Talk:Looting of Kairouan (1057)

October 2021
Can you please quote the part from this source that supports what you're attributing to it? I'm referring to As a result of the loss of Kairouan, the Zirid state began to decline M.Bitton (talk) 19:37, 8 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Since you have a history of misrepresenting the sources, I expect to quote from each one of them. In other words, I no longer trust you (for a reason). M.Bitton (talk) 19:39, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, the WP:ONUS to add information to the page is on you, therefore I suggest you stop edit warring and seek consensus for it. M.Bitton (talk) 19:44, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No need to be aggressive, page 366 mentions the territorial decline of the Zirids as they retreated to the coast. Hilal092 (talk) 19:49, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I asked you to quote the part and I expect you to do just that without making any comment about me. M.Bitton (talk) 19:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No, there is no exact part to quote, I am not going to quote things word by word. Hilal092 (talk) 19:51, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Quoting the page number as well as the start and the end of the paragraph will do. M.Bitton (talk) 19:54, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * First paragraph of page 366. Hilal092 (talk) 19:56, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That paragraph does not support the statement. M.Bitton (talk) 19:59, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It does. It supports the territorial decline of the Zirids. Hilal092 (talk) 20:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Don't play games with me. Nowhere in that paragraph does it say As a result of the loss of Kairouan, the Zirid state began to decline, meaning that you misrepresented a source (yet again). M.Bitton (talk) 20:05, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No, you just have to read what the source says. It doesn't have to be the same wording, and what is your point? Are you trying to create an excuse to prevent this article from expanding? Hilal092 (talk) 20:10, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * My point is that you are misrepresenting yet another source in order to fluff up BS article that you created. The source failed verification and the statement that is attributed to it will therefore be removed. M.Bitton (talk) 20:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The source isn't misrepresented, I even gave you the page and paragraph. What does this have to do with the fact that you deleted the entire background section and infobox? Hilal092 (talk) 20:19, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

You are now lying since the word "Kairouan" isn't even mentioned in it. The background section is another example of you POV pushing to fluff up your BS article. In fact, until proven otherwise, the whole aftermath section is about what happened after Hilalian invasion of Ifriqiya in general (there is nothing specific in it about the "Looting of Kairouan"), and therefore it too needs to go. M.Bitton (talk) 20:23, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make sense, you have to be more specific in your first sentence. The background section contains no POV, everything there is sourced. For the aftermath section, the capture of Kairouan was one of the most significant parts of the Hilalian invasion, as the Zirids had just lost their capital, the aftermath of the invasion was a result of this event. Hilal092 (talk) 20:33, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You can try if you want, but let me assure you that there is no way for you to get out of this until you admit that you misrepresented a source. M.Bitton (talk) 20:36, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I did not. And trying to frame me won't work. Hilal092 (talk) 20:41, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * So not only do you routinely misrepresent the sources, but you also lie. That doesn't look very good. M.Bitton (talk) 20:43, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You can claim all you want, won't work. Hilal092 (talk) 20:44, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no time for liars. We're done here and if needs be, the next stop will be ANI. M.Bitton (talk) 20:54, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * We all know for a fact that the only liar here is you. Hilal092 (talk) 20:59, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the aftermath section since the source failed verification and the rest is about about the consequences of the Hilalian invasion of Ifriqiya, i.e., it's not specific to the looting of Kairouan. Per WP:ONUS (this is a policy), you need to seek consensus if you want to restore it. For anyone else reading this discussion, this article is nothing more than a POV fork since everything we know about this event can be compacted into a single sentence (already mentioned in Hilalian invasion of Ifriqiya article). M.Bitton (talk) 21:16, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No, there was no consensus to delete the section, and in this case, information from the background section should be transferred to the looting section Hilal092 (talk) 19:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)