This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nubia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | You can help expand this article with text translated from
the corresponding article in Catalan. (March 2009) Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
That Catalan article does look really good. No one here from Barcelona? :)
Worth mentioning that some of the versions from before the edit wars in March were pretty good and seemed well-sourced as well. There are certainly things to salvage without a full-scale revert. - LlywelynII ( talk) 17:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I moved the following bit out of the article:
First, there is nothing 'however' about this; there is also solid linguistic evidence that the Nile-Nubians originally came from the south/southwest (see Nobiin language#History). This study sure seems to be relevant to this article, but we should find a better place for it — it was placed in the prehistory section for no apparent reason. I'm parking it here because its phrasing and placement were potentially misleading.
Some additional info: the timeframe of the northward migrations of the Nuba people is not pinned down yet, though Greenberg (as cited in Thelwall 1982) calculated that a split between Nile-Nubian and the Nubian languages in central Sudan has occured at least 2500 years ago. This could be correlated to the overthrowing of Kush by the 'Noba' people. On the other hand, the linguistic data shows that the Nubians most probably came in several waves of migrations. — mark ✎ 23:24, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I've reverted these edits, because the user who made them had vandalized just before and after making them, if someone wants to check the facts out, perhaps they are correct. — siro χ o 00:33, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
Is it worth noting the fact that Nubia is the setting for 'Aida'? I don't believe that Aida is based on much fact, but it might be worth at least adding a link. -- TangentIdea 04:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
This article needs a picture of Nubian pyramids. -- Revolución ( talk) 21:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Yet another picture of lightskinned people over-represented as the default type of another ethnic group. Those nubians look more Arabic than Nubian. But of course "nubian" will be redefined to mean "those who look Arabic, only slightly darker". Or my favorite "they always looked that light". Anyone want to show other pictures that don't violate the copyright violation? I would go there myself, take a few dozen pictures, come back and post them, but I don't have the time or money. -- Zaphnathpaaneah 06:21, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean, "look more Arabic"? Arabic is a language. The people who speak it are Arabs. Their ethnicity is Arab, but their skin colour ranges from as white as a typical European to as dark as a typical sub-Saharan African. Manormadman ( talk) 08:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Not all Nubians were as dark as you think they were. Some times Egyptians depicted them as the same reddish or dark brown as themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.3.179.161 ( talk) 07:39, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
nubia has been ovelooked [for] egypt
( NitaReads 03:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC))
Here is the link for the Archaeological report concernng Nubia's existence before the Egyptian Dynastic period. It's titled "The Lost Pharoahs of Nubia" www.homestead.com/wysinger/menes2.pdf Tom 10/29/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.133.108.59 ( talk) 03:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Is the upper Egyptians' origin seperate from the lower Egyptians' origin, I am painfully ignorant on this matter and would appreciate some expert to make a statement here (if the above statement about the related origins of upper Egyptians and Nubians is accepted (I have no opinion on that matter)) or on the Egypt page. Seeing as upper Egypt and lower Egypt were two seperate regions, and their unification was apparently a big event, I would not be suprised by seperate origins.
Bruce Williams is a well established research professor at the University of Chicago Oriental (oriental meaning east of Europe, not strictly East Asia) department. He has a plethora of information regarding the ORIGIN of the Nubians. And like the (upper) Egyptians, he has shown that they did not originate with Northern or Asiatic or Semetic or Europeans. It is first important to know that the Nubians developed with other cultures in the Sahara before it completely dried up.
One thing that is annoying is that anything that is discovered to support a Black origin is firstly labeled "Afrocentric" then it is labled "false by Afrocentric association". Bruce Williams as far as I know is not an Afrocentricist. Even if he were, his facts are consistent with the studies I myself did in college with the A-Group and C-group origins of the Nubians and Upper Egyptians. I expect this article to become "afrocentrized" and then straw manned into rejecting the Black origins for it. -- Zaphnathpaaneah 06:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
I find this entire article to be fallacious. Nubia and Early Egypt were contemporary societies that shared a common past in black Africa. In fact, linguistic and archaeological evidence indicates that Nubia preceded Egypt. Early Nubians migrated to what then became Ancient Egypt. Archaeological research in both areas discovered evidence of early communities whose religious practices revolved around sacred priests who provided leadership and guidance. It is believed that these sacred priest performed such ceremonies as the ushering in the Moon every month. Thus, Nubia and Egypt share common linguistic origins, common religious origins and common cultural origins. Due to many factors, including geographical location, Egypt became far more prosperous than Nubia. Egyptian wealth led to the development of a highly complex, multistrata society that drew immigrants from far away as servants and employees. Nubia, on the other hand, retained much of original cultural practices and ethnic composition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.231.32.1 ( talk • contribs)
S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54. VL
The Pre-History chronology either has typos or is confused? It goes from 3100 BC to 65,000 BC to "early-28th" century BC. What kind of chronological progression is that? (I think "early-28th" should be "early 28th", unless the entire date is a typo.) Kofannon
I'm using a textbook that is used in an AP World History class, and it states that the Kerma era is counted as part of Kush. Does anyone have a citation for a different periodization? I also find that the Kush section is very weak. Even a general overview it should mention Napata and Meroe and their respective eras. I mean they're on the map, what is the point of that map if you're not going to mention the important cities on it.
![]() | This article contains
weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies
biased or
unverifiable information. (March 2009) |
This reference is posing as legitimate. It is pushing a point of view. The Egyptians could not be black. Only the Nubians could be class as black.
Jesus, who put that retarded tag on the article? Since when is PBS considered biased towards blacks? WTF happened to Wikipedia? It seems they only elect eurocentrist to their editing team.
nubians helped build ABU SIMBEL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.116.85.76 ( talk) 23:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia editable by anyone. The views expressed by the writers of Wiki articles are not necessarily those of Wikipedia and sponsors.
"By the 100th millennium BC" the people of Nubia were full participants of the Neolithic revolution? That should at least read "10th millennium BC", at the earliest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.20.56.229 ( talk) 15:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Please explain your edits, Taharqa. They have all the appearance of article ownership. You reverted 18 months' of article improvements and expansion by other editors to the version of 2007-10-01. This is suspiciously close to the last version that you edited. In the process, you removed the semi-protection notice, quite a bit of added content, and several added source citations. All this under the guise of reinstating a "stable version", when there's no evidence the edit history or on this talk page of any instability in the first place. You then proceeded to edit-war when your edit was reverted. Reverting to your own version from all that while ago, erasing content and sources added by other editors along the way, with incorrect edit summaries (It was you, not others, who "blanked over sourced material".), and then edit warring to keep the article that way, has the hallmarks of article ownership. Please explain your edits. Uncle G ( talk) 13:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Reverted
[3] this disciple of Hitler person whose mission is to delete or tag all Black African related subjects. Believe it or not, he is an administrator.
And here is Nanjira text (p 82):
Similar but the above has been paraphrased and more detail. Besides no one has monopoly to the term "black civilizations". It was this phrase which led to the removal of the content by this Eurocentric POV pusher ( User:Dougweller). Damn how this person became an admin beats me. Tamsier ( talk) 14:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
"Nubia is the homeland of one of Africa's earliest black civilizations, with a history which can be traced from 2000 B.C. onward through Nubian monuments and artifacts as well as written records from Egypt and Rome. Nubians were depicted by Egyptians as having very dark skin, often shown with golden hooped earrings and with braided or extended hair"
is pretty much factual, 'except' for the terms "earliest" and of course "black civilizations". Thus if you write simply:
"Nubia is the homeland of one of Africa's early civilization, with a history which can be traced from 2000 B.C. onward through monuments and artifacts as well as written records from Egypt and Rome. Nubians were depicted by Egyptians as having very dark skin, often shown with golden hooped earrings and with braided or extended hair"
Then you've got a statement that is undoubtely true (although a citation for the 2000BC is needed) and unbiased. There is no need to insist with the "black civilization" since eveybody knows Nubians were mostly black africans and furthermore the term "black civilization" is racially connoted and does not have any definite meaning (what is the colour of a civilization ? aren't they people of various skin colours in any civilization ?). Therefore I believe the statement I wrote above could be kept in the article: it is neutral and factual. Iry-Hor ( talk) 18:31, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I've changed the lead paragraph as per the consensus here. DanJazzy ( talk) 15:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
[7] [8] [9] [10] Dougweller ( talk) 19:32, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:21, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:51, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
For some reason information regarding the Nubian origins of the 12th and 11th dynasties has been removed and waterdowned which does not reflect the consensus in Egyptology that Amenemaht I was of Nubian origin, there is the prophecy of Neferti for example which clearly spells this out in addition to a figure with the same name hailing from Nubia serving under the last Pharaoh of the 11th dynasty, should I edit, or how can we restore this vital information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:204:E101:5640:E9C0:FD61:A55F:DB26 ( talk) 15:24, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Please seek consensus before removing the picture gallery. This subject is not as well known as Egypt's history. These images will be new to many readers. More than half of the pics were deleted to address concerns EditorfromMars ( talk) 05:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@ EditorfromMars: I think the article gives too much weight to the ancient part of the subject, while giving almost no weight to Islamic Nubia, and too little weight to christian Nubia, They both constitute almost 1600 years. Maybe the parts that aren't directly relevant to the article could be removed or summarized. For example, A lot of weight is given to the 25th dynasty in the "Nubia in Egypt" part, I think most of it is more relevant to the 25th dynasty and Kushite kingdom articles, while this article needs to give more focus to the Nubia region and its inhabitants in every period. Also, I believe some parts belong to Nubians' article more than here, such as discussion of Ahmose-Nefertari, Medjay, the possible Nubian origin of Amenemhet I and Mentuhotep II. Finally, I'm not sure "Egypt in Nubia" or "Nubia in Egypt" are the best options. Mohamed Talk 12:05, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
