Wikipedia

Talk:Regency of Algiers/Archive 6

< Talk:Regency of Algiers
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Elinruby in topic language issue?: implausible reference
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

should have articles but don't

Latest comment: 2 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion

re the lede

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

We also fail to mention Baba Uthman Mohammed[1] in the lede. Does any have an objection to making the part about the wars a compound sentence along with the long period of prosperity? Please nobody rewrite anything in the lede. But taking wording suggestions here.

References

  1. ^ or however we are standardizing the name, I forget

 Y has been added Elinruby (talk) 12:42, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Lede is done except for just one question

Latest comment: 1 month ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Per the above I added Baba Mohammed to the infobox and lede. I made some other minor changes also. The question relates to holy war. The question is whether "European powers" should be rewritten to say "European nations and other powers such as the Vatican and Knights of Malta"? Do we talk enough about the Knights of Malta Elinruby (talk) 13:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

So thats where Knights Hospitaller ended up. Read a book about this castle designer who spent I think 40 years fortyfying their castle on Rhodes. The ingenuity of the man for killing was unbelievable. The Vatican is a nation and during that period was extremely powerful, like now and was present. I wouldn't seperate it out. scope_creepTalk 17:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC) Ok but the Knights of Malta were not, and there is actually a whole theme about holy war that used to be overemphasized and now seems to be gone altogether. I think that the point that Algiers was not the only entity that felts that there was holy war to be waged is kind of important. I think may be a short sentence should go in there, or another clause in the sentence about holy war. Apart from maybe that, are we missing anything else important thought? The constitution maybe? Elinruby (talk) 21:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
I think we did a bit of comparison between the Maltese knights and Algiers in the political status section. Do you want an emphasis on how both entities understood and implemented the concept of Holy war ? Nourerrahmane (talk) 16:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Maybe I am overestimating the extent to which the idea of holy war is shocking to an English speaker. I simply think that if the lede is going to discuss holy war it should do so in a balanced way, and there were multiple military forces waging holy war at the time, no? On the other hand, it *is* the lede and the main place we get into that in the article is with the knights of Malta, right? So I was thinking about half a sentence, maybe saying that the Regency joyfully participated in the international religious wars of the period, that would do it. Open to suggestions.
Also: shouldn't Ali Bitchin be in the lede maybe? Elinruby (talk) 11:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

crickets Elinruby (talk) 12:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

With respect to layout

Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I think I have gotten away from the problem we had in a couple of places of a multiimage template at the bottom of e section being right on top of a multiimage template at the top of the next section. Does anyone have any issues with the current image layout? I am not asking about particular images right now, or alts or captions, oe anything but whether there are problems with images overlapping or whatever anywhere in the article.

Comment? Remember we are being told that single images go to the right and multiimage templates get centered. Elinruby (talk) 21:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

 Y i think this is over Elinruby (talk) 13:13, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Image properties

Latest comment: 1 month ago51 comments3 people in discussion

@Elinruby: I've updated the British English caption property on File:Barbarijse galeien Barbarijsche Galeijen (titel op object), RP-P-1896-A-19368-451.jpg since it was all in Dutch. I'm wondering if we need to do all of them. scope_creepTalk 14:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I have been through this several times now and am pretty sure all captions are in English. I do have a haunting feeling I left off an alt somewhere though. Elinruby (talk) 14:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Few image suggestions:
Adding. Placecement may change Elinruby (talk) 01:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Adding. Don't really like the placement but it is easier to add, then rearrange Elinruby (talk) 11:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC) Y done Elinruby (talk) 11:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
I like this image a lot but the uploader did not include the legend. I can fix this but not on this device. Elinruby (talk) 11:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
never mind, it was off the edge of the screen. Tribal aristocracy section can use this Elinruby (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Added  Y Elinruby (talk) 01:59, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Why do we need an image of a Jewish man at all? Please explain this. Elinruby (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Visually I like this image a lot better than the one in the museum and wonder why I haven't seen it sooner. However, I need a reference for it or something. If I can find the image from the museum that is probably enough. Elinruby (talk) 11:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
I found the photo of it in the museum and am convinced. Still think we should attribution though. I can probably do this. Elinruby (talk) 08:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
  • I suggest we remove one the two images in the Education section and the tiled wall in the architecture section and i'm unsure, i also beleive we have too many barbarossa images. Nourerrahmane (talk) 17:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Education and titled wall is done. Barbarossa to be evaluated once images settle down Elinruby (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I added this Elinruby (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC) Y done Elinruby (talk) 11:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
This image is in History of the Regency of Algiers. Better quality sounds fine. Elinruby (talk) 11:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC) Will switch. Elinruby (talk) 11:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
This is done. I swapped the better image in. Elinruby (talk) 14:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
This is done but I have reservations about source date
Source link is a 404 error and I am not sure what it is to begin with Elinruby (talk) 11:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
this image's source link is a 404 Elinruby (talk) 16:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC) Will check on phone. Elinruby (talk) 08:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
@Elinruby The treaty of 1662 image was taken from an official Algerian ministry website, how can this fail FA ? Nourerrahmane (talk) 10:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
I am willing to believe that it originally came from a government website. However on my phone at least gloriousalgeria.dz looks like it scraped the official website.... This is discussable and could be solved with a better link. Same thing with "North West University". Elinruby (talk) 10:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Nour, see below about the copyright notice on the webpage. Elinruby (talk) 08:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I see your suggestions but haven't looked at them. Obviously we will need another reshuffle. But for the sake of my sanity let me finish something here. I want to be confident the images we are using are all from good sources. I am annotating captions about the sources for keeping track. Once I am done we can trim the captions back if that seems like a good idea Elinruby (talk) 11:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
PS: Glorious Algeria looks like a much more serious website on the laptop btw, and I can see why it might not load on the phone. So this is a government agency? What I was looking at was just some social media sharing buttons pretty much. Elinruby (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Scope creep Captions in English would be good. This should actually be true of most if not all of them though, if you want to check. Did I add an alt? I had to move stuff around to make a place for it. You happy with that part::Too hot, slept all day. Big push on a little while to finish Elinruby (talk) 06:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC) what's the official English name of that government agency? Elinruby (talk) 12:44, 24 July 2024 (UTC) @Nourerrahmane:

