Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Plmouitrez (talk | contribs) at 05:54, 9 May 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Ethiopia High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethiopia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ethiopia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EthiopiaWikipedia:WikiProject EthiopiaTemplate:WikiProject EthiopiaEthiopia High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Somalia High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somalia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somalia on Misplaced Pages. 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Africa: Djibouti High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Djibouti (assessed as High-importance).

Template:Findnotice

Zekenyan

Zekenyan you have been proven wrong multiple times, so please stop your disruption. AcidSnow (talk) 15:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Im not disrupting[REDACTED] it is you. No source says Walashma are Somali but the contrary. Zekenyan (talk) 21:23, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Lol, nice try but they do. AcidSnow (talk) 22:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Why are you trolling? You know well awale abdi added the word Zekenyan (talk) 07:32, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Ethnicity

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Should the ethnic background of the dynasty say "Argobba"?

Argobba

• Support - Per reliable sources Zekenyan (talk) 09:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. This has long ended Zekenyan so I am not sure why you keep trying to override the long established consensus. Plus, the claim that they were ethnic Agrobba has already been proven fringe. I have also gone and changed the misleading header you provided. AcidSnow (talk)
  • Comment. AcidSnow, would you provide reliable sources to prove that Zekenyan's proposal is a fringe theory. Borsoka (talk) 02:43, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
• The reference says that Walasma spoke Argobba, language is different than ethnicity, but we can say they spoke Argobba. AcidSnow, if you believe something else, you must provide a reference. Spumuq (talq) 10:28, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

These sources may make it more clear. & (Page 14 footnotes) Zekenyan (talk) 03:40, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

What the hell, Argobba? The Sultanate of Shawa was Argobba and the rulers even had Argobba names, but the Sultanate of Shawa was conquered by Ifat in the 13th century. I have no doubt Argobba played an important role in Ifat after that, but the Walashma were not Argobba. Walashma rulers had Somali names, came from areas currently inhabited by Somalis and invaded the Argobba inhabited regions from the east. But hey, since this is Misplaced Pages let's put some BS on there because some out of context articles seem to imply it, great, fantastic. Good job guys.

Zekenyan is vandalizing this page

Okay, a long while back several editors of this page came to a simple consensus as to what this page should contain and shared sources for most of their claims. We also all pointed out that Zekenyan's claims that the ethnicity of this family was "Argobba" was unfounded. Why? Simply because we all explained several times to Zekenyan; the sources he uses are fringe. They do not use actual historical evidence or genealogies or anything written from the time or even accounts from modern descendants of this family (if they exist) but are based on pure conjecture from one author by the name of Ulrich Braukamper; if you read his original work (which is what all of Zekenyan's "credible sources" source as their point of reference) you will find that he shares no actual evidence for his claims nor do any others.

The genealogies of this family are "Arabian" and tied to those of clans like the Somali Darod clan's Jaberti-Aqeeli supposed origins. Most historians or acadamics concerned with this subject you will find other than those few following Braukamper's fringe lead (or who also base their idea on conjecture) will establish them as either Arabs, Somalis or some sort of "Somali-Arab" group. They are not Argobbas who are a Southern Ethiopian Semitic speaking group native to the Horn of Africa who've merely been Islamized, there's no evidence whatsoever that they were Argobbas. We all came to a consensus to remain somewhat neutral with this page and mention both their claimed Arab and Somali origins and then moved on after warning Zekenyan to cease and desist his edit warring and the moment we all move on and don't bother editing this page for months he comes over and vandalizes it with his own view of how things should be. If you'd like sources for the claims I've made about the genealogies and such then please do go through this talk page as I've shared them numerous times in the past.

I think serious action needs to be taken against Zekenyan who defied consensus between various editors and did something as petty as waiting for us all to move on to suddenly vandalize this page to its current state (though I've reverted what I can). I am always willing to work with other editors within reason but Zekenyan has demonstrated time and time again that all he is interested in is editing warring (something he's been temporarily banned for) and pushing his own fringe agenda.

And one note to Zekenyan himself: Do not follow me to my talk page... With all due respect; you have a habit of somewhat harassing other editors on their talk page. If you wish to discuss this subject take it up here, please. Awale-Abdi (talk) 19:46, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages does not allow original research. All you have done is removed my well sourced contributions and restored unsourced material. You are welcome to post any theories on your personal blog but[REDACTED] is based on academic sources. Zekenyan (talk) 19:51, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

---

Okay... I'm going to explain why Zekenyan's sources are "fringe" or at least otherwise unreliable by placing at least three of his sources I’ve seen him share under some scrutiny:

1-

This source has numerous problems. In that many of its authors (including one who is often cited by sources claiming that the Walashama were Argobbas) contradict the statement emboldened below and demonstrate what the prevailing view of this dynasty’s origins tends to be:

"The descendants of its Walasma Dynasty established a new state in Adal. Their capital was Dakar located Southeast of Harar near Fuganbiro. The nomadic of Afar and Somali dominated the state. However, the leaderships were controlled by Semitic Argoba and Harari ethnic groups."

