Jump to content

Talk:Ottoman expeditions to Morocco

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

Overlap/merge with "Conflicts between the Regency of Algiers and Morocco"?

[edit]

Should this page and the "Conflicts between the Regency of Algiers and Morocco" page be merged in some way? Their content does not currently overlap much but their topic is functionally very similar; anything in one of those pages should probably be on the other page too, so that seems close enough to a potentially unnecessary content fork. If they were merged it might still require a new title to be fully inclusive of the possible topic scope but it wouldn't be hard to do so if editors agree. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 04:47, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, I think it would be best to stay consistent. On French wikipedia there are two separate articles, one for the Ottoman expeditions to Morocco and one for the conflicts between the regency of Algiers and Morocco. Also, the content in the Ottoman expedition articles on French and En wiki are focused on specifically different subjects: The vassal status of Morocco to the Ottoman Empire, the Moroccan king recognising the suzerainty of the Ottoman sultans and the diplomatic relations between the Ottoman sultans and the Moroccan kings. Thanks. (Kabz15 (talk) 14:21, 29 May 2021 (UTC))[reply]
I don't see a clear division between those topics. Some of those points sound exactly the same. Both articles cover military confrontations between Morocco and the Ottoman Regency of Algiers in the same periods, so it's hard to imagine readers benefitting from this split overall, especially without that division being clearly delineated with links between both articles. We also don't need to follow the example of the French Wikipedia as a rule; if they should be merged here then they should be merged there as well, someone just needs to propose it. For now I just want to solicit editors' attention on the matter. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 17:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]