It's the Ministry of Mujahideen and Rights Holders Nourerrahmane (talk) 13:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Is that something like the Armed Forces? Elinruby (talk) 13:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
the above question remains unanswered. Elinruby (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Map of the Mediterranean.png has no source provided. This is because we are using a version I cropped and uploaded - note to self to go get provenance from original file. Elinruby (talk) 13:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

After the Dance, same thing. The other Bro de Comeres is from an auction site. 14:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
After the Dance was also from an auction site. Elinruby (talk) 11:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
@Nourerrahmane: Mohamed Racim.jpg what is up with the copyright on this? Sourcing just says Mohamed Racim. Did he personally give it to you or what? When was this painted? Elinruby (talk) 14:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Salahedine ben Naoum,history researcher <-- is this a good image source? Also Geographicus describes itself as a "dealer" <-- is that the same thing as an auction site? Elinruby (talk) 14:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
I will look at image suggestions next. If we could stop converting back to File syntax from multiimage without discussion that would be great; also those black and while paintings are called "etchings". I think I have verified most if not all of the the image sources for the images that were in the article Elinruby (talk) 15:25, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Image suggestions look good; I am going to hike out for caffeine then spend a couple of hours adding/rearranging before I have to leave again. Hopefully to finish tonight. There remains the source verification. Yes really. Issues with "what is a quote" are a PROBLEM. If I can. tonight. If not, as soon as it seems preferable to gouging my eyes out. There are some other items on that to-do list that are not addressed yet, A sentence on Baba Mohammed among them. This question remains unanswered Salahedine ben Naoum,history researcher <-- is this a good image source? Also Geographicus describes itself as a "dealer" <-- is that the same thing as an auction site? Elinruby (talk) 14:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC) and if it does not get answered I will simply replace those images also Elinruby (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
On Geographicus no. They donated their whole collection of images to Wikipedia in March 2011 so is perfectly fine. Can't locate the other image. scope_creepTalk 08:04, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
On the miniature Mohamed Racim.jpg. Well used and well-liked image on tumbler, reddit, facebook. There is a CC 4.0 sharealike licence, so is licenced correctly. Its ok. scope_creepTalk 08:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Although in saying that. It is a 1972 image, I can't see how it it would be licenced like that. Need further explanation. scope_creepTalk 08:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I removed the Racim image as there is no indication that it meets the copyright requirements  Y Elinruby (talk) 11:47, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
@Scope creep: Thank you for tracking down Geographicus. The other image is an image of a treaty near the end of an article. In the Roman alphabet. Sorry for flaking yesterday; there are no wildfires within 50 miles of here but it is the height of wildfire season and I guess the windy overcast weather blew some smoke this way. Sinuses were screaming and the medication I took for that put me to sleep. All is well now however, skies are blue and I feel fine. Need to do a couple of things today but this is top of my list on wikipedia still and very near the top of the overall list. Just checking messages right now. Geographicus map stays in then, got it. Elinruby (talk) 20:56, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Morning @Elinruby: Curiously my mate in Groveland, California was talking about that yesterday. He is a director the HOA,HBA or something, the housing association for the housing estate he's on, for a couple years and he's talking about how they fined this dude because he had dead tree in his garden and refused to remove it, and they were running scared. This was happening over months. So they fined him, eye watering and got the crane and forcefully removed it. Strange times. I couldn't find that image re: Roman alphabet?? We need to add the detailed galley image that Nour found re: above and the after image when they moved to ocean going ships, to show the contrast. Don't if they are in. scope_creepTalk 07:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)