Ulrich Braukamper who is cited by this source for example merely entertains the idea that the Walashma/Ifat were possibly Argobbas here in a book of his but then shortly after does not hold to this view and uses the usual view that’s been shared on Misplaced Pages about their Qurayshi & Hashemite genealogical origins suggesting that they were Arabians. He does not then tie this dynasty to the Argobba at all but even cites sources that I have often mentioned such as Ibn Khaldun who touch upon their Aqeeli genealogy. I was wrong about Braukamper because upon further research; it seems he didn't believe this dynasty was Argobba.

A source Braukamper often cites on the history of the Walashma (Enrico Cerulli) that this document of Zekenyan’s cites as well also contradicts the statement that this group was Argobba. Enrico Cerulli’s views on them if I recall were not honestly removed from that of Braukamper and he even acquired a historical genealogy (it’s the one mentioned here and shared here by another author who cites Cerulli as his source) that tied them to this Somali saintly figure as their ancestor, a figure who has nothing to do with Argobbas and ultimately claims an Arabian genealogy.

And then there’s finally I.M Lewis, and his views on the Walashma were what the following text often shared on[REDACTED] alluded to:

"According to I.M. Lewis, the polity was governed by local dynasties consisting of Somalized Arabs or Arabized Somalis, who also ruled over the similarly-established Sultanate of Mogadishu in the Benadir region to the south. Adal's history from this founding period forth would be characterized by a succession of battles with neighbouring Abyssinia."- source for what's in this text

Which is that this dynasty based on their genealogical ties to Somali-Arab genealogies like that of the Darod’s Aqeeli based one were either Somalized Arabs or Arabized Somalis of some sort or just plain Arabs. But before Zekenyan begins to accuse me of "original research"; I'm merely sharing why this author would tie them to Somalis, I do not care if this dynasty was Arab, English, Japanese or Somali but am I merely sharing what authors like Lewis believed them to mostly be.

This document Zekeneyan’s shared is not a reliable source to be citing on wikipedia… The document as a whole is not bad at all but that one statement it makes which is relevant to this page is directly contradicted by the authors of over 3 works that it utilizes as historical sources who all hold the more accepted view that this group was somehow Arab and in the case of Lewis and seemingly Cerulli associate them more with Somalis than with Argobbas. The only author I recall in its sources who ever claimed that they were Argobbas was perhaps Professor Tadesse Tamrat who was seemingly basing this on Braukamper’s musings so that’s not reliable.

2-

This is an outdated book but that’s hardly the problem… The problem is simple, really… This source is merely using Zekenyan’s third source as a source (that I will be placing under scrutiny below) for the claim it is making which in turn cites the likes of Braukamper, Tamrat and Lewis numerous times (two of whom contradict what it claims about the Walashma’s origins). Merely observe the sources shared at the bottom right.

You can’t share a source that’s just using another source you’re sharing as a source, that’s nonsensical.

3-

This source doesn’t share reliable sources for how they were Argobba and actually often cites the likes of Lewis and Braukamper among others like Cerulli (for historical references) who directly contradict what it says which would be fine if it came out and shared new and relevant evidence (a medeival historical text claiming they were Argobbas? A genealogy tieing them to Argobbas?) proving they were Argobbas but it does no such thing (read it) and merely makes a claim from what can be surmised…

None of these are reliable sources and the likes of them are pretty much all Zekenyan seems to have when he claims this dynasty was Argobba. Something most authors who’ve ever touched on them from Richard Pankhurst to I.M Lewis to Enrico Cerulli and even Braukamper; would directly oppose. And again, those are all authors his own conjectural sources cite numerous times when harking back to Horn African history.

I will say what I’ve said numerous times in the past… There is no evidence that this group was Argobba. Their genealogies (both the one tying them to the Somali saintly figure and the one tying them to Aqeel ibn Abi Talib) are not tied to Argobbas, no historical record of their time ever claims they were Argobbas or makes the claim that they spoke Argobba. All claims as to what language they spoke as this source will show for example; point to them having spoken Arabic with no other language unfortunately being explicitly mentioned.

