| Revision as of 09:40, 20 December 2013 editOmar-toons (talk | contribs)5,164 edits →Political maps and NPOV← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:45, 23 December 2013 edit undoOmar-toons (talk | contribs)5,164 edits →Political maps and NPOVNext edit → | ||
| Line 95: | Line 95: | ||
| As the inclusion of political maps is not indispensable and since a map without borders is already given on the infobox, imho we can avoid putting any map with marked political borders as it is contrary to ] to make the disputed territory of Western Sahara as fully independent or fully integrated to Morocco. | As the inclusion of political maps is not indispensable and since a map without borders is already given on the infobox, imho we can avoid putting any map with marked political borders as it is contrary to ] to make the disputed territory of Western Sahara as fully independent or fully integrated to Morocco. | ||
| On the other hand, ] is based on regional data that can't be ultimately "croped" to a region |
On the other hand, ] is based on regional data that can't be ultimately "croped" to a region like on ] ; for example, Berber speaking population in the Goulmime-Smara region is concentrated on the north, and if they only represent 20-40% of the province's population, the figure could be up to 60-70% on the northern part of the region, then the second map would be biased: this is why ] can't be added to Wiki. | ||
| For all these reasons, keeping the article without political map would be, imho, the appropriate way to avoid a ] dispute. | For all these reasons, keeping the article without political map would be, imho, the appropriate way to avoid a ] dispute. | ||
Revision as of 13:45, 23 December 2013
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
Hello
I just deleted the following table from the article. I did so for three reasons:
- The figures of only 6 million Berbers are far away from any other figure given in Morocco, where around 12 million is stated, with a trustworthy source (Encarta).
- The source Looklex is definitely not trustworthy, I've used it sometimes and I find it less trustworthy than Misplaced Pages itself, so I wouldn't rely onto. Nobody explains where the figures given at Looklex come from and sometimes they are blatantly contradictory.
- The figure given in the table of 6 million Berbers does not even reflect the figure of Looklex, which gives 9 million. So the table is useless.
I'm sorry for the original research I fitted into the article, but it builds upon two sources: the official population figures of the regions and the map inserted in the article. Until we get some better sources, we could leave the text like that. It is, in my opinion, better than a Looklex-sourced table, which cannot be considered a well-sourced information.--Ilyacadiz (talk) 17:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- It's not allowed to enter original research in the article, I have replaced all the original research by sourced material.81.243.116.244 (talk) 16:50, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
deleted table, sourced to Looklex:
| Ethnic groups of Morocco | Population | % of total Population |
|---|---|---|
| Arabs (and Arabised-Berbers) | 26 000 000 | 80% |
| Berbers | 6 000 000 | 19% |
| Sahrawis | 250 000 | 0.8% |
| Other | 110 000 | 0.2% |
Number of speakers of Berber languages
I have a good source, The Moroccan population census of 2004 asked people older than 5 what languages did they speak, the figures are on the Haut commissariat au plan which is an official Governmental website, it gives the numbers by region (12 regions in total), after adding things up:
- 3.89 million for tashlhyt
- 2.43 million for tamazight
- 1.27 million for tarifit
I'll add these figures later with the proper link. Tachfin (talk) 10:12, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
- Done, Questions are welcomeTachfin (talk) 13:50, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Terminology Amzigh vs Berber
Rev the last edit, the use of the term "Amazigh" instead of "Berber" is per official government terminology as used in the Constitution text, and on the government website here you can read:
the official status of the Arabic language has been enhanced, and the Amazigh language has been granted an official status with a gradual integration process (schools and main public sectors).
There is no "English word" issue because:
- 1. Proper Noun
- 2. Unlike other languages e.g, French there is no authoritative institution to establish what's an official English word and what isn't. OED states:
The Vocabulary of a widely diffused and highly cultivated living language is not a fixed quantity circumscribed by definite limits...there is absolutely no defining line in any direction: the circle of the English language has a well-defined centre but no discernible circumference.
- We should stick to government terminology since it is the authoritative source on this article, for instance The U.S uses the term African American instead of Black or sub-Saharan African in its ethnicity statistics...No body challenged the terminology a government chooses to use.
Lastly, this is merely an esthetic issue. Even if a user does not recognize the term while reading the wikilinks are provided to redirect to the proper "Berber Languages" page. Tachfin (talk) 18:52, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Interviews
There is some data from some interviews from the Ennaji that may be useful on here:
- p. 157: She gathered data in 2000, 2001, and 2002 in the northern hemisphere summers to determine language use and attitudes towards language among educated people. She sent 160 questionaires in Arabic and French to participants living in urban areas who were literate; she received 124 back.
- p. 158: She also interviewed 28 people, half of them Berber
I'll be using this survey as a source WhisperToMe (talk) 23:59, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
% French speakers
Hello,
Actually, different sources give different figures about the % of French speakers in Morocco :
- according to the OIF : 13.5% fully francophone + 19.5% partially ;
- according to the CIDOB : 29% speak Arabic & French, 35% Arabic, French & English, 8% Arabic, French & Spanish ;
- according to the 2004 census : among alphabetized people (57% of pop. in 2004) 53% can write and read Arabic & French, 16% Arabic, French and another language .
Imho we should only put the "crude data" on the Template (33% (OIF) to 39% (census), these are relatively close), and put the details in the corpus of the article, explaining the details given by each source.
Regards,
--Omar-toons (talk) 05:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me :) WhisperToMe (talk) 15:02, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Political maps and NPOV
Hello,
As the inclusion of political maps is not indispensable and since a map without borders is already given on the infobox, imho we can avoid putting any map with marked political borders as it is contrary to WP:NPOV to make the disputed territory of Western Sahara as fully independent or fully integrated to Morocco.
On the other hand, the map of the 2004 census is based on regional data that can't be ultimately "croped" to a region like on Mouh2jijel's map ; for example, Berber speaking population in the Goulmime-Smara region is concentrated on the north, and if they only represent 20-40% of the province's population, the figure could be up to 60-70% on the northern part of the region, then the second map would be biased: this is why WP:OR can't be added to Wiki.
For all these reasons, keeping the article without political map would be, imho, the appropriate way to avoid a WP:POV dispute.
Regards,
--Omar-toons (talk) 09:37, 20 December 2013 (UTC)