Talk:Byzantine–Moorish wars

Rename and move without discussion
Hi Why did you move this page and then rename to something that is not mentioned in the sources and completly change the lede without discussion?  scope_creep Talk  20:13, 14 March 2022 (UTC)


 * There has recently been an upsurge of editing on the topic of the Moorish wars, and much of these very poor quality. The extremely numerous grammatic mistakes and the types of these mistakes suggest that many of these articles were just directly translated from French probably using google translate. Furthermore, a very high amount of inaccuracies or outright bias were present (just one example: in the Battle of Thacia it is claimed that John Troglita died in the battle, which is highly inaccurate as he wasn't even on the continent of Africa at the time), and lot of the articles were misplaced. The infoboxes in these articles were also completely chaotic, and the same was true for this article. Thus i started fixing them up, starting with Thacia, fixing the grammar and removing the high amount of inaccuracies and bias.
 * Now when i came to this article, much of the same was true. If you read the parts not yet re-written/fixed, or just look at the article before the edits you will find it filled with inaccuracies and grammar mistakes. A further issue was that the article included literally the entire conflict. From 533 to 548, the article wasn't about the battle of Cillium as a matter of fact the article describes the battle of Cillium relatively briefly, giving it no special attention whatsoever. Since the article was about the conflict as a whole and not about Cillium, i decided to move it to reflect this. An article focusing solely on the Battle of Cillium can be created later, although further work on the article's grammar and information should be done and more sources should be added as well. I plan on doing this later.
 * It didn't really cross my mind to discuss it, i assumed nobody would necessarily disagree with this move, although i now see why my lack of explanation and discussion on this matter is an issue.
 * Whatever748 (talk) 21:46, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Half your comments is about other articles that don't necessarily apply here. French and German articles tend to have more context about a subject, but that is not a bad thing, particularly in a smaller articles with a complex subject. It could have been split into seperate articles. It is is not a necessarily a long article and there is no excessive detail. It is no bother having additional content, if it is still in the same context. The battle of Cillium in 544 section could have been expanded, if the sources supported it and a several copyedits would have taken care of the grammer. Now you have article that not linked to Wikipedia on fr and has no connection to the sources that are already present and with a generic title that not mentioned in the sources. The title probably conflicts with the moorish wars on the Iberian Peninsula. The original title wasn't that far off.   scope_creep Talk  11:22, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Now you have article that not linked to Wikipedia on fr and has no connection to the sources
 * It is linked to several other articles, even to Justinian's campaignbox which previously had a red link here.
 * and with a generic title that not mentioned in the sources
 * The Moorish wars or the Byzantine war against the moors was literally the official name of the war, even Procopius called it that.
 * The original title wasn't that far off.
 * Like i said this wasn't a renaming, but more of a complete move of the article, as for the many reasons mentioned above, this article is in general more fit to be the article about the conflict as a whole rather than solely the battle of Cillium. As i said, an article solely focusing on Cillium can be written later. Whatever748 (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Its been 2 years and still no article about that, there's a french one about it too. FKnight Al Makhalifi (talk) 13:02, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Infobox "Result"
Please note that Template:Infobox military conflict states against "result" that "this parameter may use one of two standard terms: "X victory" or "Inconclusive"." The infobox has been amended to reflect this. Please read the template "result" guidance in full before amending or reverting. It would probably be best to discuss any proposed change here first to seek consensus. Thanks