Talk:Mogadishu

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mogadishu article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives (index): 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	Mogadishu was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 19, 2014 Good article nominee Listed January 18, 2023 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cities: National capitals Cities portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. This article is supported by the project's national capital taskforce. Somalia Top‑importance Somalia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somalia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somalia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), a contentious topic. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

Etymology of "Muqdisho" (Mogadishu) – Request for sourcing and revision

The article currently includes a speculative Hebrew-derived etymology of Muqdisho, claiming it stems from the Hebrew מִקְדָּשׁ (miqdash, “temple”). This lacks credible documentation and appears to conflict with established Somali and linguistic sources.

Supporting evidence from reputable sources:

1. ⁠Somali-language, local derivations:

Sewasew explains that the name derives from the Somali words muuq (“sight”) and disho (“kill”), meaning “sight-killer” or “blinder,” intended to convey the city’s breathtaking beauty.

Profilbaru.com (source drawing from Somali or regional scholarship) also affirms that “Mogadishu… is most likely derived from a morphology of the Somali words Muuq and Disho… meaning ‘Sight Killer’ or ‘Blinder’”.

2. Alternate scholarly theory (Persian/Arabic):

The Persian phrase Maq’ad-i-Shāh (seat of the Shah) is another scholarly proposal, reflecting early Persian cultural influence in the region; this is mentioned in multiple regional history references.

3. No credible Hebrew-source evidence:

Even though some have noted phonetic similarity to Hebrew miqdash, authoritative Somali or Arabic historical accounts (or academic etymological studies) do not support a Jewish or Hebrew origin. Such claims are absent from the sources reviewed and may reflect modern speculation rather than scholarly consensus.

4. Historical context — long-standing Arabic/Islamic presence:

Arabic and Persian settlers have inhabited Mogadishu since the 8th century, with documented governance and trade ties by the medieval period. This includes Arab-Persian influence well before any purported Hebrew connection.

Request: Please remove or revise the unsourced Hebrew etymology. If retained for completeness, it should be clearly labelled as speculative and require a reliable source. Wikipedia’s Verifiability and No Original Research policies necessitate that only etymologies supported by published studies are presented.

Suggested reliable sources for citation:

Sewasew website (Somali/academic summary of Somali etymology)

Profilbaru.com entry on Mogadishu’s etymology

BanadirWiki article “Why the name Mogadishu?” summarizes etymological perspectives

Thank you for improving the article’s accuracy."

It's from ChatGPT, and I'm busy, so if anyone wants to fact-check before posting, that will be lovely. 2600:1009:A012:470E:2597:6E37:EFB9:2597 (talk) 19:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a problem with something in an article, next time it's best to just write the comment yourself. WP:LLMTALK states that "editors should not use LLMs to write comments generatively". As for the etymology, there are different theories for the name, so if you want to add another cited view, you can do that. Limegreencoral (talk) 13:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is with the Hebrew part of the etymology section. It relies on vague phonetic similarity between Miqdash and it root Q-D-S and the name Muqdishu. Phonetic similarity can't be taken seriously, because many words from different languages can sound similar despite not having any connection. Examples for this could be the English word pan and the Japanese word for bread (pan). Despite these two words almost being identical phonetically, they have no connection whatsoever. In addition to that, historically, there was no significant Jewish presence in Muqdishu to at least back up this theory. Aurelianus Cicero (talk) 21:58, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree that it is a bit of a stretch. There was a lot of WP:OR in that section of the article which I removed. Hopefully that addresses the problem. Limegreencoral (talk) 22:03, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is more than a stretch, the user relies on a book "An Azanian Trio", which in itself not a historical book, but a collection of Arab-Swahili chronicles filled with myths and legends, that is poorly written (Kawkab al-durriya li-akhbar Ifriqiya). So, how come a book full of myths and legends, like this one, could be taken seriously?. Aurelianus Cicero (talk) 15:30, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mogadishu's name and origin

There is a clear conceptual etymological link between the Greco-Egyptian Sarapion, which derives from Serapeum, to the cultic Semitic term Maqdishu deriving from the root Q-D-Š. The etymology of Mogadishu is clear. Some may dislike this for antisemitic or nationalist reasons, but we must be honest.

