaeology of Islam in Sub-Saharan Africa states:

I.M Lewis(1994:140)suggests that along with Barawa, Mogadishu was founded in the tenth century. Jamaa(1990:07) similarly refers to a tradition that records te immigration of a group of Arabs from the Persian Gulf who supposedly founded both cities at the time same date. However, he discounts this tradition on the basis of epigraphic evidence, namely a tombstone of a woman which was found in mogadishu dated to c.720 CE. This an importanr piece of evidence...

3) Then which a study that is cited in that book The Origins and Development of Mogadishu AD 1000 to 1850 Ahmed Dualel! Jama[24]

and which is not a thesis by the way it's a credible peer reviewed study cited in many books, you can do a google check it here [25] and it's carried out by archeological unit for Mombasa Museum in Kenya. It States:

Recent oral, written and archaeological evidence, however, contradicts the outright view of the Middle Eastern origins of the coastal settlements. Firstly, the guide book called the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, written in the first century AD, and translated several times into English by various scholars' such as Casson, under the title of the Periplus Maris Erythraei, alludes to those towns as 'Sarapion' and 'Nicon' respectively (Casson 1989, pp. 138-39)

5) That last bit of text you showed about the original population speaking a different language is an assumption made by Virginia Lulling & co in connection with the Kitab Al Zunuj foundation origins which has also been investigated in the archeological study and it states:

Addressing the origins of this Swahili dialect in the Barawa of today, Hersi (1977), writes that, towards the end of the fifteenth century, a new group of Arab retumees from Spain wandered up and down the East African Coast before finally settling in Barawa, and this, together with Barawa's strong trade ties with the south, may account for the Swahili linguistic ties.Other scholars maintain that, the Swahili dialect called Chimini, spoken in Barawa, indicates that, the original population was strong enough to resist the influence of both Somali and Arabic. Oral traditions collected for this research support the former position

For Example Barawa in particular speaking Swahili and the difference between Barawa and other ports as this text says is that later migrants came at turn of the 15th century which is what accounts for the presence of the language. Persumeably to seek refuge from the Portugese. It's actually the reverse that happened in what was originally posited. Barawa was founded by a saint from the Tunni clan called Aw-Ali Barrow majority of scholars particularly agree on that (See:[26]) and Raxanweyn was the earliest settlers there and established that port. So the idea that the original population spoke swahili or another language is not well accepted as the source above me shows.

6) And like i added in the Foundation & origins section the majority of Benadiris are majority Gibil Madow and these clan groups have been thought to have lived there for several centuries and claim Somali clan lineages from either north or the interior with Moorshe being regarded as the oldest clan in the city and are Ajuuran. They are not recent arrivals nor do their origins stories even reflect that they came with Abgaal to overtake a city filled with lightskins who originally spoke a different language which you are positing and they are not even politically tied to them. Merka and Mogadishu speak much the same dialect as the surounding clans in the interior and that live in the cities which is called Af Reer Xamar and this also mentioned by Ibn Batuta in his meeting with the Sultan that he spoke Af Xamar. They were not isolated or seperated by the wall.

The walls itself was built in many wealthy cities on being in Zeila, Berbera, Afgooye, Harrar etc. And they acted as prolifiration for arms before Merchants could enter the cities and not just to protect the cities from external threat. It was not designed to keep Somali pastoralists outside the city walls because these same clans have sections of them who lived in the coastal cities doing business as well as the interior.

AKA Reer Magaal and Reer Badiyoo

8) About Omani you fail to mention key details because on wikipedia there should be neutral inclusive view, not undue weight and stating as such it is inaccurate for the aforementioned reasons in these sources [27] [28] That it was joint rule but ultimately Omani/Zanibaris rule was not more than nominal(Only Existing in name) they had no real authority at all. They had to ask for permission to build the fort and citizens of benadir respected the authority of Geledi much less so Zanzibari. Meanwhile Geledis authority had to be respected by the Omanis in return like the sources states. Even Viriginia luling states the Omani rule was nominal. [29]. So the section on it is fine the way it is and it clarifies the relationship and their role. They laid nominal claim to Benadiri had frendship cooperations with eachother but ultimately the direct rulers were Geledi and before that Hiraab. Merka came under Biimal direct rule after being nested from Geledi whom they were living under. As the sources states, there is no propaganda.

