User talk:HararAwalV2

Hi HararAwalV2! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! – LuniZunie ツ_(talk) 18:23, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, sorry if this is an inconvenient timing but i wanted to tell you that i finished the Aw Muhammad wiki book and i’d like your feedback on what do you think should be improved before i submit it Samyatilius (talk) 20:35, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Berbera, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Sheikh, Somaliland, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed your recent edits in the introduction of Avalites and the ‘People’ section, which you changed incorrectly. Please, before making edits especially on significant or sensitive topics you need to discuss the changes you are proposing. For example, you added:

‘In Camoens: His Life and Lusiads, Richard F. Burton links the Habr Awal people with the ancient Avalitae mentioned by Ptolemy and in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. He notes that Camoens’ reference to the “Barbarica Region” corresponds to the Somali coast, and following Ibn Battuta and Varthema, he identifies this group with the Habr Awal who historically occupied the coast of Zeila to Siyara.’

This is not relevant to the Avalitae in the ‘People’ section (which you changed to ‘inhabitants’). First, the later Bilad al-Barbar of Ibn Battuta is not simply Barbaria of classical antiquity. Second, it is Barbaria, not ‘Barbarica.’ Third, the Avalitae have nothing to do with Barbaria being the Somali coast, and I have already mentioned Avalitae in the Periplus and Ptolemy section so there is no need to repeat it here. You should familiarize yourself with how Wikipedia works (it seems you are new). Also, regarding the introduction which you completely removed the text, but the intro should serve as a summary of the whole article. There is no reason to delete it, and its sources are already cited in the body ( it is not necessary to cite them again in the introduction). Shahanshax (talk) 02:43, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Shahanshax

Thank you for your message, but I think your assessment of my edit is incorrect and dismisses a properly sourced contribution without sufficient justification. I have added sourced, unrepeated content that introduces a modern scholarly interpretation of the Avalitae, rather than duplicating what is already stated from classical sources such as the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea or Claudius Ptolemy. My addition draws specifically on Richard Francis Burton, who explicitly links the Avalitae to the Habr Awal through a synthesis of classical and later sources. This is not redundant; it is an interpretive perspective that belongs in a section discussing inhabitants or later identifications of the group. Removing it outright ignores the value of including notable scholarly viewpoints, which is a core principle of Wikipedia.

Your objection based on distinctions between “Barbaria,” “Barbarica,” and Bilad al-Barbar does not invalidate the edit, because the wording and linkage reflect Burton’s own analysis, not original research on my part and is only referenced in the quote which contains information relevant to this article

Furthermore He draws on accounts from figures such as Ibn Battuta and Ludovico di Varthema to argue for continuity in the population of the region, and my contribution simply represents that published interpretation. Dismissing it as “not relevant” overlooks the fact that the section is precisely where such historiographical identifications should be included. If there are concerns about weight or phrasing, they should be addressed constructively, not by removing sourced material entirely :)

More importantly, you removed this sourced content without first opening a discussion on the talk page, while simultaneously accusing me of not following Wikipedia process. That is inconsistent. If you believe an edit is problematic, the correct approach is to raise the issue and seek consensus, not to revert sourced, non-duplicative material unilaterally. I would ask that you create a topic on the discussion page before removing such contributions in the future so that this can be properly reviewed.

Finally, regarding your use of “northwest Somalia,” this is incorrect. Across Wikipedia, the general consensus in many related articles is to refer to the region as Somaliland, reflecting common usage in reliable sources. Replacing that with “northwest Somalia” without discussion introduces inconsistency and appears to be a point-of-view change rather than a neutral editorial decision. If terminology is to be standardized, that should be done through consensus, not unilateral edits. HararAwalV2 (talk) 19:18, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

First of all, let’s talk about your recent changes. You removed the file in the infobox showing the location of Avalites within Barbaria (northern Somalia) for no apparent reason. Why was it deleted, and for what reason? Secondly, you did not properly cite your claim that Burton identifies ancient Avalites with the Habr Awal. Instead, you added sources that do not include page numbers or clear references, which makes them difficult to verify. I will link them here:

1. https://academic.oup.com/nq/article-abstract/s5-XI/264/59/4449489?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false — which page and where does your claim come from?
2. Burton, Richard Francis (1856). First Footsteps in East Africa: Or, An Exploration of Harar. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-03030-4 — which page contains this statement, and how can we verify it?

Thirdly, your full text states:

“Richard F. Burton links the Habr Awal people with the ancient Avalitae mentioned by Ptolemy and in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. He notes that Camoens’ reference to the ‘Barbarica Region’ corresponds to the Somali coast, and following Ibn Battuta and Varthema, he identifies this group with the Habr Awal who historically occupied the coast of Zeila to Siyara as the ancient Avalites.”

