A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 30, 2005, March 30, 2006, and March 30, 2007. |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The following note has been left at this User's Talkpage: "== History of Morocco== You have tagged this article "dubious" without offering your rationale at Talk:History of Morocco. Please do so at your early convenience. Thank you. -- Wetman 09:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)"
What of Morocco as a Barbary State? Scott Ritchie 3 July 2005 00:16 (UTC)
Formatting that encases the framed table of contents in text, in just the way a framed map or image is enclosed within the text, is now available: {{TOCleft}} in the HTML does the job.
Blank space opposite the ToC, besides being unsightly and distracting, suggests that there is a major break in the continuity of the text, which may not be the case. Blanks in page layout are voids and they have meanings to the experienced reader. The space betweeen paragraphs marks a brief pause between separate blocks of thought. A deeper space, in a well-printed text, signifies a more complete shift in thought: note the spaces that separate sub-headings in Wikipedia articles.
A handful of thoughtless and aggressive Wikipedians revert the "TOCleft" format at will. A particularly aggressive de-formatter is User:Ed g2s
The reader may want to compare versions at the Page history. -- Wetman 20:27, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that User:Bokpasa has tagged the article as a {{POV}} w/o even ever discussed his issues. I've leaving meassages and questions about their late new edits who are absolutely innacurate like changing all Dynasties to Sultanates!!!! Even blanking a whole section about the chronologies and like if the history only started yesterday!!! I am removing the tag and informing them in their talk page again. Or could you please indicate which parts you see as POV and make our life easy? Cheers -- Szvest 02:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC) Wiki me up™
I find the image about Moroccan Expansion a considerate POV image. First of all Mauritania was never claimed by Morocco, due to differnces within the ruling Istiqlal party, there was a delay in recognition. This is not the same as an actual claim. And the map of Mauritania isn't even right. Check any map of Mauritania and you'll see. I'm removing the image, if anybody has a problem with that, please write your arguments on the talkpage. -- karimobo ( talk) 21:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
the First Barbary War article indicates that Morocco was one of the Barbary states that the US warred against in 1801 to 1805 to avoid being held to ransom as the price of avoiding piracy. Yet, no battles were fought with Morocco and Morocco had a treaty of friendship with the U.S. What is the truth here? Perhaps the government of Morocco was conniving with the piracy and Christian slavery of Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli? Perhaps, Morocco did not fully control the activities of some its cities and residents? Any facts here? Thanks Hmains 17:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
i replaced idris Ibn salih with Idris ibn Abdallah, who is the correct person, i think. Unixer 18:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Why sometime we can read Isqtal want? --Moi 13:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC) unsigned comment by User:Bokpasa
Morroco is than Almoravids sucessor`s, like Saudi Arabia Caliphate sucessor`s...
I know, that they have the same languague, same religion, and the same culture, and geography.. but are not the same country.unsigned comment by User:Bokpasa
International court of Justice 1975Moi 14:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
History of Morroco are similiar like Iran history. Dinastys and kings
In this resolution the Internacional Court of Justice, wrote Morroco, isn´t the same country Almoravides,Amohades... is different, for this reason Morroco wasn`t historic rights to West Sahara, and West Sahara can be a country...
And I can right in english, but in one tratate with Spain, Moorroco reconoce that it haven`t got anyright to the south of Draa river -the year 1880`s.Moi 20:03, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Can you read corretly?... because I dont think so.... You are muy "headache" because you dont reconoce the " Internacional Court of Justice" in resolution of West Sahara in 1975, rechazed , that Morocco is the heirless of Amohades,Almoravides,Wattasides,.....
