Talk:Portus Magnus, Algeria

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Africa: Algeria Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Algeria.

Merge Proposal[edit]

Proposing a merge to Bethioua, the article this originally redirected to. If this article were exclusively about the Roman settlement then it could potentially remain as a separate article, but it includes content about post-Roman periods. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 06:28, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[Oppose]. I don't agree with the merger. Indeed, because user Rosguill wrote that without post-Roman periods the article could remain as a separate article, I am going to erase these excerpts from the article.--Esauster (talk) 17:39, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was silly. Don't blank content, least of all to maintain needless forked pages. — LlywelynII 06:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[Oppose]. I don't agree with the merger. Same reasons of Esauster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.238.140.234 (talk) 19:16, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support. There's not enough content to justify a separate stubby article in place of a single better one about Bethioua; it should include the entire history of the location; and (especially) keeping this article separate from Bethioua has created/sustained nonsense across multiple projects that this location was identical with Arzew instead of Bethioua. There's absolutely nothing good about the separate article and a lot of bad coming from it. — LlywelynII 06:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NOT Arsenaria[edit]

On top of the mess mentioned above (the solution to which is to remerge the page to fill out Bethioua), at least according to Pliny, Arsenaria was an entirely different settlement inland 3 Roman miles from the sea. (That is, it ain't Arzew either. Some other place or a formerly separate place that something grew to include.) — LlywelynII 06:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]