This article iswritten inAmerican English, which has its own spelling conventions (center,color,defense,realize,traveled) and some terms may be different or absent from othervarieties of English. According to therelevant style guide, this should not be changed withoutbroad consensus.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage oflanguages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage oflinguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of theArab world on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofIslam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
This article is within the scope of theWikiProject Western Asia, which collaborates on articles related toWestern Asia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit theproject page for more details.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related toSaudi Arabia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Saudi ArabiaWikipedia:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaTemplate:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Morocco, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofMorocco on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.MoroccoWikipedia:WikiProject MoroccoTemplate:WikiProject MoroccoMorocco
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject United Arab Emirates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of theUnited Arab Emirates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.United Arab EmiratesWikipedia:WikiProject United Arab EmiratesTemplate:WikiProject United Arab EmiratesUnited Arab Emirates
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Algeria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide toAlgeria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, pleasejoin the project.AlgeriaWikipedia:WikiProject AlgeriaTemplate:WikiProject AlgeriaAlgeria
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Bahrain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of theKingdom of Bahrain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.BahrainWikipedia:WikiProject BahrainTemplate:WikiProject BahrainBahrain
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofEgypt on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofIraq on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Jordan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofJordan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.JordanWikipedia:WikiProject JordanTemplate:WikiProject JordanJordan
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofLebanon-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographicPalestine region, thePalestinian people and theState of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visitingthe project page, where you can add your name to thelist of members where you can contribute to thediscussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Qatar, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofQatar-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.QatarWikipedia:WikiProject QatarTemplate:WikiProject QatarQatar
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofSyria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Tunisia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related toTunisia. For more information, visit theproject page.TunisiaWikipedia:WikiProject TunisiaTemplate:WikiProject TunisiaTunisia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Yemen, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofYemen on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.YemenWikipedia:WikiProject YemenTemplate:WikiProject YemenYemen
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofAfrica on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofIsrael on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related toIran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, pleasejoin the project where you can contribute to thediscussions and help with ouropen tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofPakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofIndonesia andIndonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Malaysia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofMalaysia andMalaysia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.MalaysiaWikipedia:WikiProject MalaysiaTemplate:WikiProject MalaysiaMalaysia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofancient Near East–related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East
Traditional ArabicThe current image in the infobox is useless. It is just the single word العربية, which already appears above it in text in the infobox. The image caption says it's "written in Arabic naskh script"; it's not written, but typed, and with the inferior typefaceTraditional Arabic. For more on why this typeface is terrible, see Titus Nemeth'sArabic Type-Making in the Machine Age (2017).
I explained this in the edit summary when I replaced the useless image with a folio of theBlue Quran, widely appreciated as one of the highest quality manuscripts written in Arabic.
Snowstormfigorionreverted my edit arguingstandard for modern language articles to either have no image or a simple text file of the language's name in its script; image is also already present in the vocabulary section
To me, the basis of their opinion of Arabic as an exclusively modern language is unclear.Hebrew has an image of theIsaiah Scroll scroll. The other image in this article is a different image of a different folio of the same Quran, but it can be removed. Or if a more suitable image can be chosen we can use that one instead. But the current image is useless.إيان (talk)04:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The text you cite from theWP:AR main page is decorative. It is not used on theWP:AR article about Arabic. The main image of an article is meant to be representative/illustrative of the topic. What doesFile:Arabic calligraphy thuluth.svg illustrate about Arabic? Nothing. It's needlessly ornamental and does not representatively illustrate Arabic. It's placement as the main image of this article, implying that it were representative or illustrative of Arabic, is also somewhatOrientalist. There is also the issue that the mononymالعربية is a neologism. Throughout most of the language's history, its speakers called itاللسان العربي.
Instead of a bad SVG image, the main image should be from a manuscript—the primary way in which Arabic has been recorded over the past millennium+. This would be representative and illustrative.إيان (talk)02:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your first argument regarding the file being a duplicate of the typed Arabic in the article is valid, those concerning the Thuluth script, however, are null. "Needlessly ornamental" is entirely subjective; "does not representatively illustrate Arabic", it's one the oldest and most well-known scripts of Arabic; "Orientalist", see prev, the script has been in use since before orientalism was a thing; "اللسان العربي (a-lisan al-arabi)" is absurdly over-meticulous and not the used term to refer to the language either in Arabic or other languages,WP:COMMONNAME would apply here. Again, if it's used on Arabic Wikipedia's front page, using it in this article is fine, at least until further consensus is reached.Snowstormfigorion (talk)04:51, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Snowstormfigorion please self-revert. The discussion is ongoing and you don’t have consensus for the change you wish to implement. A majority so far (FunLater and myself) believe the article is better with no image at this point. When I have a moment, perhaps tomorrow, I’ll address the arguments you make though you haven’t satisfactorily addressed the ones I raised.إيان (talk)06:42, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thinkthe file that was used on 29 February is not a good representation of typed Arabic script. It looks unlike most modern typed text and it is, unlike most Arabic text, vowelized. But...
