From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleMorocco was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 7, 2006 Good article nomineeListed
December 9, 2007 Good article reassessmentDelisted
October 1, 2009 Good article nomineeNot listed
October 18, 2009 Good article nomineeListed
October 24, 2009 Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on July 13, 2004, March 2, 2005, March 2, 2006, March 2, 2007, March 2, 2008, March 2, 2009, and March 2, 2010.
Current status: Delisted good article

Not to be confused with...

Really? We need this at the top of the page? Seems patronizing:

Not to be confused with Maraca, Monaco, Comoro Islands, or Comoros.

Aren't we forgetting these?

Not to be confused with Macaque, Macaca, Marac, Maracanã, Morokro, Maracas, Mokoro, Macaron, Maroc, Maruca, Marocconus, Moruca, Maroko, or Marruecos.

By the way, one of those really does mean Morocco; the others don't. Mathglot ( talk) 02:14, 15 November 2023 (UTC) reply

"Ethnic groups" in infobox

I entertained a conversation like this before, but I didn't set forth an awfully thorough argument and it has been archived since. I deem it useless to have an "ethnic groups" parameter in the infobox because:

  1. There is no authoritative source regarding ethnic groups or diversity in Morocco. Such parameters are not included in the census. Prior to 1975, the census kept a tally of Berbers, Arabs, Foreigners, and "Israelites" but this is not up to date.
  2. Despite this, there are multiple surveys (AfroBarometer, ArabBarometer, Britannica, etc...) in which Moroccans are asked their ethnic identity throughout time. Nearly all of them differ on the percentage and methodology -- some observe more Berber respondants than Arabs, some include Baydhan and no Sahrawis, etc... They may be from reliable sources, but per WP:ONUS and WP:SOURCESDIFFER I deem the best response to this to be simply removing the "ethnic groups" parameter
  3. Even if multiple reliable surveys can be found, the methodology between them will inevitably differ and I fear this page will simply boil down to an edit war on who has the latest and best survey for this parameter. Per Britannica's "Berber" entry, "an accurate count of Berbers is difficult to come by for a variety of reasons, including a lack of thorough surveys". I fear this article turns into a tug-of-war regarding what defines racial identity, which is a debate that I'm certain nobody wants to occur here.

