Talk:History of Morocco

message: The following note has been left at this User's Talkpage: "==History of Morocco==
You have tagged this article "dubious" without offering your rationale at Talk:History of Morocco. Please do so at your early convenience. Thank you. --Wetman 09:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Let me apologize for that... I am a fairly novice editor of the wikipedia network, and my tagging was in reference to the aticle "The History of Morocco" has been tagged as a Featured Article, without going through the usual mechanics... I apologize if i havbe caused serious problems here, however I hoped to draw the attention of a more experienced user who could help me here. I made a note of my complaints below on the Talk page Thethinredline 15:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't know but this never went through the mechanics. It therefore doesn't qualify. This was just a vandal, I move that this FA status is just removed and that we shouldn't have to go through the usual procedures. Thethinredline 14:15, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since I've seen that the "featured" tag was added by a clever hardcore often-blocked vandal, User:217.169.129.33, I have removed the spurious tag. Thanks are due to to Thethinredline's keen eye! Welcome to the sleazy underbelly of Wikipedia! All editors should be required to log in first, to reduce vandalism. --Wetman 21:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm just glad that the gross infringement of wikipedia procedure was found by a higher power, and dealt with. At least I now have someone to go to if i should spot another significant miscarriage of wikipedia ;-P Thethinredline 21:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Former vandal-added "featured article" tag

message: Formatting that encases the framed table of contents in text, in just the way a framed map or image is enclosed within the text, is now available:  in the HTML does the job. 
Blank space opposite the ToC, besides being unsightly and distracting, suggests that there is a major break in the continuity of the text, which may not be the case. Blanks in page layout are voids and they have meanings to the experienced reader. The space betweeen paragraphs marks a brief pause between separate blocks of thought.  A deeper space, in a well-printed text, signifies a more complete shift in thought: note the spaces that separate sub-headings in Wikipedia articles. 
A handful of thoughtless and aggressive Wikipedians revert the "TOCleft" format at will. A particularly aggressive de-formatter is User:Ed g2s
The reader may want to compare versions at the Page history. --Wetman 20:27, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Distracting blank spaces

message: I noticed that User:Bokpasa has tagged the article as a  w/o even ever discussed his issues. I've leaving meassages and questions about their late new edits who are absolutely innacurate like changing all Dynasties to Sultanates!!!! Even blanking a whole section about the chronologies and like if the history only started yesterday!!! I am removing the tag and informing them in their talk page again. Or could you please indicate which parts you see as POV and make our life easy? Cheers -- Szvest 02:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am finding consideragle POV in the way some information is potrayed and mainly a with that which has been left out. Please bear with me, I am working on it and will show my discontent on the talk pages.Cgonzalezdelhoyo 11:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag 

message: the First Barbary War article indicates that Morocco was one of the Barbary states that the US warred against in 1801 to 1805 to avoid being held to ransom as the price of avoiding piracy.  Yet, no battles were fought with Morocco and Morocco had a treaty of friendship with the U.S.  What is the truth here?  Perhaps the government of Morocco was conniving with the piracy and Christian slavery of Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli?  Perhaps, Morocco did not fully control the activities of some its cities and residents?  Any facts here?  Thanks Hmains 17:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  barbary pirates 

message: i replaced idris Ibn salih with Idris ibn Abdallah, who is the correct person, i think. Unixer 18:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  idris 

message: Morroco is than Almoravids sucessor`s, like Saudi Arabia Caliphate sucessor`s...
I know, that they have the same languague, same religion, and the same culture, and geography.. but are not the same country.unsigned comment by User:Bokpasa
:::So you base your logic on comparaisons and original research instead of facts and notable references? You brought no valid reason anyway! 
:::By the way, do you have any notable or academic reference that back up your original research? Yes Al Istiqlal party did a make-up to a several sections of Moroccan history as it was done or has been occuring in all parts of the world but that doesn't mean your theory is correct! Do you know that you're editing an encyclopaedia and not teaching at a primary school where pupils just listen to what the teacher is preaching w/o any academic sources? I brought my sources above and was thinking you had a few as well but you got nuffin.
:::Please don't forget to sign your comments! -- Szvest 23:47, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV-section