I noticed that the "linguistic" section of this article serves as an etymology of the term Nubia, but does not give a reference for its assertion that it is derived from the "Noba" people. It's fine if that's the case, of course, but I found it interesting that the Etymology Online shows it as a different source, and described as "related to Coptic noubti "to weave," or from Nubian nub 'gold.'" [1] It's of no real importance, but it seems a better explanation would help the article. Sych ( talk) 16:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
References
No 156.215.18.155 ( talk) 01:31, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Dear Editors I edited any section tying the "Noba" with the Nubians as it is incorrect and the sources used to support such claims are very weak and not based on sound academic references. Also there seems to be a confusion about "Nuba" and "Noba". this is an amateur's mistake as the two term do not mean the same thing and have not been used to refer to the same people. The association of "Noba" with "Nubians" is a political agenda and not based on archaeological or historical facts. If the editors like , we can provide the sources from credible research and specialized books on this mater , however they are present in hard copy. it is better to use these references than to use dubious works found in some internet pages . Kryako ( talk) 10:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nubia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | You can help expand this article with text translated from
the corresponding article in Catalan. (March 2009) Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
That Catalan article does look really good. No one here from Barcelona? :)
Worth mentioning that some of the versions from before the edit wars in March were pretty good and seemed well-sourced as well. There are certainly things to salvage without a full-scale revert. - LlywelynII ( talk) 17:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I moved the following bit out of the article:
First, there is nothing 'however' about this; there is also solid linguistic evidence that the Nile-Nubians originally came from the south/southwest (see Nobiin language#History). This study sure seems to be relevant to this article, but we should find a better place for it — it was placed in the prehistory section for no apparent reason. I'm parking it here because its phrasing and placement were potentially misleading.
Some additional info: the timeframe of the northward migrations of the Nuba people is not pinned down yet, though Greenberg (as cited in Thelwall 1982) calculated that a split between Nile-Nubian and the Nubian languages in central Sudan has occured at least 2500 years ago. This could be correlated to the overthrowing of Kush by the 'Noba' people. On the other hand, the linguistic data shows that the Nubians most probably came in several waves of migrations. — mark ✎ 23:24, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I've reverted these edits, because the user who made them had vandalized just before and after making them, if someone wants to check the facts out, perhaps they are correct. — siro χ o 00:33, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
Is it worth noting the fact that Nubia is the setting for 'Aida'? I don't believe that Aida is based on much fact, but it might be worth at least adding a link. -- TangentIdea 04:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
This article needs a picture of Nubian pyramids. -- Revolución ( talk) 21:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Yet another picture of lightskinned people over-represented as the default type of another ethnic group. Those nubians look more Arabic than Nubian. But of course "nubian" will be redefined to mean "those who look Arabic, only slightly darker". Or my favorite "they always looked that light". Anyone want to show other pictures that don't violate the copyright violation? I would go there myself, take a few dozen pictures, come back and post them, but I don't have the time or money. -- Zaphnathpaaneah 06:21, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean, "look more Arabic"? Arabic is a language. The people who speak it are Arabs. Their ethnicity is Arab, but their skin colour ranges from as white as a typical European to as dark as a typical sub-Saharan African. Manormadman ( talk) 08:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Not all Nubians were as dark as you think they were. Some times Egyptians depicted them as the same reddish or dark brown as themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.3.179.161 ( talk) 07:39, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
nubia has been ovelooked [for] egypt
( NitaReads 03:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC))
Here is the link for the Archaeological report concernng Nubia's existence before the Egyptian Dynastic period. It's titled "The Lost Pharoahs of Nubia" www.homestead.com/wysinger/menes2.pdf Tom 10/29/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.133.108.59 ( talk) 03:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Is the upper Egyptians' origin seperate from the lower Egyptians' origin, I am painfully ignorant on this matter and would appreciate some expert to make a statement here (if the above statement about the related origins of upper Egyptians and Nubians is accepted (I have no opinion on that matter)) or on the Egypt page. Seeing as upper Egypt and lower Egypt were two seperate regions, and their unification was apparently a big event, I would not be suprised by seperate origins.