A solution could be like with the France article, with a Nationality parameter -- per the 2014 (latest) census; this number should be 99.7% Moroccan and 0,25% other. I seek consensus regarding this. NAADAAN ( talk) 18:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Furthermore, the source used in the article claims it's an approximation -- whilst it's presented as an uncontested fact in the article. NAADAAN ( talk) 18:12, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
There has been a similar discussion to this on Talk:Moroccans, and consensus has been established that most sources agree on the ~70% Arab and ~30% Berber ethnic breakdown. As of now, the 2012 source appears to be the most recent source available regarding ethnic groups. The situation in the article regarding France differs from that of Morocco, considering that French nationality is intertwined with ethnicity. The French people are both an ethnic group and nation, whereas Morocco is multi-ethnic. Skitash ( talk) 18:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
You can understand that a subject as polarizing as ethnic identity probably shouldn't be dependant on consensus based on vague, unclear, numbers with unclear methodologies. Morocco's multi-ethnic nature can be made justice just as well in the lead without having to resort to estimating numbers IMO. NAADAAN ( talk) 18:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Ethnic demographics, by their nature, are complex and multifaceted. It is practically impossible to obtain exact figures. This is why Wikipedia articles rely on estimates, which is the case in many country articles, such as Sudan. Even reputable sources, such as the CIA World Factbook base their information on estimates. In my opinion, highlighting the country's nationalities "99.7% Moroccan and 0.25% other" is not useful at all, and does not tell us anything. Template:Infobox country does not have a nationality parameter for a reason.
It seems that numerous sources align on a comparable ethnic breakdown range, and generally do not significantly differ from one another. Here are a few sources I could find:
  • Encyclopedic World Atlas: "Arab 70%, Berber 30%" [1]
  • The Report: Morocco 2012: "Morocco's population is approximately 67% Arab, 31% indigenous Berber and 2% Sahrawi" [2]
  • World Health Systems: "More than 80% of Moroccans are Arab, while the remaining 20% are Berber" [3]
  • Arab Barometer: 71% Arab, 28% Berber, 1% others [4]
  • Genetic Disorders Among Arab Populations: "Majority Arabs, 35% Berbers" [5]
  • Guide to African Political and Economic Development: "Arab 70%" [6]
  • Snapshot of Past and Present Historical Events in African Countries: "Arabs make up 65% of the over 33 million population of Morocco while the Berbers consist of the rest." [7]
Given this, it is reasonable to agree on an approximate range of 65-70% Arab and 30-35% Berber. Skitash ( talk) 19:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
"Infobox country does not have a nationality parameter for a reason" doesn't mean anything, that parameter can easily be implemented. The policy of the state under Mohammed VI has been to prioritize a mixed "national identity" above perceived ethnic differences, and ommitting it would be the wiser choice rather than arguing over this endlessly.
Out of the 7 sources you have provided, 1 was a business brochure, 2 were more focused on public health than demographics. Regarding the Arab Barometer, the data is very versatile, with "20% Berber; 44% Arab" (2021) to "28% Berber; 70% Arab" (2023) -- such an increase in the number of Arabs within 2 years is odd. Furthermore, this doesn't take bias into account; I would assume that Arabs would be more avid to participate in the ArabBarometer and the fact the survey is done online would likely put others in disadvantage.
This is a very cautious subject, I wish not to fall in a pithole of debates about "what is truth" and playing around with semantics but the amount of surveys (including the ones I provided) elaborate on what an Arabized Berber could be classified as (Berber or Arab, Distinct?) and there are multiple reliable sources claiming that "the majority of Maghrebis are Arabized Berbers" and that " the origins of the Maghreb's population are therefore Berber: the vast majority of today's Arabic speakers are simply Arabized Berbers". There are numerous reliable sources that disprove the earlier estimate of Berbers and Sahrawis in the country, a few I could find:
We could go around in circles about this for ages, but the reality is that this is practically a minefield and there are thousands of arguments we could raise towards one another. From my personal experience, ethnic statistics are seen as an academic taboo in Morocco (probably a remnant of French colonialism where it was outlawed). Following a cultural Arabization campaign led by the Istiqlal Party, I am pessimistic that an accurate number will be determined. I have refrained from even scratching the surface regarding genetic analysis, I apologize for the essay. NAADAAN ( talk) 20:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Thank you for your input, however:
  • The New Arab source [8] which you provided bases its estimates on an advocacy group made for indigenous people [9] which itself is based on estimates claimed by the Amazigh Cultural Movement, which is not necessarily neutral. Additionally, the New Arab article says that 70% of Moroccans claim Amazigh heritage, contrary to what the source actually says "While the 2016 census in Morocco estimated the number of Tamazight speakers to be 28% of the population, the Amazigh associations claim a rate of 65 to 70%". This is about language, not ethnicity.
  • The Western Sahara conflict source [10] says that Western Sahara makes up 2.7% of the total Moroccan population, not Sahrawis. Sahrawis themselves constitute about a third of the population of Western Sahara.
  • Veremen's source [11] gives a very wide range "28-60%", therefore making it unreliable.
  • [12] [13] These sources are outdated.
  • The figure in the Indigenous peoples’ rights in Morocco source [14] is based on the claim of a leading Amazigh activist. Not necessarily neutral.