Morocco is than Almoravide, like Algeria. Anyone of them are Almoravides. Moi 00:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Bokpasa is unfortunately a well-known user in es:. He supports strong anti-Moroccan stances but usually, as here, lacks any sources that sustain their opinions. I think that what he tries to show here is the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ on the Western Sahara. In the link provided (only the summary is available) you can see (answer to question 2) that the ICJ states that:
Although I don't have the text of the whole Opinion, I understand that Bokpasa's rationale is that, considering that according to the ICJ there is "not territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and the Moroccan State", and that the Almohad Empire did include such territories, it's not valid to make the statement "Morocco equals to Almohad Empire". Best regards -- Ecemaml 14:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC) (administrator en es:)
Don't get me involved I don't want to get roped into this, as I have neither expertise nor interest in it, but I will refer you to this, this, and this. While the modern Moroccan state hasn't existed since 1956, clearly a Moroccan nation has existed for several centuries. - Justin (koavf)· T· C· M 16:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Bokpasa, que pasa?! Please stop attacking me personally like you dit here. It is not the first time but i hope it will be the last one. I may remind you of the consequences. Back to the subject! Who says Spain and Portugal were part of Morocco? Could you explain to us what's wrong in here? -- Szvest 14:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
And why we dont write "Antonine Dynasty" is a Spanish Dynasty... is the same case....emperators born in Spain...as almoravids and almohades in Morocco..
Acording Wikipedia rulers the NVOP BOX, not be remove...but you always removing... Moi 00:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Why you always vandalist my acts?
You don`t know the different of:
And.
And
And its good learn more about Morroco, and its real history. Because , your opinion about Morroco its similiar like "Führer" and his "Germany". Moi 22:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Since you have learned your way (you are reverted in all wiki versions es, fr and here), you can see the effect of your learning. You are totally wrong and mislead. If you have learned the History of Morocco in a Spanish university, so does Ecemaml and other Spanish users here and in the es wiki. So how come your points are different than theirs? It just mean that your are totally using your POV. Apart from all this garbage, you brought no single source or reference to sustain your claims (apart from the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ on the Western Sahara which limits its opinion to the 18th and 19th centuries. You brought nothing, am i right?
One more thing, as i already asked you to refrain from personal attacks twice, it is time to have a break. I am blocking you for that according to wikipedia policies that you are not respecting. You have accused me a racist and Hitler. Now you become more sophisticated in this behaviour, you are calling me a Fuhrer. Is this a civilized manner to discuss matters in your life? If so, this is not the right place to do so. You called the other admin in the fr wiki a racist as well!!!! I mean it is sooooo random your accusations are! Learn to be civilized before asking me to learn about the history of Morocco. Don't forget to enhance your English and other languages, and never forget to respect the manual of style in wikipedia.
Tienes entonces que añadir eso a tu propaganda en la pagína de discusión allí. Di a todo el mundo que somos terrerificos y nos parecemos muchisimo al Fuhrer y que nos vamos a matarte despues del bloqueo. No olvides de insister de llamar a ese jaleo istiqlal a la vez del PP. Buena suerte.
P.S. Remover el nonsense no significa que soy pro-morocco como no significa que tu eres anti-morocco. -- Szvest 11:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
In order to get a more accurate description of the history of Morocco, I think that some emphasis on the loose character of the statal structures of the different dynasties that ruled Morocco should be introduced. I mean, muslim statal structures were weaker and looser than their counterparts in Europe (heir to the Roman traditions), for example. Also, in order to avoid the constant interference of Bokpasa (as in es: he didn't learn to follow the manual of style, therefore their contributions are usually rubbish) it would be good, especially when talking about early phases to talk about "what currently Morocco is" (or the territory of nowadays Morocco) instead of Morocco. Best regards -- Ecemaml 07:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Somebody know where is Aguz ( Souira Guedima)?Bokpasa 14:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Souira Guedima is the modern name for what used to be known as Aguz, Agouz (or in French translation of el-Bakri spelled Couz), it used to be port for Aghmat in 11th century, then was taken over by Portuguese in early 16th century. It is at the mouth of the Tensift river. MisterCDE 01:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
There is not much information on Morocco during World War II. This can be expanded to a section. Jay ( talk) 05:31, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
There's a reason for that: /info/en/?search=Marocchinate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.237.234.90 ( talk) 19:36, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
I use your own source of information, I write to ask wich part you think it`s wrong but you do not write me, and clear, and wrote Vandalism???
