Jump to content

Talk:Arab migrations to the Maghreb

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleArab migrations to the Maghreb was one of the History 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
DateProcessResult
August 14, 2023Good article nomineeListed
September 2, 2024Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Arab migrations to the Maghreb/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Steelkamp (talk · contribs) 14:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Steelkamp (talk) 14:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article criteria

[edit]

Well written

[edit]
  • Optional: There are a lot of duplicate links which should mostly be removed, particularly for duplicate links within the same paragraph. Duplicate links may be left as is if they are in different sections though. Duplicate links can be easily idenfitied using duplinks-alt.
  • "During the earliest Muslim conquests..." Can you give a timeframe for this in years?
  • "7th-8th century." Should this be changed to "7th or 8th century"?
  • "The Umayyad Caliphate was aware of the importance of the spread and settlement of Arabs in the Maghreb." Importance to who?
  • "anti-Kharijite wars". Is there a Wikipedia page this can link to?
  • "Ifriqiya (modern-day Tunisia)". This note could be shifted up to the first mention of Ifriqiya.
  • "To weaken resistance by Arab tribes in Ifriqiya, the Almohad ruler Abd al-Mu'min transferred them to Morocco in large numbers and settled them in the Atlantic plains." This sentence could mention the century/decade if that is known. I know it already says the century in the section title but I think it should be written in the paragraph as well.
  • "Under the Marinids, the Arabs grew in importance in Morocco." Same here. I think the time period should be mentioned.
  • "The appearance of the Arabs added to the complexity of the ethnic population of Morocco". I think this can be reworded. It's not exactly clear what it means.
  • "The Almohad ruler Abd al-Mu'min". This can be simplified to "Abd al-Mu'min" seeing as he is already introduced earlier in the paragraph.
  • "and also dominated the valleys of the Moulouya, Draa, Sous, as well as the Tafilalt oasis region." What is this referring to? Should this sentence be split into two?
  • Is Harry Norris a historian? Should this be prefaced by "Historian Harry Norris"?
  • "A major effect of the Arab migrations to the Maghreb was the Arabization of its population. In addition to changing the population's demographics, the migration resulted in the Arabization of the native Berber population." Could these sentences be simplified? Aren't these sentences saying the same thing?
  • "The Arabization took place around Arab centres". What does this mean? Is this referring to Arab centres in the Maghreb?
  • "The migration of Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym in the 11th century had a much greater influence on the process of Arabization of the population." I suggest changing this to "The migration of Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym in the 11th century had a much greater influence on the process of Arabization than the migration beforehand."

Verifiable with no original research

[edit]

Broad in its coverage

[edit]

Neutral

[edit]

Stable

[edit]

Illustrated, if possible

[edit]

General

[edit]

Looks good enough to me now. Will pass this review. Steelkamp (talk) 09:17, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some important details to add

[edit]

Luis del Mármol Carvajal's figures are greatly exaggerated when we know that they considered the Banu Ifran (Berber tribe) to also number a million individuals. Let us add to this that, for example, according to the same author, the Berber language was still predominantly spoken in Morocco, the population of the Maghreb after these invasions was largely Berber according to this author but also according to Leo Africanus and Ibn Khaldoun.


This information has been omitted, however, you insist on the number of Hilalians who came to settle in the Maghreb.


But for that you would have to have read the books talking about these events to know: Histoire des berbères et des dynasties musulmanes de l'Afrique septentrionale, Les prolégomènes d'Ibn Khaldoun or L'Afrique de Marmol.



The Adam Truth (talk) 15:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is called Wikipedia:Original research, and therefore does not belong in Wikipedia. Skitash (talk) 16:13, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nope since I am relying on the point of view of historians but also on the books that you yourself use for your article (and which you obviously do not have in full).Your own source proves that the numbers are exaggerated. But once again, you didn't read it in its entirety. We call it "cherry picking". The Adam Truth (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you take another look at the article. Marmol is not the only historian who estimates such figure. Skitash (talk) 16:19, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Marmol or other, we understand that the figures have been greatly inflated when we know that Ibn Khaldoun affirmed that the Berbers were largely the majority in the Maghreb even after these Arab invasions. You insist on the Arab demographic contribution but you do not talk about the demographic state of the Maghreb after these invasions because you are not neutral. In fact, this means that these millions of Arabs have always been a very small number. minority compared to the Berbers, this does not agree with modern figures. The numbers are inflated. Modern historians have also confirmed this, but you do not cite them, you are not neutral. The Adam Truth (talk) 16:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't recall bringing up any majority or any of the nonsense points you have just mentioned. A widely accepted figure remains widely accepted. Moreover, I'm not inclined to waste any more time discussing with an obvious SPA, particularly given your similar cross-wiki abuse activities in other Wikipedias. Skitash (talk) 16:40, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Already answered this. Seeking to reestablish the truth on subjects that various propagandists attempt to distort is not shameful or incriminating, far from it. Good night. The Adam Truth (talk) 16:48, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This article is shocking. Crackpot research, fabricated figures, and impossible facts to know are being presented as well established facts. This article is pseudoscience. There is simply no feasible means by which 150,000 medieval Arabs could be classified with such a precise and distinct ethnicity, to have participated in a specific event unless it was a documented battle. 150,000 Arabs, migrated to here. Did you dream that number up? What is your source? Did they dream that number up? Not to mention what does 'Arab' actually mean when applied to these hypothetical medieval people? Certainly not the pan-Arabism of today? Just odd race science better fit for racism forums than a Wikipedia article.
There are things that you can prove about history and there are things that can only exist as pure speculation. This article is purely speculative. 50.47.190.141 (talk) 11:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no argument here. What exactly is your point? "150,000 Arabs, migrated to here. Did you dream that number up? What is your source?" I can't tell if you're being sincere here or not. Perhaps you could consider taking a look at the two sources supporting this fact in the infobox and the first paragraph in #Rashidun and Umayyad era (7th–8th century)? A source that specializes in the Arabic language and its spread clearly states that "North Africa was conquered by the Arabs in the seventh and eighth centuries, but only some 150,000 troops settled there, while the greater number pressed on to Spain. North Africa was thinly settled and the Arabs stayed in cities like Tangier along the coast, although some of these settlements were later pushed to rural areas such as Jbala."[1][2]
This appears to be a matter of personal preference rather than factual disagreement. The article is supported by around 62 references, while no sources or counterarguments have been provided on your end, aside from baseless opinions. Skitash (talk) 17:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your source is a linguist, who stating in a book, a non academic published book, just a personal book anyone can write, that makes a one sentence mention of a large Arab army settling in North Africa. This author is not stated to have any credentials that would make them an authority on this subject. Then in the very next sentence, the author writes "the greater number pressed on to Spain". Which could mean anything from a few, a hundred, a thousand, or all 150,000 Arabs left. Which would in the same breath debunk any notion that there was a permanent settlement of Arabs in North Africa. Which would be required to establish the notion that there was an "Arab migration". Not an Arab army march through this area. But of course the author makes no attempt to be precise about such a critical claim, because they themselves do not know about the subject and are just spreading a rumor they picked up somewhere else. Predictably this article and it's citations turned out to be exactly what it smelled like. Someone dreamed up a number. Someone else read the number. Then went on to fabricate an entire thesis on it. No one in that chain of citation has any authority or primary source to backup anything.
This is your source for the entire article. I want readers to understand that. To not get blind-sighted by the user Skitash claiming to have "62 references". Which is obviously a desperate attempt to use the weight of spamming references to legitimatize their article. Which is also obviously a complete fabrication. 50.47.190.141 (talk) 10:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an academic source. It was published by the Georgetown University Press and it written by Mary Catherine Bateson (keep in mind that this person was an anthropologist that had a PhD in linguistics and Middle Eastern studies). Furthermore, it appears to me that you have failed to interpret the sentence correctly. The source clearly implies that the greater number of troops (another force exceeding 150,000) proceeded to Spain while specifically only some 150,000 settled in North Africa. It does not in any way suggest that the larger group comprises troops from within the 150,000 that settled in North Africa. Either way, there are plenty of sources supporting this widely accepted figure which I will add to the article shortly.
The rest of your argument seems like ad hominem to me and therefore bears no merit. Your exclusive emphasis on the 150,000 figure and your claim that "This is your source for the entire article" indicates that you have failed to read anything in the article beyond the infobox where the 150,000 number was mentioned. Skitash (talk) 17:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Colonialism

[edit]

It’s not migration, it’s colonization, Arabs invaded then moved in, displacing and assimilating the natives, even enslaving people, just like Europeans in the Americas Leonardo Kotek (talk) 15:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remarks

[edit]

Hello Steelkamp (talk · contribs) (reviewer), Skitash (talk · contribs) (writer?) ...