Once again, you are repeating the same statement. First of all, Barbaria is not the same as Bilad al-Barbar. Barbaria was the Greco-Roman name for northern Somalia, whereas Bilad al-Barbar refers to a much broader region of the Somali lands, as described by Ibn Battuta, stretching from Zeila in the north to Mogadishu in the south. Clearly, if you are not familiar with this topic, I cannot explain everything in detail here, but as I have stated, Barbaria is one region (northern Somalia), while Bilad al-Barbar is a broader region—similar to how al-Maghreb refers to northwest Africa, while the Barbary Coast refers specifically to the Mediterranean coast of North Africa (excluding Egypt). You are also using incorrect terminology: it is “Barbaria,” not “Barbarica,” and Bilad al-Barbar, not Barbaria. You also accused me of deleting your content for no reason, which is incorrect. I have already explained previously that what you added is not relevant to the article. Finally, you criticized my use of “northwestern Somalia” instead of Somaliland. However, both terms are used in reliable sources, since Somaliland refers geographically to the northwestern part of Somalia (used here in a geographic, not political sense). There are several sources that use both “northwestern Somalia” and “Somaliland,” including:

1. https://unhabitat.org/urban-planning-manual-for-somaliland
2. https://www.utrop.no/diverse/news-in-english/3928/
3. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4006988
4. https://items.ssrc.org/category/crisis-in-the-horn-of-africa/

So I am not making up this term rather it is widely used. Lastly, you stated that I should have created a discussion on the talk page which i'm going to do soon. Shahanshax (talk) 20:14, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

First of all, regarding the infobox image, I did not remove it “for no apparent reason.” If there was an issue with that edit, it should have been raised and discussed rather than framed as arbitrary. That said, my primary focus has been on improving the textual content, and I have no objection to retaining the map provided it is accurate and relevant to the article.

On the sourcing issue, your criticism about page numbers is valid in principle, but it does not invalidate the content itself. Richard Francis Burton does make an identification linking the Avalitae to Somali groups, and I will re-add the material with precise page references to make this fully verifiable. The appropriate response here is to request clarification or improved citation—not to remove sourced material outright.

As for the substance of the edit, you are focusing on the Barbaria vs Bilad al-Barbar distinction, which, while noted, is not the central point of my contribution. I am not attempting to equate those terms. The core of the edit is Burton’s identification of the Avalitae with the Habr Awal, and that is directly relevant to a section discussing inhabitants. If the terminology around “Barbaria/Barbarica” is an issue, it can be corrected without removing the entire contribution. Dismissing the content as “not relevant” is therefore not justified.

More importantly, you removed sourced, non-duplicative content without prior discussion while simultaneously claiming that I should have discussed it first. That is inconsistent. If an edit is genuinely problematic, the correct approach is to raise it on the talk page and seek consensus, not to unilaterally revert it.

On the terminology point, I do not agree with your characterization. Somaliland is widely used across Wikipedia and in reliable sources, not merely as a vague geographic label but as the standard term for the region in question. Replacing it with “northwestern Somalia” is not a neutral correction, it introduces inconsistency and disregards common usage across related articles. The existence of sources using both terms does not justify selectively enforcing one over the other without consensus.

Finally, I agree that this should be taken to the talk page, which is what should have been done before removing the material in the first place. I will reintroduce the content with clearer attribution and precise citations, and we can address any remaining concerns there in line with Wikipedia guidelines.

On the sourcing issue, your claim that the material is not verifiable is incorrect. The identification by Richard Francis Burton is explicitly referenced, and the relevant passage can be found on page 498. I will update the citation to include the exact page number so that it is fully transparent and easily verifiable. However, the presence or absence of a page number in the initial edit does not justify removing the content altogether—especially when the source itself was already provided. The correct approach would have been to request clarification or add a citation needed tag, not to revert sourced material outright.

Furthermore, once properly cited, this becomes a clearly attributable statement rather than something open to dispute on verification grounds. At that point, the issue is no longer about whether the claim exists in the source, but how it is presented in the article which, again, is something that should be resolved through discussion, not removal. HararAwalV2 (talk) 20:30, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi, It seems we are once again back to square one. You have added twice the reference: Burton, Richard Francis (1856). First Footsteps in East Africa: Or, An Exploration of Harar. Cambridge Library Collection. African Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-03030-4, while removing other source u previously added. Even with this reference, you did not indicate the page number, so there is no way to verify your claim that Burton identifies Habr Awal with the Avalites. Without a page number, we cannot check whether the statement is accurate. Additionally, you added:

"He notes that Camoens’ reference to the 'Barbarica Region' corresponds to the Somali coast, and following Ibn Battuta and Varthema, he identifies this group with the Habr Awal who historically occupied the coast of Zeila to Siyara as the ancient Avalites."

What does this have to do with the Inhabitants section? I already explained that Avalitae were one of major inhabitants of Barbaria (northern Somalia) so the later has nothing to do with this section, which should focus on the people of Avalites, not its location. Furthermore, Ibn Battuta mentions Bilad al-Barbar, not Barbaria. Perhaps you could check for yourself what Bilad al barbar and Barbaria refers to. I have repeatedly explained that Bilad al-Barbar and Barbaria are not the same, yet you keep adding the same sentence about Camoens’ “Barbarica Region,” which is irrelevant to this section. I cannot continue like this and may need to request page protection, as this is disrupting the article. I have worked very hard to improve this article, which was quite short before my edits (you can trace my contributions). Finally, I request that in the future you include a summary of your changes before publishing, so we know exactly what you added or modified. Publishing without providing a summary is against Wikipedia rules. Shahanshax (talk) 20:46, 3 April 2026 (UTC)