Jump to content

Talk:Algeria: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Daran75 (talk | contribs)
Izmir18 (talk | contribs)
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply
Line 84: Line 84:
::@M.Bitton. In their last change in Morocco they wrote: "Per your edit on the Algeria article". The edit here in Algeria has nothing to do with the one in Morocco. It sounds like: "Yes, if there is no dynasty in Algeria "They're not allowed in Morocco." These are two different topics. But I would be happy to explain my point of view to you. It is the case that Algeria's formation includes all dynasties that took place on Algerian soil or Algerian capitals. This is the case in Algeria and Tunisia. Except in Morocco it's not like that. The formation of Algeria even includes the "Roman Empire". If the current formation of Algeria says "Kindom of Telcem" and Hasfid Dynasty in Tunisia, then it is not wrong to write Marinid Dynasty under Morocco's formation. If "the Regency of Algiers" is in the formation of Algerirn and Ottman Tunisia in Tunisia, then it is not wrong to write Saadi Dynasty under Morocco's formation. Or how do you see that? [[User:Izmir18|Izmir18]] ([[User talk:Izmir18|talk]]) 18:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
::@M.Bitton. In their last change in Morocco they wrote: "Per your edit on the Algeria article". The edit here in Algeria has nothing to do with the one in Morocco. It sounds like: "Yes, if there is no dynasty in Algeria "They're not allowed in Morocco." These are two different topics. But I would be happy to explain my point of view to you. It is the case that Algeria's formation includes all dynasties that took place on Algerian soil or Algerian capitals. This is the case in Algeria and Tunisia. Except in Morocco it's not like that. The formation of Algeria even includes the "Roman Empire". If the current formation of Algeria says "Kindom of Telcem" and Hasfid Dynasty in Tunisia, then it is not wrong to write Marinid Dynasty under Morocco's formation. If "the Regency of Algiers" is in the formation of Algerirn and Ottman Tunisia in Tunisia, then it is not wrong to write Saadi Dynasty under Morocco's formation. Or how do you see that? [[User:Izmir18|Izmir18]] ([[User talk:Izmir18|talk]]) 18:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
:::It has everything to do with the usual nonsense that SPAs tend to target. In any case, I intend to sort out this once and for all. As for your edit: now that you understand what [[WP:ONUS]] is about, you know exactly what to do. [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 18:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
:::It has everything to do with the usual nonsense that SPAs tend to target. In any case, I intend to sort out this once and for all. As for your edit: now that you understand what [[WP:ONUS]] is about, you know exactly what to do. [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 18:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
::::Please explain, why are you changing the formation of Tunisia? You only change them because they were changed in Algeria. Just like in Morocco. Why are you doing that? Why can't the formation in Tunisia stay like this? [[User:Izmir18|Izmir18]] ([[User talk:Izmir18|talk]]) 18:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
*{{re|Daran75}} you're welcome to share your thoughts on the matter. [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 18:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
*{{re|Daran75}} you're welcome to share your thoughts on the matter. [[User:M.Bitton|M.Bitton]] ([[User talk:M.Bitton|talk]]) 18:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
*:No, I don't care. Please stop mentioning me and do whatever you want with the article. [[User:Daran75|Daran75]] ([[User talk:Daran75|talk]]) 18:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
*:No, I don't care. Please stop mentioning me and do whatever you want with the article. [[User:Daran75|Daran75]] ([[User talk:Daran75|talk]]) 18:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:56, 27 December 2023

Former good articleAlgeria 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
DateProcessResult
November 30, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
May 22, 2012Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 5, 2004, July 5, 2005, July 5, 2006, November 1, 2006, July 5, 2007, November 1, 2007, July 5, 2008, November 1, 2008, July 5, 2009, November 1, 2009, July 5, 2010, November 1, 2010, July 5, 2011, July 5, 2012, November 1, 2013, July 5, 2014, November 1, 2014, July 5, 2015, November 1, 2015, July 5, 2016, and November 1, 2016.
Current status: Delisted good article

Where is the coat of arms?

