Talk:Tariq ibn Ziyad: Difference between revisions

This article 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. Biography: Military C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Mid-importance). An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Berbers C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Berbers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Berbers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BerbersWikipedia:WikiProject BerbersTemplate:WikiProject BerbersBerbers articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. British Overseas Territories Unassessed This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Overseas Territories, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Overseas Territories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.British Overseas TerritoriesWikipedia:WikiProject British Overseas TerritoriesTemplate:WikiProject British Overseas TerritoriesBritish Overseas Territories articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Gibraltar C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gibraltar, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gibraltar and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GibraltarWikipedia:WikiProject GibraltarTemplate:WikiProject GibraltarGibraltar articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. GibraltarpediA C‑class Mid‑importance This article is part of GibraltarpediA.GibraltarpediAWikipedia:GLAM/GibraltarpediATemplate:WikiProject GibraltarpediAGibraltarpediA-related articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Portugal C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Portugal To-do: edit history watch purge Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo. Improve key articles to Good article Portugal Lisbon Improve Os Lusíadas Coat of arms of Portugal More... Review Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box). Requests See Requested articles Assess Help assessing articles. Need images Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia Wikify Vote: Watch this list — Edit this list Spain Unassessed This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Military history: Biography / African / European / Spanish / Early Muslim Start‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military biography task force African military history task force European military history task force Spanish military history task force Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600) Morocco Unassessed This article is within the scope of WikiProject Morocco, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Morocco on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MoroccoWikipedia:WikiProject MoroccoTemplate:WikiProject MoroccoMorocco articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Help expand the project: edit history watch purge You can help! يمكنكم أن تساهموا Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Mounir Charïbi Assess : Rate the Unassessed Morocco articles and Unknown-importance Morocco-related articles. Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to articles in Category:Morocco articles missing geocoordinate data Photo : See requested photographs in Morocco Stubs : Morocco stubs Other : Translate from Arabic: Sellam Ameziane, Mrebih Rebbu

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 19, 2004, July 19, 2005, July 19, 2006, July 19, 2007, and July 19, 2008.

Template:Vital article

The article addresses that we are not sure of Tariq's ethnicity. So why does it state that he is a Berber commander in the first couple sentences?

the pure history does not have concerning the arabic speesh of Tariq ibn-Ziyad, as tarik ibn ziyad have burned no ships. because its army could not understand arabic, because they were berber, the Arabs have crossed with moussa ibn nusayr in 712 to Spain, therefore why do you thinks that a berber will speak a arabic with army of berber-speaking in the time of the war.i will improve it later.Aziri 13:56, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The european couldn't comprehend that an army of 12,000 can defeat an army of the 100,000 warriors, so they invented this story in order to underestimate the victory of muslims in Andalusia.
Kindly reveiw the reasons below and hopefully to mention the both side of story on the article as I believe that this is a free encyclopedia, I didn't delete any part of the european version of the story, please retain our side of story.

There is no mentioning of this accident of burning the ships in Muslim books, the only mentioning of this claimed accident is in European books.

Number of reasons that Tariq ibn Ziyad couldn't burn the ships:
1- Not all of the ships were Muslims owned (the leader of port septe owned ships which sailed with Muslims in exchange of lands in Andalusia).
2- The consequences of burning the ships should be thanked or punished by Calipha. (also no books mentioned that Calipha either thanked or punished Tariq).
3- It is forbidden to destroy public property in Islam (he could simply send the ships away home)
4- Musa ibn Nusair sent enforcements to Tariq ibn Zyad (how could he sent these enforcement while the ships were burnt).
The dilemma of burning the ships stayed in dispute between Muslims and the west.

I disagree, he may have burned a couple of ships, two or three, just to symbolize there was no going back, to boost morale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.154.84 (talk) 20:48, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no leader in his right sense would cut off his back lines with the capital city or the nearest stronghold in Africa which could send him reinforcements when he needs it. So that makes us conclude that this event is fake story.

