User talk:R Prazeres

Friendly Connection: MadRoyalist

Hi R Prazeres, I want to thank you for your constructive advice on the page Sultan. If there is any way, I can assist, please let me know. Cheers!--MadRoyalist (talk) 17:05, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi MadRoyalist, I'm glad it was a little instructive. I actually did have a follow-up question, but I didn't have more time earlier:

Could you clarify the details of the single source you cited, "Buyers in Royal Ark; Afghanistan, Section: Glossary"? Is it a book, article, web resource? Who wrote it? Etc. In short, the citation should have more details to make it easier for the average reader to track down and determine if it's a reliable source that does indeed verify the information.

Some other comments, if helpful:

• If you're not already in the habit of using them, try to use the regular citation templates (there are shortcuts to them in both the source and visual editor interfaces). These will show you most of the information you should aim to fill in and makes things easier for both you and other editors/readers.
• You should include citations to supporting sources after each paragraph or each major piece of information you add, even if it's just repeating the same source. So in this edit, for example, if all the information is from the same source, just repeat the citation after each paragraph in the bullet list. That eliminates any ambiguity in determining the supporting source.

I still think the content you added doesn't belong on the Sultan article for structural reasons (i.e. keeping the article balanced and making good use of overview articles versus specific topic articles), but I hope you can implement these recommendations elsewhere, where applicable. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @R Prazeres, Thanks for replying. Actually this is from a project of a quiet well known royal genealogist who saved his research in a website (here). This glossary (here) enumerates the titles, mentioning an interesting and exotic signification to the title Sultan.

I am used to the following template of citation:

"(Author) in (work), (page/chapter)"

I definitely agree to your point of view of the structure of the Sultan article as it really makes sense, so thus again thanks. You know what, how about making up an article called "Sultan (Afghanistan)"? Looking forward to your feedback. MadRoyalist (talk) 08:05, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

If your material relates to the Kingdom of Afghanistan specifically, then my suggestion would be to include it there first in a new section. That article is also linked in the Sultan article (in the list section, Southern Asia), so readers interested in a particular tradition should be able to navigate to the right place pretty easily. It could be a separate article in the future, but that's usually more appropriate if the topic is too large to fit elsewhere and if it has many reliable sources.

As for the Buyers source, I'm not sure if it strictly qualifies as a reliable source per Wikipedia:Reliable sources (e.g. has any of his work been published by independent publishers?), but I think that'll be for other interested editors to judge in the future, as this isn't my specialty.

In any case, for the citation format, use Template:Cite web, which will automatically generate the standard format for Wikipedia. When you edit, you should see in the editing toolbar an option for "cite", where you can find different templates, including this one. (There's a rough guide for this at Help:Referencing for beginners; if you're using the visual editor the interface will look a little different but it's the same principles.) Among other parameters, the template includes a spot for the url, which allows you to link directly to the relevant page and makes it easy for everyone else to consult the source directly.

For example, the inline citation could look something like this:

Hope that helps, R Prazeres (talk) 09:12, 10 April 2023 (UTC) R Prazeres (talk) 09:12, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

References

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. L2212 (talk) 19:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Might be up your street

I noticed that there was no twin towers (architecture) page, so I created one, but it's just a stub. It occurs to me that through all your architectural meanderings you might have some significant latent knowledge to impart on the subject. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:15, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

I saw this when you posted it but completely forgot to reply! I don't have time to work on it right now but I'll leave some notes on the talk page there. Thanks for the notice, R Prazeres (talk) 17:22, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Edit request

I want you to look into the article Islamic geometric pattern. The article says nothing about uniqueness of Islamic geometric pattern and what makes it distinct from the geometric patterns of other cultures and civilisations. You have knowledge on art amd architecture and have access to journals and books. I hope you'll improve the article. Thank you! Hu741f4 (talk) 16:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Hu741f4, thanks for your message and your suggestion. I have a lot of other stuff to work on, so I can't promise I'll be able to add anything to Islamic geometric patterns, but if I come across any useful reference material, I'll keep this in mind! R Prazeres (talk) 16:40, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Template:Fes

Look, I don't want an edit war with you, especially over something that is clearly your work, so I'm just going to drop this. However, I would like to note that according to this section, it's preferable to have an actual links to the pages rather than redirects when it comes to navigational templates. 2600:8800:590E:BB00:ECF6:B318:2311:B80D (talk) 06:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for pointing that out, I was thinking of the general policy and missed that detail. You're right, it leads to a circular link when the template appears at Fez, Morocco, so it's better to use the direct link. I'll change it right now. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 07:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

ANI notice

I've started a report at ANI re: book spamming [1] that may be of interest. Cheers, 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:29, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, thanks. I'll leave a note there too. R Prazeres (talk) 03:52, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Saadian Tombs

Hi, I made an account. Can you please explain to me why the image I added of the tombs is not better in terms of quality than the current image? Because as I see it, the image currently used is dimly lit and far inferior in calibre than the one I added. Thanks. Hamamat32 (talk) 23:56, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

The image you added is clearly of much lower resolution and is discoloured or filtered. The current image is probably the highest quality image available and shows the most significant room in the entire complex, so it should remain. R Prazeres (talk) 00:03, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Actually you're right, it is filtered, so never mind. But while we're at it, do you happen to know what the other photo (the one that's not a loggia) is? And is it okay if I add it? Hamamat32 (talk) 00:09, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