And the so called Governors you wanted to add one was a native Somali as well. As I'M lewis even notes, so i am not sure if it even adds to anything because they didn't really govern anything like GoldenDragonHorn stated and were actually customs officer representatives.

There has been provided enough reliable sources to subtaniate things and reach consensus and there is not much left to talk out or discuss in my opinion. Ragnimo (talk) 07:17, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's laughable you guys try to call notable historians on Somali history outdated like I.M. Lewis, but try to pass off unknown writers as credible to further your propaganda. That is not how Wikipedia works guys. The most scholarly work is of importance. Kindly look back at your arguments. --AlaskaLava (talk) 20:01, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have yet to make any response when your own scholars go against your propaganda.

You claimed Lewis didn't mention the Muzaffar dynasty being Ajuran yet he clearly states.

Mogadishu was ruled by the Muzzafar dynasty, an aristocracy related to the Ajuran if not actually of Ajuran stock.

Source: A Modern History of the Somali: Nation and State in the Horn of Africa

Mohamed Haji Mukhtar another scholar you like to use even confirms Ajuran's rule over Mogadishu since the 13th century stating Ajuran ruled from the coast of Mareeg in central Somalia all the way to the Kenyan frontier and Mogadishu is just located in-between.

AJURAN. An imamate or dynasty that emerged in Somalia to control the Shabelle valley from Qallafo, on the upper Shabelle, to the shores of the Indian Ocean, and from Mareeg on the central Somali coast to the Kenyan frontiers in the southwest, thus controlling most of the south-central regions of contemporary Somalia, from the mid-13th to the late 17th centuries.

Source: Historical Dictionary of Somalia page 35.

Virginia Luling and Lee Cassanelli are both very popular historians in Somali history subjects. Even Lewis and Haji Mukhtar often quote from these two historians and here is what Lee Cassanelli said about Hiraab Imamate.

The Imamate formed a clear division of power. The alliance involved the army leaders and advisors of the Habar Gidir and Duduble, a Fiqhi/Qadi of Sheikhal, and the Imam was reserved for the Mudulood branch who is believed to have been the firstborn. Once established, the Imamate ruled the territories stretching from Mogadishu in the Banaadir province along the coast to as far as the port town of Hobyo in the northernmost central town.

Source: The Shaping of Somali society by Lee Cassanelli.

Even after 3 editors have come to provide ample evidence, instead of countering said claims you rebutted with a meagre 4 sentences which is quite insulting honestly. WanderingGeeljire (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because there is no need to go back and forth. I am literally the only one here willing to reach consensus and add the views of all scholars on Somali history rather than omitting parts, when it comes to Ajuran I am willing to add what the different scholars their views are, Virginia Luling, Haji Mukhtar,I.M Lewis or The Cambridge History of Africa. You guys just wanted to add that the Muzaffar were of Ajuran descent when I literally showed you guys that even scholars are uncertain. Please do not come forward with random writers who have no credentials. Completely omitting everything just because it doesn't suit your agenda is not how Wikipedia works and calling one of the most famous or notable scholars on Somali history outdated is sad to say the least. --AlaskaLava (talk) 22:20, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1) The idea that some of his views are outdated did not originated with any of us. It is not our opinion. Multiple scholars have many of his views are outdated and retired. Take for example his view of Galla(Oromo) proceeding Somalis (i.e The Somali Conquest of the Horn of Africa) it has been debunked and over turned by multiple scholars like Herbert Lewis[30][31],Turton, Harold Flemming and even Umar Mansur.

Turns out it wasn't even based on Somali oral tradition either but something he fabricated and maintained by him and he found contradictions every step of the way. Also him having outdated colonialist views can also be gleamed from his usage of Hamites to describe Somalis with which is an outdated white supremacist colonialist theory and its considered pseudoscientific and pseudohistory. You wont find any modern scholars using that term to describe Somalis with today but you can find them used with abundance by I'M Lewis and which other scholars have criticized him for (See: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43660151?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents).

