Talk:Regency of Algiers

should have articles but don't

• Imad Al-Din Doukkali
• Djenina Palace Elinruby (talk) 01:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
• ben Gana family mentioned in Tribal aristocracy section
• ibn Zahhar Elinruby (talk) 03:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

PR

Latest PR work completed. scope_creep^Talk 11:02, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the great work scope, for the images i'll let Elin take care of it, she's been working on them for a while now. Nourerrahmane (talk) 10:11, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Banner of the Dey image

I nominated the edited version that was in the article for speedy deletion. As far as I can tell, it has been taken out already. Is that right? Because apparently the sourcing doesn't meet FA standards, as I understand it.

Could we please check the sourcing on the images please before any more work goes into cropping them or tweaking them or moving them around any more? Thanks. In particular I was wondering about authors like "School of Antwerp" -- I gather the reliability is from the museum? So anonymity doesn't matter? But something was said about auction sites -- you mean like Sotheby's? Elinruby (talk) 15:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Don't use any current image that come from an auction site. They are taken on the day for the catalogue, so are current and still under copyright. They are entirely unsuitable for Wikipedia. This is the Antwerp school. If its from a museum they are known for ensuring provenance. scope_creep^Talk 15:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

OK so I am just saying, at least some of our images come from Sotheby's. This is a high-end auctioneer, yes? Elinruby (talk) 16:15, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

As for Antwerp School, I have it linked in the caption; I just wanted to confirm that anonymous works are ok if they are on a museum website? Elinruby (talk) 16:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: What images from Sotheby? scope_creep^Talk 16:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I see what you mean. That first one I came across is from Bonhams. Definently in the public domain. Each image uploaded is checked for pd by the image team, when the tag says its pd, set when uploaded, so I'm assuming its ok. For anon works I don't know. I would assume its ok if the tag is pd. We could ask MarchJuly? scope_creep^Talk 17:13, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I am just saying that if we have any more problems with sources of images it would be good to find out now, before a whole lot of image editing gets done. Elinruby (talk) 18:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep: did you ever ask MarchJuly? I am also of the opinion that we can assume that a holding of the British Museum is attested to. Just not sure about seaside pirate museums and the like. And I also think that the article has too many pictures of sea battles, but Nourerrahmane likes naval battles, and it is certainly true that this is a significant theme in the history. In other words it is not really the case that we desperately need the two paintings attributed to schools, and as far as I am concerned this is academic and I just want to know how many images I am trying to fix the layout for in the section. They are both in a multiimage template so it is not a showstopper. Elinruby (talk) 09:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Not at the time. Nour left a message saying you were doing the images. I would assume if they come from the British Museum they are good. If the image is taken by a private individual at a auction for example, the source attribution is valid and there is a valid PD tag, then it will be good to use. If the source attribution is missing or damaged, and can't be traced back then I'd say remove remove it. There are looking for completeness and correctness of process as well as suitability of the image within the paragraph context. I've seen images taken out in the past, because the subject is only tangenitally linked. It may be a case that the image is what you would consider perfect, but for various reasons, new folk reading the text, they want something different, so its hard to tell. On the naval battles, if the context mentions it, then it may be suitable, but certainly if there is too many of them, it will get some of them pulled, certainly. Its not a naval battle article. Only if the battle was particularly special, i.e. a turning point in history, a major figured ransomed, a change in government or leader, major economic, military or political change would you want to see them. Certainly a 1 to several at the beginning of the article, even a series, because it was pirate civilization. There is dozens to hundreds of naval battles not mentioned so that is the core context, but not overkill. Balance is needed. scope_creep^Talk 17:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

• not sure what he meant by "doing" the images". The part that I just now said was done was trying to get to a reasonable layout from the last image shuffle One issue *I* have is that I would like the image of a man on a horse in the tribal aristocracy section to be about 50% bigger.
• You did not answer the question about whether your issue with the legend of the map his fixed Elinruby (talk) 05:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

small detail

Olivier Bro de Comères (1813–1870) should have an article, first of all, and the captions of those two images right next to each other should not contradict one another Elinruby (talk) 18:55, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• De Comères family: I think there was a batch of images in the architecture section taken on a Wiki Loves Manuments photowalk from one of their private homes. A museum now? But it would be worth having a little bio stub to link to. There are also several French writers just after the occupation. What should we write? I think at least two of them were semi-famous, no? Elinruby (talk) 09:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
• extensive article at Louis Bro the grandfather, a military official, many linked articles at French Wikipedia. It defies summary really Elinruby (talk) 13:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Apart from ce, are there more issues that need to be adressed ? Nourerrahmane (talk) 17:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Got this File:Divan members of Algiers.jpg, a chaouch, a private and a grand divan members from a German book. Nourerrahmane (talk) 01:34, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

A description of them was given in this book of Georges Marçais. p 63 [1] Nourerrahmane (talk) 01:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Found additional sources on arts and crafts :

[2]: Art Antique et Art Musulman en Algérie par A. BERQUE

[3]: L'art en Algérie de Georges Marçais Nourerrahmane (talk) 21:37, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

ok so this is the reference for the German book? Elinruby (talk) 13:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby you speak of the Divan members image ? this is the link for commons where you can find the ref for the german book. Nourerrahmane (talk) 09:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

The Bro de Comères images were both removed because they were from auction sites. I looked at the Marçais book on Google Books but I am having trouble getting anything out of snippet view. Which is ironic; considering how Old it is it can't possibly be under copyright Elinruby (talk) 00:22, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

• also: Georges Marçais certainly seems like a notable artist. Elinruby (talk)
• Berque source also good, contains discussion of water supply systems with for Roman baths. Elinruby (talk) 22:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

thinking of using this in the Diwan section, or perhaps reordering the images in the Crafts section, Needs straightening and maybe cropping Elinruby (talk) 12:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

re the lede

We also fail to mention Baba Uthman Mohammed in the lede. Does any have an objection to making the part about the wars a compound sentence along with the long period of prosperity? Please nobody rewrite anything in the lede. But taking wording suggestions here.