Bruce Williams is a well established research professor at the University of Chicago Oriental (oriental meaning east of Europe, not strictly East Asia) department. He has a plethora of information regarding the ORIGIN of the Nubians. And like the (upper) Egyptians, he has shown that they did not originate with Northern or Asiatic or Semetic or Europeans. It is first important to know that the Nubians developed with other cultures in the Sahara before it completely dried up.
One thing that is annoying is that anything that is discovered to support a Black origin is firstly labeled "Afrocentric" then it is labled "false by Afrocentric association". Bruce Williams as far as I know is not an Afrocentricist. Even if he were, his facts are consistent with the studies I myself did in college with the A-Group and C-group origins of the Nubians and Upper Egyptians. I expect this article to become "afrocentrized" and then straw manned into rejecting the Black origins for it. -- Zaphnathpaaneah 06:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
I find this entire article to be fallacious. Nubia and Early Egypt were contemporary societies that shared a common past in black Africa. In fact, linguistic and archaeological evidence indicates that Nubia preceded Egypt. Early Nubians migrated to what then became Ancient Egypt. Archaeological research in both areas discovered evidence of early communities whose religious practices revolved around sacred priests who provided leadership and guidance. It is believed that these sacred priest performed such ceremonies as the ushering in the Moon every month. Thus, Nubia and Egypt share common linguistic origins, common religious origins and common cultural origins. Due to many factors, including geographical location, Egypt became far more prosperous than Nubia. Egyptian wealth led to the development of a highly complex, multistrata society that drew immigrants from far away as servants and employees. Nubia, on the other hand, retained much of original cultural practices and ethnic composition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.231.32.1 ( talk • contribs)
S. O. Y. Keita, "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54. VL
The Pre-History chronology either has typos or is confused? It goes from 3100 BC to 65,000 BC to "early-28th" century BC. What kind of chronological progression is that? (I think "early-28th" should be "early 28th", unless the entire date is a typo.) Kofannon
I'm using a textbook that is used in an AP World History class, and it states that the Kerma era is counted as part of Kush. Does anyone have a citation for a different periodization? I also find that the Kush section is very weak. Even a general overview it should mention Napata and Meroe and their respective eras. I mean they're on the map, what is the point of that map if you're not going to mention the important cities on it.
![]() | This article contains
weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies
biased or
unverifiable information. (March 2009) |
This reference is posing as legitimate. It is pushing a point of view. The Egyptians could not be black. Only the Nubians could be class as black.
Jesus, who put that retarded tag on the article? Since when is PBS considered biased towards blacks? WTF happened to Wikipedia? It seems they only elect eurocentrist to their editing team.
nubians helped build ABU SIMBEL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.116.85.76 ( talk) 23:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia editable by anyone. The views expressed by the writers of Wiki articles are not necessarily those of Wikipedia and sponsors.
"By the 100th millennium BC" the people of Nubia were full participants of the Neolithic revolution? That should at least read "10th millennium BC", at the earliest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.20.56.229 ( talk) 15:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Please explain your edits, Taharqa. They have all the appearance of article ownership. You reverted 18 months' of article improvements and expansion by other editors to the version of 2007-10-01. This is suspiciously close to the last version that you edited. In the process, you removed the semi-protection notice, quite a bit of added content, and several added source citations. All this under the guise of reinstating a "stable version", when there's no evidence the edit history or on this talk page of any instability in the first place. You then proceeded to edit-war when your edit was reverted. Reverting to your own version from all that while ago, erasing content and sources added by other editors along the way, with incorrect edit summaries (It was you, not others, who "blanked over sourced material".), and then edit warring to keep the article that way, has the hallmarks of article ownership. Please explain your edits. Uncle G ( talk) 13:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Reverted
[3] this disciple of Hitler person whose mission is to delete or tag all Black African related subjects. Believe it or not, he is an administrator.