  • The Britannica source [15] is also quite outdated. Additionally, "Arabized Berber" is not an ethnic group, but its solely a term which signifies Berbers who underwent Arabization, who would usually consider themselves culturally and linguistically Arab. The source also gives a percentage of 10% "Mauritanian Moors", and it is not very clear as to what this is supposed to mean.
  • [16] Berber speakers does not equate to ethnic Berbers.
In relation to your last point, it is important to note that there is a distinction between ethnicity and genetics, and there shouldn't be intertwining of the two. Genetics and Berberist assertions aside, ethnic estimates generally approximate that 65-70% of Moroccans identify as part of the Arab ethnic group. This is what constitutes the basis for determining ethnicity. Skitash ( talk) 21:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
"Berber speakers does not equate to ethnic Berbers." Not all rectangles are squares but all (in this case most) squares are rectangles, if this is your qualification then I am curious on what makes an Arab or a Berber in your opinion considering most Berber speakers are native. You forget that some of the "not necessarily neutral sources" are not only scholarly but peer-reviewed, which would be the best per WP:SOURCETYPES.
You seem to have a grievance against older sources and "Amazigh activists" but in such a circumstance where there are no official metrics regarding this, this is close to the best we can have -- furthermore, I assume good-faith and wouldn't believe it would serve their interest to exaggerate in scholarly papers (but rather underestimate it). I also doubt that demographics in Morocco significantly shifted from 2000 to now.
Nonetheless, here are some sourced statements:
So I conclude, with all of the past arguments, the following:
  • Reliable sources regarding Berbers in Morocco range from ~20-60%, some activists give the number as high as 80%.
  • Based on my personal experience (I acknowledge that I am not a reliable source) and some media reports, ethnic statistics are at best lacking and an academic taboo, at worst forbidden.
  • There has not been any reliable tally, census, or large-scale regarding the number of Berbers in Morocco
  • It would be futile given this limited data to even attempt to separate Berbers and Arabs from a country comprised in a majority of "Arabized Berbers".
  • As a point of reference, many country-related GAs based their ethnic statisics on the Census, which we don't dispose in this case. (see Philippines, New Zealand, Singapore, Azerbaijan, Jordan seems to actually conjure ethnicity from religion which is less reliable than language, )
I propose, in such a severe case of WP:SOURCESDIFFER, and attempting to figure out our own statistics here would be approaching original research WP:SYNTH, to completely ommit ethnic statistics in the infobox and instead opt for either:
  • Linguistical statistics (i.e. 90% Darija, 40-60% Tamazight dialects, etc...), using numbers from the IRCAM & the HCP.
  • Nationality (92% Moroccan, 5% European, 2% Subsaharan and 1% other in 2022 per an HCP/MFA report or 99.7% Moroccan and 0.25% other per the HCP's 2014 census), using data from the HCP and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
  • Ommiting any statistics on the infobox and adding the varying estimates onto the lead.
Anthropologists Thomas K. Park and Aomar Boum describe Berbers as a "group of people who epitomize the inulity of racial classificaons, whose narrow focus on a small subset of a group's genetic inheritance makes scant sense of modern genetic knowledge" (p. 130), ultimately this is beyond "a complex subject", attempting to put any numbers into sense and presenting it as an ultimate fact onto Wikipedia would be reckless at this point where we don't have any reliable sociological study about this. This is finding a needle in a haystack, but perhaps the upcoming 2024 census may offer some answers. Good night :) NAADAAN ( talk) 23:08, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I get where you're going but there is something that you should consider. The sources you provided exclusively focus on estimating Berber percentages without accounting for Arabs or other ethnic groups, unlike the ones I provided which present an ethnic breakdown of all ethnic groups. Your citations, asserting Berber percentages ranging from 60% to 80%, attribute Berber identity to populations that, in reality, do not identify as such. The main premise behind this claim lies in the assertion that many Arabs are Arabized Berbers (Berbers who became Arab, and are today Arab), which is something you also mentioned. In accordance with the broad definition of ethnicity, which takes into account aspects such as identity, language, culture, etc, these individuals would be considered as part of the Arab ethnic group. Government censuses (not accessible in this case) usually provide individuals with the opportunity to self-identify with their ethnic affiliation, and this is what forms the basis for determining ethnic percentages of countries. It is not activists that decide. Given that most Moroccans identify as Arab, it would not be possible for a Berber percentage to be so high if an official census was conducted. Unofficial surveys which take place (e.g. Arab Barometer) usually indicate a percentage range of 60/65% to 70% for those identifying as Arab. This perfectly aligns with the ethnic breakdown sources which I provided.
I will have to disagree with your proposal. Again, a nationality parameter is needless and does not tell us anything. While you drew a comparison between this article's context and that of France, these two articles clearly differ, given that ethnicity is intertwined with nationality in France. I suggest either leaving the long standing version of the article as it is, or perhaps changing the range to the widely accepted 60%/65% to 70% Arab and 30%-35% Berber. Skitash ( talk) 18:21, 12 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I think it would be useful to deconstruct all of this through helping to distinguish what constitutes what ethnic identity in Morocco in relation to Arabs and Berbers compared to the scope of the available sources we have.
The only survey or study that provide methodology regarding any tally of Berbers in comparaison to Arabs that I could find were the census on Berber speakers, and the Arab Barometer. I will address the Berber speakers statistics in a later message.
