Talk:Haim Farhi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Origins of the Farhi Surname
The first documented Farhi lived in the 13th century in Provence, France, under the protection of the Popes d'Avignon. Ishtori HaFarhi was given or took the name Ha Farhi for his hometown Florenza, Spain.
Ishtori in the introduction of his book Kaftor va Perah (written in the late 1340) described the origin of the Farhi surname. He was named after the town of Florenza where his parents lived. Flora is “flower” in Spanish and as Perach in Hebrew. Ishtori became known as HaParhi (the Parhi). The surname later became just Farhi. Perah and Farhi share the same Hebrew letters.
The Syrian Farhi descend from Haim who lived in Tyre near Smyrna (today's Izmir) and who moved to Damascus in 1731. His brother Joseph moved to Istanbul.
Although the Farhi name in Hebrew is always spelled the same way Image:Farhi hebrew.jpg, many Farhi living in the Middle East, spelled it in Arabic as: Image:Farhi arabic.jpg (Fe, Alef, Re, He, Ye), with other without the Alef.
Those with the Alef were considered the aristocratic ones and were most probably wealthier. The Alef pronunciation was usually used in the Turkish language and associated with those of Turkish origins.
Later at the end of the 19th century, many Farhi families emigrated from the Ottoman Empire to several American, European and African countries and their descendants have changed the spelling of their surnames to maintain its phonetic pronunciation. The variation of the Farhi surname are: Fari, Farkhi, Farji, Farje, Farkic, Farchy, Farhis, Farhie and Farry.
AlainFarhi 20:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC) Alain Farhi
- this looks very good, albeit you should put it into the article and not on the talk page. if possible you should add a link or tag to a reference. JaakobouChalk Talk 21:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ottoman Palestine or Israel
- per this diff: [1]
Nickhh, Seeing the conflict, I am hoping to avoid the Israel/Palestine issue (both non-existent during the Ottoman times of this article) and planning on changing the territorial descriptions per their Wilayah based locations for the proper time stamp (1800s). The plan is to replace "Northern Israel" with either 'Akko Sanjak', Galilee, 'Damascus Wilayah' etc. and adding 'Currently Northern-Israel/Syria/other' within parenthesis. Thoughts? JaakobouChalk Talk 19:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry every book or account I've ever seen about this period refers to "Palestine" (as the name of the area, not as a reference to a putative 21st Century state of Palestine). I know that's not 100% reliable of course, but until anyone offers reliable and sourced reasons why the current wording should change I'd argue it should stay as it is. Using old Ottoman descriptions as some kind of compromise seems a bit wilfully obscure. Again it's a "compromise" which isn't needed. --Nickhh (talk) 16:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Napoleon Bonaparte first captured Egypt and then tried to capture the Damascus Wilayah, which in those years (1790s) was in full control of both the Jerusalem Sanjak and the Akko Sanjak. He was unable to take over the Akko Sanjak due to the inginuity of Haim Farhi, who decided on the creation of an inner wall during the siege on the out city walls. The Akko Sanjak was a near autonomous body due the the strength of its leader but it was still historically considered under the main administration of the Damascus wali.
- The "area of Palestine" is a Roman borrowed terminology and not a very factual/accurate one considering the "modern" names for different areas used in the 1790s. For starters Napoleon's campaign considered a territory larger than the Roman territory of 'Syria Palestina' and also, there is really no justification of using territorial names that don't fit the related era.
- I don't know what books you're referring but this would be a great time and place to present them. JaakobouChalk Talk 22:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Failed "good article" nomination
Upon its review on February 18, 2008, this good article nomination was quick-failed because it:
-
- had a virtual or complete lack of reliable sources
thus making it ineligible for good article consideration. According to WP:Verifiability, "Material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source."
This article did not receive a thorough review, and may not meet other parts of the good article criteria. I encourage you to remedy this problem (and any others) and resubmit it for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far.— Agüeybaná 02:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] English and Copy Editing
The level of English grammar and usage of language in this article leave much to be desired. This was also a period of great anarchy in those provinces of the Ottoman empire and the events occurred against that background, which should probably be mentioned. Mewnews (talk) 22:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)