References

Y has been added Elinruby (talk) 12:42, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Lede is done except for just one question

Per the above I added Baba Mohammed to the infobox and lede. I made some other minor changes also. The question relates to holy war. The question is whether "European powers" should be rewritten to say "European nations and other powers such as the Vatican and Knights of Malta"? Do we talk enough about the Knights of Malta Elinruby (talk) 13:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

So thats where Knights Hospitaller ended up. Read a book about this castle designer who spent I think 40 years fortyfying their castle on Rhodes. The ingenuity of the man for killing was unbelievable. The Vatican is a nation and during that period was extremely powerful, like now and was present. I wouldn't seperate it out. scope_creep^Talk 17:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC) Ok but the Knights of Malta were not, and there is actually a whole theme about holy war that used to be overemphasized and now seems to be gone altogether. I think that the point that Algiers was not the only entity that felts that there was holy war to be waged is kind of important. I think may be a short sentence should go in there, or another clause in the sentence about holy war. Apart from maybe that, are we missing anything else important thought? The constitution maybe? Elinruby (talk) 21:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

I think we did a bit of comparison between the Maltese knights and Algiers in the political status section. Do you want an emphasis on how both entities understood and implemented the concept of Holy war ? Nourerrahmane (talk) 16:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Maybe I am overestimating the extent to which the idea of holy war is shocking to an English speaker. I simply think that if the lede is going to discuss holy war it should do so in a balanced way, and there were multiple military forces waging holy war at the time, no? On the other hand, it *is* the lede and the main place we get into that in the article is with the knights of Malta, right? So I was thinking about half a sentence, maybe saying that the Regency joyfully participated in the international religious wars of the period, that would do it. Open to suggestions.

Also: shouldn't Ali Bitchin be in the lede maybe? Elinruby (talk) 11:21, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

crickets Elinruby (talk) 12:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

With respect to layout

I think I have gotten away from the problem we had in a couple of places of a multiimage template at the bottom of e section being right on top of a multiimage template at the top of the next section. Does anyone have any issues with the current image layout? I am not asking about particular images right now, or alts or captions, oe anything but whether there are problems with images overlapping or whatever anywhere in the article.

Comment? Remember we are being told that single images go to the right and multiimage templates get centered. Elinruby (talk) 21:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Y i think this is over Elinruby (talk) 13:13, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

no more complaints about how long this is taking until y'all start answering these y/n "is this done" questions

• Tonight I am going to try to do something with the images at History of the Regency of Algiers, which are pretty random. If I have time I will try to finish the 17th century in this article Elinruby (talk)

• Speaking of: Is anyone looking at the infobox?

I also noticed that although Titteri is listed the Kingdom of Kuku is not, and wasn't Kuku at least an ally at one point? What's the scope of that list? places that were at some point occupied by Algiers? Dramatis Personae?. Same question applies to the rules and deputies fields. We're definitely not including everything there, can someone check what we are including or not? I know they were going through deys fast at one point, but shouldn't we at least try to get the important ones in. And given the scope of that deputies probably should at most include people like Salah Reis and Simon Danza.

• Is everyone happy with the map in the infobox Y/N

• No. Still not keen on it, because of the missing components and labels that actually make it a map. Its missing even the basic map scale bar. The reader can't even how big it is, for example. Take a look at [4]. The minimum is 6 components, generally for a map. Its needs the scale bar added, and the oceans/sea and other countries labelled at the minumum. scope_creep^Talk 15:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Y *Is the concern about insufficient attention to sea power in the lede addressed? Y/N

Y *What year was it when an onion was worth more than a slave? Did that get taken out? Y/N

• Yes but its in the history article I looked at the source. It states, at that point in the time, the onion was more valuable than the slave and no other information provided. It is essentially valid. Ignore this please. scope_creep^Talk 15:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

If it's in the history article it's all good Elinruby (talk) 14:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• Should the Knights of Malta be mentioned in the lede in the context of holy war? Y/N

• No. Nour says they should they should be of the body, which is correct. But they are European Powers by definition, i.e. the crusades, or the end of the crusades but only here in relation to the song. And only mentioned tangenitally in relation in a minor in history. So no in both articles. scope_creep^Talk 15:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

• Does our expected audience understand privateers? Y/N

• Yes, because it is linking privateers in the lede. It can't be clearer. A quick search of privateers turns up the definition at US Naval Institute Naval History Command which links back to the privateer article. Ignore this please. scope_creep^Talk 15:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Y *Baba Mohammed has been added to lede and infobox OK? Y/N

• Yes. He was a Dey and in-charge of the government so perfectly reasonable to be in the infobox. scope_creep^Talk 15:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

• mentioning influx to Melilla from Grenada as intro to presidios makes sense Y/N Elinruby (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  - Oh alright, the image changes seemed a bit strange for me in that article

  - Infobox looks good for me

  - Lede: Another ce maybe needed there, also we may need to add a word that links the political stabilty of Algiers with the propserity of Algiers under Muhammad ben Osman.

  - Yes it's been adressed

  - Not necessarly, this should be adressed in the body.

  - I beleive yes...I think Panzac's quote in the Foreign relations section makes it clear enough.

  - Yes

  - Yes, post-Reconquista period is important to understand the foundation of the Regency

  Speaking of Kuku, it was Allied with Arouj, enemy with Hayredd in, enemy with Hasan Agha, Allied with Hasan Pasha, Salah Rais, and the rest of the Beylerbeys. Kuku was important during the Barbarossa period and was mentionned during Algerian campaigns against Morocco. Nourerrahmane (talk) 14:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC) the

It seems like some items might be missing because I can't quite find the answer about an onion. I agree about Baba Mohammed and will try to make that happen. I am otherwise hearing that Nourerrahmane is happy with the lede and thinks we should leave Knights of Malta to the body, which was the other outstanding question about the lede. I am a bit confused about the answer about Kuku -- ok, they were allies and enemies at different times, ok. Would this not make them at least as important as Titteri? I have absolutely no dog in this fight, as they say, however. I am just the annoying editor who keeps asking questions. If someone can explain to me in ten words or less why Titteri is in the infobox but kuku is not then I will be delighted to move on. Elinruby (talk) 05:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Kuku officially ended in the early 17th century due to an Algerian expedition and internal squabbling among local leaders of Kuku.

