Talk:History of Tunisia

message: For anyone interested, there is a discussion regarding merging History of Punic-era Tunisia: chronology and History of Punic-era Tunisia: culture into History of Carthage being held at Talk:History of Carthage#Merge. There is a new suggestion that material from those articles could be merged into History of Tunisia. SilkTork ✔Tea time 09:48, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Carthage merge

message: I have restored the article to the condition it was in before being split into several articles. The size is too large to read or navigate easily, so needs to be reduced. I will work on this over the next few days, and any help would be appreciated. SilkTork ✔Tea time 11:13, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Restore, now reduce...

message: Right: 1942–1980
Wrong: 1942-1980
We settled this in 2005.  I thought we'd nearly fixed the problem by about a year later.  But it seems it will be here in force forever. Michael Hardy (talk) 07:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Much other editing needs to be done; we could use some help with this. Carlstak (talk) 21:30, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hundreds or thousands of routine punctuation corrections are needed in this article. 

message: This section probably need updating as it cites figures which are a decade or more old. However I'm not even sure if ts section is really necessary Oman article abt the history of Tunisia - perhaps it belongs in the main 'Tunisia' article? Mccapra (talk) 11:08, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What "Oman article" are you talking about?Akhooha (talk) 20:14, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Apologies I'm working on an iPad and my autocorrect has totally mangled my sentence. I should have reread it before posting.  Here's what I meant to say: 'This section probably needs updating as it cites figures which are a decade or more old. However I'm not even sure if this section is really necessary in an article about the history of Tunisia - perhaps it belongs in the main 'Tunisia' article?' Thanks. Mccapra (talk) 20:37, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: 2000s in Tunisia

message: The section in the article on the Muradid beys includes a map showing the distribution of Altaic languages. This has some tangential relevance to the spread of Turkish rule in Tunisia, but only very tangential. As the map shows, Tunisia does not fall within the distribution area of Altaic languages. I suggest this map should be removed. Mccapra (talk) 19:55, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Distribution of Altaic Languages

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on History of Tunisia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130816174911/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ts.html to https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ts.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130816174911/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ts.html to https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ts.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130816174911/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ts.html to https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ts.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:46, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of Tunisia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081209031130/http://www.tazzla.org/berber.html to http://www.tazzla.org/berber.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:40, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
* 
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:22, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: Hello, I haven't really engaged much with Wikipedia editing in the past, so I'm sorry in advance if I commit some kind of faux pas. However, in reading this article, some of it does not appear to me to fully abide by Wikipedia's policy of presenting information from a neutral POV. For example, this is from the section on the Constitution of Carthage: "[Hannibal's] political opponents cravenly went to Rome and charged Hannibal with conspiracy" (emphasis mine).
This is maybe a slightly separate issue, but the paragraph after that starts with the following, which sounds more like an essay than something I would expect to find on Wikipedia: "The above description of the constitution basically follows Warmington. Largely it is taken from descriptions by Greek foreigners who likely would see in Carthage reflections of their own institutions. How strong was the Hellenizing influence within Carthage?" and it goes on in this vein. I'm putting it here because I think this style of writing could be said to be persuasive writing, which would also not count as neutral. 
I don't really know anything about this subject (hence why I'm reading the Wikipedia article about it), but thought this was worth highlighting for anyone who is more qualified to work on it. Toprat (talk) 20:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality issues