Practically all elements of Hamitic Hypothesis are here , with the excepetion of Arab influences replaces the more usual Caucasian

His point of view was heavily motivated by Hamiticism. Thats why he puts undueweight of Arabs and Arab influence all over Somali history when there is no real basis for it. It's psuedo history/science. And it disqualifies wikipedias guidelines of WP:FRINGE/PS

2) Not a single person here included unknown Authors. Every author are reputable and are cited and refrenced in many Peer reviewed, books, publications and sources as well as topics around Somali studies.Like we have carefully explained and shown, again u place doubt on them because what they say doesn't fit ur agenda.

Furthermore you seem to Mention Mainstream a lot but when there has been refrenced literally Encyclopedia Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: A Historical Encyclopedia giving out what is actually a mainstream view of what is widely considered by scholars and it was written in 2007. not 1975. This is a Historical ecyclopedia and follows Wikpedia conventions of Wikipedia is an encyclopedia WP:MAINSTREAM Yet you keep ignoring it because it doesn't fit your preconcieved narrative of Mogadishu.

3) Lastly GoldenDragonHorn added a section with a neutral POV which is very much in line with WP:NPOV He included the point of view of I'M Lewis in addition to what is widely accepted today and added sources for them.

Same goes for the Omani-geledi section which is created: Which is also been written from a neutral point of view. Not giving anything undueweight inline with the wikipedias guidelines.

To me it seems as if you are not interested in looking at the sources given . Consensus to you means reaching some sort of compromise to include or put undue weight on something that simply isn't well accepted anymore or not true at all for ur own Arab nationalist propaganda. Wikipedia:Propaganda

There is nothing left to discuss in my opinion unless u have anything contesting whats been given and to me it seems like you have an arab nationalist agenda. . Ragnimo (talk) 03:46, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This issue is not gonna stop unless you guys deal with your own foreign myth, it is pointless trying to fend off AlaskaLava by claiming all these Sultanates were ruled by native Somalis when every Somali clan wiki says they are Arab migrants. This Arab myth needs to be removed from every clan and the main wiki and replaced with DNA sources, otherwise you can't say the Mudaffar or any Arabs were foreigners and Somalis were natives when every clan is claiming to be foreigners in their own clan wiki. Toltol15 (talk) 02:00, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Rsk6400 second account? and did you follow me from the hamite talk page and then insert urself here?

What you are talking about is unrelated to this discussion. Mogadishus founding is not even based on Somali clan patriarch quraishi myths. Unless Fakr Ad din is being talked about. Thats something entirely different. It is based on the undue weight I'M Lewis assigns to Arab influences which is coneccted to his adoption of the Hamitic hypothesis and the psuedo historical 19th century book Kitaab Al Zunuj which states mogadishu was founded in 10th century by Arab/Persian migrants, it has since been discredited by modern scholars. Also Muddaffar being Ajuuran isn't really in doubt though as far as i know even I'M Lewis himself says as much.

What's being argued here isn't that 'Somalis come from Arabs and therefore the cities were founded by Arabs' , if thats what you are assuming. No one can posit or even begin to think that. But the case is Mogadishu had real migrants that settled there, but they didn't establish it and remained assimilated minorities under the rulership of the natives

There is nothing left to talk about, these views are dead and outdated. And the sources show it.Ragnimo (talk) 03:24, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not Rsk6400, I'm actually having a talk with him on the Somali wiki so I can't be him, I came here because it's kind of related and I just wanted to drop my 2 cents, whether Somalis come from Qurayshi or Arab is not the issue here and I am aware of that and I did not come here for that, I came here because I noticed you guys are using the "native" argument to support your claim when all over Wikipedia it says that Somalis are Arab migrants and the patriarch came from Yemen in the 9th century, and you are here refusing AlaskaLava Arab migrant settlers of the 10th century, this does not make any sense. I removed his Hamitic myth from the Dir wiki but he added it back, every time someone removes the Somali Arab descent myth he adds it back and the reason I am guessing is because it supports his Arab settlers claim of Somalia, as long as this Somali Arab myth is supported and spread deliberately by Somali editors you cannot use the "native" argument and refuse others as not being natives. A better way to support you claim is to remove the Arab myth from the clan wikis first and then you can have a strong case but as long as clans are claiming descent from Yemeni Sheiks it will be a matter of who came first and not native vs foreigner. Toltol15 (talk) 05:57, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Toltol15: Thank you for notifying me. @Ragnimo: I notified you on your talk page that you should assume good faith. I was not happy that you set a link to my user page without notifying me via ping. BTW: Wikipedia:Indentation makes discussions easier to understand. --Rsk6400 (talk) 07:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies to you and Toltol. It wasn't my attention to be accusatory of any kind. I saw you edited his talk page and i just thought it might be an alternate account as that is allowed here.