I still find no image to be the best option, the same way there is no need to add an image saying "Latina" or "English" on each of these pages. The image is redundant, العربية by itself (without لغة), instead of عربي, is uncommon in my Arabic language (and likely many others) and the Arabic script can't represent all Arabic languages: TheMaltese language uses Latin.Levantine,Darija, etc. are commonly written in slightly different versions ofArabizi, in addition to the Arabic script, and Levantine is sometimes even written in theHebrew script (the infobox has a list of scripts).
As said above, a file of one of the most well-known scripts of Arabic is a good representation of Arabic, the fact that an aspect or two of it are not present in other scripts is not really a reason not to include it. Also, the Arabic script is integral to Arabic and the second most-used script in the world, not inserting it simply because it's not used in Maltese, makes little to no sense. As for العربية, it is the most common term used to refer to the language in Modern Standard Arabic and other languages, e.g., the languages side menu on Wikipedia. Until further decision and consensus is made, the thuluth file is a decent replacement and compromise.Snowstormfigorion (talk)21:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Arabic Wikipedia is in MSA and is referred to in MSA. This page isn't aboutMSA or theArabic script; it's about all the non-signed Arabic varieties, which cannot be represented by a single word written in a single script using a single font. Also, please let's keep using the stable version with the bland العربية until a generalconsensus is reached.FunLater (talk)22:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with no image. And with the blandTraditional Arabic version of العربية over the Orientalist ornamental image Snowstormfigorion keeps trying to force despite consensus against it.إيان (talk)22:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The notion that the Arabic script cannot be used to represent Arabic due to Maltese and other minor forms whose number of speakers all-together represent >1% of the majority using the script is plain unreasonable; the Arabic script is perhaps the most distinguishing feature of Arabic. العربية is used in Modern Standard Arabic due to it being thestandard term used to refer to the language; and as it is not possible to use all fonts at once a well-known font is used instead.إيان, again, "ornamental" is completely arbitrary and subjective, and callingthuluth orientalist is the same as callingthis 1250 quran orientalist.Snowstormfigorion (talk)23:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article is not only about so-called MSA nor is it only about Arabic vernaculars. It treats Arabic comprehensively inWP:summary style, from its historic predecessors and origins through to the present. Indeed, this article should not give undue weight in the main image to marginal use like Maltese or ad-hoc chat orthography with which virtually nothing is published. If there is an image (which, again, is not necessary), it is entirely appropriate for it to be one that displays Arabic script.
That Snowstormfigorion's image is uselessly ornamental is not arbitrary or subjective. All of those little V shapes are purely decorative and serve no purpose at all. They are called علامات الإهمال. Once upon a time they denoted a حرف مهمل but now they are often used (abused) by calligraphers as space fillers.
The 1250muṣḥaf is actually in themuhaqqaq hand, not thuluth. There are historical manuscripts of quality written in versions of thuluth made over the centuries sinceIbn Muqla reportedly invented it that are much better than the garbage image Snowstormfigorion is trying to force through. However, the best hand/font for representing Arabic would be Kufic (also used in the 1250 muṣḥaf). It's more significant historically and today, and—unlike thuluth—it has been used everywhere Arabic has been used; it's not an exclusivelyMashreqi hand.إيان (talk)03:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is how the script is written, and why is the image "garbage"? because it's an SVG? As for regional use, it's really not a factor that should be considered, instead the notability of the script. It seems that your argument against the thuluth script is simply that you're not fond of it.Snowstormfigorion (talk)16:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The last posting made by myself hasn't received a response in 4+ months, and I made it abundantly clear in the edit summary that the edit isn't set in stone and that, as stated prior, any who disagree and have a valid argument against the edit are welcome to revert and discuss this in the talk page.Snowstormfigorion (talk)22:46, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1) TheWP:ONUS to seek consensus for your proposed change is entirely on you. 2) Not a single editor has agreed with you. 3) The other editors are not obligated to answer, much less convince you.M.Bitton (talk)23:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PerWP:EDITCON, "An edit has presumed consensus until it is disputed or reverted". There's yet an established consensus concerning this and no disagreement has been voiced for over four months since the last posting, and mere argument devoid "agreeing" is not how this works nor how consensus is built, as the former by itself would constituteWP:JDL; applies to your third point withal.Snowstormfigorion (talk)23:59, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit has been reverted multiple times by multiple editors, therefore, there is no reason for you to assume anything other than it doesn't have consensus.M.Bitton (talk)00:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion did not result in a consensus to include or omit anything. Again, there hasn't been a