Titeri is in the infobox because its governor organised a local resistance against the French army after the city of Algiers fell in 1830. Nourerrahmane (talk) 06:37, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, you explained it. The explanation doesn't make any sense, but I will take that as a request to move on for now. We can come back to the infobox later Elinruby (talk) 11:30, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

still pending. The reason I said that the explanation made no sense is that to my mind existing at the Regency's creation makes it a predecessor but I am sure what the stuff N said would make Titteri. Infobox needs to reviewed shall we say. Also, do we really need two flags? Check sourcing but N. Has a list, just not sure if he added any of it to the infobox or the flag article. Elinruby (talk) 10:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Auction sites

Is this a case in point? File:Bombardement of Algiers 1784.webp

We are also still using the file from Sotheby's Elinruby (talk) 23:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Take it out. It will be a potential fail. scope_creep^Talk 15:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

The one above is gone. I will go find the Sotheby's one. 04:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Sotheby's image located and removed Y Elinruby (talk) 10:31, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

might be an anthology

removed but preserving link to famous atlas, may just be a bibilographic mislabelling (see also talk page at history of the regency of Algiers) [[File:Atlas Van der Hagen-KW1049B13 058-The City of ALGIER.jpeg|alt=Ships at harbor before a walled and built-up city ascending a steep hill behind a citadel at the water's edge|thumb|City of Algiers, 17th century]] Elinruby (talk) 05:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Image properties

@Elinruby: I've updated the British English caption property on File:Barbarijse galeien Barbarijsche Galeijen (titel op object), RP-P-1896-A-19368-451.jpg since it was all in Dutch. I'm wondering if we need to do all of them. scope_creep^Talk 14:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I have been through this several times now and am pretty sure all captions are in English. I do have a haunting feeling I left off an alt somewhere though. Elinruby (talk) 14:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Few image suggestions:

• Barbary wars section : The battle off Cape gata between Algiers and the U.S. File:The American Fleet Defeating Rais Hamdu off Cape Gata MET DP-19637-001.jpg

Adding. Placecement may change Elinruby (talk) 01:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

• 17th century: City of Algiers File:La cite le port et le mole d Alger.jpg

Adding. Don't really like the placement but it is easier to add, then rearrange Elinruby (talk) 11:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Y done Elinruby (talk) 11:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

• Society section: Map about the state of the tribes in the regency: File:Central maghreb under ottoman suzerainty.png

I like this image a lot but the uploader did not include the legend. I can fix this but not on this device. Elinruby (talk) 11:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

never mind, it was off the edge of the screen. Tribal aristocracy section can use this Elinruby (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Added Y Elinruby (talk) 01:59, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

• Economy section: Jewish man from Algeria File:Ein Allgierischer Jud.png

Why do we need an image of a Jewish man at all? Please explain this. Elinruby (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

• Political status section: Barbarossa's flag File:Flag of the Barbarossa brothers Oruç and Hayreddin.jpg

Visually I like this image a lot better than the one in the museum and wonder why I haven't seen it sooner. However, I need a reference for it or something. If I can find the image from the museum that is probably enough. Elinruby (talk) 11:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I found the photo of it in the museum and am convinced. Still think we should attribution though. I can probably do this. Elinruby (talk) 08:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

• I suggest we remove one the two images in the Education section and the tiled wall in the architecture section and i'm unsure, i also beleive we have too many barbarossa images. Nourerrahmane (talk) 17:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Education and titled wall is done. Barbarossa to be evaluated once images settle down Elinruby (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

• This map corresponds perfectly to the Maghrebi wars section File:Map of the Barbary states in 1707.jpg

I added this Elinruby (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Y done Elinruby (talk) 11:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

• Better quality image of the Franco Algerian war (death of père levacher) File:Tijdens het Franse bombardement op Algiers wordt de Franse consul door de Algerijnen in een kanon geladen en gedood, 16, RP-P-1896-A-19368-1522.jpg

This image is in History of the Regency of Algiers. Better quality sounds fine. Elinruby (talk) 11:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC) Will switch. Elinruby (talk) 11:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

This is done. I swapped the better image in. Elinruby (talk) 14:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• Another one File:Dictionnaire Décembre Alonnier-II-002.jpg

This is done but I have reservations about source date

• Spanish Algerian war File:Plan de la baie d alger situee sur la cote d afrique expedition barcelo 1783.jpg Nourerrahmane (talk) 18:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Source link is a 404 error and I am not sure what it is to begin with Elinruby (talk) 11:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

• How about this, shows a spanish attack on Algiers in 1784 from this museum. [5] Nourerrahmane (talk) 09:49, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

• Beylerbey period: A more suitable picture showing berlerbey Uluç Ali marching on Tunis in 1569. File:The Ottoman Army Marching On The City Of Tunis In 1569 Ce.jpg

this image's source link is a 404 Elinruby (talk) 16:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC) Will check on phone. Elinruby (talk) 08:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

• Algerian expansion: A barbary galley engaging a Spanish galleon File:Spanish engagement with Barbary pirates RMG BHC0747.tiff Nourerrahmane (talk) 10:30, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby The treaty of 1662 image was taken from an official Algerian ministry website, how can this fail FA ? Nourerrahmane (talk) 10:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I am willing to believe that it originally came from a government website. However on my phone at least gloriousalgeria.dz looks like it scraped the official website.... This is discussable and could be solved with a better link. Same thing with "North West University". Elinruby (talk) 10:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Nour, see below about the copyright notice on the webpage. Elinruby (talk) 08:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I see your suggestions but haven't looked at them. Obviously we will need another reshuffle. But for the sake of my sanity let me finish something here. I want to be confident the images we are using are all from good sources. I am annotating captions about the sources for keeping track. Once I am done we can trim the captions back if that seems like a good idea Elinruby (talk) 11:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

PS: Glorious Algeria looks like a much more serious website on the laptop btw, and I can see why it might not load on the phone. So this is a government agency? What I was looking at was just some social media sharing buttons pretty much. Elinruby (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Scope creep Captions in English would be good. This should actually be true of most if not all of them though, if you want to check. Did I add an alt? I had to move stuff around to make a place for it. You happy with that part::Too hot, slept all day. Big push on a little while to finish Elinruby (talk) 06:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC) what's the official English name of that government agency? Elinruby (talk) 12:44, 24 July 2024 (UTC) @Nourerrahmane:

It's the Ministry of Mujahideen and Rights Holders Nourerrahmane (talk) 13:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Is that something like the Armed Forces? Elinruby (talk) 13:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

the above question remains unanswered. Elinruby (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Map of the Mediterranean.png has no source provided. This is because we are using a version I cropped and uploaded - note to self to go get provenance from original file. Elinruby (talk) 13:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

