This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mountolive (talk | contribs) at 09:39, 23 August 2016 (→in Spanish: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 09:39, 23 August 2016 by Mountolive (talk | contribs) (→in Spanish: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Moors article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 14 days |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Archives | |||||||||
|
|||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Telling the woods from the trees - the file I deleted and Othello
Today I deleted a file recently uploaded to Commons by a new account who also added it here, File:Moor Chief.jpg because the title it has now is misleading. The painter didn't suggest it was a Moor. But I was looking at a 'tree' and missing the forest. It is a 19th century painting and the article doesn't suggest anywhere that there were any people called Moors in the 18th century. That reason alone is enough to say that the painting doesn't belong here. The Othello painting is also 19th century and I think should be removed. Doug Weller talk 13:30, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe moved down the gallery, but I still feel a picture of Othello is interesting as the most well-known fictional Moor. Pinkbeast (talk) 16:30, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
- Or move it into the popular culture section? Doug Weller talk 19:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
- I think that would be very sensible and if there are no objections we should do it. Pinkbeast (talk) 16:52, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
///////////////
From Ireland ...
Have to agree with the previous poster on here, in that Wiki is becoming quite known for apparent bias. Why just one photo showing very pale people as Moors? I have been doing research and from what I have come across, I feel that there should be, at the very least, a mixture of the skin tones added for a fuller picture of what they looked like. This is just giving one side to those who are not previously familiar with any study on the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.19.170.170 (talk) 05:11, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
The Moors pre-date Islam the start of the paragraph does not make sense.The Romans were the first people to use the word Moor to describe the people that lived there. Wiki bais because wiki is racist towards black people there is a history of racism on wiki when comes to black people. Last time checked st Maurice the moor the predate Islam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.32.138 (talk) 10:37, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Moors&oldid=prev&diff=724076695
So we had "Arabs, Berbers, North Africans (primarily those of Morrocan descent) and Muslim Europeans" and someone changed it to "Arabs, Berber North Africans and Muslim Europeans", which looked to me like the usual drive-by axe-grinding given the user's other edits, so I changed it back.
Now Rwenonah has reverted me with the edit summary 'north africans are made up of arabs and berbers, so saying "North Africans" again is superfluous'.
I'm not convinced and am seeking other opinions. As I see it, part of the point here is that Christian Europeans used the term "variously" - to apply to all manner of people. The reverted text is confusing at best - why only Berber North Africans not Arab North Africans? Did Berbers stop being Moors if they went to Andulasia? (Obviously not). "Arabs, Berbers, North Africans (primarily those of Morrocan descent) and Muslim Europeans" covers all the bases; leave it be. Pinkbeast (talk) 19:50, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
- For one thing, that doesn't cover all the bases. It doesn't even spell Moroccans right, which should disqualify it immediately. Are there any North Africans who were not Arabs or Berbers? No. Why do we include them separately? Why are Moroccans singled out? "Moors" could (and did) equally well apply to people of Tunisian, Algerian or Libyan descent, so why aren't they included? What is "Moroccan descent"; Morocco wasn't even a country when "Moor" originated, and there is in no meaningful sense a "Moroccan" ethnicity separate from Arab and Berber ethnicity. I think the newer text is less flawed. Rwenonah (talk) 02:42, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
- I don't agree that a piece of text containing a typo should immediately be discarded. I'll leave the rest for other editors to comment on. Pinkbeast (talk) 16:37, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Moors
This info is wrong please re-study — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.105.94.12 (talk) 21:32, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Moors: people who overran the Iberian Peninsula in A.D. 711.
In A.D. 711 the Moors, Islamic invaders from northern Africa, conquered the Iberian Peninsula. Spain's culture changed dramatically because of the influence of the Moors. Today the culture of Spain and Portugal are quite different from other cultures of Europe because of the Moorish influence on their art, architecture, engineering, music, and literature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.134.189.87 (talk) 14:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
in Spanish
In Spanish the term 'moro' is merely descriptive, and as such is rendered by the authoritative dictionary of the Spanish language. That is the standard usage.
Hence, I dont see why the observations of some authors (all of them but one non-Spanish, by the way) should go first in the text.
Worse: of the cited ebooks, a search for 'moor' or 'moro' in 'Geopolitics of the EU' shows 0 results. Idem for these searches in 'Transcultural modernities'.
'Translating sensitive Texts' renders three results for 'moor' (none derogatory) and 0 for 'moro'. I couldnt manage to find a 'search' option at 'The multiculturalism backlash'. Idem for 'Multiculturalism, Muslims and Citizenship'.
Hence, there is a clear and authoritative source saying that it is not derogatory and five so-called sources in which I didnt manage to find any reference any reference at all to the word 'moro'. I am not the best when searching at ebooks, but unless someone else finds any of the related words, these sources (and the claim they are apparently supporting) should be removed.MOUNTOLIVE fedeli alla linea 09:39, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Categories: