User talk:HararAwal

Recent edit

Your recent edit on the Isaaq page showing the Isaaq as historically being the predominant clan in Zeila using the Burton citation is UNDUE and misleading. Please either provide a citation mentioning them as the predominant demographic or reword it to match the citation.MustafaO (talk) 22:37, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MustafaO You're correct in spotting this era I have now changeed it to historically Native to Zeila, which is supported by many primary first hand accounts HararAwal (talk) 11:23, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @HararAwal

The source (Burton) doesnt mention "native" in any way he gives a wide geographical range. It is also repeat sourcing a point to give unweight due by pasting over the artice.

2nd point, you added "native" here and in the Zeila talk page are advocating that current demographics are not native? I think that's a point you'll have to evidence clearly otherwise this edit has to be modified again I'm afraid.

My suggestion, reword it to match the citation we agreed on in the Zeila talk page a few weeks ago. Regarding your new post, you could take that to a 3rd opinion as it seems to be a bit of a stretch. MustafaO (talk) 14:25, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MustafaO

I used the term Native because the Habar Awal were among the earliest recorded groups living in Zeila. That said, I recognize that no other tribe has been described using this term, so I’m happy to agree with you and revert it to the original wording. I want to clarify that I am not suggesting other tribes are not native; rather, my intention was to highlight the presence of multiple Somali tribes that have historically lived in Zeila, as I’ve noticed their contributions are sometimes underrepresented.

Perhaps we could settle on phrasing such as “historically inhabited” to reflect this more accurately, unless you have another suggestion I would like to hear what you have

My intention is simply to promote fairness by making sure every tribe and ethnicity that contributed to Zeila’s history is reflected proportionately, so that no group is either overemphasized or diminished HararAwal (talk) 17:38, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @HararAwal

Thank you for the clarification. Naturally it is important to understand that when we talk about mentionability, current populations will always be mentioned more than historical populations.

I think you should mention the Isaaq as one of the populations that have a big amount of history in Zeila which I support, but since they dont live there anymore, it would be UNDUE to mention them in the same frequency as the current populations. This goes for all Somali Wikipedia. MustafaO (talk) 17:51, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TDLR, is this resolved? Magherbin (talk) 18:21, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of, the issue is that there has been irrelevant pieces of information added that doesn't relate to the demographics passage, thus making the lead page look very unprofessional, that is my main worry HararAwal (talk) 19:56, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I've had previous content disputes with the two editors hence dont want to insert myself in the dispute. I would suggest trying WP:DR if you're unable to resolve this. Magherbin (talk) 22:35, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]