If you are sure Im wrong, write why part with rthre arguments and thrue sorce of Information itws wrong!.
Bokpasa 14:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I put it correct information, and I will put more references. Bokpasa 08:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Per the request above by Omar-Toons, I have requested temporary full protection for this article. The edit war seems to be getting out of hand -- Jubilee ♫ clipman 06:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I strongly encourage you all to discuss your differences while this page is fully protected. There must be some common ground? -- Jubilee ♫ clipman 15:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Please, Bokpasa, stop including a barely loosed collection of chronological items without proper sources just to push your original research about the nonexistence of Morocco in the Middle and Modern Ages. -- Ecemaml ( talk) 14:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Original maps:
Diferents maps:
Bokpasa 16:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Maps around history http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/northafrica/haxmorocco.html
Bokpasa 14:54, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Cheers, Vipinhari || talk 18:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
On 13 January 2008 the user Perspicacite made substantial edits to the post-colonial sections of this article.
Among other things it resulted in about 22 years being removed so that it now goes from mentioning the Sand War to annexing Western Sahara in 1985.
Surely there must have been something happening in Morocco between these events?
Referring to
History of Western Sahara does not make it acceptable to remove all Moroccan history during those 22 years and all Moroccan history not related to the Western Sahara issue since 1963.
Something must have happened in Morocco except that conflict for the last 48 years?
Could someone with the required knowledge please restore/insert the missing information?
85.225.84.165 (
talk) 08:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Casablanca1950s.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 15:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC) |
I've marked the article with 3 tags: it needs more references, copy-editing for coherence in tone & style, and may contain original research. The article has 14 references with many sections & paragraphs lacking any reference at all. Given that this is English Wikipedia, from the perspective of a native English speaker/reader, there are a number of areas which require work to help give the article a clear and steady tone/style. I've done a little work in trying to fix the issues myself, however I am not an expert in the subject and would feel more comfortable if other editors addressed the issues. Coinmanj ( talk) 22:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't want to address the question of references - I agree it's probably desirable to add more. I don't think it needs the objection to style, however. I've made some corrections to the English, especially toward the beginning of the article, and I don't think it needs its English language style flagged any longer. Wallace McDonald ( talk) 05:53, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
@ Omar-toons:, the article had a copy-edit tag to which I responded; I don't need to gain consensus for a copy-edit, if the tag was there in the first place. That said, I am happy to discuss any specific issues you might have; "you didn't discuss a copy-edit" is not valid ground for reverting me. Specifically, the only information I removed was unsourced; you cannot revert that and demand consensus. More importantly, I am not doing content work, and so I am not hung up on my version; if you add sources and sourced material, I am not going to take the slightest issue, and thanks for addressing some of the CN tags. I did, however, rewrite the lead to match the article content; the lead had unsourced material that wasn't even covered in the article body, which was not going to fly. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 03:59, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
More corrections; "protectorate" should be plural, because it was not a joint protectorate. "Heads of state," not "head of states." Parentheses are confusing, and the tense was incorrect; past tense, it became the Spanish protectorate. Parentheses are not needed, and confusing. The protectorate didn't dictate that the Sultan had no real power; the treaty did. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 16:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
The recorded history of Morocco begins with the Phoenician colonization of the Moroccan coast between the 12th and 6th centuries BC, although the area was inhabited by indigenous Berber people for several thousand years before that.