There is no credible evidence that folk etymologies like sight killer (Muuq Disho) have any credibility. Moreover, the Somali language rarely shortens long vowels in compound words. The seat of the Shah etymology also sounds like a folk etymology and is less plausible than the root word Q-D-Š. AzanianPearl (talk) 09:52, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the current, most basic form:

Etymology

The name Mogadishu appears in early Arabic sources as Maqdīshū (مَقْديشو), which closely resembles the Hebrew word מִקְדָּשׁ (Miqdāsh), meaning “holy place” or “sanctuary”. The Semitic root Q-D-Š relates to holiness, sanctity, sacredness.

The 16th century explorer Leo Africanus knew the city as Magadazo (alt. Magadoxo).

Hamar or Xamar, the local nickname of Mogadishu, likely derives from a Somali word for "red," referring to the reddish hills nearby. AzanianPearl (talk) 10:06, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly what I mean when I said you are engaging in WP:SYNTH. The source cited An Azanian Trio makes no mention of a Sarapion, or QDS or any specific temple. You are making your own claims. There is no consensus for this supposed claim other than a quick mention in one book. I've reported your disruptive behavior to the administrators. Wikipedia is not the place to add your own research. Limegreencoral (talk) 10:18, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The current basic uncontroversial version has no mention of the Sarapion linkage and keeps it to the Semitic affinities. This material was present prior to you editing the page, so it is you now who needs to seek consensus for the folk etymologies of sight killer which have no historical basis and are formed as recent nationalist naratives. AzanianPearl (talk) 10:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You cant just remove theories of the name just because you don't like it. The previous version included many different perspectives of the etymology which you removed. Limegreencoral (talk) 10:48, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The main additions you made were the folk etymologies of Muuq Disho (Sight Killer) and Maqal Disho (Livestock Slaughtering/Killing), these are clear folk etymologies that even contradict each other in meaning (Sight and Livestock have no conceptual linkage). You need to find consensus for this as I dispute this. We can find endless folk etymologies with low quality sources; this doesn't mean it is worthy of encyclopedic reference.

As for what Abyssinians called Mogadishu in the late Middle Ages, that is not relevant to the origins of the term as Mogadishu stems from late antiquity. It has been moved to the appropriate history portion of the page for this reason. The portion on Xamar/Hamar meaning red (which I agree with) has been condensed as etymology sections should best be kept brief.AzanianPearl (talk) 11:05, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There can be different theories for the names origin. There is no unanimous agreement on where the name comes from. To remove them even though there is a source cited is wrong. And to include the way Abyssinains referred to Mogadishu is fine. This about the etymology which can include early historical mentions of the name. Limegreencoral (talk) 11:03, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you have more etymology examples, include them as well if you want. There is not one specific origin of the city name. I don't understand your point about keeping it brief, the section is a normal length considering that that there are different possible origins of the name. Stop removing content that is sourced just because you don't agree with it. Limegreencoral (talk) 11:07, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Xamar section is 3-4 sentences. Why does it need to be shrunk more? There's no valid reason, stop deleting content. Limegreencoral (talk) 11:08, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The quality of the sourcing for Muuq and Maqal are too poor and not worthy of encyclopedic reference. Find material from a respectable peer-reviewed paper. My main sourcing came from Brill Publishing, which is a quality academic publisher. What Abyssinians called Mogadishu is not relevant to its etymology as Mogadishu came about as a term from late antiquity. Hundreds of years before contact with medieval Abyssinian kingdoms. It is currently kept as brief as possible due to the controversial nature of this segment.AzanianPearl (talk) 11:12, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no controversial nature. I don't know what you're talking about, the length is fine. Different theories can be proposed. The local population having their own oral explanation for the terminology of the name is also okay to be included. And the way Leo Africanus or the Abyssinians referred to Mogadishu can be mentioned as well. You keep trying to shorten and remove parts of the section for no good reason. The section as it stands is neutral and includes different perspectives. That is a good thing for an article. Limegreencoral (talk) 11:14, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And where did you get the notion that the Etymology section needs to be super brief? If you go look at other articles for cities with an ancient history their etymology section can be even more lengthier. Sacrificing deeper explanations that are not too long just for the sake of briefness makes no sense for the article. Limegreencoral (talk) 11:18, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AzanianPearl @Limegreencoral Machidas being included will mislead readers. The Machidas were a population, not a city. It should be removed, they inhabited further in the interior. Using sources from the early modern period from authors who did not trek the area unlike Jeronimo Lobo who's correspondence letters and works discuss where they inhabit. Mogadishu was considered a separate entity. Replayerr (talk) 14:01, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Ethiopians referred to Mogadishu as Meqdush @Limegreencoral @AzanianPearl in Baede Maryam's works discussing the levies which they extracted. Replayerr (talk) 14:03, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]