But back to the topic of Somali peoples nativity , if you look at Somalis article it says Somalis (Somali: Soomaalida) are an ethnic group belonging to the Cushitic peoples native to Greater Somalia. It doesnt state that they are foreigners or non-native on any pages as an ethnic group. That itself should never be in doubt because they speak a cushitic language

Also what i was saying is this is a bit seperate from the discussion we are having on mogadishu but yeah i can certainly remove or clarfiy the false mythic nature of certain clan lineages on the wikipages when i have time later on and edit in new information about it if you think it will help. Ragnimo (talk) 09:18, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The cushitic thing still falls in the purview of the Hamitic theory and the Yemeni migrants Somalis are believed to have descended from could have spoken it, this whole thing is still the Hamitic theory but removing these myths from the clan wikis as a start should at least give credence to your nativism claim here and elsewhere. Toltol15 (talk) 15:17, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just to keep things short guys we will go through every paragraph and add the views of all scholars, cherry picking Virginia Luling her research won't cut it. My view is to add the views of the notable scholars in a neutral view in all paragraphs. Also the images will be re-added since they are invaluable to the history of Mogadishu. I don't have an agenda and won't point fingers to some of you who do. I consider myself the most neutral here. Cheers --AlaskaLava (talk) 21:21, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely not neutral in this discussion, the fact that you wrongfully started a sock-puppet investigation, on two individuals in this talk-page, with the flimsiest of evidence is a strong sign that you rather silence the consensus than engage in good-faith discussion. You most definitely DO have an agenda on Wikipedia, as was pointed out by several people in this discussion and by @TheseusHeLl in your own sock-puppet investigation[32], where the pattern highlighted was the repeated insertion of "Arab" in non-Arab Islamic figures and historic societies using fringe-theories and sources.

You have also not addressed a single point in the above replies that dissect and pick-apart your cherry-picked propaganda vis-à-vis Somali history and the sources used, but are already mentioning 'new edits', which is absurd because you have yet to defend and justify your original edits. The images of 'custom-officers' also don't add anything to the article or the history of Mogadishu, and is a strong example of decorative imagery[33], when the accompanying information in the article is sufficient enough. --GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 14:15, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Toltol15 Somalis do not descend from Yemeni migrants. Cushitic is an indigenous language only to Northeast Africa and hasnt been spoken anywhere else. See: Cushitic peoples. The only language ever been spoken in Yemeni has been Semetic. Cushitic does not fall in the same purview of hamitic, they dont relate to eachother other than them being named after biblical terms. One is psuedhistory/psuedoscience and the other is an Ethnolinguistic term with real basis. If you are not familiar with Somalia or horn of africa affair, i suggest you defer to those who more knoweledgeable than you and not be argumentative for the sake of it on a talk page. I took ur suggestion on cleaning up the clan lineage pages i will get around to doing it.

GoldenDragonHorn Thank you for sharing that with us. So i was correct in my assertion that he had an arab nationalist agenda. Everything pointed out in that sockpuppet investigation u linked is the exact same thing we have experienced dealing with him. I was trying to assume Good faith by reasoning with him but it seems as if we all been wasting our time and he was a sock all this time. While we are on the topic can someone look into Magherbin? He has the same pattern as Alaskalava he makes disruptive edits around horn african muslim related wiki articles but loves to add Arab personalities into non Arab-islamic figures [34]. When i tried explaining to him that that Somalis being called berber had no relations to the bebers in Maghreb he just ignored me kept pressing on[35], i doubt anybody that dense to even comprehend things. They both have obvious ethnonationalist agendas behind their editings.

