Talk:Azd
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Zahran tribe was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 7 January 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Azd. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Untitled edit
It's not at all obvious that most of today's Lebanese Christians are of Ghassanid descent. They (mostly Maronites) consider themselves to be descendants of a mixture of pre-Arab Semitic peoples of the area who were Christianized (Arameans, Romanized remnants of the Phoenicians and others). Therefore I added a "citation needed" marker.
maronites are not phoenicians. however i agree that there are no satisfactory source in the whole article, and 5 family history websites do not constitute valid sources —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.232.69.64 (talk) 04:37, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- Most Lebanese Christians are not Ghassanid. They have Y-DNA haplogroups typical for the Levant, and different from Lebanese Christian Ghassanid claimants and Yemen. YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 09:22, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Qahlan???, no doubt Qahtan: Hamza al-Iṣfahānī, Ta ʾrīḫ, 108; Ibn Saʿīd al-Andalusī, Die Geschichte der ‚reinen Araber‘ vom Stamme Qaḥṭān. Aus dem Kitāb Našwat aṭ-ṭarab fī ta ʾrīḫ ǧāhilīyat al-ʿArab des Ibn- Saʿīd, hg. u. übers., eingel. u. komm. v. Manfred Kropp (Heidelberg 1975), 170 pyule — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.169.169.137 (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2015 (UTC) cf. Fischer-Irvine, Kahtan, Encyclopedia of Islam vol. 4, 1991, 447-9 (not Kahlan). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.169.169.137 (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Proposed changes to the article edit
Proposed changes (lead and 'Lineage of Azd' section)
| ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The Azd or Al-Azd (Arabic: ٱلْأَزْد) is one of the largest Arab tribes, prior to the 2nd century, Azd settled in South Arabia, of whom part migrated to the north, after the breach of the Maʾrib dam in the 2 or 3rd century AD, most of the tribe left the area amd moved to other parts of Arabia.[1][2] The tradition of AZD migration finds support in the Geography of Claudius Ptolemy, which locates a tribe called the Kassanitai south of the Kinaidokolpitai and the river Baitios (probably the wādī Bisha).[3][4][5] The most important tribes of Azd: (Aus and Khazraj, Bariq, Ghassan, Khuza'a and Daws).[6][7]
 In the genealogical system: al-Azd b. al-Ghawth b. Nabt b. Malik b. Zayd b. Kahlan b. Saba b. Yashjub b. Ya'rub b. Qahtan.[8][9][10] Group of Azd from Bani Qahtan, the genealogists disagree about the pedigree of Qahțān [himself]. Some trace him back to Ismā'īl b. Ibrāhīm , saying that his [name] was Qahţăn b . al - Hamaysa ' b . Tayman b . Nabt b . Ismā'īl b. Ibrāhīm. Wahb ibn Munabbih[11] and Hishām b. Muhammad al-Kalbi held this genealogy ( as true ). Hisham ibn al-Kalbi quoted his father as saying that he had been contemporaneous with [older] scholars and genealogists who traced Qahțān's pedigree in this way. Other [genealogists] argue that the [name] was Qahţăn b. Faligh b. 'Abir b. Shalakh.[12] In genealogical poetry by Hassan Ibn Thabit Al-Azdi mentioned Azd b. Ghawth b. Zayd (Nabt) b. Malik b. Zayd b. Kahlan b. Saba'[13](Arabic: الأزد بن الغَوثِ بنِ زَيدِ بنِ بن مالك بن زيد بن كهلان ) in his poem while complimenting his ancestors gradually:[14] مَن يَكُ عَنّا مَعشَرَ الأَسدِ سائِلاً Another poem by Hasan ibn Thabit: وَنَحنُ أُناسٌ أَصلُنا الأَزدُ مِنهُمُ However, there is much poetry falsely attributed to Hassan b thabit, and the fact these lines are so unmoored from authorship suggests they may have been written much later.[15] References
| ||||||||||||||||
.svg)
looks to all source, the article now with out really source. I dont know, why back the page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.49.36.59 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi 94.49.36.59. You're right that the article is currently in a very poor state. However, it's not clear from your comment why your proposed changes would be better than the current revision. In particular, they appear to be equally poorly sourced, and even worse than the current revision when it comes to clarity. It would be better if someone who masters English and has access to reliable sources would take a look at this article. Thanks, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 18:47, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hi again 94.49.36.59. It appears that already in November 2020 there were a lot of disruptive edits to this article, so I restored the 23 October 2020 revision, which looks substantially different from the one you objected to ([1] now vs [2] before). How does it look now? ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 19:14, 20 July 2022 (UTC)