message: International court of Justice 1975Moi 14:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bokpasa. Please guide us to the particular reference and show us explicitly what does that say. -- Szvest 14:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Iran, Sweden, Guatemala, Banana islands are all original research from your side. If you have something concrete, please bring it or else stop this "headache" for once. -- Szvest 22:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I am very fed up w/ your original research. If you don't stop this nonsense and agree to the terms and policies of Wikipedia (mainly WP:Cite sources), i'll be obliged to treat this as vandalism. -- Szvest 10:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi, Hitler! ... I have a Primary source and you always dont want reconoce that... Why?..vandalism ., ok.... Moi 11:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Bokpasa. If you have a primary source, show it to me explicitly. If not than send it to Hitler instead. I am not Hitler. This lack of objectivity shows that you are just ranting. I'd not call it a personal attack as it is not important. -- Szvest 11:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Having considered this evidence and the observations of the other States which took part in the proceedings, the Court finds that neither the internal nor the international acts relied upon by Morocco indicate the existence at the relevant period of either the existence or the international recognition of legal ties of territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and the Moroccan State. Even taking account of the specific structure of that State, they do not show that Morocco displayed any effective and exclusive State activity in Western Sahara. They do, however, provide indications that a legal tie of allegiance existed at the relevant period between the Sultan and some, but only some, of the nomadic peoples of the territory, through Tekna caids of the Noun region, and they show that the Sultan displayed, and was recognized by other States to possess, some authority or influence with respect to those tribes.
Although I don't have the text of the whole Opinion, I understand that Bokpasa's rationale is that, considering that according to the ICJ there is "not territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and the Moroccan State", and that the Almohad Empire did include such territories, it's not valid to make the statement "Morocco equals to Almohad Empire". Best regards --Ecemaml 14:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your assistance Ecemaml. I've read the court Advisory Opinion of 16 October 1975. I must note and remind Bokpasa that the opinion/hearing deals with the situation (as it is mentionned there a few times) "at the time of its colonization by Spain and in the period immediately preceding". There's no indication or reference whatsover to the medieval or early periods of Moroccan history. -- Szvest 17:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Another note. Morocco's name has ever been "Al-Maghrib" since the Idrissides. Almohad, Idrissides, Almoravides had all the time called their territories the same name, which has been "Al-Maghrib". -- Szvest 17:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your input Justin. -- Szvest 17:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Pls sign your comments and stop trolling and talking about racism!!! In fact, what are you talking about TOI? Where in the article it says Morocco controlled Portugal and Spain? -- Szvest 16:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Morroco born in 1660

message: Bokpasa, que pasa?! Please stop attacking me personally like you dit here. It is not the first time but i hope it will be the last one. I may remind you of the consequences. Back to the subject! Who says Spain and Portugal were part of Morocco? Could you explain to us what's wrong in here? -- Szvest 14:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stop your "Racist" allegations

message: Why you always vandalist my acts?
You don`t know the different of:
*dynasty: members of the same family
*country
And. 
*Moorish
*Morrocan
And
*Magreb
*Morrocco..can you see differents map....
And its good learn more about Morroco, and its real history. Because , your opinion about Morroco its similiar like "Führer" and his "Germany". Moi 22:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: FayssalF

message: *Dynasty...Yes, a family reigning over a country... Dynasties in Chinese history - Cerdicing Dynasty in England, Jiménez Dynasty in Spain and the list is so long.
*Country...May have been ruled by a succession of dynasties. History of China and China / History of Korea and Korea / History of Spain and Spain / History of Sweden (have you ever called those a Ming, Visigoth, Viking dynasties instead of calling countries by their names?!)
*Moors... Historically, European scholars have divided the Moors into two groups: African, and European-Arab Moors.
*Moroccan (and not Morrocan)... People who have lived in Al-Maghrib since centuries now.
*Maghreb...read the etymology to learn better. 
Since you have learned your way (you are reverted in all wiki versions es, fr and here), you can see the effect of your learning. You are totally wrong and mislead. If you have learned the History of Morocco in a Spanish university, so does Ecemaml and other Spanish users here and in the es wiki. So how come your points are different than theirs? It just mean that your are totally using your POV. Apart from all this garbage, you brought no single source or reference to sustain your claims (apart from the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ on the Western Sahara which limits its opinion to the 18th and 19th centuries. You brought nothing, am i right?
One more thing, as i already asked you to refrain from personal attacks twice, it is time to have a break. I am blocking you for that according to wikipedia policies that you are not respecting. You have accused me a racist and Hitler. Now you become more sophisticated in this behaviour, you are calling me a Fuhrer. Is this a civilized manner to discuss matters in your life? If so, this is not the right place to do so. You called the other admin in the fr wiki a racist as well!!!! I mean it is sooooo random your accusations are! Learn to be civilized before asking me to learn about the history of Morocco. Don't forget to enhance your English and other languages, and never forget to respect the manual of style in wikipedia. 
Tienes entonces que añadir eso a tu propaganda en la pagína de discusión allí. Di a todo el mundo que somos terrerificos y nos parecemos muchisimo al Fuhrer y que nos vamos a matarte despues del bloqueo. No olvides de insister de llamar a ese jaleo istiqlal a la vez del PP. Buena suerte. 
P.S. Remover el nonsense no significa que soy pro-morocco como no significa que tu eres anti-morocco.  -- Szvest 11:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: FYI

