Jump to content

Talk:Morocco

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleMorocco was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 7, 2006Good article nomineeListed
December 9, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
October 1, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
October 18, 2009Good article nomineeListed
October 24, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 13, 2004, March 2, 2005, March 2, 2006, March 2, 2007, March 2, 2008, March 2, 2009, and March 2, 2010.
Current status: Delisted good article

Semi-protected edit request on 17 July 2024

[edit]

The Roman Empire's involvement in Morocco, then known as Mauretania, began in the 2nd century BCE and lasted until the 5th century AD. The Romans were drawn to the region's strategic importance, establishing settlements, trade routes, and fortifications. Their presence left a lasting cultural impact and a legacy of archaeological sites across the country's northern landscape ArthurEFex (talk) 17:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 18:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barbary lion as national animal or emblem

[edit]

Many places say the Barbary lion is the national animal of Morocco, but none of them appear to be reliable sources. This article references the CIA World Factbook, which is usually pretty good, but I'd think there should be a better source. Maybe in another language? Thanks, SchreiberBike | ⌨  00:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, is the Factbook acceptable or not? If so, I'm not sure why we'd need additional sources. Remsense诉 00:31, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Factbook says "lion" instead of "Barbary lion", so it's not sufficient for Barbary lion. Perhaps there are sources in Arabic that say "Barbary lion". The sources I can find are all of indiscriminate collection of facts, or repeating beliefs without saying why they believe that. Has the government ever said anything about it? SchreiberBike | ⌨  01:10, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May be worth generalizing to merely "lion" for the time being. Remsense诉 01:11, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cursory search finds a sources in Morocco and abroad that talk about the subject, but I'm not sure if they're reliable enough:
1. SNRT News (state-owned broadcaster): "the Atlas Lion is also the symbol of the Moroccan royalty", this is coroberrated by the Journal de Dimanche in France;
2. The Université Rennes 2 published an article stating that the Atlas lion "symbolized Morocco", but I'm not sure about context;
3. An article on al-Arab says the Atlas lion is the "symbol of Morocco in the world".
I will probably update with more sources when I find the time. NAADAAN (talk) 23:45, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the sleuthing! Remsense ‥ 论 00:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 08 August 2024

[edit]

Change from "HDI (2022) 0.698" to "HDI (2024) 0.698"

Reason : The source date is 2024, not 2022.

Thank you 194.154.197.119 (talk) 08:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on "ethnic groups" in infobox

[edit]

Should the "ethnic groups" parameter on the infobox be ommited in favor of the "national languages" parameter which is already present? NAADAAN (talk) 23:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like that's enough, any more consensus before I close this? NAADAAN (talk) 14:01, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion (RfC on "ethnic groups" in infobox)

[edit]
  • The Higher Planning Commission (HCP), who coordinates the national census, only publishes linguistic statistics rather than ethnic, the sourcing for the "ethnic groups" in the infobox is quite flimsy, and other country FAs such as Canada simply ommit ethnic groups in their infoboxes despite their multicultural society. We have discussed this at length before, but it had degenerated into an argument over sourcing and its semantics.
Considering that there is no single reliable nation-wide survey on ethnic origin in Morocco (and I suspect that they are outlawed like in France), the controversial nature of the subject, the divergence in sources, and the fact that the "national languages" would be more accurate; I propose that it should be ommitted in favor of languages. NAADAAN (talk) 23:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because of Morocco's demographic history, mentioning "ethnic groups" seems appropriate. Senorangel (talk) 04:07, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course we mention it, but do we mention it in the infobox?

    There is no authoritative source regarding ethnic groups or diversity in Morocco. Such parameters are not included in the census

    By itself, this fact about the data (complemented with @NAADAAN's description of its incomplete replacements) is enough to convince me that it is wholly unacceptable for inclusion in the infobox, which is meant to summarize key facts at a glance. It follows that if data is murky, poorly-sourced, or has dubious methodology, it is completely unacceptable in the infobox. Moreover, if the sourcing or methodology of data even needs to be explicitly explained to the reader for them not to misunderstand what it means and doesn't mean—it is equally unacceptable for the infobox. This information should be treated with the nuance it requires where it belongs, which is in the body of the article itself. Remsense ‥ 论 05:04, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Recent press conference regarding the 2024 census with Ahmed Lahlimi, the head of the HCP (nat. statistics agency):

    The aim behind these calls [to include Amazighs in the census], according to their authors, is to ensure “better representation” of this population. However, according to the official, “speaking Arabic or Amazigh makes no difference, just as asking for the language spoken serves no purpose. It's a general population census, not an ethnic census”.
    In the same vein, the High Commissioner highlighted Morocco's cultural plurality, where different civilizations have coexisted throughout history, making diversity a strength of the country. “It's impossible to say with any certainty who the Amazighs, Arabs or others are. There are Amazigh families who speak only Arabic, just as there are Arab families who speak Amazigh,” he said by way of example.
    He was also asked religion and faith, Lahlimi replied: “People's beliefs are their own business. It's strictly personal. It has nothing to do with the objectives of the [census].”

    This reinforces the point being here that, in the very least, these are waters too murky to be worth including in an infobox. Perhaps it'd be worth considering the removal of the language parameter too? NAADAAN (talk) 03:40, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2024

[edit]

For ethnic group the Arab section is wrong it should be Arab-Berber 2601:140:8C00:1010:F569:C267:2A57:97A5 (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Skitash (talk) 19:52, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Morocco&oldid=1258579983"