Archaeological evidence has shown that the area was inhabited by hominids at least 400,000 years ago. Until the arrival of the Phoenicians, the region was inhabited by hunter-gatherers, who eventually evolved both the Berber language as well as agriculture. From the 12th century BC the region was dominated by Phoenician traders and settlements, before the the state of Carthage extended its hegemony there in the 5th century BC. Some independent tribal kingdoms, such as Mauretania, existed as satellites of Carthage during this period. With the fall of Carthage in 40 BC, the coastal region became a province of the Roman empire, with satellite kingdoms in the interior. In the mid-5th century, it was overran by Vandals, before being recovered by Byzantine Empire.
The region was conquered by the Arabs in the early 8th century AD, but broke off from the Arab Caliphate after the revolt of 740. Half a century later, the Moroccan state was established by the Idrisid dynasty.[1][2] Under the Almoravid and the Almohad dynasties, Morocco dominated the Maghreb and Muslim Spain. The Saadi dynasty ruled the region from 1549 to 1659, followed by the Alaouite dynasty in the 17th century, who have since been the royal family of Morocco. The kingdom was consolidated by Ismail Ibn Sharif, who used an army of black slaves to maintain control over the Berber people. He also succeeded in driving the English colonial empire from Tangier in 1684 and the Spanish Empire from Larache in 1689.
In 1912, after the First Moroccan Crisis and the Agadir Crisis, the Treaty of Fez was signed, dividing Morocco into French and Spanish protectorates. In 1956, after 44 years of French rule, Morocco regained independence from France, and shortly afterward regained most of the territories under Spanish control.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of Morocco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:06, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Bocchus I was not the first known Mauretanian king, unless this refers to something like the first king after Carthaginian presence had ended in Mauretania when they retreated to Carthage sometime after the 2nd Punic war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7xn ( talk • contribs) 11:53, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:52, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure what kind of maintenance template would flag this issue on the main page, but currently large parts of the article are directly copied from several articles, without any trimming to make them fit an overview article like this (see e.g. WP:SUMMARY). Part of the whole point of having dedicated articles for each topic is so that other articles can summarize and link to them rather than literally repeat their entire content (or their whole "history" sections, in this case). Additionally, some of the copied content was already lacking citations at the articles from which they were copied (e.g. the Almohad article), so now these verifiability issues have been imported here too and are unlikely to be fixed independently here. Condensing and summarizing their content, however, would also make it easier to add new citations.
PS: I already alluded to some of these problems in my edit summaries back in September 2021, but I figured there needs to be a clearer notice of this somewhere. R Prazeres ( talk) 01:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I thought that the page did not sufficiently reflect the transnational influence that Morocco had through its nationalist-independence movements, in the global struggle against colonialism. I added a section to further develop:
Morroco has been a key transnational hub in the struggle against colonialism in the Middle-east region. The end of World War II that had weakened European colonial powers, the start of the US-URSS search for influence and the establishment of the United Nations in 1945 praising universal equality, represented an impetus for anti-colonial and nationalist movements in Morocco.[1]
Through its special international status and the French and US presence in Tangier, the city became a hub for anti-colonial activism. Fromout Tanger, a link was established between the inside resistance and activists from other countries. By creating a transnational network of supporters and public advocates (i.e. cultural elites, politicians, public figures, academics, medias), the nationalist movement aimed to bring the Moroccan cause to the forefront of the international community debate.[2]
In order to gain influence at a global level, Moroccan nationalist movements globalised their cause by seeking to unite with the pan-arabism movement and the Arab League, extending their activism networks to Cairo.[3] Another example is Paris, that became an important European city from where cultural elites advocated for the independence cause and brought the protectorate question to the forefront of the public debate.[4] The independence movement eventually managed to bring their national claim for independence to the UN for the first time in 1951, gaining a vote of 20 states in favour and 23 against.[4]
( Curiouschanter ( talk) 23:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi all, there is a splitting proposal at the Alawi dynasty article that is directly relevant to the topic here and that would likely benefit from further input by interested editors. See Talk:Alawi dynasty#Splitting proposal (and seeking feedback). Thanks, R Prazeres ( talk) 20:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 30, 2005, March 30, 2006, and March 30, 2007. |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The following note has been left at this User's Talkpage: "== History of Morocco== You have tagged this article "dubious" without offering your rationale at Talk:History of Morocco. Please do so at your early convenience. Thank you. -- Wetman 09:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)"
What of Morocco as a Barbary State? Scott Ritchie 3 July 2005 00:16 (UTC)
Formatting that encases the framed table of contents in text, in just the way a framed map or image is enclosed within the text, is now available: {{TOCleft}} in the HTML does the job.
Blank space opposite the ToC, besides being unsightly and distracting, suggests that there is a major break in the continuity of the text, which may not be the case. Blanks in page layout are voids and they have meanings to the experienced reader. The space betweeen paragraphs marks a brief pause between separate blocks of thought. A deeper space, in a well-printed text, signifies a more complete shift in thought: note the spaces that separate sub-headings in Wikipedia articles.
A handful of thoughtless and aggressive Wikipedians revert the "TOCleft" format at will. A particularly aggressive de-formatter is User:Ed g2s
The reader may want to compare versions at the Page history. -- Wetman 20:27, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that User:Bokpasa has tagged the article as a {{POV}} w/o even ever discussed his issues. I've leaving meassages and questions about their late new edits who are absolutely innacurate like changing all Dynasties to Sultanates!!!! Even blanking a whole section about the chronologies and like if the history only started yesterday!!! I am removing the tag and informing them in their talk page again. Or could you please indicate which parts you see as POV and make our life easy? Cheers -- Szvest 02:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC) Wiki me up™
I find the image about Moroccan Expansion a considerate POV image. First of all Mauritania was never claimed by Morocco, due to differnces within the ruling Istiqlal party, there was a delay in recognition. This is not the same as an actual claim. And the map of Mauritania isn't even right. Check any map of Mauritania and you'll see. I'm removing the image, if anybody has a problem with that, please write your arguments on the talkpage. -- karimobo ( talk) 21:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
the First Barbary War article indicates that Morocco was one of the Barbary states that the US warred against in 1801 to 1805 to avoid being held to ransom as the price of avoiding piracy. Yet, no battles were fought with Morocco and Morocco had a treaty of friendship with the U.S. What is the truth here? Perhaps the government of Morocco was conniving with the piracy and Christian slavery of Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli? Perhaps, Morocco did not fully control the activities of some its cities and residents? Any facts here? Thanks Hmains 17:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
i replaced idris Ibn salih with Idris ibn Abdallah, who is the correct person, i think. Unixer 18:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Why sometime we can read Isqtal want? --Moi 13:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC) unsigned comment by User:Bokpasa
Morroco is than Almoravids sucessor`s, like Saudi Arabia Caliphate sucessor`s...
I know, that they have the same languague, same religion, and the same culture, and geography.. but are not the same country.unsigned comment by User:Bokpasa
International court of Justice 1975Moi 14:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
History of Morroco are similiar like Iran history. Dinastys and kings
In this resolution the Internacional Court of Justice, wrote Morroco, isn´t the same country Almoravides,Amohades... is different, for this reason Morroco wasn`t historic rights to West Sahara, and West Sahara can be a country...
And I can right in english, but in one tratate with Spain, Moorroco reconoce that it haven`t got anyright to the south of Draa river -the year 1880`s.Moi 20:03, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Can you read corretly?... because I dont think so.... You are muy "headache" because you dont reconoce the " Internacional Court of Justice" in resolution of West Sahara in 1975, rechazed , that Morocco is the heirless of Amohades,Almoravides,Wattasides,.....
