User talk:70.74.238.17

March 2015

Hello, I'm Gyrofrog. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-Ghazi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Gyrofrog (talk) 17:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Walashma Dynasty

The Walashma have two genealogies:

• One points to Yusuf bin Ahmad al-Kawneyn, a Somali saint who devised a system a Somali nomenclature for Arabic vowels, his work eventually evolving into Wadaad writing. A Harari historian shared this [-], as did the semi-legendary apologetic "History of the Walashma" [-] and Enrico Cerulli (a scholar in Ethiopian & Somali studies) who got the genealogy from Harar [I.M Lewis notes it down as it was taken by Cerulli]. It's only through him in this genealogy that they have 'Arab origins' because this Somali saint like all Somalis had an Arabian genealogy (even groups like Harari people have such genealogies; they're rarely ever to never legitimate)...

• The other genealogy which is the most accepted and shared, even shared by the famous Ibn Khaldun [-], is one that claims they are descended from Aqeel Ibn Abi Talib via the supposed Darod clan ancestor Isma'il al-Jabarti whose only descendant ever known to affect the Horn of Africa in anyway was Abidrahman, founder of the Darod clan. With any group claiming a Jeberti/Jabarti connection including Jeberti people [-] who are mostly Tigrinya Muslims associating themselves with the Darod clan progenitor who supposedly came to the Somali Peninsula and took a daughter of the Dir clan chief named Dobira as his wife.

Their genealogies are "Arab", yes. Just like all Somali genealogies are but just as the Walashma page stated (you apparently didn't read all of it and see it's mentioning of where their genealogies trace to? Idk) their genealogies tie them directly & clearly to Somali figures who in turn claim Arab origins which are totally unlikely to even impossible (claiming to be descended from Hashemites/ relatives of the Prophet for example). Anyway, this is why historians such as I.M Lewis do not simply call them Arabs but "Arabized Somalis" or "Somalized Arabs" [-]. Go to the talk page, there're even more sources on this there (I think it was the last discussion where a member was claiming they were Argobba).

They weren't Arabs (if you consider them "Arabs" then all Somalis are Arabs-> I suppose some would argue that though despite the genetic clarity that isn't true ;) ) and I suggest you read the page you're editing and the various sources as well as genealogies shared on it before you make such an edit... Otherwise; take care of yourself, man. And welcome to editing Wikipedia. Awale-Abdi (talk) 12:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Discussion on the Walashma Talk page

I made a discussion at the end of the Walashma talk page-> do check it out. Out of respect I wrote "Somalized Arab" or "Arabized Somali" on the page for neutrality's sake until we're done with our discussion. If you don't join in on the discussion then you're basically just edit warring, man. And that is against the rules here. So please; just join in, we'll have a civil conversation and hopefully move onto the lives we both have outside of this site. Thanks, I did appreciate your "multi-ethnic" compromise, says to me that you're interested in being civil here, thanks. Awale-Abdi (talk) 07:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:37, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Harari234 with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Amaury (talk) 03:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

Hello, 70.74.238.17. This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Zekenyan (talk) 18:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Would you kindly stop edit warring and socking Harari234? AcidSnow (talk) 15:50, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring already. AcidSnow (talk) 18:28, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

You don't know anything about the history Acidsnow. What your doing is being selfish adding false information. Its pretty obvious that you want to claim Adal and Ifat Somali. So I think your the one who should stop editing. Before you and your friends came it was said to be a "Muslim Sultanate"(Which was true), but when you guess came, you guess started adding the Adal and Ifat Somali even though the dynasty was not. You clearly don't know a lot of the history, which you need to research and read more about.

P.S: I think you should gain more consensus. 70.74.238.17 (talk) 20:35, May 4 2015 (UTC)

Gain consensus? I had consensus since the beginning. You shouldn't be suprised that it was a Muslim Sultanate since that's what all Somali Sultanates were. Anyways, sign into your account. AcidSnow (talk) 18:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

I already warned you numerous of times so don't be surprised. AcidSnow (talk) 23:41, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Acidsnow's behavior is unacceptable. can you comment here. [1] Zekenyan (talk) 21:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

This is User:Harari234 and he is forbidden to edit on Wikipedia. AcidSnow (talk) 22:13, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@70.74 LOL you dont seem to know history that well. You even reverted one of my edits. Are you just here to revert every users edits? Zekenyan (talk) 09:43, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

70.74/ Harari234 doesn't know anything about the Horn's history at all... In fact he tried to claim that the Walashma had to be Arabs because they spoke Arabic (a Semitic language). Apparently he didn't realize that nearly every Muslim dynasty in the Horn whether Somali or Harari tended to know how to speak Arabic:

"As we have said, the Sultan of Mogadishu is called Shaikh by his subjects. His name is Abu Bakr ibn Shaikh Omar and by he is a Barbara He talks in the dialect of Mogadishu (Somali), but knows Arabic."

That was in the 14th Century in Mogadishu where the "Barbara" (a term used for Somalis and some other pastoral nomadic Cushitic speakers in the Somali Peninsula during the Middle Ages) Sultan of Mogadishu spoke Arabic alongside his native "Mogadishan" (generally assumed to be Benadiri Somali).

sources on the encounter: [-] , [-]

Even the Warsangali Dynasty's rulers like the Walashma could speak Arabic (and they were contemporaries of the Walashma who ruled lands nearby to theirs). Hell, Somali dynasties as late as the 19th Century would use Arabic to keep their records or to conduct trade. It was the language of literacy and trade in the Eastern Horn of Africa for a millennia or more & a chap who seemingly did not know this has no business editing anything on the Horn of Africa's history. Awale-Abdi (talk) 15:01, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for evading a previous block. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 10:35, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

---