  • Ref 50. Jongeling, Karel; Kerr, Robert M. (2005). Late Punic Epigraphy: An Introduction to the Study of Neo-Punic and Latino-Punic Inscriptions. Mohr Siebeck. p. 71. ISBN 978-3-1614-8728-6. : the quoted passage has nothing to do with the supported assertion. here is page 71 as it can be consulted : [3]
  • S. Chaker, « Arabisation », Encyclopédie berbère [En ligne], 6 | 1989, document A252, consulté le 15 août 2024. URL : [4] is an excellent source on the subject. It gives a different version of Arabization on an alleged Punic substrate and dismantle this theory:

If Arabic had covered Punic in certain areas of Maghreb, it is certain that the difference in substrates (Berber on one side, Punic on the other) would appear clearly in Maghrebi Arabic and linguistic geography of the Maghreb: the influence of Punic – if Punic there had been – should be significant in the regions concerned; which is not the case. Furthermore, it would be very unlikely that the Arabs found on their arrival an important use of Punic, a language entirely different from Berber and close to theirs, without them having mentioned it in their numerous precise and detailed descriptions of the Maghreb. Nothing allows, through the Arabic sources, to perceive in North Africa a linguistic reality other than the Berber (and Latin in the Romanized and Christianized urban world). Arab authors are even extremely clear on this point: the deep Maghreb, the rural Maghreb and tribal is Berber and nothing else..

The article must therefore be corrected on this point. Thanks. Monsieur Patillo (talk) 23:19, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]

Arab migrations to the Maghreb

[edit]

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: WP:CLOP not resolved. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:49, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been doing a spot-check on this article's sources, and I have, unfortunately, found a non-insignificant amount of close paraphrasing and direct copyvio from the article's book sources. I'm going to list all the examples I've found so far, but it's going to take a while to fix them and more thoroughly check the rest of the article. I have also found a few cases where the close paraphrasing either distorted the meaning of the text to the point of inaccuracy, or was accidentally cited to the wrong source.