I weeded the History article earlier then took a break. Working my way up to adding new images and re-doing the layout, since now we have single images in Multiimage format and various other layout problems. Kind of upsetting -- I spent days on editing some of the images that have copyright problems, but there you go. Should have checked this myself. I want to finish the last 5-6 pages of the novel I am reading then will start on this article again. Re your mate: I can see why. Look up the Paradise Fire. Up here we have had at least one catastrophic fire -- I am not sure how the nearby fire in Spence's Bridge is doing as all the news coverage is currently about the devastation in Jasper, a famous and beloved resort town noted for stunning Rocky Mountain scenery. That one is on the other side of several mountain ranges and no threat, and even the kinda-close one would have to find a way to burn a path around a long rocky and treeless canyon to threaten more than the air quality here. But all that could change with one thunderstorm. Welcome to climate change. There is now a wildfire season on the the entire west coast of North America.

Answering a question from above: I removed the treaty image at the History article also, after taking another look. I did not find it on the website, but more important, all subpages of the website of the Ministry of Mujahadeen and Rights Holders that I looked at had a copyright notice at the bottom saying that all rights were reserved. Theoretically a photo of an official historic document like a treaty would be exempt, but what do I know about Algerian copyright law? It needn't necessarily follow British/US patterns. That one is in Arabic, which is why I specified that the other one I was questioning used the Roman alphabet. I questioned it because it is attributed to a "researcher", which is not in the same class as the Prado, but might be ok if he is well-known, I guess. I will find it and put the file name right here when I come back, but the question is in green above. Back soon. All is well, just taking a short break. Elinruby (talk) 07:47, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Yea, Coolio. If you see any copyright notice, forget the image. For each image, even if its before the 1924 cut-off date, i.e. PD, its a whole lot of work to prove it. A whole lot. scope_creepTalk 11:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Ah I see I did not supply a file name, just the source. Not sure. I will probably find it again as I am working, and let you know. You're right, it doesn't seem to be the remaining treaty image. If you are looking for ways to help, there are some questions on the talk page of the History article, and I definitely gave the file name for those. Warming up the mental engine. Elinruby (talk) 08:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Made some headway. Feeling kind of discouraged right now, like my time is not being respected and/or N is just not reading the policy or people telling him about the policy. The new images need to be from reputable, verifiable sources. And free of copyright. OK? Much better overall tho, maybe I am just tired. I will be back, but I need a break again. @Scope creep: I get the concept of the change in ship technology. Looked for the image you wanted me to add. I am all for it. Will be first thing I do when I come back. Elinruby (talk) 11:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
@Elinruby: I just read up on the history article talk. We were talking about the two before and after galley/ship on there. I don't know if the before/after needs to go on here or on the history article. I think the original galley image was on here, right at the top, mid image in that first block, but has been replaced with something. They should probably go here since this is the core of privateering, but where is the question? scope_creepTalk 11:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
@Elinruby: Got that wrong. The first galley image was in the history article, between Barbarossa and his brother. So the before/after should go in there, somewhere. scope_creepTalk 11:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Scope creep do not understand the above. My understanding is that since the switch from galleys to sailed ship was so pivotal, the idea is to put a galley and a sailed ship together to illustrate the change, is that right? So far the galley is in but I do not guarantee it is in the "right" place. There is an etching of ships with sails but it isn't from the same period at all. Working on this in little short bursts. Trying to be verbose with the updates tho. Elinruby (talk) 11:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
@Elinruby: They should be together in the same block. scope_creepTalk 11:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
But I think the other image is from the 18th century and might be seen as irrelevant to the topic. Not sure. I am clicking around the edges of this but may not actually start work until tomorrow for mental health and logistical reasons. But I do see the concept and agree with it, not that that actually matters since you plus Nour is two out of three, which I have declared to be consensus... I will come back to this. I agree that we should do this and if necessary provide a little more text about it. I don't remember right now where the 18th century image is from (and would need to look up the admiral's name to be sure of the dating) but it is, mind you, totally fine, I remember vetting it, I am pretty sure. Good for inclusion just maybe not there. In fact, to who it may concern, it would be great if someone found an image, preferably also an engraving, of 16th or 17th century Algerine ship. Elinruby (talk) 06:34, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
I added the image to the Barbary Wars section Elinruby (talk) 14:43, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

no more complaints about how long this is taking until y'all start answering these y/n "is this done" questions

Latest comment: 1 month ago12 comments3 people in discussion
  • Speaking of: Is anyone looking at the infobox?
I also noticed that although Titteri is listed the Kingdom of Kuku is not, and wasn't Kuku at least an ally at one point? What's the scope of that list? places that were at some point occupied by Algiers? Dramatis Personae?. Same question applies to the rules and deputies fields. We're definitely not including everything there, can someone check what we are including or not? I know they were going through deys fast at one point, but shouldn't we at least try to get the important ones in. And given the scope of that deputies probably should at most include people like Salah Reis and Simon Danza.
  • Is everyone happy with the map in the infobox Y/N
  • No. Still not keen on it, because of the missing components and labels that actually make it a map. Its missing even the basic map scale bar. The reader can't even how big it is, for example. Take a look at [2]. The minimum is 6 components, generally for a map. Its needs the scale bar added, and the oceans/sea and other countries labelled at the minumum. scope_creepTalk 15:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

 Y *Is the concern about insufficient attention to sea power in the lede addressed? Y/N

 Y *What year was it when an onion was worth more than a slave? Did that get taken out? Y/N

  • Yes but its in the history article I looked at the source. It states, at that point in the time, the onion was more valuable than the slave and no other information provided. It is essentially valid. Ignore this please. scope_creepTalk 15:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
If it's in the history article it's all good Elinruby (talk) 14:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Should the Knights of Malta be mentioned in the lede in the context of holy war? Y/N
  • No. Nour says they should they should be of the body, which is correct. But they are European Powers by definition, i.e. the crusades, or the end of the crusades but only here in relation to the song. And only mentioned tangenitally in relation in a minor in history. So no in both articles. scope_creepTalk 15:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Does our expected audience understand privateers? Y/N
  • Yes, because it is linking privateers in the lede. It can't be clearer. A quick search of privateers turns up the definition at US Naval Institute Naval History Command which links back to the privateer article. Ignore this please. scope_creepTalk 15:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

 Y *Baba Mohammed has been added to lede and infobox OK? Y/N

  • mentioning influx to Melilla from Grenada as intro to presidios makes sense Y/N Elinruby (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
    - Oh alright, the image changes seemed a bit strange for me in that article
    - Infobox looks good for me
    - Lede: Another ce maybe needed there, also we may need to add a word that links the political stabilty of Algiers with the propserity of Algiers under Muhammad ben Osman.
    - Yes it's been adressed
    - Not necessarly, this should be adressed in the body.
    - I beleive yes...I think Panzac's quote in the Foreign relations section makes it clear enough.
    - Yes
    - Yes, post-Reconquista period is important to understand the foundation of the Regency
    Speaking of Kuku, it was Allied with Arouj, enemy with Hayredd in, enemy with Hasan Agha, Allied with Hasan Pasha, Salah Rais, and the rest of the Beylerbeys. Kuku was important during the Barbarossa period and was mentionned during Algerian campaigns against Morocco. Nourerrahmane (talk) 14:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC) the
It seems like some items might be missing because I can't quite find the answer about an onion. I agree about Baba Mohammed and will try to make that happen. I am otherwise hearing that Nourerrahmane is happy with the lede and thinks we should leave Knights of Malta to the body, which was the other outstanding question about the lede. I am a bit confused about the answer about Kuku -- ok, they were allies and enemies at different times, ok. Would this not make them at least as important as Titteri? I have absolutely no dog in this fight, as they say, however. I am just the annoying editor who keeps asking questions. If someone can explain to me in ten words or less why Titteri is in the infobox but kuku is not then I will be delighted to move on. Elinruby (talk) 05:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Kuku officially ended in the early 17th century due to an Algerian expedition and internal squabbling among local leaders of Kuku.
Titeri is in the infobox because its governor organised a local resistance against the French army after the city of Algiers fell in 1830. Nourerrahmane (talk) 06:37, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
OK, you explained it. The explanation doesn't make any sense, but I will take that as a request to move on for now. We can come back to the infobox later Elinruby (talk) 11:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
still pending. The reason I said that the explanation made no sense is that to my mind existing at the Regency's creation makes it a predecessor but I am sure what the stuff N said would make Titteri. Infobox needs to reviewed shall we say. Also, do we really need two flags? Check sourcing but N. Has a list, just not sure if he added any of it to the infobox or the flag article. Elinruby (talk) 10:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

language issue?: implausible reference

Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Internal trade was extremely important due to the makhzen system.[1]

Probably supposed to say the Makhzen system was extremely important to internal trade. It is also possible, though less self-evident, that internal trade was important to the makhzen system, but if we are going to go there this should be better explained. Reference is out of print and not easily available Elinruby (talk) 11:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
0n re-reading could also be the makhzen system allowed internal trade to be important Elinruby (talk) 23:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Kaddache 2003, p. 235.

Clothing, crafts, arts

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Seems there was puppet theatre and mud wrestling, seems worth a mention. Also the instruments we have are correct but a flute should be added. Elinruby (talk) 11:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Regency_of_Algiers/Archive_6&oldid=1244481668"