Despite your past assertion, there's a myriad of sources that demonstrate that in the case of Morocco, Berber speakers equate to the amount of Berbers in the country (I will provide them if necessary). The available literature would lead me to conclude that while not all Berbers speak Tamazight, virtually all Tamazight speakers are Berbers and a percentage of Tamazight speakers would equate to Berbers in Morocco.
The Arab Barometer is janky at worst and inaccurate at best, judging that per the 2022 AB Wave VII technical report, data in Morocco were only collected from Arabic-speaking urban Moroccans, this causes some bias when it comes to ethno-lingustic parameters especially considering that the main purpose of the Arab Barometer is to serve as an opinion poll -- this is nonwithstanding that there are concerns of a social-desirability bias in the survey which would be relevant in the case of Amazighs taking part in a pan-Arab poll. What do you think can remedy this? NAADAAN ( talk) 20:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC) reply
"There's a myriad of sources that demonstrate that in the case of Morocco, Berber speakers equate to the amount of Berbers in the country" If you believe this is the case, then wouldn't Berbers constitute 26% of the population, given that 26% of Moroccans are Berber speakers according to the 2014 Moroccan census you provided? Since a reliable census on this already exists, there is no need to rely on estimates. There are individuals who speak Berber but identify as Arabs and vice versa. Therefore, equating Berber speakers to ethnic Berbers is not entirely accurate. I suggest sticking to what reliable ethnic breakdown sources say; that Berbers comprise 30% to 35% of the population.
"Data in Morocco were only collected from Arabic-speaking urban Moroccans" Actually, the source explicitly states that data in Morocco was collected from both urban and rural populations. It also covered all 12 provinces of Morocco, which obviously includes Berber-inhabited areas. Again, Arabic-speaking doesn't mean anything. Many individuals may choose to identify as Berber while exclusively using Arabic as their native language. I don't see why Amazighs wouldn't take part in a "pan-Arab poll", and it is noteworthy that Arab Barometer has been peer-reviewed [17] (best among WP:SOURCETYPES), and it has been described as a non-partisan research network that has been conducting high quality and reliable public opinion surveys in the MENA region. Skitash ( talk) 21:34, 12 December 2023 (UTC) reply
I'm afraid we're both getting side-tracked here. My main grievance here is that there is no authoritative source or survey regarding ethno-demographics in Morocco, and it would be reckless to present any number as fact in such a gray-zone. I have offered to replace that with nationality and linguistic statistics which could demonstate a similar or equating point in a case where there is an authoritative source.
The initial argument I had raised was that the affirmation that Arabs were the majority of the population was contradicted by assertions made by other reliable sources, and the fact an accurate count cannot be determined with relevant data being " both scarce and hotly contested" -- this led me to conclude that it should likely be changed rather than throw numbers around and presenting it as fact.
There are individuals who speak Berber but identify as Arabs. [...] equating Berber speakers to ethnic Berbers is not entirely accurate. El Aissati (2001): "In the case of Amazigh, [...] the most prominent index to ethnicity is linguistic. People define themselves as Imazighen once they speak the Amazigh language." (p. 58, WP:YANARS)
The source on the infobox is the 2012 Oxford Business Group report on Morocco, the 2020 report states has completely ommited such statistics and opted for linguisitcs, stating that "it is estimated that at least 40% of the population, [...] speak one of three Berber or Amazigh languages, which were the region's native languages." (p. 13)
The peer-review in question was done by FinEquity, which is a working group that seems to focus more " women's economic empowerement" than ethnodemographics. Ultimately, you conceeded that it was reliable and high-quality as a public opinion survey notwithstanding that ethnic identity surveys involve a different methodology. There has also been a peer-reviewed paper that rises concerns of social-desirability bias in the survey, which would effectively poison the survey in a question as sensitive as ethno-identity. Excuse any possible delays in my response, my schedule's getting tighter and tighter. -- NAADAAN ( talk) 23:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply
As I previously mentioned, the sources you've presented seem to overlook the existence of various ethnic groups in Morocco and primarily focus on emphasizing the prevalence of Berbers (while also claiming Arabized Berber populations), when only a minority of the population identify as such. Your argument that "people define themselves as Imazighen once they speak the Amazigh language" contradicts your sources, as you would be suggesting that only 26% identify as Berber. [18] While determining the exact number of people with Berber ancestry might be challenging, establishing identity (the basis for determining ethnicity) is definitely achievable and is certainly not a gray-zone. The third link to Lameen Souag you provided which claims that that relevant data is "both scarce and hotly contested" accounts for speakers of Berber languages, and this is contradicted by the 2014 Moroccan census (a reliable source) which provides accurate percentages of Berber speakers. I don't see why a government census would not be reliable. If you take another look at the sources I provided, you will observe that they align on comparable percentages and consider all ethnic groups, avoiding exclusive emphasis on either Berbers or Arabs, in contrast to your sources. The absence of ethnicity mention in the 2020 Oxford report does not contradict prior estimates or diminish their validity. We still have older figures and other reliable sources which support similar percentages. Public opinion surveys can be useful in judging ethnic percentages, and if you're concerned with Arab Barometer possibly containing any bias, the Afro Barometer can serve as an alternative (notice how the percentages are strikingly comparable to those of Arab Barometer and other reliable sources). [19] Skitash ( talk) 19:08, 14 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Thank you for your patience, "You will observe that they align on comparable percentages and consider all ethnic groups, avoiding exclusive emphasis on either Berbers or Arabs, in contrast to your sources." I will rely on other articles as a rule of thumb -- the pages for other countries in the Maghreb (ref. Tunisia, Algeria) use sources focusing on each specific ethnic group rather than comparative sources, must they be removed? As a matter of fact, the page for Egypt has had no ethnic statistics whatsoever since 2011 despite a significant divide between Arabs and Copts.