It's just a decorative niche along the outer wall of the garden, to the east of the eastern mausoleum. It's not really of any significance as far as I know, but I see no harm in adding it after one of the present images (maybe after the image in the "The eastern mausoleum" section, since that's close to where the niche is located). R Prazeres (talk) 00:18, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Just did, thanks again! Hamamat32 (talk) 00:30, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I placed the first image from the of the tombs article in Marrakech and cropped it a bit, I hope that's okay. Hamamat32 (talk) 22:28, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Yup, that looks good! R Prazeres (talk) 00:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Zawiya Dila'iya

Hello, first I want to thank you for recognising my contributions to the article. On the "Succeeded by" section, I believe having the Alaouite Sultanate (Morocco) as the successor state would be more logical than it being the 'Alawi dynasty; this would be read as if the Zawiya got integrated into the dynasty (family) rather than getting annexed by the state, which is the case.

I would like for you to reconsider it that way until an article for the histroy of Morocco (1666-1912) is made to clarify such confusion. Thanks. StaticOasis (talk) 22:27, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I understand the logic, but I think that's a technical point that readers won't actually be thinking about. The purpose here (in my opinion) is to direct readers to the article that covers the next political regime or period after this, and the 'Alawi dynasty is how references refer to that, so this is following the example of reliable sources. The 'Alawi dynasty article was also written with this in mind. Directing them simply to Morocco isn't very informative and arguably misleading, because there were other historical stages (namely the Protectorate of course) between then and the modern Kingdom of Morocco.

If the word "dynasty" is really all that's confusing, we could easily make an "'Alawi Sultanate" redirect page in the meantime and insert that instead. I do indeed think that in the future we need an article about the pre-colonial 'Alawi sultanate, rather just one for the dynasty generally, so I think any discussion about that would be welcome on the talk page there. R Prazeres (talk) 22:47, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Your view does make sense. I agree that creating a pre-colonial 'Alawi Sultanate would be the best solution to such a concern. Thanks again. StaticOasis (talk) 12:33, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Tagging pages for deletion

Hello, R Prazeres,

I think you'll find it easier to tag pages for all types of deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/RFD/MFD/etc.) if you start using Twinkle. Twinkle is a very useful editing tool that helps in so many ways, reporting vandals to noticeboards, posting welcome and warning notices on user talk pages, placing tags on articles and especially tagging pages for deletion. It remembers all the templates you might need to use so you don't have to memorize them or go looking for them when you need them. So, for example, if you find a page that should be deleted as a CSD G5, as the work of a block-evading editor, that option, along with other possibilities, will be presented to you, along with a field that prompts you to name the sockmaster (in this case, User:Samira819). Most page patrollers and a lot of admins work with Twinkle and I think if you try it out, you'll find it to be helpful and very user-friendly. Thank you for considering my suggestion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:05, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the tip! (I had installed Twinkle, but it didn't occur to me to explore this functionality; I won't underestimate it in the future!) R Prazeres (talk) 20:31, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Emblem

I'm not sure if you noticed, but this edit of mine was caught in the revert. I believe that the Nasrid route is worth mentioning (regardless of the possible COI). What do you think? M.Bitton (talk) 16:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry I missed that, I figured the other edits were just trying to clean up what the new editor was doing, and the shuffling-around of sources wasn't helping to sort out what was intended to be attributed to what. It is indeed worth mentioning, it just isn't mentioned in Bennison's chapter, the "Maroc Médiéval" source itself doesn't seem to state that hypothesis clearly either (from a quick read), and I can't access Ali-de-Unzaga's publications. The only snippet I can see online of the latter seems to refer to other authors in turn on this point ([2], see footnote), so I was able to track those down and I was going to add it now with citations to those instead, assuming that works too. Feel free to follow up. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 17:17, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I thought as much. I used this source, in which Miriam argues that we can't be sure whether the emblem is of Marinid or Nasrid origin. Since this source supersedes her earlier paper (from 2003 I think) that was used by Bennison, it makes no sense to keep referring to the old one. I suggest attributing the new argument to her (similar to what I did) and maybe either remove Bennison's source or attribute her own conclusions to it. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 13:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, that sounds good to me. After rereading the source more fully, the issue is indeed presented clearly there, and it's also what Miriam seems to be insisting on at their user talk page. I'll make an edit and reword it shortly, and as always feel free to revise. R Prazeres (talk) 14:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, your edit looks good. I have removed a redundant sentence and replaced "further studies" with "recent studies" (apparently, the Nasrid theory goes back to the 19th century). Feel free to revise as you see fit. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 15:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

archiving

Hey, R Prazeres! It's helpful to other editors if you set up archiving of this page. You can find a simple method at Help:Archiving (plain and simple) Valereee (talk) 17:18, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion! I'll set that up when I get a moment. R Prazeres (talk) 17:21, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Your eyes...

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#not neutral Nationalist Lourdes 05:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Akane Yamaguchi

Hello. Help improvements and copy edit. Thanks you. 2402:800:6344:6610:E9CA:3119:3C88:9387 (talk) 05:27, 12 July 2023 (UTC)