Morocco is than Almoravide, like Algeria. Anyone of them are Almoravides. Moi 00:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Bokpasa is unfortunately a well-known user in es:. He supports strong anti-Moroccan stances but usually, as here, lacks any sources that sustain their opinions. I think that what he tries to show here is the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ on the Western Sahara. In the link provided (only the summary is available) you can see (answer to question 2) that the ICJ states that:
Although I don't have the text of the whole Opinion, I understand that Bokpasa's rationale is that, considering that according to the ICJ there is "not territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and the Moroccan State", and that the Almohad Empire did include such territories, it's not valid to make the statement "Morocco equals to Almohad Empire". Best regards -- Ecemaml 14:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC) (administrator en es:)
Don't get me involved I don't want to get roped into this, as I have neither expertise nor interest in it, but I will refer you to this, this, and this. While the modern Moroccan state hasn't existed since 1956, clearly a Moroccan nation has existed for several centuries. - Justin (koavf)· T· C· M 16:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Bokpasa, que pasa?! Please stop attacking me personally like you dit here. It is not the first time but i hope it will be the last one. I may remind you of the consequences. Back to the subject! Who says Spain and Portugal were part of Morocco? Could you explain to us what's wrong in here? -- Szvest 14:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
And why we dont write "Antonine Dynasty" is a Spanish Dynasty... is the same case....emperators born in Spain...as almoravids and almohades in Morocco..
Acording Wikipedia rulers the NVOP BOX, not be remove...but you always removing... Moi 00:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Why you always vandalist my acts?
You don`t know the different of:
And.
And
And its good learn more about Morroco, and its real history. Because , your opinion about Morroco its similiar like "Führer" and his "Germany". Moi 22:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Since you have learned your way (you are reverted in all wiki versions es, fr and here), you can see the effect of your learning. You are totally wrong and mislead. If you have learned the History of Morocco in a Spanish university, so does Ecemaml and other Spanish users here and in the es wiki. So how come your points are different than theirs? It just mean that your are totally using your POV. Apart from all this garbage, you brought no single source or reference to sustain your claims (apart from the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ on the Western Sahara which limits its opinion to the 18th and 19th centuries. You brought nothing, am i right?
One more thing, as i already asked you to refrain from personal attacks twice, it is time to have a break. I am blocking you for that according to wikipedia policies that you are not respecting. You have accused me a racist and Hitler. Now you become more sophisticated in this behaviour, you are calling me a Fuhrer. Is this a civilized manner to discuss matters in your life? If so, this is not the right place to do so. You called the other admin in the fr wiki a racist as well!!!! I mean it is sooooo random your accusations are! Learn to be civilized before asking me to learn about the history of Morocco. Don't forget to enhance your English and other languages, and never forget to respect the manual of style in wikipedia.
Tienes entonces que añadir eso a tu propaganda en la pagína de discusión allí. Di a todo el mundo que somos terrerificos y nos parecemos muchisimo al Fuhrer y que nos vamos a matarte despues del bloqueo. No olvides de insister de llamar a ese jaleo istiqlal a la vez del PP. Buena suerte.
P.S. Remover el nonsense no significa que soy pro-morocco como no significa que tu eres anti-morocco. -- Szvest 11:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
In order to get a more accurate description of the history of Morocco, I think that some emphasis on the loose character of the statal structures of the different dynasties that ruled Morocco should be introduced. I mean, muslim statal structures were weaker and looser than their counterparts in Europe (heir to the Roman traditions), for example. Also, in order to avoid the constant interference of Bokpasa (as in es: he didn't learn to follow the manual of style, therefore their contributions are usually rubbish) it would be good, especially when talking about early phases to talk about "what currently Morocco is" (or the territory of nowadays Morocco) instead of Morocco. Best regards -- Ecemaml 07:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Somebody know where is Aguz ( Souira Guedima)?Bokpasa 14:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Souira Guedima is the modern name for what used to be known as Aguz, Agouz (or in French translation of el-Bakri spelled Couz), it used to be port for Aghmat in 11th century, then was taken over by Portuguese in early 16th century. It is at the mouth of the Tensift river. MisterCDE 01:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
There is not much information on Morocco during World War II. This can be expanded to a section. Jay ( talk) 05:31, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
There's a reason for that: /info/en/?search=Marocchinate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.237.234.90 ( talk) 19:36, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
I use your own source of information, I write to ask wich part you think it`s wrong but you do not write me, and clear, and wrote Vandalism???
