Talk:List of rulers of Morocco

message: Since this is a list, would it not be better to rename the article to something like List of rulers of Morocco (and not "King", since as the article itself notes that term is not really applicable to many individuals on the list itself)? Any objections?--cjllw | TALK 01:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections here--as you say, it seems completely sensible.  And I think you're right to identify this as "List of rulers"--an article titled "King of M" or "Sultan of M" implies that it should elaborate on what that office entails (powers, succession, etc.) in addition to listing the dynasties.  Those would be great articles, but that's not what we have here now.  --Dvyost 01:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article move

message: User:80.58.2.170, would you be able to explain further here your reasoning for adding the {POV} tag to this article? If you have an issue with it, it would be customary to at least outline what you see the issues to be.--cjllw | TALK 00:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  addition of POV tag 

message: I read in this site  that Abd Allah was the ruler of Morocco four times.
:"Moulay Abdallah, Sultan 1729-deposed 1735, restored and again deposed 1736, 1740-1745 and finally restored 1745-1757, +1757."
However, in this list it was mentioned that he ruled twice, then Abd Allah III and Abd Allah IV were the rulers after him. According to that site, all of them were the same person, and there was no Abd Allah III or IV. Is this list correct or not? ~MK~ (talk) 03:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abd Allah of Morocco 

message: Acording to Le Petitte Larousse, Morocco began in 1631, not before. Its the same as U.K., its not only the history of England, and what happens about Scotland?...
Since 1956, Morocco think they are sucessors of all arabic states in this part of Magreb, but acording to Espasa-Calpe 1917, the country was cold "Imperio Jarifiano". And if you see the kingdom order its differents, and they are more differents and its NOT the same country. Acording to:  Euratlas, Le petitte Larouse, Junta de Andalucía, Espasa-Calpe.. its not the same country. Morocco was part of this countries, yes this is thrue, but Morocco its a new kingdom.
Acording to new Morrocan writers Morroco its the legal sucessor to Almoravides, but I can found 9 more legal sucessor of Almoravides (incluying Banu Ganyra) and Almohades. Later we can found Morocco as legal and only sucessor to Almohades, but I can found more than  3 kingdoms sucessor, not only Marinid...
Bokpasa 18:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bokpasa at it again. Why are you here? To tell people that Morocco never existed at those times? Blatant ignorance when you leave Italy stub tags and Spain even when you talk about 10th, 11th, etc centuries? Do you have something specific against Morocco and not Spain or Italy? -- FayssalF - Wiki me up®  12:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morocco versus History 

message: See Talk:Muhammad II of Morocco for a question about an image. Dcoetzee 06:19, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hollar engraving 

message: I was dissatisfied with the use of "Sultan" in the headings.  It's a Turkish title, that is found in Egypt and points east, but it was never really used in the Maghreb. I know "sultan" has become a catch-all loose term in English for any Muslim prince (at least since the late 19th C.), and I don't mind seeing it used in article text. But at least in a formal list of rulers, the titles should be a bit more careful. The Moroccan rulers were actually quite particular about it. From a quick scan through C.A. Julien (1961) Histoire de l'Afrique du Nord, Paris: Payot: 
* Idrisids are ambiguous; they were certainly known as "Imam" and "Sayyid", and it seems on their coinage, they used both "Imam" and amir al-moumim ("Commander of the Faithful", i.e. Caliph)(here fn); several secondary sources call them Caliphs, others carefully avoid the term and don't clarify either way. 
* The Almoravids stuck assiduously to "Emirs" (to be precise, amir al-moslimin, "Prince of the Muslims", a title of imperial but not impious connotations); they were very adamant about that. (Julien, p.88) 
* The Almohads called themselves Caliphs after 1145, consistently and without apology (Julien, p.102)
* The Marinids reverted to Emir ("Prince of the Muslims").  Never used "caliph". (Julien, p. 168)
* Not sure about the Wattasids. Probably just Emir too. 
* The Sa'adians called themselves "Caliphs" after 1550  (Julien, p.208)
*  Not sure about the Alawites. It seems they (or at least the foreign press) picked up "Sultan" at some point along the way.  Although earlier documents have him as king, emperor, emir, prince, and they also happened to use (and still use) amir al-moumim.  
In short: until this list is resolved, I am not going to change the specific titles of individual dynasties. But I did remove the statements that insinuates they had the Turkic title of "Sultan", at least before the 1600s.  So the headings changed simply to "Rulers of Morocco" for now, with "Kings" at the end. Walrasiad (talk) 14:53, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sultan? 

message: It's very strange but someone removed all the alaoui kings photos, although every single article had the accurate photo corresponding as drawn in the shrine of Moulay Ali Sharif until today  — Preceding unsigned comment added by HfedBo (talk • contribs) 11:51, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of all the alaoui kings photos 

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) 06:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The region of Morocco was known in Antiquity as the Kingdom of Maurusia or Mauretania. Stating that "Morocco started with the Idrissids" is more of an ideological and political statement than anything, and is the official story told by the Moroccan State. I think the article should be neutral and include all known people who ruled the region, just as it is the case in the German version of this page. I've tagged everyone who has been involved in this discussion page at some point. --Ideophagous (talk) 04:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why not the Kings of Mauretania too? 

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) 18:06, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The redirect Queen of Morocco has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  BDD (talk) 20:43, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Queen of Morocco]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]