Talk:Algeria

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)

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)

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)

Protection isn't for resolving content disputes. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

I also removed the unnecessary entries from the Tunisia article. M.Bitton (talk) 18:47, 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? Izmir18 (talk) 18:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC) Blocked sock. M.Bitton (talk) 22:14, 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. 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? Izmir18 (talk) 18:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC) Blocked sock. M.Bitton (talk) 22:14, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I already did and anyone who disagrees is free to seek consensus (for the same reason that you mentioned when you reverted Daran75). M.Bitton (talk) 18:57, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The fact that you think that your unilateral decisions should only be reverted after a consensus is found screams of entitlement.

A consensus should only be sought before changes are to be made to the article, not after. Daran755 (talk) 19:09, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm only applying the same principle to all articles to prevent the disruption. The fact that you seem to agree with Izmir18 (the editor who reverted your last edit after adding a similar list to another article) means that I'm moving in the right direction. M.Bitton (talk) 19:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

"all articles" so why stop at Tunisia and Morocco then? I obviously don't agree with Izmir18 since he appears biased against Algeria. As far as I'm concerned my "edits" were just reverts of non-agreed removals in the infobox. I haven't removed any content. Daran755 (talk) 19:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Izmir18: Your edit summary unfounded change, partly apparently for nationalistic reasons. is a personal attack. M.Bitton (talk) 19:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

No i say ,,apparently". I report you to the admins. Izmir18 (talk) 19:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC) Blocked sock. M.Bitton (talk) 22:14, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

report him for what? you're the one who should be reported since you deem yourself authorized to remove content on the Algeria article and add similar content into the Morocco one. Daran755 (talk) 19:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

• @Daran75: you're welcome to share your thoughts on the matter. 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. Daran75 (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

• @Skitash: the trouble with restoring what one thinks is an important state or whatever is that it opens the door for more of the same as there will never be an agreement as what is important and what isn't. That's why I only kept the first and the last known states. M.Bitton (talk) 19:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  Right, I see what the problem is. I have taken out the Aghlabids from the Tunisia infobox to prevent any potential edit wars in the future. Skitash (talk) 19:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  Much appreciated. M.Bitton (talk) 19:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Terminology of Algeria and Algiers

I think the § Name and § Etymology sections are okay as far as they go, but they don't go nearly far enough. Two basic facts must be explained in this section:

1. the term Algiers (that is, the term derived from الجزائر" (Al-Jazā'ir)) goes back to the Middle Ages, while the term Algeria (derived from the French Algerie) dates back only to colonial times; and:
2. while English and French (and other languages) have two distinct words for Algiers and Algeria, Arabic does not, and الجزائر" (Al-Jazā'ir) is the term used to denote both the capital, and the country. Usually, context is sufficient to distinguish them.

There may be more, and I'm no expert on these matters, but these are basic facts about terms central to this article (and to the Algiers article, which also fails to explain them) that need to be described here. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 10:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Algeria/Algerie is not only from the colonial period, but the name was 'francized' by the French from Algeria. The term existed long before. Riad Salih (talk) 15:16, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Riad for pointing to that source. I forget where I heard about it coming from colonial times, but it spoke about usage in French (first) and English in colonial times in the early 19th century; I don't believe it mentioned the earlier Latin roots. The Latin source also uses the term Algeria for the city, as Arabic does, and doesn't mention any separate word for the region. Other terms for the city mentioned in the first paragraph are Algira, Algerium, Argyria, and Geseir (clearly their romanization for the Arabic الجزائر less the al- particle); adding "We call this city Algira" (hanc vrbem nos Algiram vocamus). One interesting tidbit I learned from it was the claim that it was founded by the "Mesgana family". I added a discussion about this at Talk:Algiers because that article never mentions the name at all.

Coming back to the origin question: the part of the origin story I haven't found yet, is how the French picked up the Latin term, using it for a new meaning. Interestingly, the online OED does not have an entry for Algeria; they do have one for Algerian, but not Algeria:

OED entry for Algerian

Information from Summary and Etymology tabs from OED online entry for Algerian; may require login. From proper names, combined with English elements. Etymons: proper name Alger, Algiers, ‑ian suffix; proper name Algeria, ‑an suffix. Partly (originally) < †Alger (although this is apparently first attested slightly later in an English context: 1585), †Algier, †Arger, †Argier, variants of Algiers (Arabic al-Jazā'ir, lit. ‘the Islands’, French Alger), the name of a city in North Africa (now the capital of Algeria) and in early use also of the territory controlled by it + ‑ian suffix; and partly (in later use) < Algeria (1575 in an English context), originally another name of the territory controlled by the city of Algiers, now the name of an independent country in North Africa (named after the city; Arabic al-Jazā'ir, French Algérie) + ‑an suffix. Compare French algérien (1575 or earlier as noun). Notes The name of the city (and hence the country) in Arabic is al-Jazā'ir < al the + jazā'ir, broken plural of jazīra island, so called on account of four former islands off the shore of the city, which became part of the mainland in the 16th cent. Forms of the place name beginning in Ar- and their derivatives (compare the β forms) are apparently the result of assimilation in European languages. Algiers and its sphere of influence along the coast were part of the Ottoman Empire from 1516 from to 1830. This territory and a large part of the adjacent desert subsequently came under French rule and were known in French as Algérie française. Algeria gained independence in 1962. Compare the following earlier references to the name of the city in English contexts: 1545 The emperour his maiestie him selfe, at the Citie of Argier in Aphricke had h[is] hooste sore handeled wyth the Turkes arrowes. R. Ascham, Toxophilus i. f. 36vCitation details for R. Ascham, Toxophilus 1549 His notable seruice in themperours affaires (as in his viages to Tunise and Algier). W. Thomas, Historie of Italie f. 187Citation details for W. Thomas, Historie of Italie

The Dictionnaire de l’Académie française has this definition of algérien (also no Algérie, which I now believe is because they don't include proper names, which the adjectival form is technically not; that may explain the OED content as well, and both may have a geographical dictionary where they have that content, but I haven't found them, yet. My go-to source for French etymology is CNRTL, and they have attestations of algérien to 1792 (link), where it had the meaning of "someone from Algiers" until 1892, when algerois became the demonym for the city, and my guess is that that's when algerien started to be the dominant meaning for someone from the region, although CNRTL doesn't make this claim. This would make sense, as one of the demonymic suffixes for cities ending in -er is +ien (-ienne fem.), however rules of French demonym formation are complex, and there are many other forms (Tangerois, Vancouverois, Rochestérien, Lancastrien, Hanovrien, Exonien < Exeter, Mancunien < Manchester, etc.) so Algerien for someone from Algiers is a possible usage, which, (I speculate), became confusing by the end of the 19th c. when they were dealing with the larger region of N. Africa, and relegated Algerois as the city demonym (another legitimate suffix) and Algerien for the region. Just my theory, but seems reasonable, and I'd love to find a source somewhere to disentangle all of this.

One other interesting side issue is the confusion in English about the demonym for Algiers. Some sources just say it's Algerian, and I've seen Algerine (but mostly in older sources). For Tangiers it's Tangerian, and that suffers no such ambiguity, because there's no country "Tangeria". Reminds me a little bit of the confusion in English about the demonym for "Niger": with no good answer in English, we fall back to French, and even so, there's no agreement whether it's Nigerien or Nigerois in English (the NYT apparently switched to the latter in 2011, and M-W lists both currently). Mathglot (talk) 22:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2024

change ethnics group arab 85% berber 25% to arab-berber 99% european less than 1% .

according to the source cited ⴽⵓⵙⴰⵢⵍⴰ (talk) 22:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: The source says that only 15% of the population identifies as Berber. Skitash (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

I think i don't see the same source as you,can you please give me the actual source ? 105.109.176.241 (talk) 19:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)