message: In order to get a more accurate description of the history of Morocco, I think that some emphasis on the loose character of the statal structures of the different dynasties that ruled Morocco should be introduced. I mean, muslim statal structures were weaker and looser than their counterparts in Europe (heir to the Roman traditions), for example. Also, in order to avoid the constant interference of Bokpasa (as in :es: he didn't learn to follow the manual of style, therefore their contributions are usually rubbish) it would be good, especially when talking about early phases to talk about "what currently Morocco is" (or the territory of nowadays Morocco) instead of Morocco. Best regards --Ecemaml 07:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Ecemaml. Do you have any particular examples that we can discuss? -- Szvest 11:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi! Why I can see kingdoms Barghawata and Sijilmassa? again.... Moi 14:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add them if they don't appear but please respect the layout:Wikipedia:How to edit a page. Please do not forget to sign (use the 4 ~). -- Szvest 16:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some items 

message: Somebody know where is Aguz (Souira Guedima)?Bokpasa 14:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Google knows all No, but you could try Google Earth. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:08, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Never heard of Aguz. Souira Guedima refers to the old name of Essaouira which was Mogador at the times of the Portugueses. Literally "Souira Guedima" means "old Essaouira"! I am suspecting that we have 2 articles talking about the same. -- Szvest 15:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place

message: There is not much information on Morocco during World War II. This can be expanded to a section. Jay (talk) 05:31, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  World War II 

message: :*Since  ignored all the users' comments about the fact that original research isn't accepted,
:*Since he added non-linked non-sourced maps on the article,
:*Since he continued to modify the article even after a 3R request was launched,
:*Since he modified the article by an extreme POV ,
:*Since he was already banned on the English WP because of accusations of vandalism, original research, hoaxes, POV and so on, and permanently banned on the Spanish and French sections for the same reasons,
:*Since he claims that people don't know history, and that he does ,
:*Since I said that I will no longer edit the article to avoid being involved in and editwar,
:*Since I (and many other users) don't understand what he writes on discussion pages (then I suppose that his contributions could be a copyright violation, but that's only my POV),
:*I putted an OR template to prevent people from getting the information shown on the article as creditable.
:Omar-Toons (talk) 04:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  OR 

message: I put it correct information, and I will put more references. Bokpasa 08:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eppur si muove 

message: * Different number of  and  brackets. - Map of Morocco in 1844]]
* Reference duplication - Laurousse 1990
Cheers, Vipinhari || talk 18:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes perphaps you can find more mistakes, I have another reference Espasa-Calpe 1921, and Treaty of Spain-Morocco in 1767, in this Morocco wrote that: "The Arabs of that country, with no subordination nor fear anyone, because of the remoteness that are in my Realms, and I have no jurisdiction over them", acording to another reference Souss Bokpasa 20:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please fix these 