I don't understand your argument regarding the census, I wouldn't say it's clear-cut and undisputed as you portray it to be since the IRCAM had contested the census's results and criticized its methodology (the president of the HCP adds that they had not "conducted an ethnic census"), I think it is useless to entertain an argument about a census considering that a new one is due in a few months. Your argument is The Afro Barometer also only claims to be a reliable source regarding "evaluations of democracy, governance, and quality of life" and not sociodemographics.
My argument is as follows: there are reliable sources (some being WP:TIER1, others WP:TIER2) contesting the numbers shown in the infobox, per WP:SOURCESDIFFER "Sources themselves do not need to maintain a neutral point of view. Indeed, many reliable sources are not neutral. Our job as editors is simply to summarize what reliable sources say", summarizing those sources would give us a vague range which would be counter-productive concludes that it's better if it's removed, especially in such a polarizing subject. Best regards NAADAAN ( talk) 19:20, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply
It appears that you are relying on other articles to bolster your argument, when this goes against WP:OTHERCONTENT. Whether or not Egypt had no ethnic statistics since 2011 is irrelevant here, particularly given that most Wikipedia articles do include ethnic statistics in the infobox. Your assertion that the 2014 Moroccan census is unreliable due to criticism by IRCAM bears no merit and does not undermine the census's validity. Splitting hairs like this is not an efficient way of arguing. What I don't understand is your eagerness to eliminate widely accepted ethnic percentage range by attempting to contradict them with sources that are mostly mere estimates by activists and advocacy groups. These sources exclusively focus on highlighting the Berber percentages while disregarding the Arab populations, a flaw which I have already addressed and pointed out. Not only that, but one of the articles you cited does not even interpret the original source properly, and claims something completely different. What I also don't seem to understand is why you have just decided to delete the Arab and Berber ethnic percentage ranges in the demographics section of the article. Without an edit summary, you have replaced it with one estimate focusing on Berbers and completely omitting the existence of Arabs, and this just seems to be a neutrality issue. Skitash ( talk) 17:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
particularly given that most Wikipedia articles do include ethnic statistics in the infobox Why should this article be any different then? You raised WP:OTHERCONTENT, but I must remind you that this policy states that "while comparing with other articles is not, in general, a convincing argument, comparing with articles that have been through some kind of quality review such as Featured article, Good article, or have achieved a WikiProject A class rating, makes a much more credible case" -- considering that another editor had agreed citing other FAs like Canada and Germany and that I raised the cases of other countries in the Maghreb, this point still stands.
What I also don't seem to understand is why you have just decided to delete the Arab and Berber ethnic percentage ranges in the demographics section of the article. I've been planning to expand further on the demographics section of the page to make it more concise with details about the modern effect of Arab Hilalian migration, as I deemed the previous version on the page to be haphazardly written. Of course if these edits keep being reverted then I sadly don't have an awful lot of wiggle room.
Insofar that others editors agree on being at least cautious about this data, it is better off omitted from the infobox. Using the Census linguistic data for the infobox would be undue per our previous understanding, this especially fueled by disagreement between sources -- these are the only factors at play here. I will ask for a WP:3O. NAADAAN ( talk) 18:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
I agree with being cautious, especially given the contentious nature of ethnicity in Morocco (as in many other places). It might help to know where the cited source ( [20]) obtained its figures to begin with and which other reliable sources cite the same or similar figures. If the census doesn't ask for ethnic identification, then where is this coming from? R Prazeres ( talk) 18:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
It's worth noting the cited source seems to be a business brochure rather than a demographic review. For information, here's the questionaire used for the latest census in 2014, with no mention of ethnicity.
A point I ommited is that surveys like the AfroBarometer and ArabBarometer are done through the internet, hence privileging people living in urban centers and creating an inherent bias against more rural Berbers and Sahrawis. NAADAAN ( talk) 18:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Clearly not clear with just stats in infobox ....dont list in infobx like FA articles Canada, Germany or Japan..let prose in body explain.!!!!! Moxy- 19:29, 18 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Almoravid, Almohad and Marinid dynasties missing in the description