It seems as if Him and Askalava took advantage of how most of the old time Somali editors either are inactive, retired, banned or blocked to go on their disruptive editing progaganda spree without being met with resistance or be checked for it.

btw for contextual purpose those costume officer representatives were actually petitioned to be sent[36] by the elders in Xamar as a neutral counter balance to Sultan of Geledis influence and hostility in town affairs during a struggle for supremacy by various ruling factions in Mogadishu. A Somali called Cali Maxamed sent from Zanzibar. Not exactly indicative of Zanzibari imposed rule but on the countrary more or less shows how Geledi was the imposing rulers-Ragnimo (talk) 13:22, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Abshir55 You have obviously not properly checked the sources as you claimed. It's obvious you're purposely vandalizing articles in order to suit your agenda due to your tribal affiliations. I'm simply an editor on Wikipedia that keeps tabs on history. Now to stay on topic, I will show you what the sources actually say and you have no way around to remove them.

The social structure of southern Somali tribes" page 177 says: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1317929/

Already at this period the Sultanate of Zanzibar claimed sovereignty over the Benadir ports, but the control exercised was merely nominal. As far as Mogadishu was concerned, it was Yusuf who had the more immediately superior power. The city was then in the hands of the Abgal, and in a state of decay and near-ruin. Two years before, Yusuf' had been called in to mediate in a dispute over the succession to the position of Sheikh; the city was divided into two hostile quarters, which had become in effect rival towns. He had arrived with an army of about 8,000 men, and gave his decision in favour of the chief of the Shingani quarter. This latter's rival, unwilling to accept the decision, but unable to resist Yusuf's superior force, escaped from the city, leaving his section of it to be ruled by a kinsman.

Somalia: A Chronology of Historical Documents 1827-2000 - Page 5 says:

In 1843 an annual taxation was re - imposed and Sultan Yusuf Mahamed a Somali from Geledi ( Digil subclan ) was named governor of Mogadishu .

Ayaltimo 20:49, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First sentence of History section

The first section of the History section says

Tradition and old records assert that southern Somalia, including the Mogadishu area, was inhabited very early by hunter-gatherers.

I mean, this can't be true, at least not the "very early". "Very early" would have been thousands of years ago -- many, actually. There are no traditions and old records that go back that far. How about either

Tradition and old records assert that southern Somalia was inhabited by hunter-gatherers into historical times.

or

TSouthern Somalia was inhabited very earlyby hunter-gatherers into historical times.

I'm not familiar with this article and not up to working thru the sources. Just pointing this out. Herostratus (talk) 00:02, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GAR

Mogadishu

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Lacks some citations, but more importantly recent updates in the history section. Is additionally recent-biased in economy section. As Dr. Blofeld notes, not a lot of work required, just some diligent copyediting and sourcing. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A GA from 2014. There is many unsourced material (such as the entirety of the culture: general section.) along with some supposedly needed updates and a better wording of

"In October 2017, over 500 people were killed by a truck bombing.[citation needed]

In March 2022, al-Shabaab killed over 60 people in a series of attacks.[122]

In October 2022, an al-Shabaab double car bombing killed over 120 people.[citation needed]"

among many other things. If that can be addressed then this will not have to be delisted. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The economy section displays recentism, only covering events since 2011. Steelkamp (talk) 05:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly the main article writer Middayexpress was blocked in 2015. The article has degraded since 2014 through overediting. I don't know if Fsmatovu wants to take a look at it and see if he can source and improve it to retain GA status? I don't think it needs a lot of work, just to check there are no unsourced claims, removed what can't be sourced and avoid the short snappy sentences like those mentioned above.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:14, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

New mogadishu

Mogadishu way so kortay 70% 197.220.92.24 (talk) 17:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Brett, Michael (1 January 1999). "Ibn Khaldun and the Medieval Maghrib". Ashgate/Variorum. Retrieved 6 April 2018 – via Google Books.

[2] ttps://www.landinfo.no/asset/1091/1/1091_1.pdf

[1]

[2]