Jump to content

User talk:R Prazeres

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject idea

[edit]

Hello, I am considering making a WikiProject for Pre Islamic Arabia, or for the History of Arabia in general with a taskfroce on Pre Islamic Arabia. Would it interest you to join this if it were made? Pogenplain (talk) 00:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pogenplain: Thank you for asking, and sorry for the delayed reply. I'm not particularly focused on Arabia and even less so on the pre-Islamic period, I'm afraid, so I probably won't join, but I hope you find some editors who will! It's a topic that deserves attention. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 17:32, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

[edit]

Hello you previously reported an edit war on the Dhund (tribe) article, there now seems to be edits by what appears to be banned editor User:Wildhorse3

Sorry about the info overload but you seem familiar with the page and reporting this, so I'm putting this here.

My edit was then reverted by an IP address 103.191.123.139. The comments struck me as odd: "British Raj sources are not reliable for Caste/tribe related articles go and read (RAJ) don't edit-war. Or discuss on talk page and gain consensus"

This was from an account deleting content and citing WP:RAJ and going on to treat it as Wikipedia policy (it isn't, it's an essay). What seemed strange was this account seems familiar with Wikipedia and talks of discussion and consensus - yet made no commentary on the talk page.

Something else seemed odd though as I realised both the Awan (tribe) and Dhund (tribe) had the exact same quote

After checking the Awan article (and source) I realised it only seemed to be accurate for that article looking through the history of Awan article I noticed this edit by banned user Wildhorse3 "Undid revision by Angeluser (talk) reverting an attempt of POV pushing. Please provide a better reason to revert properly sourced scientific"

Here is Wildhorse3 reverting back to a version by his sock User:Sitush7

Here is Sitush7 reverting an article - he mentions discussing it on the talk page and yet doesn't comment on it himself. His edits are then reverted as he's a sock

Wildhorse3 deleted content here stating stated "rw, removed unsourced and poorly sourced content, editable online encyclopaedias are not a reliable source"

While mostly correct in the content he deleted, he also happened to delete content cited from the Imperial Gazetteer of India and the The Panjab Chiefs. In this edit 103.191.123.148 deletes text from the Panjab Chiefs leading me to suspect that these 103.191 IP address are Wildhorse3.

The text from the Panjab Chiefs was reporting a folk tradition or story believed by the tribe

In this edit Wildhorse3 claims the Syed is an Arab tribe and also Wildhorse3 added links to Awan tribe and Dhund tribe

As well as removing uncited text he also removed text by Lepel Henry Griffin from the Punjab chiefs in the Awan article Griffin was reporting on claims made by the Awans, something that Awans continue to state as can be seem from the current version of the article.

Interestingly here Wildhorse3 said "Please specify and elaborate so that we can reach a consensus and not indulge in an edit war. Simply removing properly sourced stuff, that has been there for months, without any good explanation is not going to help"

Which is similar to this edit as noted above that says "don't edit-war. Or discuss on talk page and gain consensus.
Pahari Sahib 00:18, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I was involved in that article only temporarily and it seems like a lot has happened there since. I'm not sure I can help with this, but here some quick thoughts from skimming through the information:
For context: the editor I was dealing with at the time (this IP) was mainly focused on pushing a claim of Arab Abbasid ancestry and removing mentions of Punjabi ethnicity (e.g. [1], [2], [3]). I suspect that Sardarkhanabbasi is that same editor, as their edits look like more of the same (e.g. [4], [5], [6]). I also just noticed [7] by another new account.
I wouldn't be surprised if there's another IP doing this (this looks suspiciously like the same result), but the style of writing makes me think it's likely not be the same person, maybe just someone with an overlapping POV. And you're right that their edit summaries look very much like someone who has edited Wikipedia before. But I'm not familiar with the sockmaster you mentioned, so I'm not well-placed to investigate this.
If the disruptive edits are just IPs so far, then the easiest course of action is probably either to request semi-protection of the article or o report the IP(s) to WP:ANI/EW, though you may need to wait and see if the disruption continues before you have enough evidence to support a report. It's often easier to just stop the immediate disruptions in this way rather than file a report at WP:SPI (which also takes longer to resolve, typically). R Prazeres (talk) 18:18, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for "climate of Marrakesh"