If you are sure Im wrong, write why part with rthre arguments and thrue sorce of Information itws wrong!.
Bokpasa 14:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I put it correct information, and I will put more references. Bokpasa 08:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Per the request above by Omar-Toons, I have requested temporary full protection for this article. The edit war seems to be getting out of hand -- Jubilee ♫ clipman 06:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I strongly encourage you all to discuss your differences while this page is fully protected. There must be some common ground? -- Jubilee ♫ clipman 15:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Please, Bokpasa, stop including a barely loosed collection of chronological items without proper sources just to push your original research about the nonexistence of Morocco in the Middle and Modern Ages. -- Ecemaml ( talk) 14:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Original maps:
Diferents maps:
Bokpasa 16:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Maps around history http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/northafrica/haxmorocco.html
Bokpasa 14:54, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Cheers, Vipinhari || talk 18:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
On 13 January 2008 the user Perspicacite made substantial edits to the post-colonial sections of this article.
Among other things it resulted in about 22 years being removed so that it now goes from mentioning the Sand War to annexing Western Sahara in 1985.
Surely there must have been something happening in Morocco between these events?
Referring to
History of Western Sahara does not make it acceptable to remove all Moroccan history during those 22 years and all Moroccan history not related to the Western Sahara issue since 1963.
Something must have happened in Morocco except that conflict for the last 48 years?
Could someone with the required knowledge please restore/insert the missing information?
85.225.84.165 (
talk) 08:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Casablanca1950s.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 15:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC) |
I've marked the article with 3 tags: it needs more references, copy-editing for coherence in tone & style, and may contain original research. The article has 14 references with many sections & paragraphs lacking any reference at all. Given that this is English Wikipedia, from the perspective of a native English speaker/reader, there are a number of areas which require work to help give the article a clear and steady tone/style. I've done a little work in trying to fix the issues myself, however I am not an expert in the subject and would feel more comfortable if other editors addressed the issues. Coinmanj ( talk) 22:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't want to address the question of references - I agree it's probably desirable to add more. I don't think it needs the objection to style, however. I've made some corrections to the English, especially toward the beginning of the article, and I don't think it needs its English language style flagged any longer. Wallace McDonald ( talk) 05:53, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
@ Omar-toons:, the article had a copy-edit tag to which I responded; I don't need to gain consensus for a copy-edit, if the tag was there in the first place. That said, I am happy to discuss any specific issues you might have; "you didn't discuss a copy-edit" is not valid ground for reverting me. Specifically, the only information I removed was unsourced; you cannot revert that and demand consensus. More importantly, I am not doing content work, and so I am not hung up on my version; if you add sources and sourced material, I am not going to take the slightest issue, and thanks for addressing some of the CN tags. I did, however, rewrite the lead to match the article content; the lead had unsourced material that wasn't even covered in the article body, which was not going to fly. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 03:59, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
More corrections; "protectorate" should be plural, because it was not a joint protectorate. "Heads of state," not "head of states." Parentheses are confusing, and the tense was incorrect; past tense, it became the Spanish protectorate. Parentheses are not needed, and confusing. The protectorate didn't dictate that the Sultan had no real power; the treaty did. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 16:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
The recorded history of Morocco begins with the Phoenician colonization of the Moroccan coast between the 12th and 6th centuries BC, although the area was inhabited by indigenous Berber people for several thousand years before that.
