User talk:Exacrion

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Also, when you post on

]

Exacrion, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Exacrion! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host) talk) 16:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply ]

February 2015

Please read substratum. If Tunisian Arabic has a Punic substratum, that's very interesting, but it does not mean that Tunisian is a dialect of Punic. It's still considered Arabic. E.g., French is commonly argued to have a Gallic substratum, but it's still classified a Romance language, not Celtic. — kwami (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know

It is considered Arabic for socio-linguistic reasons above all else.

To Kwamikagami: But considering the change of perspective, it was interesting to add punic, with the berber substratum, (when they are not the same thing), in the language pages treating of that. And, all the Maghrebis dialects/languages are concerned, not only Tunisian, which brings a whole new perspective on the Punic influence today.

Also it is interesting to look into, that if the pre-Islamic Berber (especially near Tunisia), weren't just simply Punics. As far as I researched, there is unquestioned Punic influences in Tunisian Arabic in religious and agricultural matters, such as "Ba'li farming", "ommek Tannou" and some rituals of Punic faith still practiced today, like versing water on the head of a doll repreasenting ommek tannou (mother Tannou or Tanit), while chanting, in order to make it rain, the days of drought (you'll find more informations in the Tunisian pages in French wikipedia).

One noticeable thing also, is the interesting connection between Tunisian or Libyan Arabic to Hebrew and Levantine dialects of Arabic. The other nearby dialects to Tunisia and Libya do not share this connection. Also there is not known immigration from the Levant to the Maghreb or the opposite in recent History. That might be just a coincidence, but we can still hypothesize, that their link is shared in the remains of Phoenician (Canaanite language). Although we need researches on that matter.

Last but not least, Tunisian traditional (and Maghrebi to some extent) cuisine do not include pork or cook with diary products, by opposition to other Mediterranean or Arabic countries. The first element is usually believed to be due to Islam. While the second, less known, is allegedly due to the old Jewish community in the country. But we know, that back in time, these prescriptions where respected as traditions, by the people of Canaan and they eventually made it up, to the status of religious prescriptions at some point. If that's not the case, shouldn't the Tunisian cuisine cook with dairy even at least for some dishes for those non-Jewish ? Also considering the long history of the country, it is no wonder that many traditions and cultural aspects are as old as Carthage goes.

A fact that many overlook also, is that the destruction of Carthage in 146 BC, wasn't the end of the Punics, as there were countless other Punic cities all over the Mediterranean and especially in modern-day North Africa (the Maghreb)

Add to that, that when Egyptian Islamic legions got to Tunisia in the 7th century, they reported the common tongue (old Maghrebi arabic I guess), as something different from Arabic or the Berber they were used to, this report continued throughout the Maghreb countries they conquered. You can find more in the History of Tunisia pages, and i am still looking (although I do it in French pages) Exacrion (talk) 20:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection.

You don't seem to understand that this is an encyclopedia. We report what is known, not what we speculate might be true. Tunisian cuisine has nothing to do with the classification of Arabic dialects. You have a ref that says there's a Punic substratum in Maghrebi Arabic. That's entirely reasonable, and if it weren't for the obvious nonsense that you're writing, I wouldn't have bothered to check the source. But then you have a review of the book written by someone who doesn't understand it, and you're also using that as a ref. According to your logic, Tunisians and 50 million other people speak Punic rather than Arabic. That's an incredible claim, and you'd better have a good source for it. You don't. Therefore, it does not belong on Wikipedia.

Present your evidence on the talk page, per

WP:FRINGE. — kwami (talk) 21:33, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

As you are one of the contributors to Tunisian Arabic. You are kindly asked to review the part about Domains of Use and adjust it directly or through comments in the talk page of Tunisian Arabic.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 14:30, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]