Talk:Najran

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Early history[edit]

I'm not sure Abraha al-Ashram spechally almansour are very stronge tribe identical with "SBQLM" of the third century. "SBQLM" arrived prior to Dhu Nuwas's reign as he was fought by Himyar King Ilsharah Yahdib. On the other hand north arabien king Imru Al-Qais ibn Amqu of 328 may very well be the Lakhmid king Imru' al-Qais I ibn 'Amr(288-328) but not the poet Imru' al-Qais. I got both from the german article and related sources and the different transcription of the arab names through time and in other languages is a constant source of irritation. ...er-wait a minute - no it is the same king of the Lakhmids - good got that sorted - still not sure about the governor --T.woelk (talk) 17:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, in that case please try to find out as to what SBQLM's real name is, if there is any in historical sources. As for Imru al-Qais, he is a Lakhmid king from Northern Arabia and was the first of his dynasty to actually convert to Christianity. He even unsucessfully tried to unite Arabia, but Arabia would only be united after the advent of Islam. Just imagine, how different the history of the world would have been, had he suceeded. Joyson Noel (talk) 22:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, you are right he should have succeeded, so it would had been more easier for spread of Islam, since Christianity has many thing similar to Islam. And I think Muslims wouldn't had faced prosecution from polytheists. مع تحيات شباب داربي

I wasn't saying that Imru' al-Qais should have succeeded. What i meant was that history would have been very different, had he succeeded in uniting Arabia before Muhammad's time. Anyway, it was two years ago and now, looking back in retrospect, i feel that it was unnecessary to mention it. Joyson Noel Holla at me 16:24, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect possible vandalism with this line in the early history section: " King Sir Matt and mahde The Great was the first Emperor of Saudi Arabia in 1972.", but I don't have the time track down the previous version and/or verify Kkeller (talk) 20:13, 22 March 2012 (UTC)kkeller[reply]

population[edit]

I removed a statement "Due to its long history, the inhabitants of Najran are made up of many ethnic groups, religions and backgrounds", because the rate of population growth that is being claimed in the previous statement indicates that the diversity is due to immigration. Also, since when does it follow that a city having a long history means that it will have a diverse population?

According to the Najran region and Najran city articles, the region in 2010 had 505,652 inhabitants and its capital also exactly 505,652. That means that exactly zero people lived in the region outside the capital city. It is likely that the surrounding region is poorly inhabited, but zero people in all the region is an unlikely number. For comparison: in 2004 the city had 246 880 inhabitants. ThomasPusch (talk) 13:47, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Najran. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:29, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archaeology & history w/o dates are completely useless.[edit]

The Nabataea website is not a reliable source anyway. It's a good starting point, as people there seem passionate, but they lack the needed academic approach. Also, copying word by word the website content is not allowed on Wiki. The result is a 1001 Nights fairy tale: once upon a time, there was something amazing there. Please try harder. Arminden (talk) 17:14, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]