And here is Nanjira text (p 82):
Similar but the above has been paraphrased and more detail. Besides no one has monopoly to the term "black civilizations". It was this phrase which led to the removal of the content by this Eurocentric POV pusher ( User:Dougweller). Damn how this person became an admin beats me. Tamsier ( talk) 14:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
"Nubia is the homeland of one of Africa's earliest black civilizations, with a history which can be traced from 2000 B.C. onward through Nubian monuments and artifacts as well as written records from Egypt and Rome. Nubians were depicted by Egyptians as having very dark skin, often shown with golden hooped earrings and with braided or extended hair"
is pretty much factual, 'except' for the terms "earliest" and of course "black civilizations". Thus if you write simply:
"Nubia is the homeland of one of Africa's early civilization, with a history which can be traced from 2000 B.C. onward through monuments and artifacts as well as written records from Egypt and Rome. Nubians were depicted by Egyptians as having very dark skin, often shown with golden hooped earrings and with braided or extended hair"
Then you've got a statement that is undoubtely true (although a citation for the 2000BC is needed) and unbiased. There is no need to insist with the "black civilization" since eveybody knows Nubians were mostly black africans and furthermore the term "black civilization" is racially connoted and does not have any definite meaning (what is the colour of a civilization ? aren't they people of various skin colours in any civilization ?). Therefore I believe the statement I wrote above could be kept in the article: it is neutral and factual. Iry-Hor ( talk) 18:31, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I've changed the lead paragraph as per the consensus here. DanJazzy ( talk) 15:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
[7] [8] [9] [10] Dougweller ( talk) 19:32, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:21, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:51, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
For some reason information regarding the Nubian origins of the 12th and 11th dynasties has been removed and waterdowned which does not reflect the consensus in Egyptology that Amenemaht I was of Nubian origin, there is the prophecy of Neferti for example which clearly spells this out in addition to a figure with the same name hailing from Nubia serving under the last Pharaoh of the 11th dynasty, should I edit, or how can we restore this vital information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:204:E101:5640:E9C0:FD61:A55F:DB26 ( talk) 15:24, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Please seek consensus before removing the picture gallery. This subject is not as well known as Egypt's history. These images will be new to many readers. More than half of the pics were deleted to address concerns EditorfromMars ( talk) 05:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
@ EditorfromMars: I think the article gives too much weight to the ancient part of the subject, while giving almost no weight to Islamic Nubia, and too little weight to christian Nubia, They both constitute almost 1600 years. Maybe the parts that aren't directly relevant to the article could be removed or summarized. For example, A lot of weight is given to the 25th dynasty in the "Nubia in Egypt" part, I think most of it is more relevant to the 25th dynasty and Kushite kingdom articles, while this article needs to give more focus to the Nubia region and its inhabitants in every period. Also, I believe some parts belong to Nubians' article more than here, such as discussion of Ahmose-Nefertari, Medjay, the possible Nubian origin of Amenemhet I and Mentuhotep II. Finally, I'm not sure "Egypt in Nubia" or "Nubia in Egypt" are the best options. Mohamed Talk 12:05, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
I noticed that the "linguistic" section of this article serves as an etymology of the term Nubia, but does not give a reference for its assertion that it is derived from the "Noba" people. It's fine if that's the case, of course, but I found it interesting that the Etymology Online shows it as a different source, and described as "related to Coptic noubti "to weave," or from Nubian nub 'gold.'" [1] It's of no real importance, but it seems a better explanation would help the article. Sych ( talk) 16:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
References
No 156.215.18.155 ( talk) 01:31, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Dear Editors I edited any section tying the "Noba" with the Nubians as it is incorrect and the sources used to support such claims are very weak and not based on sound academic references. Also there seems to be a confusion about "Nuba" and "Noba". this is an amateur's mistake as the two term do not mean the same thing and have not been used to refer to the same people. The association of "Noba" with "Nubians" is a political agenda and not based on archaeological or historical facts. If the editors like , we can provide the sources from credible research and specialized books on this mater , however they are present in hard copy. it is better to use these references than to use dubious works found in some internet pages . Kryako ( talk) 10:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)