After the Dance, same thing. The other Bro de Comeres is from an auction site. 14:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

After the Dance was also from an auction site. Elinruby (talk) 11:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

@Nourerrahmane: Mohamed Racim.jpg what is up with the copyright on this? Sourcing just says Mohamed Racim. Did he personally give it to you or what? When was this painted? Elinruby (talk) 14:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Salahedine ben Naoum,history researcher <-- is this a good image source? Also Geographicus describes itself as a "dealer" <-- is that the same thing as an auction site? Elinruby (talk) 14:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I will look at image suggestions next. If we could stop converting back to File syntax from multiimage without discussion that would be great; also those black and while paintings are called "etchings". I think I have verified most if not all of the the image sources for the images that were in the article Elinruby (talk) 15:25, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Image suggestions look good; I am going to hike out for caffeine then spend a couple of hours adding/rearranging before I have to leave again. Hopefully to finish tonight. There remains the source verification. Yes really. Issues with "what is a quote" are a PROBLEM. If I can. tonight. If not, as soon as it seems preferable to gouging my eyes out. There are some other items on that to-do list that are not addressed yet, A sentence on Baba Mohammed among them. This question remains unanswered Salahedine ben Naoum,history researcher <-- is this a good image source? Also Geographicus describes itself as a "dealer" <-- is that the same thing as an auction site? Elinruby (talk) 14:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC) and if it does not get answered I will simply replace those images also Elinruby (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

On Geographicus no. They donated their whole collection of images to Wikipedia in March 2011 so is perfectly fine. Can't locate the other image. scope_creep^Talk 08:04, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

On the miniature Mohamed Racim.jpg. Well used and well-liked image on tumbler, reddit, facebook. There is a CC 4.0 sharealike licence, so is licenced correctly. Its ok. scope_creep^Talk 08:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Although in saying that. It is a 1972 image, I can't see how it it would be licenced like that. Need further explanation. scope_creep^Talk 08:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

I removed the Racim image as there is no indication that it meets the copyright requirements Y Elinruby (talk) 11:47, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Thank you for tracking down Geographicus. The other image is an image of a treaty near the end of an article. In the Roman alphabet. Sorry for flaking yesterday; there are no wildfires within 50 miles of here but it is the height of wildfire season and I guess the windy overcast weather blew some smoke this way. Sinuses were screaming and the medication I took for that put me to sleep. All is well now however, skies are blue and I feel fine. Need to do a couple of things today but this is top of my list on wikipedia still and very near the top of the overall list. Just checking messages right now. Geographicus map stays in then, got it. Elinruby (talk) 20:56, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Morning @Elinruby: Curiously my mate in Groveland, California was talking about that yesterday. He is a director the HOA,HBA or something, the housing association for the housing estate he's on, for a couple years and he's talking about how they fined this dude because he had dead tree in his garden and refused to remove it, and they were running scared. This was happening over months. So they fined him, eye watering and got the crane and forcefully removed it. Strange times. I couldn't find that image re: Roman alphabet?? We need to add the detailed galley image that Nour found re: above and the after image when they moved to ocean going ships, to show the contrast. Don't if they are in. scope_creep^Talk 07:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I weeded the History article earlier then took a break. Working my way up to adding new images and re-doing the layout, since now we have single images in Multiimage format and various other layout problems. Kind of upsetting -- I spent days on editing some of the images that have copyright problems, but there you go. Should have checked this myself. I want to finish the last 5-6 pages of the novel I am reading then will start on this article again. Re your mate: I can see why. Look up the Paradise Fire. Up here we have had at least one catastrophic fire -- I am not sure how the nearby fire in Spence's Bridge is doing as all the news coverage is currently about the devastation in Jasper, a famous and beloved resort town noted for stunning Rocky Mountain scenery. That one is on the other side of several mountain ranges and no threat, and even the kinda-close one would have to find a way to burn a path around a long rocky and treeless canyon to threaten more than the air quality here. But all that could change with one thunderstorm. Welcome to climate change. There is now a wildfire season on the the entire west coast of North America.

Answering a question from above: I removed the treaty image at the History article also, after taking another look. I did not find it on the website, but more important, all subpages of the website of the Ministry of Mujahadeen and Rights Holders that I looked at had a copyright notice at the bottom saying that all rights were reserved. Theoretically a photo of an official historic document like a treaty would be exempt, but what do I know about Algerian copyright law? It needn't necessarily follow British/US patterns. That one is in Arabic, which is why I specified that the other one I was questioning used the Roman alphabet. I questioned it because it is attributed to a "researcher", which is not in the same class as the Prado, but might be ok if he is well-known, I guess. I will find it and put the file name right here when I come back, but the question is in green above. Back soon. All is well, just taking a short break. Elinruby (talk) 07:47, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Yea, Coolio. If you see any copyright notice, forget the image. For each image, even if its before the 1924 cut-off date, i.e. PD, its a whole lot of work to prove it. A whole lot. scope_creep^Talk 11:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah I see I did not supply a file name, just the source. Not sure. I will probably find it again as I am working, and let you know. You're right, it doesn't seem to be the remaining treaty image. If you are looking for ways to help, there are some questions on the talk page of the History article, and I definitely gave the file name for those. Warming up the mental engine. Elinruby (talk) 08:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Made some headway. Feeling kind of discouraged right now, like my time is not being respected and/or N is just not reading the policy or people telling him about the policy. The new images need to be from reputable, verifiable sources. And free of copyright. OK? Much better overall tho, maybe I am just tired. I will be back, but I need a break again. @Scope creep: I get the concept of the change in ship technology. Looked for the image you wanted me to add. I am all for it. Will be first thing I do when I come back. Elinruby (talk) 11:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: I just read up on the history article talk. We were talking about the two before and after galley/ship on there. I don't know if the before/after needs to go on here or on the history article. I think the original galley image was on here, right at the top, mid image in that first block, but has been replaced with something. They should probably go here since this is the core of privateering, but where is the question? scope_creep^Talk 11:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Got that wrong. The first galley image was in the history article, between Barbarossa and his brother. So the before/after should go in there, somewhere. scope_creep^Talk 11:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Scope creep do not understand the above. My understanding is that since the switch from galleys to sailed ship was so pivotal, the idea is to put a galley and a sailed ship together to illustrate the change, is that right? So far the galley is in but I do not guarantee it is in the "right" place. There is an etching of ships with sails but it isn't from the same period at all. Working on this in little short bursts. Trying to be verbose with the updates tho. Elinruby (talk) 11:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: They should be together in the same block. scope_creep^Talk 11:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

