Talk:Numidians

Black? Caucasoid? Arab?
I am seeing edit warring about race. Example:

What do the sources say? --Guy Macon (talk) 15:17, 13 October 2019 (UTC)


 * YDNA and linguistic data show that the Berbers are much younger, but for some reason in many articles huge Berber age and continuity is claimed. --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii (talk) 17:21, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Article Evaluation
Askyia (talk) 21:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

I have chosen this article because I consider it is too short and does not explain the history of the Numidian people besides a couple of paragraphs dedicated to the Punic Wars and their usage of cavalry. Although it could be argued there are limited sources regarding the Numidians, I still think much more can be said about them. The Numidians are important in the history of Algeria and North Africa in general, their influence would be felt throughout the region for centuries as their cavalry tactitcs continued to be employed well into the gunpowder era. Furthermore, the Numidian kingdom are one of the first organized Amazigh kingdoms in the region and as such their cannot be understated.

The introductory sentence does give a concise idea of who the Numidians were, as well as providing information regarding the topics discussed in the article for the most part, the exception being the relationship between the Numidians and Carthage. For the size of the article, the lead was concise and gave an idea of which topics the article will focus on.

Regarding the content, although the information provided during the Punic Wars is accurate and does provide a detailed summary of Numidian participation during the Punic Wars, the content is simply too short to showcase the history of this people. Key elements of Numidian history are missing, from their origins to the eventual conquest by Julius Caesar. One of the main sources used in the article, The Numidians 300 BC–AD 300 published by William Horsted in 2021, provides a summary of the events regarding the collapse of their kingdom. Furthermore, as mentioned before, the trade relationship between the Carthagians and Numidians was not explained in the article even though it is mentioned on the lead.

The article's tone is written from an unbiased neutral point of view. It provides the information without being persuasive but merely informing of what transpired. This is tied to the usage of sources in the article which, despite being a short one, it meant that the article could convied the same objectivity as secondary sources do. The article uses up-to-date secondary sources, which provides a better understanding on the subject and further increases its reliability. However, since it mainly focuses on the Punic Wars, the article cites sources mainly dedicated to the those conflicts thus it is slightly constraining.

The article is well-written and well-structured, the lead, the history section and the warfare section all describe an specific topic. The talk page does not have much going for it, other than a discussion on the "Caucasoid, Negroid or Arab" discourse and useful links to wikiprojects dedicated on North Africa

The article has a lot of potential, but it severely lacks information on different topics not only on the historical aspect, but also the elements on which that society lived such as clothing, art, religious beliefs, architecture, etc. The article's objectivity and the use of reliable sources is great, but once again the lack of content overall makes it underdeveloped. Askyia (talk) 21:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: North African History, AFH 4302
— Assignment last updated by Adrian Velazquez 2003 (talk) 00:57, 26 April 2023 (UTC)