[edit]

Hello,

Here are the sources for the Marrakesh update : "https://open-meteo.com/en/docs/historical-weather-api?csv_coordinates=31.601832631717684,+-8.025858520733665" "https://fr.climate-data.org/afrique/maroc/marrakech/marrakech-4746/" "https://www.climate.top/morocco/marrakech/humidity/?utm_source=chatgpt.com" Climater67 (talk) 19:25, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great, but please add them to the table in the article. They need to be visible to all other readers.
By the way, are you the same person as Earthsofabil67? (Who was also editing at Taza?)
Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 19:27, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

[edit]

Hello, @R Prazeres!

Ive recently created these two articles (Benachour massacre of 5 January 1997 and Benachour massacre of 5 December 1996) and ive realized that they are both in the same exact village, and have just exactly a month of difference, however i think having two articles would be too much, and ive been wondering seeing as you are interested in the topic of North Africa if i should merge these two into one. (Possibly something like Benachour Massacres).

Thanks! :) Algerianeditor17 (talk) 23:41, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erasing the word Arab from Moorish architecture

[edit]

Why was the word Arab removed but the word "berber" kept in the same context? were the Umayyads, Nasrids, Aghlabids are all Arabic dynasties Prosnu (talk) 23:12, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A solution

[edit]

Hello [@R Prazeres] Thank you for reviewing my edits and comments. I understand the concern behind the phrase "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" and I agree that adding dictionary-style definitions to the main article should be avoided. However, I just wanted to clarify that I don't mean to add a short dictionary entry, but rather to address a historical/linguistic issue: the Arabic use of the term "dawla" in the Middle Ages, and how some modern readings of phrases like "state of the Turks" or "state of the Circassians" might lead to interpreting the Mamluk political system as an "ethnic" Turkish or Circassian state, rather than understanding the term as a dynastic/period designation in many contexts. In general, this type of focus on things that lead to understanding and adopting a theory influences the understanding of history and other dimensions, but the goal is an encyclopedic account to explain something within the framework of Wikipedia's content itself. What I am saying is not new, but there are many examples, such as Macedonia and the origins of the word Jerusalem and Tulunids and Ikhshidid. To avoid distracting from the main historical narrative, I propose this compromise: I will prepare a draft article (userspace or draft namespace) on this topic. It will present: (a) examples from primary medieval texts, (b) interpretations by contemporary historians with full citations, (c) examples from academic and recent research, and (d) the historiographical implications of reading Mamluk identity. I will follow the WP:V / WP:NOR / MoS guidelines. If the community agrees, I will add a short, neutral line to the name section of the main Mamluk Sultanate article with a link to the draft (for readers who want more detail). Or perhaps not yet, and it can be considered later, e.g., I will post a link to the draft on this talk page and welcome your comments/cooperation. Do you accept this approach? So, bro, do we have a deal '-'? Yosf22ww (talk) 22:28, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A fox for you!

[edit]

Dear R Prazeres, we were in touch a few years ago, my name is Stephennie Mulder, I’m a professor of Islamic art who oversees the annual #StudentsOfIslamicArt edit-a-thon (meetup page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup_StudentsofIslamicArt). Your work on Wikipedia and particularly on Islamic topics is so excellent, I am a huge fan.

I will be running the assignment again this fall with my class at UT Austin in a collaboration with classes at the University of California Merced and the University of Delaware. I am now gathering a list of articles on medieval Islamic art and architecture for the students in my class to edit, and I thought I’d reach out and see if you have any suggestions for articles on medieval topics you’d like to see expanded or created. I know you have a few on your page marked as stubs, would be glad to start there. But I thought I’d ask if there are any you’d like to see them work on in particular.

I oversee this assignment closely, but because this is student work, it is not always quite as polished as it might be were a subject area expert to work on an article, so I offer that caveat! But I typically find that the experience of editing Wikipedia is deeply illuminating for students on many fronts.

Anyway, would be happy for your thoughts, and truly grateful for the excellent work you do here!

Stephennie

ArtsOfIslam (talk) 21:06, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Stephennie, thank you for your very kind message. I'm happy to hear my contributions are seen as positive!
As a quick general thought: I think students (and new editors) do seem to make the most positive contributions when picking a topic with narrow scope — like a single monument or single significant object, or a particular type of art in a particular period/region, etc. — that hasn't received much work yet. On broad topics or topics that have significant coverage already, they seem to struggle to find a good direction to go and to find good-quality sources that allow them to improve on the existing material. At least, that's been my impression.
From what I can think of, I know there are many lesser-known but significant historical monuments that have not received much attention yet. I've made a very incomplete list of suggestions below, but it's biased by the topics I've personally worked on, so there's certainly more than these.
In Turkey:
In Syria and Palestine (most of these are Mamluk; I've barely surveyed later periods yet):
There's also a large number of stubs for madrasas and mosques in Tunis: see Category:Mosques in Tunis and Category:Madrasas in the medina of Tunis. Although some of them may not have much information available in WP:RS and students are likely to need some French abilities to research these effectively.
I've barely scratched the surface of sites in Iran and Central Asia, so I have fewer suggestions to offer, but a couple that have come to my mind previously:
Beyond architecture, one area of Islamic art that I think has received relatively less attention on Wikipedia is metalwork. So far, there's a paragraph on it at Islamic art#Metalwork, articles on a few individual pieces, and some period-specific summaries in larger articles (e.g. Almohad Caliphate#Metalwork, Mamluk Sultanate#Art, and Abbasid art#Metalwork). I'm not sure which specific topics to suggest, but we generally lack dedicated articles on the topic, if that inspires anything!
I hope some of the above is helpful. I'll be busy in the coming weeks but feel free to contact me again if helpfu; and I'll be happy to look again. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 19:04, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PS: If you wanted a very short list of suggestions, then the ones I'd be most happy to see improved/created from above might be:
R Prazeres (talk) 19:46, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Qibla

[edit]

As far as I know, Wikipedia reverts are made within established rules. I'm worried that someone didn't feel the need for my contribution on the Qibla issue, and that my contributions have hit a conservative wall. NGC 628 (talk) 07:20, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what that statement is even trying to convey, but the tone of self-righteousness isn't convincing. You have been asked many, many times to stop pushing the same POV and you've been warned recently more than once to stop resorting to WP:OR. It's not even the first time I've told you that it's not the first time ([11]). There really isn't an excuse for this anymore and you are setting yourself up for possible accusations of being a tendentious or single-purpose editor. Take this as yet another warning. R Prazeres (talk) 19:03, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have never challenged the perpetrators for any reversals that were accompanied by the necessary explanations. It's true that I work in certain areas, and anyone can do this. All I ask is that you to demonstrate that this reversal is based on a properly implemented Wikipedia policy. It's vital for all of us and for our policies of impartiality that this action not be taken to fulfill someone's taboos.

Additionally, I watched a few videos about changing the qibla in Islam and saw that you also have a strong interest in Islamic architecture. The qibla is also a subject related to architecture. I would be very grateful if you could share your knowledge on this subject. Regards. NGC 628 (talk) 06:25, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crusades wikiproject

[edit]

There's a new editor trying to get Wikipedia:WikiProject Crusades off the ground, if you've any interest in lending a hand. -- asilvering (talk) 23:12, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up! I'll keep it in mind. R Prazeres (talk) 01:51, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:R_Prazeres&oldid=1313585456"