But I think the other image is from the 18th century and might be seen as irrelevant to the topic. Not sure. I am clicking around the edges of this but may not actually start work until tomorrow for mental health and logistical reasons. But I do see the concept and agree with it, not that that actually matters since you plus Nour is two out of three, which I have declared to be consensus... I will come back to this. I agree that we should do this and if necessary provide a little more text about it. I don't remember right now where the 18th century image is from (and would need to look up the admiral's name to be sure of the dating) but it is, mind you, totally fine, I remember vetting it, I am pretty sure. Good for inclusion just maybe not there. In fact, to who it may concern, it would be great if someone found an image, preferably also an engraving, of 16th or 17th century Algerine ship. Elinruby (talk) 06:34, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I added the image to the Barbary Wars section Elinruby (talk) 14:43, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Algerian autonomy section

The map of the Barbary States I just added has a caption and an alt, but I cannot currently get the caption to display. I know this is probably something with the name of the parameter, but cannot myself see the issue at the moment. Y diagnosed and fixed by Scope creep Elinruby (talk) 14:40, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Algerian copyright law

Stumbled across this

• official French version of Algerian copyright law as published in the Journal officiel.
• Haven't tried to look up the earlier question about government websites yet, but it seem potentially useful to someone. Elinruby (talk) 06:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, i'll read it. Nourerrahmane (talk) 09:47, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Peer Review closed

Per suggestion, Peer review is now closed. One step closer to FA. scope_creep^Talk 10:44, 29 July 2024 (UTC) We are getting there. Still going through new images and figuring out where to put them. I see daylight maybe. Elinruby (talk) 11:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Added images

I added few images to reflect the time period of their sections, added an image of the ship with oars fighting a spanish galleon next to the square-rigged ship image to reflect both the naval technology upagrade of Algiers and its corsair attacks on Spanish vessels in the 17th century. I also added an image of the Dutch Algerian negotiations in 1620 (if the image could be cropped that would be good) and also the image of the death of pere levacher next to the English attack on Bejaia image, as these wars resulted in change of Algerian policy. The Barbary states image was displaced to the Maghrebi wars section since it dates back to this period. If anyone here doesn't agree with these additions he can just revert them. Nourerrahmane (talk) 13:54, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Changed title from 18th century: Regional power to Decline of privateering Nourerrahmane (talk) 13:58, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Argh. Elinruby (talk) 01:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't like the the changes on multiple aesthetic grounds. I know I have been absent for about 36 hours; I have been trying to convince myself that this article is not an endless waste of time. I do not blame you for impatience. I do blame you for STILL not having absorbed that single images go to the right, and that what you created at the end of the Foreign policy intro is a GA fail. I can't even. I will review the sourcing on the new images tomorrow evening (PDT) and go from there. The caption on the Dutch envoys image isn't great either. If you want this process to go faster please start reading the talk page. I am going to go bang my head on a wall now. I know you never ever answer questions, but supposing you choose to do so, I would love to know why the header change. I was supposed to be working on a stable version, remember Elinruby (talk) 02:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I will revert it but I do like to have an opinion from @Scope creep. The only thing I got from your comment is that you don’t like them. The map of 1707 can be moved to the right and that’s it.

the sourcing of the images in fine. I have checked them. Nourerrahmane (talk) 06:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I am glad that you thought to do that unprompted. Look, I will look at that version and maybe take some from there. Or better yet, tell me specifically what you have, where you think it should go, and why. We just removed some images, it's true, but remember that we had too many, before. I thought that what we were doing with the previous list was working, but apparently not? If not, let me know and I will stop annotating what happened with each image.

I suspect that the additions are good, but as I was trying to tell you once on your talk page once, even when you are 98% completely correct that 2% can be disastrous at times, and there is a lot that can be done with the 98% that can take it from "understandable with a little determination" to "a pleasure to read". Not to brag or anything, but they tell me I am good at that and that is part of why I am here.

The other part is that I really think this is an important article. It will change some preconceptions, maybe, or at least put a little more on the record than "they were just barbarians" stuff you are mad about. Which is another reason I have hung in here. Some of the stuff the article touches on (jihad, the attitude of the French) is really sensitive and while I am not knowledgeable I have learned enough to be respectful of these topics, I think.

But I am losing my mind over this and have started dreaming about this article again.

I am trying to keep this article as dispassionate as possible though. Not altogether successfully, I admit. You and I have had some disagreements where you just removed the material, which was not what I had been suggesting.

The price of a slave vs the price of an onion is one thing I would like to put back in. Do you have a reference for that handy? If not, I can probably find it, but it is the looking for things that has been taking some time here, and this is for things that you probably know off the top of your head. Does that go in the Golden Age section?

Does the fact that you reverted mean you are done with the article? Truly done? I am serious, I am so tired of the article that I am having trouble bringing myself to finish the article. I have one more iteration in me and forget it. Interested as I am in the topic, I can't keep endlessly copy-editing it. Elinruby (talk) 00:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

In fact fuck it, submit this thing. Maybe the next GA fail will get you to listen. I am tired of edit-warring with you to get you to accept help. Elinruby (talk) 02:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby you can just undo the changes in one single click…just revert it.

Well I won’t be present this month of August I’m off to China and as you know we can’t edit in Wikipedia from there Nourerrahmane (talk) 05:58, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

@Nourerrahmane:@Elinruby: I think in this late stage, adding images outside consensus is problematic. We are trying to get to FA. When you add stuff like that, its like still active development instead of the final stages of finishing the article and getting it ready for review. I don't and we don't have an infinite period of time available to continue working on this article, tweaking it all the time. We should be in end stages. The continual tinkering destroys the finalisation process and takes us back to square one, every time. You have look at it, discuss, review, reach consenus, copyedit, all again. I have my own articles to work on, which i've been largely doing for the last three weeks, because of the previous delays that is burning up and wasting time. But its been 5-6 weeks on these images and we are still not finished. I think you should probably revert and use what we have agreed on. scope_creep^Talk 09:06, 1 August 2024 (UTC

@Nourerrahmane and Scope creep: I think Scope has verbalized my feelings quite well. And yet. These changes are usually improvements from the point of view of content. Here is my suggestion for getting this freaking done. Since we are starting over again, let's start over and get everything this time. Nour, take some time, add whatever you were thinking of with the economy sources you identified. They do look highly pertinent Tell me when you are done, completely done. The RL stuff that has been an impediment for me the past week goes away tonight, but don't consider that a deadline. Finish,and tell me when you are completely finished.

I will make ~48 hours available to copyedit. No more. I know I have quit before but this is really the last rodeo -- I am done. I am still willing to spend that much time on this (which is what I originally signed up for, months ago) but if you waste my time again no more will be available. Period. Tell me when it is ok for the time to start. Note, I am not saying 48 hours in one stretch.

Now. Since I have the attention of you both, I do need an answer to a couple of things. Most notably, the monopoly of Jewish merchants on wheat sales to France. How pertinent is it really that these merchants were Jewish? I do not question that they were -- that seems clear from sources -- but as I mentioned, although I was not involved in this, I was a party in the Holocaust in Poland Arbcom case where someone was questioned at extreme length about his thinking in creating Jew with a coin and yes, that article was highly sourced, with Polish and possibly antisemitic sources. Unless the Jewish identity is somehow important, I think we should simply remove the adjective, since as far as I can tell, the story would have been the same whether he was Jewish or not. Thoughts? Elinruby (talk) 14:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Please answer the question about Jewish merchants, thanks. Also does the constitutional document we discuss bear any relation to the current constitution Elinruby (talk) 00:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I added Spanish engagement with Barbary pirates RMG BHC0747.tiff to the 17th century section, tentatively. It could actually be in itself the illustration for both the sailed ships and the oared ships, no? Placement is tentative and image order may get flipped based on gradations of pink. I am proceeding on the basis that the issue of needing to illustrate the transition of oared ships to sailed is now taken care of. Please let me know if anyone has an issue. I am currently nibbling around the edges. I would prefer N acknowledge that he is done for now. Otherwise, please, I can do this as long as I don't have to keep starting over. I do think this is an important article. Elinruby (talk) 02:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Evening @Elinruby: Solid work. I will take a look on the Jewish term question. scope_creep^Talk 20:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Well the reference is pretty clear on it and more on it, a lot more Jews in Algeria. I would leave it in. It is clear as day in the text. There is an article History of the Jews in Algeria which may provide additional context. scope_creep^Talk 20:45, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I want to say something about can and should be on wikikedia, but it is also possible that I am just gun-shy from experiences on other articles. I will take another look, and maybe discuss some more. Meanwhile it is another hot overcast day of uncertain air quality. I actually have two air purifiers and am about to plug one in, but probably no actual work until several hours after nightfall (currently 17:14) today. By the way, there was another failed verification but it was in the manufacturing section, mostly untouched by any of us, so I am unfazed by that, but do think that I still need to go through that section with a fine-toothed comb. The stuff I did yesterday was mostly fidgeting, though I think the copyedits were good. Elinruby (talk) 00:19, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Morning @Elinruby: I know what your talking about. Baggage they call it in the uk. You can't avoid it. It stains you and changes you. For extra context on the Jewish term, the reason I added the wp article on is that it states: "Jewish merchants did well financially in late Ottoman Algiers". Its not referenced but its all there, and in well written about. On the copyedit, it may be fidgeting but it adds up. I think you mentioned the manufacturing section about 4-5 weeks ago. I never checked those sections when I was doing the ref checks. If you want to expand/change it a wee bit, while Nour is away, I can do the copyedit on it and check the refs. It would be ideal if we could get it ready before the months out. I don't think we have done baseline on it for a couple of weeks, to see exactly what is still needing done. We can maybe do this weekend. It can't much now. I don't mind spending a full a couple of weeks on including weekends, to get everything finalised. I'm just a wee bit worried that Nour has taken some reading to China and comes back with a whole bunch of new ideas of what needs changed. scope_creep^Talk'

Most of his ideas are really good as far as I can tell however... I kept (keep?) finding sentences that didn't quite make sense. Some of it is me being a little terse and cutting a bit too much wordiness when we were cutting for lenth, which I am fixing, mind you.

Random rework thoughts:

• Passive voice to active usually improves readability -- writing in bureaucratese and it's actually quite a useful skill, but I am trying for smooth colloquial english. But like I said before, there is "is grammatically correct and parses" but "weird in context". Wrong synonym chosen from dictionary. Somewhere along the line.
• I did a surface copy-edit of this article about two years ago before I ever heard of Nour and was fuming about the number of little "Expedition to x" articles on which I could find no further information. This article links them up and a lot of that work, if you look, is Nour and M.Bitton. There I think I actually asked him to do this article.
• Anyway, getting this written is important but going forward theoretically if we are saying it is a featured article then one of the criteria for that is "comprehensive". He said he was going to go work on "Barbary corsairs", which seems like a good idea to me.
• Odjak and Djenina Palace and the Harbormaster all also really deserve articles. A bunch of deys, beys and pashas are ILLs.
• Do you want to do another checklist? It would be cool to have a place to write things like "first source in this section does say exactly that"
• There is a question about tile. There was an extensive discussion about tile already which I plan to look up before blowing fuses by asking it; you may recall the many commons images?
• types of mosques in Algiers. Something not quite parsing in Architecture section.
• Manufacturing section: it was assigned to me but of course there is an immense learning curve and I was bogged down in what is zwellij (sp?) and then.. I'd rather not remember, honestly, but yeah, the reason you didnt get to it is I signed up fopr it 162.216.189.67 (talk) 15:31, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

fresh image notes

• @Scope creep: can you figure out why I can't get the caption to appear under the 1707 map? Also, despite the single-image-to-the-right rule, it seems like a shame to thumb it and maybe Nourerrahmane was right about this.
• Possible extraneous image: Woman wearing a burqua looks out from a tiled balcony over orange trees in a central courtyard