response to thelast posting in almost five months, thus there is no reason for you to assume there is sill disagreement; the latter I made clear that if persists the edit may be reverted and that discussion can be resumed.Snowstormfigorion (talk)11:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As long as others have disagreed with you, and they have (you know this all too well), you have no choice but to abide by the NOCONSENSUS. If you're not happy with that outcome, you know what to do. I'm done here.M.Bitton (talk)12:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with the image you are adding per the same arguments I made previously when I disagreed with the image you were adding.FunLater (talk)13:48, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am all withإيان andFunLater here. User-generated vector graphics that simply diplay the endonym of the language in a larger size than the native name parameterright above it are generally useless in language articles, whether they produce plain text orfeign to be calligraphic. They add nothing of value here. FunLater has suggested to add a distribution map instead, but note that we have a different parameter for that which is already in use. I basically likeإيان's idea of a snippet from a historical manuscript, although finding the proper choice might open another can of worms of unnecessary discussions—but maybe not. –Austronesier (talk)14:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was used in the places you mentioned based on its style. But the font looks too different from the most commonly used fonts to warrant it representing Arabic.FunLater (talk)16:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're discussing the addition ofFile:Arabic calligraphy thuluth.svg in this article. The file is not in use any of the three articles you mentioned in your comment from 06:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC). Obviously, your Commons image of the thuluth script isnot featured in the flags of Saudi Arabia and the Arabic League.
Sure, you like your own work. I don't disagree with that, i.e. the fact that you like that image so much. But I disagree with using the file here in this article. Why? See what I've written less than three hours ago (and also all the very good arguments brought forward byUser:إيان). –Austronesier (talk)17:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think a good image that could represent Arabic should be
high quality,
significant to Arabic,
and not something that would make any popular Arabic-speaking ethnicities feel not well-represented (for example,Islamic manuscripts won't representArab Christians).
Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request.
This article needs attention from an expert in linguistics. The specific problem is: There seems to be some confusion surrounding the chronology of Arabic's origination, including notably in the paragraph on Qaryat Al-Faw (also discussed on talk). There are major sourcing gaps from "Literary Arabic" onwards.64.189.18.48 (talk)05:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of arequested move.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider amove review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
The dialects "cannot" be descended from Classical Arabic?
Someone has added to the "Classification" section that the Arabic dialects "do not descend from Classical Arabic". We should not be saying this in Wikipedia voice as it is simply a theory held by some and does not represent a broadly held consensus, not to mention the fact that it directly contradicts the rest of the article which assumes that the dialects are in fact descended from Classical Arabic, or at least a vernacular register of Classical Arabic. I think that if we want to present this viewpoint it should be mentioned that this is one theory of the origin of the dialects and not the majority view.Vivelapucelle (talk)18:16, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This statement is based on a number of sources, including a secondary source, Birnstiel (2019), who writes: "Traditionally, Classical Arabic has been regarded as more or less identical with the ancestor of all varieties of Arabic, ancient and modern, and thus as nearly identical to Proto-Arabic (Fischer 1997: 187–8). However, many varieties of Arabic both ancient and modern preserve features lost in Classical Arabic and present a state corresponding more closely to what is found in other Semitic languages (Al-Jallad 2018b, Huehnergard 2017, Pat-El 2017). This shows that these varieties of Arabic cannot have developed from Classical Arabic." We might add something about the "traditionally" held view, but in order to present it as unchangedcommunis opinio, we would need an equally modern source that we can cite with the same weight as the Routledge handbook. –Austronesier (talk)19:21, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a"change X to Y" format and provide areliable source if appropriate. The article is referring to the languages that are recognized as official by the most countries, not to the most spoken languages.Day Creature (talk)19:08, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sub-section "Status in the Arab world vis-à-vis other languages" starts "With the sole example of medieval linguist Abu Hayyan al-Gharnati..." Surely this is meant to say "the soleexception."Draqueeb (talk)13:56, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-3 vital article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a"change X to Y" format and provide areliable source if appropriate.Skitash (talk)12:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Request withdrawn Ok, I initially didn't notice that this title is fine perWP:NCLANG, so I withdrew my request.--Karimtalk to me :)..!16:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