Hello, may i ask why do we jump from Idrisid dynasty to Alawi dynasty in the history section by omitting more than 600 hundred years of our history? We have to be consistent.. we can't say that the establishment of the moroccan state is in 788 and then we jump directly to the alawi dynasty as if there was nothing after. Those other dynasties are also moroccan dynasties. We need clarification. Thanks. Moorishino ( talk) 15:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC) reply

This has been addressed before (e.g. here). The infobox is a summary of essential points, not a list of everything. This is consistent with other articles. R Prazeres ( talk) 00:56, 17 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Country area

I've tried to clean up some edits made by a sockpuppeter, but the country area totals could really use some attention from someone with knowledge of the country. In particular, the "territory" footnote in the infobox needs a citation or two, and the body of the article needs to repeat the detailed info that's in the lead. Ed  [talk]  [OMT] 20:30, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Wiki Education assignment: ARH 371_The TransAtlantic_Cross-Cultural Representations

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 2 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dawhite5 ( article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Dawhite5 ( talk) 04:35, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2024 

Iddir el bourki (
talk) 11:49, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
reply

Morocco

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) ( Talk) 16:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 2 March 2024

Morocco is one of the safest countries in the world. Iddir el bourki ( talk) 11:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The site you provided is the webpage of a Moroccan travel agency, which is neither reliable nor independent. Liu1126 ( talk) 13:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Who provides travel Morocco and what you want to know clear about. 49.184.15.103 ( talk) 17:10, 5 March 2024 (UTC) reply