Elinruby (talk) 07:18, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Yip. scope_creep^Talk 09:22, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

sp. scope_creep^Talk 09:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

k Elinruby (talk) 14:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

• btw is that really a hijab she is wearing? I wrote that caption, and I am thinking I should reality check it. Elinruby (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC) Also, orange trees? maybe you can see them if you zoom in? Elinruby (talk) 14:41, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Its a modern burqa, I think. The orange trees are clear as day. The courtyard is full of them. It would be great having a garden full of orange trees. 17:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

cannot currently find the file name, but I have a place for this image Elinruby (talk) 09:15, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

my sister has a satsuma tree in her yard in California. The oranges are delicious but she has trouble with squirrels eating them before they are ripe enough to be picked. It is cool travelling through places where they grow in orchards, like parts of Florida and California, as you can usually get them for next to nothing at gas stations. Anyway, burqua is the word I suspected I was missing. Will fix that if we use the image. Also thanks for confirming oranges; I couldn't remember if I wrote that or just accepted it. Next question, should we use the image? It was there as an illustration for tiles, I think, but the woman is a distraction and the other three out of the batch of four it was in seemed to be better examples and less cluttered without it. Waiting for the temperature to drop a little more -- been soaking in cold water -- but intend to put in a solid session tonight. Should I put up another checklist?

I think the current image layout is good but some sections do not have images and I am not certain I have reviewed all of Nour's suggestions on the history talk page. The Jew with a coin episode, even if I was not involved in it, just the broader case, made me very wary of depictions that might be seen as stereotypical. There are several illustrations of clothing, not sure we have that straight. Manufacturing should be checked very carefully. If anything needs to be expanded at that end of the article though, the most important would be agriculture and urban society, I think. Tribal aristocracy Nour and I agonized over, word by word, so I am pretty sure what is there is accurate and I do not think either you and I are the best people to expand it. Should probably be reviewed again for intelligibility though. Elinruby (talk) 04:49, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Maybe a little too much vocabulary overall is one thought I am having. But yet in some cases you not only have to know the transliteration but all the spellings of it

Final runthrough: checklist

Overall is more polished at the top of the article. Later sections still need a little work. Elinruby (talk) 06:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• 1 History
• 1.1 16th century: Establishment

That section is fine as far as I can see. It is very dry, much dryer than I would normally use, but that could be ok, since it covering a huge period, 30 years in a one para. I linked a couple of things and a very slight copyedit but nothing much. I'm more worried about passive voice than anything and would likely refrain from trying to copyedit and bring that in. That is what worries me on the Lister article, i.e. the passive voice is there and it gets rejected. I did a GA on a spinning spark article, it was huge, but it got rejected at FA because of problem with passive voice. So will avoid doing copyedit to change stuff, except for spelling, linking and very light copyedit. scope_creep^Talk 11:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Whatever you can do. But your changes so far have been good btw. My objection to people copyediting was to ESL people editing. Normally I am happy to clean up bad English but I have seen all of this a few too many times. Elinruby (talk) 13:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

If I understand correctly we are going straight to FA? Because they are less stringent about length than GA, apparently. spent some happy time with MoS last night and as far as I can tell we are following it with respect to people's titles and section headers; I looked at those in particular. Did you say to take the page numbers out of the bibliography? Elinruby (talk) 13:58, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

spinning spark? I need to charge my phone before I can do source verification, taking a break. I have slightly improved versions of some images and I think the Cercle militaire image needs to move. But we are getting there. Elinruby (talk) 14:01, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: User:Spinningspark No, we have to go through WP:GA first. Matarisvan hanged this on his last comment at the peer review, but I knew the comment was wrong anyway. Page numbers in the bib section. I think you shouldn't have them. I vaguely remember reading about it, they conflict with the ref. scope_creep^Talk 15:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Any way to double-check? It would be a lot of work to put them back. I think the main place we have them is when the cited work is a chapter in an anthology. Re GA, I think that we more than meet the criteria assuming we catch all the embarrassing stuff. We may hear about length again, but come on. This is four hundred years of North African history. Elinruby (talk) 21:24, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll ask at the GA board. scope_creep^Talk 08:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Ask about images from the 1850s also. I didn't know there was a GA board Elinruby (talk) 12:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

• 1.1.1 Barbarossa brothers

• 1.1.2 Expansion of Algiers

Very odd short sentence "Beylerbey Uluç Ali Pasha against Tunis in 1569" scope_creep^Talk 15:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Can you check it as I've rearranged it. scope_creep^Talk 16:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Section is ok apart from that. scope_creep^Talk 16:18, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Will check. That sentence fragment sounds like ADD kicked in when I was doing a rewrite. That's the sort of thing I need to be checked for. As for passive voice, newspaper editors pound that one into you. I am actually pretty experienced with that. Maybe I can do a pass through Lister for you if we can ever stop working on this article. By the way, I submitted Angelita C. et al. v. California Department of Pesticide Regulation for peer review Elinruby (talk) 21:24, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: That would be really great re: Lister. I will check the Angelita on peer review. scope_creep^Talk 08:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I looked it over and saw a missing caption, and I know the mural image needs fixing. But the references are already in sfn format for a start. Going to email you at some point today Elinruby (talk) 09:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Its only about 30% done. There is mountains of stuff to go into it. I plan to split it into five articles. scope_creep^Talk 19:34, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

• 1.2 17th century: Golden Age
• 1.2.1 Algerian autonomy

"The European converts to Islam, known in Europe as renegades and turned Turks, formed mostly the tai'fa". "Formed mostly". I don't know what that means. Trying to get the refs. scope_creep^Talk 20:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

tai'fa is not mentioned in ref 75 or 76. I got the 76 book but no mention of taifa. First part of the sentence is accurate. scope_creep^Talk 20:22, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes some of what I am seeing might be from packing too much into one sentence. I would say "mostly" does not belong and shouldn't be "most of" either since although there were many European renegades unless there is a source I am skeptical about whether they were a majority of the corso. Elinruby (talk) 23:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