Why Algeria has no coat of arms? It has an offical emblem. 2001:448A:11A1:122C:647C:CD4:81A2:EB6F (talk) 08:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2023

197.145.243.219 (talk) 11:01, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is only the kingdom morocco from 788

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. 💜  melecie  talk - 11:19, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update the gdp and add the other algerian dynasties and kingdoms

update the gdp (206.1 billion$ in 2023) and the gdp per capita/gdp ppp,


you guys should also add the other algerian dynasties that are missing:


ifrenids,

kingdom of the aures,

kingdom of altava,

and kingdom of tuggurt Seniorjackfr (talk) 16:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Repatriates

There is a discussion here that could do with more input. Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 20:33, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removal Of The Sulaymanids From The History Infobox.

First, The Sulaymanids were really not close from a major dynasty in algerian history, why you may ask, it is because it was a governate of the idrissids and was founded after idris I conquest of tlemcen, making it just a pity vassal of the moroccan idrissids Second, The Sulaymanids have a poor history, as not much historians talk about it, and its history is also poorly understood, as they werent as important as the for example, fatimids or the zirids or the hammadids, and since it was founded by idris I, a moroccan, i think it shouldnt be here. TBATlol (talk) 20:53, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you elaborate on what you meant by the Sulaymanids being "just a pity vassal of the moroccan idrissids"? That makes no sense. Morocco did not exist back then, and the Sulaymanids had their own separate kingdom. Regardless, it's worth noting that the Sulaymanids were among the first Muslim states in the region, and their significance should be duly acknowledged in the infobox. Skitash (talk) 21:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 27 December 2023

Seeing as some users are committed to disruptive editing this page, I suggest that this article be moved under protected status for a little while.

Wikipedia explicitly encourages consensus to be found especially on large edits on important articles like this one.

Removing entire sections in the infobox unilaterally is a violation of those guidelines. Daran75 (talk) 17:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Protection isn't for resolving content disputes. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Protection is about stopping disruptive editing and revert war. Please try to read the guidelines before using Wikipedia. Daran75 (talk) 17:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At WP:RFPP I declined User:Daran75's request for protection of this article. The proper scope of this article is a content issue which needs the agreement of editors. The article talk page is a good place to negotiate this. EdJohnston (talk) 18:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad someone started this discussion about the formation parameter which seems to attract a lot of needless attention from some SPAs. I will ping Izmir18 (who just reverted the OP's revert after adding a bunch of entries to the Morocco article) to see where they stand on this issue. M.Bitton (talk) 18:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed the unnecessary entries from the Tunisia article. M.Bitton (talk) 18:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@M.Bitton. In their last change in Morocco they wrote: "Per your edit on the Algeria article". The edit here in Algeria has nothing to do with the one in Morocco. It sounds like: "Yes, if there is no dynasty in Algeria "They're not allowed in Morocco." These are two different topics. But I would be happy to explain my point of view to you. It is the case that Algeria's formation includes all dynasties that took place on Algerian soil or Algerian capitals. This is the case in Algeria and Tunisia. Except in Morocco it's not like that. The formation of Algeria even includes the "Roman Empire". If the current formation of Algeria says "Kindom of Telcem" and Hasfid Dynasty in Tunisia, then it is not wrong to write Marinid Dynasty under Morocco's formation. If "the Regency of Algiers" is in the formation of Algerirn and Ottman Tunisia in Tunisia, then it is not wrong to write Saadi Dynasty under Morocco's formation. Or how do you see that? Izmir18 (talk) 18:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It has everything to do with the usual nonsense that SPAs tend to target. In any case, I intend to sort out this once and for all. As for your edit: now that you understand what WP:ONUS is about, you know exactly what to do. M.Bitton (talk) 18:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain, why are you changing the formation of Tunisia? You only change them because they were changed in Algeria. Just like in Morocco. Why are you doing that? Why can't the formation in Tunisia stay like this? Izmir18 (talk) 18:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]