Talk:North Africa during classical antiquity

Redirect troubles

This page is the heart of the maze of redirects. We have:

Africa (Roman province) redirecting to Africa Province, Roman Empire

Africa (province) redirecting to Africa Province, Roman Empire

Africa Proconsularis redirecting to Africa (province)

Roman Africa redirecting to Africa Province, Roman Empire

I've changed the Proconsularis redirect to Africa Province, Roman Empire and the Roman Africa redirect to North Africa in the Classical Period.

I suggest the correct action is to name the name the main article 'Africa Proonsularis' on the model of Aegyptus and Britannia. That will take an administrator to move Africa Province, Roman Empire.

It may be a good idea to move North Africa during the Classical Period to Roman Africa because North Africa in the Classical period is counter-intuitive compared with Roman Africa.

Looks like nobody's been maintaining this for a while but I'll chime in anyway.

The naming of the article is definitely not appropriate. Granted the meaning of the term "Africa" has changed but I think Wikipedia should default to the modern meanings of things unless there is a specific reason not to (and then it should be clear). "North Africa" obviously refers to a lot more than what is discussed here. A better name might be Central North Africa during the Classical Period.

Frankly, I'm not sure this article is really appropriate anyway. It certainly has an overlap with Africa Province (which is what Roman Africa should be redirecting to; I don't understand why it is redirecting here). It also has overlap with Carthage. The only part of this that is not necessarily well covered is the Vandal/Byzantine period. I would propose that this article be done away with replaced by one or two articles on the Vandal/Byzantine period of "Africa" (the Eastern Romans still called it "Africa" so the name is appropriate in that context). Then change the History of Algeria time line to substitute this article with Carthage -> Africa Provice (should be called Roman Africa) -> Vandal/Byzantine Africa.

And I would definitely oppose renaming this article to "Roman Africa" since that is what the subject of Africa Province is.

--Mcorazao 22:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Berber vandalism

Someone is going around to every page that deals with North Africa and creating material promoting Berbers on it, claiming that the ancient writer was a Berber, etc. As a rule fake 'references' to general modern works on Algeria are given, to try to prevent people getting rid of it. This page looks as if the vandal attacked it under the Carthage section. Roger Pearse 09:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no special knowledge of what has just been said there, but could I make the following comments:

• Rather than accusing "Someone", wouldn't it be more constructive to examine the edit histories concerned to find out who it is? and whether it's one person or several? If it's one or more persons with wikipedia logins, you can take the matter up on their talk pages. Only if it's a bare IP address is it reasonable to go straight to an accusation of vandalism.
• When you speak of "fake" references, do you mean references to documents which simply don't exist in that form, or genuine references which you don't regard as WP:RS? Only in the former case is the word "fake" justified.

I stress that I have no special knowledge of this situation, but I've seen cases which strike me as analogous, and shooting from the hip leads to edit warring and bad feeling, where a gentler approach can lead to sensible discussion and even consensus. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Roger Pearse removed the following source (quotation from encyclopedia Americana) in many article (Augustine, Apuleius, ... ): "Berbers : ... The best known of them were the Roman author Apuleius, the Roman emperor Septimius Severus, and St. Augustine, whose mother was a Berber". However, even if you dont have access to Encyclopedia Americana, it is very easy to check that the source is perfectly valid. Just type between quotations marks "Augustine, whose mother was a Berber" in Google books and you will find it in page 569, v.3... So Roger Pears is the vandal...--Frenchman17 (talk) 18:44, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

undone merger, cleanup

I know these pages get a lot of naive "Berber-promoting" material. This is a problem. The solution is to watch the pages, revert poor edits, and perhaps even constructively work on improving them. It is not a solution to just scrap them.

This is a sub-article of History of North Africa. Merging the page into History of Africa(!) is about as ill-advised as it gets. If anything, the History of Africa page needs to be slimmed down to a clean WP:SS format, but it certainly doesn't need added bloat from merges, especially merges from pages that are shut down because they have been vandalised. --dab (𒁳) 16:35, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

You did not undo any merge at all, you simply created tons of duplication, which was the problem I fixed in the first place. If you're gonna put a bunch of content here, then you need to drastically shrink what's in History of Africa and add a main article link ({{main|North Africa during Antiquity}}). If this doesn't happen, I will redo the merge to not have duplicate material. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 19:06, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

true, I have not "undone the merge", I have written an actual article about North Africa during Classical Antiquity. The fact that History of Africa is a festering sore of content duplication all across the board (not just regarding North Africa, and not just regarding Classical Antiquity) is far beyond my present scope of involvement. --dab (𒁳) 20:09, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm willing to pull stuff from History of Africa into here, but I'd like some clarification as to your vision for this article. You seem to only include the late periods of Ancient Egypt, while the rest of its history is missing. Why is that? It appears that you're focused on classical antiquity, but the article title doesn't seem to indicate that. Perhaps it would make more sense to move this to be Ancient North Africa so that all of Egypt can be included? Or would such a move be necessary? D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on North Africa during Antiquity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130115052428/http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/dztoc.html to http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/dztoc.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:15, 9 December 2017 (UTC)