All Zekenyan has are some sources making claims they don’t back up with compelling evidence whilst citing various authors who contradict what they’re claiming about the origins of the Walashma which is relevant because they hark back to these very authors for much of their inferences about historical facts.

Something is not a fact because it’s written in a book… It needs to be backed up by many of that book’s sources and/or that book needs to share evidence if it is contradicting so many of its sources on historical matters. Zekenyan’s sources don’t share reliable evidence and are riddled with the works of authors who contradict their claims. Nothing reliable here and indeed; a fringe view.

I would also like to apologize for saying Zekenyan vandalized this page. He technically didn’t and seemingly got consent from admins he convinced with his sources. It’s just that I am rather used to edit warring and underhanded behavior from him (no offense intended here btw) and to my chagrin; immediately assumed he was suddenly altering this page to be the way he wanted it to while other members were busy and not paying much attention to it. I apologize for the accusation because as it stands; he broke no rules, in truth... But many seem to have been curious as to why myself and others shrug off Zekenyan’s sources and there’s honestly a bit more but here’s a dose of why. Awale-Abdi (talk) 00:20, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

At any rate, my view on this page is pretty simple; revert it back to how it was before Zekenyan's editing where both the possibility of Somali ancestry believed to be plausible by authors like Lewis & Cassanelli is cited and where of course the popular Arab genealogy based view is very often gone into. In this state the page ultimately seemed rather neutral and on the first paragraph didn't even directly assign an "ethnicity" to this group but merely referred to them as a "Muslim noble family". That would be best in my humble opinion. Awale-Abdi (talk) 00:35, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

I believe there's a certain conflict of interest here. Seeing that you continue to disregard sources for OR and wp:synth. Why do you feel you are more qualified then these academics? They dont declare the dynasty a certain ethnic group without facts. They are not bloggers. Your analogy that they are tied to some saints therefore, they were somali means nothing unless the source EXPLICITLY states the walasma dynasty were somali. Here is another source that claims Argobba were taken to Shoa by Umar Walasma . Do you agree if the heading says Arab instead? Zekenyan (talk) 15:50, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Stop harking back to your sources, I've shown everyone above why they're invalid. One of them is just a document where the origins of the Walashma of the Walashma are off-handedly remarked on and contradicted by most of its sources, the other is an out-dated book that references an author who again contradicts the claim it makes. If you have a source sharing actual hard evidence that they were Argobbas where things such as a genealogy tying them to the Argobba or where an actual historical document is cited where they were mentioned to have spoken Argobba then I'll agree with you here but you don't. You have nothing but invalid sources and this isn't my opinion but proven above.

"They were somali means nothing unless the source EXPLICITLY states the walasma dynasty were somali"

Did you read what I wrote? One there is at least one source (a book written by an author whom your own sources use as a reference) that does explicitly claim the leaders of the Ifat/Adal (the Walashma) were either Arabized Somalis or Somalized Arabs. If you have a hard time accepting this source, that's not problem. Your own sources believed Lewis was clearly a credible source, hence why they use him as a point of reference numerous times. But again, I don't care if this dynasty was Arab or Somali or even English or Japanese as I stated; this page should only be filled with valid sources that back up their claims with evidence and in that regard I'm entirely fine with mostly sharing nothing more than the Walashma's Arabian genealogical traditions and then off-handedly mentioning (via reliable sources) that some of their genealogies are tied to figures like that Somali saint.

I don't care if this dynasty was Arabian or Somali nor do I want to edit this to state explicitly that they were Somali but merely share sources that do tie them to Somalis or claim they were Somalis like Lewis' works do, whilst maintaining the most accepted narrative that they had ultimately Arab genealogical traditions. My point here is simply that your claims that they were Argobba are fringe and unreliable and using shaky sources (For God's sake; one of your sources literally uses the other as a source) as you do is not going to back that claim up.

I explained to everyone above why the claims you're sharing are "fringe" or otherwise unreliable. The authors they tend to cite would directly oppose what they're claiming... The idea that they were Argobbas is not at all one that's fully accepted by academics concerned with this subject and the earliest academics who pioneered and practically started the concepts of Ethiopian & Somali studies did not believe them to be Argobbas nor do most still concerned with the subject like Lee V. Casanelli or Raphael Chijioke Njoku ever in their works refer to this dynasty as being Argobba or the Sultanate of Ifat being ruled by Argobbas. You trying to rename this page's first paragraph to read as "Argobba Muslim dynasty" is therefore disingenuous as this is not a fully accepted view among academics; evident by the fact that even your own sources cite numerous academics who contradict the claims they're making (Lewis, Cerulli, Braukamper, Pankhurst; none of them claimed this dynasty was Argobba). I'm not going to argue with you about your sources anymore; if you're still defending them after reading all I shared about them above then you're demonstrating a clear bias here.

