Talk:Marinid Sultanate

message: The merge of Merinid dynasty and Marinid isn't controversial. No doubt we can agree on this. But which should be the name used for the final article? Donama 05:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging

message: Which should be the name used in the English wikipedia, taking into account that there many alternate spellings in the other languages (see Marinid article for the other language links). Please add your support or oppose below.
====Merge into Marinid, "Marinids" or "Marinid dynasty"====
*Support because this is the name Encyclopaedia Brittanica use and I found it more often in my English-based research (note what happens in a google fight of Marinid vs Merenid) Donama 05:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Marinid or Merinid?

message: *Support because this is the name Encyclopaedia Brittanica use and I found it more often in my English-based research (note what happens in a google fight of Marinid vs Merenid) Donama 05:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge into [[Marinid]], "Marinids" or "Marinid dynasty"

message: Now please choose what format you think the article title should take. Donama 05:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title format

message: *Weak support Donama 05:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: M*rinids

message: …As long as all the redirects are provided. - Jmabel | Talk 15:59, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Doesn't matter

message: Merged into Marinid. On advice of myself, User:Jmabel, User:Lapaz and User:Drini.
But I have put some of the info I'm not 100% is merged in HTML comments at the bottom in case I missed something. — Донама 05:49, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: After merge

message: Can anyone point so some reputable references for this topic? Thanks in advance! — Донама 02:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I removed the wikipedia link for Marabuts. It leads to an irrelevant entry.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.191.153.118 (talk) 18:29, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed internal link 

message: 'The actual Head of the dynasty is Mark Tabili that it comes down from the Sultan Abu Tabil' - does this refer to a present-day descendant?  If this info is worth including (no reason why it shouldn't be, if genuine), it could do with being more clearly worded and put in a section of its own, and sourced. (In case this helps, English 'actual' does not mean the same as French 'actuel' - I suspect the word you want is 'current' or 'present-day'.)Mikeindex (talk) 09:36, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  modern descendant? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* 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.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Flag of Morocco 1258 1659.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* 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.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Flag of Morocco 1147 1269.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Marinid dynasty. 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/20150518064600/http://www.qantara-med.org/qantara4/public/show_document.php?do_id=604&lang=fr to http://www.qantara-med.org/qantara4/public/show_document.php?do_id=604&lang=fr
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) 19:52, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I noticed some minor inconsistencies (in the names and dates) between the list of rulers on this page and the list provided by Bosworth's "New Islamic Dynasties", which is a standard reference, and likewise some inconsistencies between the list and the individual pages for each sultan (which tend to rely on that same book for reference). There's no explicit indication of what other reference the list on this page would be based on, so I'm guessing these are just minor mistakes. I've made corrections and I've added a citation at the beginning of the section just for a little more transparency. If there are other sources providing different dates or names, maybe bring it up here so it can be sorted out. Cheers, Robert Prazeres (talk) 05:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor corrections to the list of rulers 

message: In the first paragraph of the history section, there's a red link to the "Zab" region of Algeria, and I note that the cited source does indeed say el Zab', but is this a reference to the M'zab region? (Which seems to make some sense in context.) Just checking if we can replace a red link with an existing link. R Prazeres (talk) 05:42, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The Zab (the Ziban in some English sources, el Zab in Arabic, le Zab or les Zibans in French) and the M'Zab valley are two different regions. Creating the Zab article might not be a bad idea. M.Bitton (talk) 00:30, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, thanks for confirming. R Prazeres (talk) 00:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zab or M'Zab? 

message: Regarding this edit:
On what page is that particular map printed? M.Bitton (talk) 13:20, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not printed on the book but it gives an overview of the size of the state, The Marinids did conquer the Ziyanids and Hafsids. Mhd240 (talk) 13:31, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Next time, don't attribute your WP:OR to a source, especially when reverting someone's edit. M.Bitton (talk) 13:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 2021 

message: stop the edit war and resolve both your differences by discussion here.Ahendra (talk) 15:35, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: please use sources. --Serols (talk) 16:04, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop Edit War 

message: Would putting the chronology of events into a new page be a good idea?
Other wikipedia history pages does not include a long list of year-events. It would look cleaner and be consistent to the other pages  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danial Bass (talk • contribs) 22:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems unnecessary. Except for really big topics, splitting content across multiple pages has drawbacks that I don't think are worth it. Plus, that section has currently (almost) no sources, so splitting it would just be creating an unsourced article. If anything, I'd say it's an argument for removing that subsection entirely (with a diff posted here for later reference). Personally, I'd prefer that editors focus on just updating and expanding the rest of the history section and making sure it's fully sourced. If, let's say, the history section were to be expanded to the point that it becomes a very long read, we could then reconsider whether a chronological summary would be useful (and even then, as you pointed out, many major articles of this type don't have one.) R Prazeres (talk) 23:24, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright that makes sense. Yeah, leave it for now with an eye to remove it if other editors expand the history section Danial Bass (talk) 03:11, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article just for Chronology of Events? 

