Talk:History of Malta

Muddled, poorly written
And the English is poor. Needs PROFESSIONAL editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 08:06, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

1940 Siege air section makes no sense
"By the end of August, the Gladiators were reinforced by twelve Hawker Hurricanes which had arrived via HMS Argus.[16] During the first five months of combat, the island's aircraft destroyed or damaged about thirty-seven Italian aircraft, while suffering even greater losses than the Italians."

How can this be possible when the preceding statements suggest that there were only 16 British aircraft on the island? 119.224.81.14 (talk) 08:40, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Muddled history
The paragraph "Under protest, Dom Mintoff resigned as Prime Minister along with all the MLP deputies on 21 April 1958. Georgio Borg Olivier was offered to form an alternative government by Governor Laycock but refused. This led to the Governor declaring a state of emergency thus suspending the constitution and Malta was placed under direct colonial administration from London. The MLP had now fully abandoned support for integration (when Mintoff's demands for financial guarantees were not accepted) and now advocated full independence from the British Crown" makes no sense. Mintoff may have resigned as PM, but MLP deputies did not resign from parliament. Olivier was asked to form a government, not offered to form. The statement of emergency is just what that says, it does not suspend the constitution or place Malta under direct rule. The MLP did not advocate "full independence from the British Crown", they advocated full independence as a Dominion under the Crown.Royalcourtier (talk) 05:50, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Class assessment

 * This article has been elevated to B class and I haven't looked to see if this was bot or independent editor assessed. There is a lot of content, and a lot of section tags. A problem is there are issues with failing to meet the assigned class criteria. All of the section tags are not in themselves an issue, as provided by, The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies (#2), of the assessment criteria, except the lead section criteria. The article has a defined structure (#3), as covered by the Manual of style regarding the lead. This should have been considered. The main concern, is The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations(#1). but the


 * Geology and prehistory section has no source or references, or the subsection,
 * Neolithic and Temple period, and
 * Bronze Age; that has one reference.
 * The editing guideline contains "quality standards" criteria ensuring "distribution-quality article"(s). This article fails the criteria for "B class" rating in more than one area. Otr500 (talk) 03:44, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

More Contributions to Contemporary History
I am simply arguing for the need of more contemporary information. I realize that this is a history page, but the most recent events are 7-8 years old. I would suggest the addition of relevant historical information from 2013-2020 as an improvement to this page. Señorza (talk) 17:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Recent deletions
Have seen nothing here about problems citing The Times of Malta, as noted by Ravenswing. All my historical additions were cited from the newspaper. Knightoften (talk) 03:42, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ... and answered on your own talk page.   Ravenswing     03:47, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Cheers, we seem to have been writing at the same time, friend. Not sure what to think now - seems I stumbled into something odd! Knightoften (talk) 03:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC)