Talk:Arabid race

Anthropology Stub‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Ethnic groups Stub‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

Stub

This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Historical Classification

I think it may be a good idea to make clear, in the text of the article, that this is an historical classification and has no scientific validity. To be clear - by no means am I arguing in favor of deleting the article, as it is important to understand the history of racism. However, I worry that young students will take such an article for scientific consensus. Thank you.Greedyhalibut (talk) 22:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made it clear that the term is antiquated and not in use anymore, but Maciamo keeps reverting my edits for some reason. His gallery of Arabids is also original research, since they have not been classified by scholars, but by himself. FunkMonk (talk) 20:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oriental and Orientalid can refer to both Arabid and Iranid, so it should not be here. FunkMonk (talk) 04:47, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This more exact name because not only Arabs belong to this race, but also Jews. STUTTGART (talk) 05:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're misunderstanding the typology. Just because a type (Arabid) is named after an ethnicity (Arab) does not mean that all members of the ethnicity belong to the type, or that other ethnicities can't belong to it. The name is irrelevant to the included ethnicities, but the type can be prevalent in some ethnicities (like Arabid is prevalent among South Arabs). No ethnicity are of a single type.

When these ideas where in fashion, Arabid and Iranid were thought to both be subtypes of the Orientalid. FunkMonk (talk) 11:47, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

McCullogh, Richard. The Races of Humanity, 2010: this author specifically subdivides Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews into different subraces, Mizrahim - into the Oriental race whereas Sephardim - into the South Mediterranean subrace («South Mediterranean or Saharid subrace (predominant in Algeria and Libya, important in Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt), primary element among the Sephardic Jews, common element [circa 20-25%] in Spain, Sicily and southern Italy[...]»). STUTTGART thus lumped them together without any supportive sources.--SimulacrumDP (talk) 14:47, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oriental type → Mediterranean branch → Caucasian race!!! STUTTGART (talk) 04:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are incorrect, read your own sources: South Mediterranean subrace (Saharid) is a separate subrace, just like Oriental.--SimulacrumDP (talk) 15:07, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Oriental can also refer to Iranids by some authors. See Biasutti: http://dienekes.110mb.com/texts/biasutticaucasoid/ FunkMonk (talk) 20:17, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Arabid

I have moved this article to Arabid, since, yet again, Oriental referred to many Eastern types of Caucasoids, not only Arabids. FunkMonk (talk) 10:58, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dbachmann moved it back for some reason. I have already explained here why it should be at Arabid. FunkMonk (talk) 13:18, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arabid.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Arabid.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mizrahi

I have removed a phrase on Mizrahi Jews being mainly Arabid in type, which was attributed to a self-published webpage by Richard McCulloch. He is not a scientist/authority on human biology. Soupforone (talk) 12:10, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So what? Hew was right. Mizrahi Jews are mostly of Oriental type, with some Mediterranean and Armenoid admixtures. They all have hook-noses. 78.8.172.63 (talk) 18:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]