  • Article: The organization of the Aghlabid army was largely based on the Arab tribes who settled in Ifriqiya in the late 7th and 8th centuries. The troops were paid at clearly defined times, while cavalry received twice as much as infantry because of the greater cost of their horses and equipment.
    • Theotókīs, Geṓrgios (2020). Warfare in the Norman Mediterranean. Warfare in History. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press. p. 89. ISBN 978-1-78327-521-2.: The organization of the Aghlabid army was largely based upon the Arab tribes who settled in Ifriqiya in the late seventh and eight centuries. Its troops were probably paid at clearly defined times, with the calvary receiving twice as much as the infantry because of the greater costs of their horses and equipment.
      • The close paraphrasing also distorted the meaning of the original text; the source merely says that the discrepancies in pay "probably" existed, while the paraphrase makes the fact seem much more definitive.
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article: To persuade the Banu Hilal and Banu Sulaym to migrate to the Maghreb, the Fatimid caliph gave each tribesman a camel and money and helped them cross from the east to the west bank of the Nile River. The severe drought in Egypt at the time also persuaded these tribes to migrate to the Maghreb, which had a better economic situation at the time. The Fatimid caliph instructed them to rule the Maghreb instead of the Zirid emir Al-Mu'izz and told them "QUOTE" and told Al-Mu'izz "QUOTE".
    • El Hareir, Idris; Mbaye, Ravane, eds. (2011). The spread of Islam throughout the world. The different aspects of Islamic culture. Paris, France: UNESCO Publishing. ISBN 978-92-3-104153-2. OCLC 779275979.To persuade the Arabs of the Banu Salim and the Banu Hilal to emigrate to the Maghrib, the Fatimid caliph gave each tribesman a camel and money and helped them cross from the east to the west bank of the Nile. He also instructed them to rule the Maghrib instead of al-Mu'izz. Yazuri told them: 'QUOTE' He then wrote to al-Mu'izz saying: 'QUOTE'
    • El Hareir, Idris; Mbaye, Ravane, eds. (2011). The spread of Islam throughout the world. The different aspects of Islamic culture. Paris, France: UNESCO Publishing. ISBN 978-92-3-104153-2. OCLC 779275979.In the eight years from 446/1054 to 454/1062, Egypt suffered from a severe drought due to a fall in the level of the Nile. This was followed by a plague that is the subject of many terrible and horrific stories. The ensuing economic crisis encouraged the Banu Salim and the Banu Hilal to embark on their celebrated westward march to the Maghrib, which at that time enjoyed a better economic situation
      • This line is fine paraphrasing-wise, but the source states that the drought and plague caused an economic crisis that led to increase migration. The article only attributes the migration to the drought.
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article: The Banu Hilal conquered lands which they largely destroyed, whose cultivation then began to decline, leading to the rise of nomadism
    • Benouis, Farida; Museum With No Frontiers, eds. (2022). An architecture of light: Islamic art in Algeria. Islamic art in the Mediterranean. Vienna: Museum With No Frontiers. ISBN 978-3-902966-14-8.: The Banu Hilal took land which they had largely destroyed, and whose cultivation then began to decline. As nomadism spread, territories of the local tribes changed and shrank
      • The close paraphrasing distorted the meaning of the text; while the source connects the rise of nomadism to changes in the tribe's territories, our article links the invasions to the rise of nomadism. While that seems likely, I'm not seeing our source make that connection.
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article: According to Ibn Khaldun, the lands ravaged by Banu Hilal invaders had become desertified and turned into completely arid desert
    • Potential source: (info seemingly fails verification in the given one) "Populations Crises and Population Cycles". web.archive.org. 2013-05-27. Retrieved 2024-08-25.he also noted that the lands ravaged by these invaders had become completely arid desert.
      • This example might have fallen under WP:LIMITED, except for the fact that it wasn't cited. In addition, the preserved creative language of "ravaged" really should be in quotes and more directly attributed to the original author.
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article: The study found out that the majority of Eu10 chromosomes in the Maghreb are due to the recent gene flow caused by the Arab migrations to the Maghreb in the first millennium CE.
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article: Therefore it has been established that the Eu10 chromosome pool in the Maghreb is derived not only from early Neolithic dispersions but to a much greater extent from recent expansions of Arab tribes from the Arabian Peninsula.
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article: These Bedouin tribes accelerated and deepened the Arabization process, since the Berber population was gradually assimilated by the newcomers and had to share with them pastures and seasonal migration paths. By around the 15th century, the region of modern-day Tunisia had already been almost completely Arabized.
    • Holes, Clive (2018-08-30). Arabic Historical Dialectology: Linguistic and Sociolinguistic Approaches. Oxford University Press. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-19-100506-0. These immigrant Arab tribes accelerated and deepened the Arabization of the Maghreb since a large portion of the Berber population (in particular those living as pastoral nomads) was gradually assimilated by the newcomers who had to share with them pastures, as well as seasonal migration paths. It seems that by around the fifteenth century, the regions occupied by modern Tunisia had already been almost completely Arabized
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article: According to Ibn Khaldun, they were accompanied by their wives, children and stock. They settled in the Maghreb after repeatedly fighting battles against the Berbers, such as the Battle of Haydaran.
    • Potential source (it's not cited to this)el-Hasan, Hasan Afif (2019-05-01). Killing the Arab Spring. Algora Publishing. p. 82. ISBN 978-1-62894-349-8. According to Ibn Khaldun, the Fatimids sent them to settle in the Maghreb accompanied by their wives, children, and stock. After repeatedly fighting battles against the Berbers, they eventually co-existed with them.
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article: The Arab Muslim conquerors had a much more durable impact on the culture of the Maghreb than did the region's conquerors before and after them, and by the 11th century, the Berbers had become Islamized and Arabized.
 Done Skitash (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 20:39, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GreenLipstickLesbian, do you feel the issues are resolved? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AirshipJungleman29 That's what I found with a 30 minute spotcheck - I genuinely have not had the time to look further, but thank you for the reminder. And while I also thank Skitash for making a good faith effort to fix the close paraphrasing and copyright issues, they appear to have done so by swapping out words with their synonyms. (Special:Diff/1242269783 shows this).
But picking two paragraphs at random, I'm seeing
Upon arriving in the Maghreb, the Arabs had to decide between settling in existing Roman and Byzantine towns or constructing new Arab towns in new locations. Archaeological and historical evidence suggests that they did both. Arab groups settled in old Roman towns such as Setif and Cherchell in Algeria and imposed their own architectural needs on the old, while other groups built totally new towns such as Basra, Fez, Qsar es-Seghir and Sijilmasa in Morocco.
and the source:
In crossing North Africa, the Arabs faced the choice of settling own in an existing Roman or Byzantine town, many of which were still inhabited, or of building a new town in a new location. Archaeological and historical evidence indicated they did both. Some groups moved into old Roman towns, like Setif and Cherchel in Algeria, and imposed their own architectural sensibilities and needs on the old. Other groups built completely new towns, such as al-Basra, Fez, Qsar es-Seghir, and Sigilmasa in Morocco.
and
The number of Arab migrants of Ifriqiya concentrated in the army and the cities, mainly Kairouan, has been estimated at 100,000. Most of the Arab migrants came from Syria and Iraq, which from the start supplied numerous migrants to the Maghreb
versus the source:
The number of Arab immigrants concentrated in the army and the cities, chiefly Kairouan, has been estimated at one hundred thousand. Most of them had come not from Arabia, but from Syria and Iraq, regions from which from the start had supplied numerous emigrants to the Maghrib.
Unfortunately, my random picks again show close paraphrasing. So no. I'm not convinced the issues have been resolved. If somebody else more familiar with the process would like to weigh in, however, that would be much appreciated. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 11:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, and as a copyright violation is a quickfail criterion, I have delisted the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:53, 2 September 2024 (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.