Keep this page the way it is now and just don't touch it would be my final suggestion for everyone concerned with this subject. I'm absolutely fine with it as it is now. However if Zekenyan wants we can create an "ethnicity" section and mention that some authors claim that they were Argobbas there. I'm willing to go for this compromise but splattering this page with information that acts as though them being Argobbas is some well-accepted fact after everything I've shared about all the authors who would oppose this view (including ones Zekenyan's own sources use as a point of reference) would merely be disingenuous. Awale-Abdi (talk) 16:57, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

"Do you agree if the heading says Arab instead?"

Truthfully, I would prefer this, yes... If you want though as I said we can create an ethnicity section and share authors like Lewis who ties them to Somalis and then your sources (despite the problems with them that I've noted) that claim they were Argobbas then merely just share that no true ethnic origins for this dynasty are known beyond what their genealogies imply. I prefer the page as it is now but if it would appease you then we can try out this ultimately very "neutral" stance? Honestly, I have nothing against you as a person of course and am growing quite tired of us going back and forth in a hostile (but veiled-ly hostile) manner here. So if we can come to neutral ground like that where both of us can just move on and not bother with this page anymore; all the better. Or I can simply go to the genealogical traditions section right now and add your claims on the side that they were Argobbas and then we leave the rest as is? Please do consider this simple compromise so we can both move on with our lives... Awale-Abdi (talk) 17:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Addition of Unsourced Material

User:WilinWil discuss your edits here. You are currently editing against consensus Zekenyan (talk) 18:48, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Hilarious, you are reverting edits from a Walashma Ingoman (talk) 23:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Ingoman Walasma was of amhara-arab background. To say his children are now Somali means nothing his descendants can be Chinese. Zekenyan (talk) 13:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

The Walashma dynasty was not of "amhara-arab background" which is something that was previously mentioned by other users. AcidSnow (talk) 00:09, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

They are what the source says. Zekenyan (talk) 03:12, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

This is the kind of guy who dominates wiki articles these days, zealous morons with way too much free time. Adios wikipediaIngoman (talk) 23:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Walashma dynasty. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120423062326/http://www.mbali.info/doc328.htm to http://www.mbali.info/doc328.htm

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) 19:45, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

SHOWA SULTANATES

I STATRED TO SUSPECT THE LOW REGARED THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO WORJI PEOPLE. MY SUSPECTE ON THE ISSUES DEVELOPED AFTER SOME CONCIDERATIONS TWO OPINION ON THE EARLY HISTORY OF WORJI . ONE FROM OUR PISET MERI RAS ,THOUGH ,PUT THE NATIVITIES OF WORJI BEFORE 371 B,C ..BUT THIS NARATION WITH OUT GOING FARHER TWISTED 360M DEGREE AND BEGAN TO NARRATE AS WORJI APPEARED IN THE LAND DURING 700 A.D. THE SCONDE NARRATION LINKED WITH MIGRATION OF WORJI FROM MEDINA DURING THE CONFLICT BETWEEN CLIPHTES . IF THIS IS SO I BELIVE THIS PEOPLE ARE THE ONE WHO SERVE AS SULTANATS OF YEFATE ,SHOWA AND IFATES . WHY ? THIS IS BECAUSE THIS PEOPLE WAS LEAD BY ABDUREHAMN . ABDUREHEMAN IS THE ONE THE GOVERN SPAIN . IF ABDUREHAMAN AND THE PEOPLE THAT MIGRATE WITH HIM TO SPAIN WAS ABLE TO ESTABLIS MUSLIM GOVERNMENT WHY NOT HIS RELATIVES THAT CAME TO ETHIOPIA .OTHER SUCH AS HADIA ,AREGBO ARE FILLOWERS OF THEM NOT WORJI 196.188.127.240 (talk) 11:55, 26 December 2018 (UTC)Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).</ref> ABREHIT BY MERIRAS

• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• Start-Class Ethiopia articles
• High-importance Ethiopia articles
• WikiProject Ethiopia articles
• Start-Class WikiProject Somalia articles
• High-importance WikiProject Somalia articles
• WikiProject Somalia articles
• Start-Class Africa articles
• High-importance Africa articles
• Start-Class Djibouti articles
• High-importance Djibouti articles
• WikiProject Djibouti articles
• WikiProject Africa articles