• 1.2.2 Foreign relations
• 1.3 18th century: Regional power
• 1.3.1 Maghrebi wars
• 1.3.2 Dey-Pashas of Algiers
• 1.4 19th century: End of the Regency of Algiers
• 1.4.1 Internal crisis
• 1.4.2 Barbary Wars
• 1.4.3 French invasion
• 2 Political status
• 2.1 1516: Founding of Algiers
• 2.1.1 Hayreddin's consolidation
• 2.2 Ottoman Regency (1519–1659)
• 2.2.1 Beylerbeylik period (1519–1587)
• 2.2.2 Pashalik period (1587–1659)
• 2.3 Sovereign Military Republic (1659–1830)
• 2.3.1 Janissary revolution: Agha regime in 1659
• 2.3.2 Deylik period (1671–1830)
• 3 Administration
• 3.1 Algerian stratocracy
• 3.1.1 Dey of Algiers
• 3.1.2 Cabinet
• 3.1.3 Diwân council
• 3.2 Territorial management
• 4 Economy
• 4.1 Algerian slave ransom economy
• 4.2 Royalties and gifts
• 4.3 Trade
• 4.3.1 External trade

First sentence was uncited, fixed that. Ruedy failed verification and was removed. He does talk about wheat but doesn't say anything about it going to Marseille. Cannot verify Merouche, although this may be due to snippet view. Cannot verify Merouche blockquote, rewriting from scratch.Elinruby (talk) 23:34, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

• 4.3.2 Internal trade
• 4.4 Taxationp
• 4.5 Agriculture
• 4.6 Manufacturing and craftsmanship

was only partially reviewed on prior pass. Problems were found. On this pass so far the first source failed verification; this has been remedied. Elinruby (talk) 06:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• 5 Society
• 5.1 Urban population

Isichei reference verifies 10,000 number but does not call them a ruling class, so I removed that. Same cite also verifies what is now the second sentence. Elinruby (talk)

Stevens reference verified Elinruby (talk) 00:48, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

• 5.2 Social structures

1st ref extremely verified Elinruby (talk) 12:49, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

• 5.3 Tribal aristocracy

Merged the two sections above since "Social structures" already discussed tribes. Little to no effect except one less header; article has a few too many Elinruby (talk) 09:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

• 6 Culture
• 6.1 Education

First statement still baffling Elinruby (talk) 14:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Second sentence is word for word from source, out of context, removing Elinruby (talk) 14:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Source is probably throwing a no target error, but the reference is valid if obscure and has some things to say.... not up for it right now though, will comment out Elinruby (talk) 03:44, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

this is still not done, but suddenly I need a break. #1 priority coming back. Elinruby (talk)

One reference is used elsewhere, so not no-target; removed the other and have it offline Elinruby (talk) 09:54, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

not sure what you are talking about but by the way I removed the paragraph the otherworldly schools not being the problem, the odjak's preoccupation with military matters was the problem, because there is an implicit "of course there is a problem, it's Algeria" schtick that French writers go into. Americans also, this is total part of their origin story also. Sigh. Decolonization is hard. There is a lot that could be said about schools but that paragraph took two different ideas and stuck them together, and cough I may attempt a rewording. Saw things in existing sources about Sufi brotherhoods forming an alliance with the Porte and maraboutic leaders launching insurrection. It isn't clear to me which entities should be in the info box, btw. I added the Kingdom of Kuku because it existed when the Regency was founded. It really would be nice to find a source or image specifically about the coffeehouses in the Regency of Algiers. Everything we had had some sort of copyright issue.Elinruby (talk) 10:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Gorguos reference does say that Elinruby (talk) 11:45, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I've fixed these missing refs. scope_creep^Talk 15:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Missing refs? Elinruby (talk) 21:31, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

First paragraph is verified and/or rewritten. Please please please PLEASE discuss before changing anything. First part of the first sentence rewritten to deal with a minor discrepancy from sources; still need to find a better source than the ones at Tlemcen, which should be possible because this is BLUESKY. But I need a break now. Elinruby (talk) 20:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

• 6.2 Architecture
• 6.3 Arts
• 6.3.1 Crafts
• 6.3.2 Music

1st reference verified.

Shannon reference checks out completely but we should add a flute and the coffeehouses

Hamdi reference in Arabic, statement does not seem controversial

Y all references and wikilinks checked. Maybe expand a little.Elinruby (talk) 12:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

• 7 Legacy

Entelis pd verified as just fine

• 8 See also

re-alphabetized

• 9 Notes

note a very dense, needs a readability review

note b refers to Constantinople as "Istanbul", which was not its name until the 20th century, but it's in a quote so I guess that is ok Elinruby (talk) 09:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• 10 References
• 11 Bibliography

fixed some alphabetization problems and issues with what is a last name. At this point all items should have a location, a trans-title, and a link, although there is one recently added source that does not have a link. This happens to be the reference for a sentence in the education section that does not quite make sense, and has some issues of tone ("otherworldly" in reference to religious schools; sounds like French disdain to me) Elinruby (talk) 06:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby: They do now. The one that should make it perfect, is that the bib section shouldn't have page numbers. The other to resist, is multiple reference per line. I see a couple of reference with three sentences. They don't like that. scope_creep^Talk 10:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I have not yet attempted to deal with overciting, but I think there is some. Are you saying sentences with three cites, or three sentences with one cite? Either way I agree Elinruby (talk) 11:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

One cite for one sentence only, not three cites. There is a couple, but it is minor. scope_creep^Talk 15:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

found one of the triplets and addressed Elinruby (talk) 10:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

language issue?: implausible reference

Internal trade was extremely important due to the makhzen system.

Probably supposed to say the Makhzen system was extremely important to internal trade. It is also possible, though less self-evident, that internal trade was important to the makhzen system, but if we are going to go there this should be better explained. Reference is out of print and not easily available Elinruby (talk) 11:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

0n re-reading could also be the makhzen system allowed internal trade to be important Elinruby (talk) 23:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

References

chaney reference

Publisher is missing. I am thinking Harvard University? Also is this a thesis? Elinruby (talk) 13:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

It is just a journal entry which is correctly cited. You don't put the publisher information in for modern journal articles. If it was 50 years old or something like that then they are historical, then you add it. scope_creep^Talk 15:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok but what's the journal then? Elinruby (talk) 09:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Explorations in Economic History. scope_creep^Talk 19:32, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Clothing, crafts, arts

Seems there was puppet theatre and mud wrestling, seems worth a mention. Also the instruments we have are correct but a flute should be added. Elinruby (talk) 11:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Old ref

• Shillington, Kevin (2013). Encyclopedia of African History. Vol. 3. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-135-45670-2.

References