message: : putted a  on the article.
:I wonder if he can explain and talk a little bit about what does he consider as POV in this article?
:Thanks in advance, Bokpasa.
:Omar-Toons (talk) 19:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: On 13 January 2008 the user Perspicacite made substantial edits to the post-colonial sections of this article.
Among other things it resulted in about 22 years being removed so that it now goes from mentioning the Sand War to annexing Western Sahara in 1985.
Surely there must have been something happening in Morocco between these events?
Referring to History of Western Sahara does not make it acceptable to remove all Moroccan history during those 22 years and all Moroccan history not related to the Western Sahara issue since 1963.
Something must have happened in Morocco except that conflict for the last 48 years?
Could someone with the required knowledge please restore/insert the missing information?
85.225.84.165 (talk) 08:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article lost 48 years? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Casablanca1950s.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: I've marked the article with 3 tags: it needs more references, copy-editing for coherence in tone & style, and may contain original research. The article has 14 references with many sections & paragraphs lacking any reference at all. Given that this is English Wikipedia, from the perspective of a native English speaker/reader, there are a number of areas which require work to help give the article a clear and steady tone/style. I've done a little work in trying to fix the issues myself, however I am not an expert in the subject and would feel more comfortable if other editors addressed the issues. Coinmanj (talk) 22:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article improvements 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of Morocco. 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/20150924004207/http://www.eva.mpg.de/evolution/staff/hublin/pdf/human_roots.pdf to http://www.eva.mpg.de/evolution/staff/hublin/pdf/human_roots.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303104131/http://morocco.usembassy.gov/early.html to http://morocco.usembassy.gov/early.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) 20:06, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Bocchus I was not the first known Mauretanian king, unless this refers to something like the first king after Carthaginian presence had ended in Mauretania when they retreated to Carthage sometime after the 2nd Punic war.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7xn (talk • contribs) 11:53, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about King Bagas 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:52, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I'm not sure what kind of maintenance template would flag this issue on the main page, but currently large parts of the article are directly copied from several articles, without any trimming to make them fit an overview article like this (see e.g. WP:SUMMARY). Part of the whole point of having dedicated articles for each topic is so that other articles can summarize and link to them rather than literally repeat their entire content (or their whole "history" sections, in this case). Additionally, some of the copied content was already lacking citations at the articles from which they were copied (e.g. the Almohad article), so now these verifiability issues have been imported here too and are unlikely to be fixed independently here. Condensing and summarizing their content, however, would also make it easier to add new citations. 
PS: I already alluded to some of these problems in my edit summaries back in September 2021, but I figured there needs to be a clearer notice of this somewhere. R Prazeres (talk) 01:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Morocco was founded in 789 ad 5.37.225.76 (talk) 19:35, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article shouldn't be a compilation of others 

message: I thought that the page did not sufficiently reflect the transnational influence that Morocco had through its nationalist-independence movements, in the global struggle against colonialism. I added a section to further develop: 
=== Nationalism and transnational anticolonial resistance ===
Morroco has been a key transnational hub in the struggle against colonialism in the Middle-east region. The end of World War II that had weakened European colonial powers, the start of the US-URSS search for influence and the establishment of the United Nations in 1945  praising universal equality, represented an impetus for anti-colonial and nationalist movements in Morocco.[1]
Through its special international status and the French and US presence in Tangier, the city became a hub for anti-colonial activism. Fromout Tanger, a link was established between the inside resistance and activists from other countries. By creating a transnational network of supporters and public advocates (i.e. cultural elites, politicians, public figures, academics, medias), the nationalist movement aimed to bring the Moroccan cause to the forefront of the international community debate.[2]
In order to gain influence at a global level, Moroccan nationalist movements globalised their cause by seeking to unite with the pan-arabism movement and the Arab League, extending their activism networks to Cairo.[3] Another example is Paris, that became an important European city from where cultural elites advocated for the independence cause and brought the protectorate question to the forefront of the public debate.[4] The independence movement eventually managed to bring their national claim for independence to the UN for the first time in 1951, gaining a vote of 20 states in favour and 23 against.[4]
(Curiouschanter (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  added section on transnational character of anticolonial resistance 

message: Morroco has been a key transnational hub in the struggle against colonialism in the Middle-east region. The end of World War II that had weakened European colonial powers, the start of the US-URSS search for influence and the establishment of the United Nations in 1945  praising universal equality, represented an impetus for anti-colonial and nationalist movements in Morocco.[1]
Through its special international status and the French and US presence in Tangier, the city became a hub for anti-colonial activism. Fromout Tanger, a link was established between the inside resistance and activists from other countries. By creating a transnational network of supporters and public advocates (i.e. cultural elites, politicians, public figures, academics, medias), the nationalist movement aimed to bring the Moroccan cause to the forefront of the international community debate.[2]
In order to gain influence at a global level, Moroccan nationalist movements globalised their cause by seeking to unite with the pan-arabism movement and the Arab League, extending their activism networks to Cairo.[3] Another example is Paris, that became an important European city from where cultural elites advocated for the independence cause and brought the protectorate question to the forefront of the public debate.[4] The independence movement eventually managed to bring their national claim for independence to the UN for the first time in 1951, gaining a vote of 20 states in favour and 23 against.[4]
(Curiouschanter (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationalism and transnational anticolonial resistance 

message: Hi all, there is a splitting proposal at the Alawi dynasty article that is directly relevant to the topic here and that would likely benefit from further input by interested editors. See Talk:Alawi dynasty#Splitting proposal (and seeking feedback). Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 20:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevant discussion at [[Talk:Alawi dynasty]]