March 2024

@ R Prazeres: I have no issue with removing the paragraph According to social anthropologist Cristiana Strava, .. if you believe that it's UNDUE. The only reason I restored is because "Vogelman29" described it as spam and deleted it while falsely claiming that it doesn't exist. M.Bitton ( talk) 21:33, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks. Yes the revert was reasonable, as it wasn't spam. If there's no other objection, I'll remove it for the reason I stated here. The source in question is perfectly relevant to cite in a discussion of contemporary Morocco, just not in this manner, and maybe not in this specific location. R Prazeres ( talk) 22:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Why is the 712,550 Km² area removed from the lead section and infobox? 808 AD ( talk) 23:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply
It's not, it's in the same place it used to be, with explanation. R Prazeres ( talk) 23:20, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply
No, it certainly has been removed from the lead section and the infobox, I'm not talking about the footnote. This change doesn't respect neutrality and has to be reverted. 808 AD ( talk) 23:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply
We're already giving the baseless claim UNDUE weight by mentioning it in the infobox, which is meant to summarize facts. M.Bitton ( talk) 03:00, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The de facto rule over WS, and the US recognition are indeed facts. Nothing is Undue here. 808 AD ( talk) 03:07, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Please read WP:FRINGE. M.Bitton ( talk) 03:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply
@ 808 AD: please read WP:ONUS and refrain from edit warring. M.Bitton ( talk) 03:03, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Oh, I actually missed that the figure was trimmed inline in a recent edit by Snowstormfigorion ( [21]). That said, footnote or no, I don't think quoting two radically different numbers inline in the lead is a very good idea. For that matter, I don't see why land area would be stated in the lead at all; it's not essential information (e.g. none of the featured country articles give that figure in the lead) and if the borders of the country are disputed, even more so a bad idea. R Prazeres ( talk) 03:05, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply
In this case, I have no problem with removing the land area from the lead (both numbers). What about the infobox? 808 AD ( talk) 03:10, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The area of Morocco ends at its southern border with Western Sahara. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 05:15, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Well, the Moroccan de facto rule doesn't. And the US recognition isn't fringe theory, we're talking about the recognition of a whole goverment, a very important member of the UN. 808 AD ( talk) 14:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The US recognition is the definition of WP:FRINGE. The so-called de facto rule (illegal occupation) covers parts of the claimed territory. M.Bitton ( talk) 14:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply
There is no consistent policy I believe for the infobox figures, but from a quick look at various other country articles where territory is a complicated question, there is typically one figure accompanied by a footnote explaining alternative estimates. I have no strong opinion about the best approach here, though obviously the figure excluding disputed territories should take precedence at least. R Prazeres ( talk) 05:52, 10 March 2024 (UTC) reply
the Israel article is a good example. 808 AD ( talk) 14:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply
No it's not. The Russia article is much better in that sense. M.Bitton ( talk) 14:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes, or for that matter, India (which is a featured article), Pakistan, Argentina, China, etc. R Prazeres ( talk) 21:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

" Sultanate of Morocco" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Sultanate of Morocco has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 14 § Sultanate of Morocco until a consensus is reached. asilvering ( talk) 01:00, 14 March 2024 (UTC) reply

March 2024

@ NAADAAN: you keep mentioning the constitution, but without citing it. Is there a reason for that? M.Bitton ( talk) 20:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply

I believed that citing different translations of the constitution was redundant, I believed that in this case -- giving a citation edit summary would be enough. Here is the official Tamazight translation of the constitution made by the IRCAM as was commanded under a 2019 law, I cited it previously in some of my edit summaries. You can see that "Kingdom of Morocco" is translated as "ⵜⴳⵍⴷⵉⵜ ⵏ ⵍⵎⵖⵔⵉⴱ" and that "God, Homeland, King" is translated as "ⵕⴱⴱⵉ, ⴰⵎⵓⵔ, ⴰⴳⵍⵍⵉⴷ" and that is the terminology used by the government. I have no idea why it's ommited. NAADAAN ( talk) 20:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC) reply
It's not redundant when it's disputed. It was removed by Snowstormfigorion who cited unsourced transcription and transliteration as an explanation. The source that you provided (I haven't checked it) should satisfy the transcription. Adding it will also prevent editors from fiddling with it, as is often the case with unsourced and badly sourced tifinagh words. Since the transliteration has also been challenged, finding a RS for it wouldn't be a bad idea. M.Bitton ( talk) 14:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply
I think a government source is good enough, I will indeed cite it now. NAADAAN ( talk) 17:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply
I have set the transliteration issue across other articles NAADAAN ( talk) 18:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply
If you mean the transcription, then I suggest you take certain precautions while doing so. This addition, for instance, is anachronistic. M.Bitton ( talk) 18:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2024

Move "French" to "Foreign languages" in the sidebar.

It makes absolutely no sense to have English and Spanish in foreign languages but not French. It is just as foreign as these two languages and isn't widely spoken by the population. Kurdish Elf ( talk) 05:08, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

 Done Skitash ( talk) 16:15, 28 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Country area

Why was Western Sahara removed? Way to offend an entire country... 2A02:908:820:AB00:90A8:2BEC:BC83:B14B ( talk) 04:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC) reply

HDI ranking error

In the info box for the HDI, Morocco is ranked as "120rd". Please correct to "120th". Intilyc ( talk) 04:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Morocco&oldid=1218213891"