message: Question: is the Royal house template really needed here? Seems to me it isn't contributing much that isn't covered in the first infobox. Some of its parameters (like "estate") are designed with the landed aristocracy in Europe in mind, not really useful here. It's also not used in any similar articles; neither in the other dynasty articles relevant to Morocco, nor for example in a GA article like Ayyubid dynasty. I'd rather just remove it and reduce clutter.
Pinging  (who just edited the box), but any opinions welcome. R Prazeres (talk) 16:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that being a just a repetition of what's in the Infobox, it serves no purpose. M.Bitton (talk) 17:06, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I'll remove it then. If anyone disagrees, we can discuss further here. R Prazeres (talk) 17:11, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal house template 

message: Hi @M.Bitton, Regarding your revert  Yes, it is redundant. The fact that the Marinid dynasty was founded by Abd al-Haqq is mentioned in the lead, the infobox, and in the Rise subsection. 
Also i still think that the statement about his grandfather is undue, but it can be moved to the article of Abd al-Haqq I.  SimoooIX (talk) 18:03, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The Infobox and the lead are meant to summarize what's in the article's body. In the Almohad Caliphate article for instance where Ibn Tumart's name is mentioned everywhere, I didn't see anyone complaining about it or going through it with a fine tooth comb. Worse still, the Hafsid dynasty article has a section dedicated to the grandfather of Abu Zakariya, again with nobody making a fuss about it. This is just to say that I'm not buying it. M.Bitton (talk) 18:38, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

text: Let's cut to the chase: If the mention of Algeria is bothering you, say it and we'll try to do something about it. M.Bitton (talk) 19:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly not. I made a rephrase to eliminate the redundancy of "Zab". If the mention of Algeria was bothersome to me, I wouldn't  keep it in this edit. However, if the fact that I didn't include "Algeria" in my rephrase is bothersome to you, you are welcome to restore my edit and include "Algeria" if you wish. Thank you. SimoooIX (talk) 19:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't need to include anything and I'm not the one who's trying to gut a specific article, you are. Anyway, the matter is now resolved. M.Bitton (talk) 22:38, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand why you keep fiddling with the sentence. What exactly is wrong with it and why do you think that the mention of Ifriqiya is an improvement? M.Bitton (talk) 23:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: My only problem right now is with the redundancy of the word "Zab". Since you seem to dislike my suggestions, could you please rephrase it yourself? I'd be glad if you do this favor for me. I really don't believe that we have to discuss such ridiculous stuff. SimoooIX (talk) 23:17, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I had a go at simplifying it. Normally, that should do it. M.Bitton (talk) 23:30, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's alright now. You've done a great work. And thank you for wasting our time. SimoooIX (talk) 23:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Wasting our time? What kind of a response is that? Is that you could think of after asking me to do you a favour? M.Bitton (talk) 23:35, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Unnecessary reverts are nothing but a waste of time. SimoooIX (talk) 23:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Utter nonsense! The revert of your first attempt at removing content was absolutely necessary (explained in depth above). If anything, you wasted our time by targetting an article over a tiny portion that you don't like. Frankly, I've had enough of this crap. Further unnecessary changes would mean going back to the stable version and waiting for a third party. M.Bitton (talk) 23:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundancy  

message: Hey all, it seems that since the family tree was added (in this edit), the last sections of the article below this are appearing as part of the chart. I've looked at the source code but at the moment I can't actually figure out what's causing this. There must be a missing a bracket or something, but maybe someone else could have a look and spot the issue? Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 22:22, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format issue at the bottom of the article 

message: Why isn't the red marinid flag shown in the article for it's well known they had a red flag adorned with an 8-pointed star formed from 2 superimposed squares 102.38.8.5 (talk) 15:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue is already discussed in in the "Flags" discussion above. That flag is fictitious and only ever originated on Wikipedia or other non-reliable internet sources. R Prazeres (talk) 16:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Why isn't Wikipedia using the one shown in Petros Roselli's map, he's the greatest source, aside from all the 15th century charts and maps that displayed the red marinid flag, Roselli's the most accurate, he belonged to a family of Jewish origin that converted to Christianity with the beginning of the Christianization campaigns in Andalusia, which explains the information available to him about the North African region and Andalusia, where the Jews were known for their role of mediation between Muslims and Christians - commercial transactions and other things, and he worked for a long period of his life in mapping  The map I'm asking to be used as a source was made in 1466 AD in the city of Mallorca on the Andalusian coast, it shows various marinid red banners alongside with others the like zyyanids 102.38.8.5 (talk) 16:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Any information on Wikipedia should be supported by reliable secondary sources (see the policies on reliable sources and secondary sources). The map you mentioned () doesn't show the red flag with octagonal star pattern anyways, and the fact that it shows multiple flags, which could mean multiple different things and which the mapmaker could have based on various old or new sources at the time, makes it all the more important to follow those policies. It's not up to us to do original research here. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

text: I suggest you read this discussion. M.Bitton (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The marinid banner 

message: Hello everyone. 
It is true that the sources do mention that their origin is the Zab region however they don't mention the city of Biskra so why is it mentioned there? We can't identify it like that especially knowing that a lot of Berber regions can share the same name. Also we should take into consideration what the reliable historians of that time say. E.g Ibn Khaldun states that the origin of those people (i.e the Marinids) is the region between Sijilmassa, Figuig and the Moloûya river, but sometimes their territory can be extended to as far as the Zab region. Ibn Abi Zar states that their origin is the region between the Zab region and Sijilmassa, He also states that those people were Nomads and their territory was stateless, they were not subject to anyone. 808 AD (talk) 17:53, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: They do and it's not the city that is mentioned, it's the region. This has been discussed and what's in article is properly sourced. M.Bitton (talk) 18:57, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the Marinids