Source reliability (non-centered)

[edit]

To support the passage from Punic that would have facilitated Arabization, recourse to a source not focused on medieval studies was used n° 50: Evans, Martin; Phillips, John (2007-01-01). Algeria: Anger of the Dispossessed. Yale University Press. p. 20. ISBN 978-0-300-10881-1. The surviving Punic language of the Carthaginians was also closely related to Arabic and its continued usage eased the Arabization process. This source replaces a previous diversion that I had pointed out above. This work deals with the contemporary period and only outlines the ancient history of the country; it cannot therefore serve as a source. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Context_matters Information provided in passing by an otherwise reliable source or information that is not related to the principal topics of the publication may not be reliable; editors should cite sources focused on the topic at hand where possible. For example, a publisher's web site is likely to be reliable for an author's identity, date of publication, etc., but not necessarily for a critical, artistic, or commercial evaluation of the work.

I can cite an example of a centered, academic, peer-reviewed source on the subject of Arabization which is: ES. Chaker, “Arabisation”, Encyclopédie berbère [Online], 6 | 1989, document A252, Online since 01 December 2012, connection on 29 September 2024. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/encyclopedieberbere/2570; DOI: link. It completely denies the thesis of Arabic superimposed on Punic.

Dans l’état actuel du débat, il paraît cependant raisonnable de retenir plutôt la thèse « berbériste» et de suivre en cela les réserves des arabisants eux-mêmes (W. Marçais, 1929) vis-à-vis de la théorie de la survie (significative) du punique et de son maintien jusqu’à la conquête arabe. Si l’arabe avait recouvert du punique dans certaines zones du Maghreb, il est certain que le différence des substrats (berbère d’un côté, punique de l’autre) transparaîtrait nettement dans l’arabe maghrébin et la géographie linguistique du Maghreb : l’influence du punique — si punique il y avait eu — devrait être sensible dans les régions concernées ; ce qui n’est pas le cas. Il serait de plus très improbable que les Arabes aient trouvé à leur arrivée un usage important du punique, langue tout à fait différente du berbère et proche de la leur, sans qu’ils l’aient mentionné dans leurs nombreuses descriptions précises et fouillées du Maghreb. Rien ne permet, à travers les sources arabes, de percevoir en Afrique du Nord une autre réalité linguistique que le berbère (et le latin dans le monde urbain romanisé et christianisé). Les auteurs arabes sont même extrêmement clairs sur ce point : le Maghreb profond, le Maghreb rural et tribal est berbère et rien d’autre.

The article must therefore not promote minority and marginal theses by means of cherry-picking from a non-centered source. Monsieur Patillo (talk) 00:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to point out that this source (Algeria: Anger of the Dispossessed. ) was added to address the previous problem of misuse of source that I had raised. This cherry-picking did nothing to make the information reliable. Monsieur Patillo (talk) 00:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Arab_migrations_to_the_Maghreb&oldid=1248345446"