Archaeological evidence has shown that the area was inhabited by hominids at least 400,000 years ago. Until the arrival of the Phoenicians, the region was inhabited by hunter-gatherers, who eventually evolved both the Berber language as well as agriculture. From the 12th century BC the region was dominated by Phoenician traders and settlements, before the the state of Carthage extended its hegemony there in the 5th century BC. Some independent tribal kingdoms, such as Mauretania, existed as satellites of Carthage during this period. With the fall of Carthage in 40 BC, the coastal region became a province of the Roman empire, with satellite kingdoms in the interior. In the mid-5th century, it was overran by Vandals, before being recovered by Byzantine Empire.
The region was conquered by the Arabs in the early 8th century AD, but broke off from the Arab Caliphate after the revolt of 740. Half a century later, the Moroccan state was established by the Idrisid dynasty.[1][2] Under the Almoravid and the Almohad dynasties, Morocco dominated the Maghreb and Muslim Spain. The Saadi dynasty ruled the region from 1549 to 1659, followed by the Alaouite dynasty in the 17th century, who have since been the royal family of Morocco. The kingdom was consolidated by Ismail Ibn Sharif, who used an army of black slaves to maintain control over the Berber people. He also succeeded in driving the English colonial empire from Tangier in 1684 and the Spanish Empire from Larache in 1689.
In 1912, after the First Moroccan Crisis and the Agadir Crisis, the Treaty of Fez was signed, dividing Morocco into French and Spanish protectorates. In 1956, after 44 years of French rule, Morocco regained independence from France, and shortly afterward regained most of the territories under Spanish control.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of Morocco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:06, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Bocchus I was not the first known Mauretanian king, unless this refers to something like the first king after Carthaginian presence had ended in Mauretania when they retreated to Carthage sometime after the 2nd Punic war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7xn ( talk • contribs) 11:53, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:52, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure what kind of maintenance template would flag this issue on the main page, but currently large parts of the article are directly copied from several articles, without any trimming to make them fit an overview article like this (see e.g. WP:SUMMARY). Part of the whole point of having dedicated articles for each topic is so that other articles can summarize and link to them rather than literally repeat their entire content (or their whole "history" sections, in this case). Additionally, some of the copied content was already lacking citations at the articles from which they were copied (e.g. the Almohad article), so now these verifiability issues have been imported here too and are unlikely to be fixed independently here. Condensing and summarizing their content, however, would also make it easier to add new citations.
PS: I already alluded to some of these problems in my edit summaries back in September 2021, but I figured there needs to be a clearer notice of this somewhere. R Prazeres ( talk) 01:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I thought that the page did not sufficiently reflect the transnational influence that Morocco had through its nationalist-independence movements, in the global struggle against colonialism. I added a section to further develop:
Morroco has been a key transnational hub in the struggle against colonialism in the Middle-east region. The end of World War II that had weakened European colonial powers, the start of the US-URSS search for influence and the establishment of the United Nations in 1945 praising universal equality, represented an impetus for anti-colonial and nationalist movements in Morocco.[1]
Through its special international status and the French and US presence in Tangier, the city became a hub for anti-colonial activism. Fromout Tanger, a link was established between the inside resistance and activists from other countries. By creating a transnational network of supporters and public advocates (i.e. cultural elites, politicians, public figures, academics, medias), the nationalist movement aimed to bring the Moroccan cause to the forefront of the international community debate.[2]
In order to gain influence at a global level, Moroccan nationalist movements globalised their cause by seeking to unite with the pan-arabism movement and the Arab League, extending their activism networks to Cairo.[3] Another example is Paris, that became an important European city from where cultural elites advocated for the independence cause and brought the protectorate question to the forefront of the public debate.[4] The independence movement eventually managed to bring their national claim for independence to the UN for the first time in 1951, gaining a vote of 20 states in favour and 23 against.[4]
( Curiouschanter ( talk) 23:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi all, there is a splitting proposal at the Alawi dynasty article that is directly relevant to the topic here and that would likely benefit from further input by interested editors. See Talk:Alawi dynasty#Splitting proposal (and seeking feedback). Thanks, R Prazeres ( talk) 20:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)