Um, you know it doesn't say or even imply in the article that he was speaking in Arabic, Berber, Russian, Chinese, or anything? - Mustafaa 05:36, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

While no implications were made, it is curious that this is much the same story as attached to Ferdinand Cortez upon landing in South America. It would be nice to have a source on this.

I have linked a source. DigiBullet 20:35, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

i have never seen that someone knows the amazighs or berberes beter than themselves i am berbere and amazigh and i speak arabic can you just explain this to me and 90% of the berbers speak arabic as you said it is written in the european story do you speak arabic to say that it is not written in the arabic book finally i have never seen a man that he knows arabic better than the arabic themselves and their book.you know our story better than us.i think you should go to study more and more.by the way do you know that there is someone who is called translater to translate from arabic to berbere.

Please do NOT add any reference to burning of ships that does not cite either a credible translation or original Arabic edition of al-Maqqari. The English translation accepted by all modern historians is that of Pascual de Gayangos, readily available on Google Books, which does not have any mention of burning any ships; I have cited the exact page where this speech of Tariq's occurs so anyone can verify this for themselves. The "Medieval Sourcebook" version is not an authoritative translation. And no other Arabic or Spanish history mentions any such thing either. MisterCDE (talk) 06:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It appears there is a mention of burning the ships by al-Idrisi, for which I have pointed out where exactly that is to be found in his Arabic text. As al-Idrisi was born in Ceuta, one might think he based his account on some local tradition ... but he does not even give the same name for Tariq's father as other historians. As Ceuta was completely abandoned for a time in the centuries between Tariq and al-Idrisi, it is unlikely that reliable local traditions survived. MisterCDE (talk) 11:38, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The entry needs a lot of clean-up; it reads as if someone wrote it using a translation engine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.183.60 (talk) 05:24, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The right arabic pronunciation of the name is Tarik bin Ziyad, rather than Tarik ibn Ziyad.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Zozo2kx (talk • contribs) 18:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is English Wikipedia, so we should not take in consideration the pronunciation in other languages when deciding the names of the articles. That being said, we must consider that the spelling "Tarik ibn Ziyad" is the standard one in English, so to speak; it has been adopted broadly in English usage, so it should not be changed. And if you compare with other Wikipedias in Western languages, they all use the form "ibn". Rsazevedo ^msg 18:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The Classical Arabic word for "son" was bnu (where the -u is a Classical Arabic case ending), made pronounceable by prefixing an i- if the previous word did not end in a vowel. Modern colloquial Arabic dialects (which have dropped the case endings) often intrude an i and make it into bin. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • E.g. for "Zayd the son of Muħammad", Classical Arabic Zaydu bnu Muħammadin became modern Arabic Zayd ibn/bin Muħammad; compare Classical Arabic Zaydun ibnu Muħammadin = "Zayd is the son of Muħammad". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The real berber name is tarik naït ziad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.112.179.105 (talk) 16:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote some modifications on this text because I have noticed false things. Today, any historian can give the birth date and birth place of Tariq.

You will find very interesting things on French wikipedia and on Britannica Encyclopedy online.

Friendly yours.FF — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.244.139.5 (talk) 23:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some user just deleted a complete section from the article with no valid reasons (it's sourced) also deleted complete guy name (sourced) i'm reverting, unless good reasons, stop vandalizing. -Dzlinker (talk) 21:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That user was me. The reasons for deleting it are:

1. The "source" is just a website which contains on it selected extracts from other works. It is not in itself authoritative.
2. In particular, the "source" website has extracted the supposed "Tariq's speech" from a book where, some pages earlier, the warning is given that the speech is fictitious. But the website does not contain this warning, and so must be regarded as unreliable.
3. That being the case, although the "speech" is part of historical discourse and so deserves at least a mention, I had already mentioned that website and the problem with it in the "External Links" section, with a link not only to the website but also to an online eBook of the original work with a page reference to the warning. That is all that it deserves ... not quoting an enormous chunk of it within the article.

In addition, someone, whether yourself or another, has altered the name which appears at the introductory sentence of the article to quote some ancestors "Abdellah" and "Walghu", and for authority has cited a book "The Golden Age of the Moor" which is very poorly referenced. There are many differing accounts of the parentage and origins of Tariq, of whom the only thing that is generally (but not universally) agreed is that his nasab begins "ibn Ziyad". If you wish to add to the list of 3 possibilities that I set up, please do ... but do not cite "The Golden Age of the Moor" because the author does not say where he got that information from, for all we know he could be making it up. MisterCDE (talk) 10:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For the speech ok, for the uncommon name Walghu, google gives 6 books citing him as Tariq ancestor [1], should be out there. -Dzlinker (talk) 13:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but not a single one of those 6 articles cites anything as authority for Tariq's complete nasab ... in fact it looks like each has exactly the same English words surrounding the name, suggesting they are all getting their information from a single source but not saying what that is. Possibly Ibn Khaldun ... but I don't have a copy handy to check ... I will leave it as it is for the moment, but if I get the time I will see if I can track this nasab down in a university library. MisterCDE (talk) 13:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An arabic research on google gives: : "البيان المغرب في أخبار ملوك الأندلس والمغرب" (Al-Bayan al-Mughrib) by "ابن عذاري المراكشي" (Ibn Idhari) who is a well known historian. It gives this nasab: هو طارق بن زياد بن عبدالله بن رفهو بن ورفجوم بن يرتغاسن بن وهلاص بن يطوفت بن نفزاو (Tariq ibn Zyad ibn Abdellah ibn Walghu (or Rafghu) ibn Warfajom ibn Yartoghassen ibn Walhass ibn Yetefut ibn Nefzaou..). If you can find an english version of this book.. the arabic version could be downloaded from here (p.203) - Regards. - Dzlinker (talk) 19:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes that is most likely where these other authors have been getting it from ... I don't believe there is any English translation of Ibn Idhari, at least not the relevant section, but I will take a look at an Arabic edition when I get some time. I have seen conflicting stories about what Ibn Idhari and his modern editors have to say. However, I should add that while Ibn Idhari is a very respected source, he wrote 600 years after Tariq's era, and what he has to say about such a remote period is not considered necessarily reliable. For example, the Encyclopedia of Islam (2nd ed.) refrains from giving any part of Tariq's ancestry apart from Ziyad. So, too, does Ibn Khaldun, who was an immediate successor to Ibn Idhari ... in fact he refers to Tariq as bin Zayd al-Laythi which is again something else unique. So I think we should follow the example of other encyclopedias (not just the one cited but also Britannica) and keep the headline as simply Tariq ibn Ziyad, and place the Walghu nasab in the list of the many other suggestions which have been put forward by other writers, some of whom were far closer to Tariq's time than Ibn Idhari. But I will still leave it as is for the moment, until I have a thorough read of Ibn Idhari. MisterCDE (talk) 06:52, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A quick scan of the downloadable Arabic text (thanks for the link) shows that the nasab you quote is indeed on p. 203, but on p. 22 is another long nasab which is different again. I need to check both in one of the critical printed editions, but it shows how unreliable medieval texts can be. MisterCDE (talk) 11:57, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speak arabic? We could do with your help at Gibraltarpedia writing articles about North Morocco or translating stuff about Moorish antiquities. Victuallers (talk) 14:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no ... I have a basic understanding of the Arabic found in historical texts, but I'm acutely aware that translation requires a sense of subtle meanings (and also religious and cultural meanings) which would escape me. MisterCDE (talk) 13:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This may arouse very strong feelings and infighting but is posted here only for scholarliness. The article is very informative and gives multiple accounts of his ethnic origin yet the opening sentence of the article sets him as, without other possibilites, Berber. A more correct form would be: Tariq ibn Ziyad (Arabic: طارق بن زياد‎, died 720) was a Muslim Berber, Arab or Persian general who led the Islamic conquest of Visigothic Hispania in 711-718 A.D. Mazighe (talk) 04:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is necessary to wash the history from Bedouin fake. Taric (Tarik) has never been part of the Amazigh (Berber) anthroponymes and this name means absolutely nothing. In fact, he was Wisgothe prince heir, grandson of King Alaric, whose throne was usurped by an imposter. Taric was a refugee in Tamazgha (North Africa) where he trained units of agar-Berber mercenaries to reclaim his throne in Spain. There are so agar, Jews and Berbers also came to Spain in the year 711 it does not emphasize that no one had heard about neither Islam (the there was not at that time) or the Koran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adbouz (talk • contribs) 09:56, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am actually in the process of reading a book about African history and it says that Tariq was an African chief from North Africa that converted to Islam during the Arab invasion of Morocco. It also says that he was a general in the Arab-Moorish armies of Musa. His defeat of King Roderic apparently is what eventually led to the Moorish rule of Spain. I interpret that as suggesting that Tariq was actually Moorish. I'm not sure if I should leave a citation here or if I should go ahead and add the info to the wiki page. Romar731 (talk) 04:09, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This needs to be readdressed. User Mazighe makes a good point and my suggested edit is that the opening paragraph shouldn't be so sure about his ethnic origins as that would be intellectually dishonest. 82.11.55.192 (talk)

I have (again) removed the alleged "portrait" painting File:Tariq01.png [2]. This image is problematic on two levels. First, the claim that it is meant as a representation of Tariq is unsourced and unsubstantiated. This would need a reliable source. Second, even if such a source were provided, it would still have no encyclopedic use at the top of the article. There are (obviously) no real, authentic portraits of Tariq. He lived in a culture that simply didn't do portraits. If a 16th-century Italian painter created an imaginary portrait of him, that may be of some marginal interest in the context of a "legacy" section or something of the sort, but it still has no place in the infobox. It might tell us something about the way later centuries thought about Tariq (if that in turn could be sourced), but it tells us absolutely nothing about Tariq himself. We should never use later imaginary depictions of persons in infoboxes as if to imply they were what the person actually looked like.

Needless to say, the other picture that has repeatedly been inserted instead File:Tarik ibn Ziyad - .jpg is even worse and even more useless. It's a cheap, artistically worthless scribble by an utterly untalented 19th-century book illustrator. It looks more like a Gaulish warrior from an Asterix comic than anything else. The idea that this piece of artistic crap could be of any information value for our readers is just breathtakingly silly. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:55, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, A good step forward, Sunrise. Faizan 12:16, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NO, besides your "cheap" PoV (you should keep it for yourself) we have no solid reason for cutting it out. We should use it. -Dzlinker \,,/(*_*)\,,/ 22:15, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Unlike you, I have given a reason for my editorial judgment. As long as you can't even be bothered to do as much, your opinion will of course be ignored. So, would you bother to to provide some "solid reason" for using this image? What, in your opinion, is the encyclopedic information value it offers to the reader? Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:11, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the edit war over Tariq's ethnicity:

• The Encyclopaedia of Islam, calls him a Berber.
• Conflict and Conquest in the Islamic World: A Historical Encyclopedia: A Historical Encyclopedia, ed. Alexander Mikaberidze, page 879, calls him a Berber
• The Berber Identity Movement and the Challenge to North African States, by Bruce Maddy-Weitzman, page 24, calls him a Berber.
• The Spread of Islam: The Contributing Factors, by Abū al-Faz̤l ʻIzzatī, page 384, calls him a Berber.

Source(s) calling him an Arab:

• The Arab Conquests of the Middle East, by Brendan January(this person has a MS in Journalism)[3], not a historian and does not have any specialization in this time period.
• Arabic - Complete Idiot's Guide, by K. F. Habel(graduated from Modern Standard Arabic at the Defense Language Institute), not a historian.

Source mentioning him as Persian:

• God's Crucible: Islam and the Making of Europe, 570-1215, by David Levering Lewis, page 103, states that "some" historians claim Tariq was Persian, but was most likely from a Berber tribe.
  

Does anyone else have sources? --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like he is Berber per RS. although Berber is a broad term --like Moor.--Inayity (talk) 13:14, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• There are numerous sources that claim he was of Berber, Arab &/or Persian origins, some going as far as to claim he was bi-racial. Here are a few that I know of & can refer:
• That he was Persian of the Provence of Hamadan: The 11th century manuscript chronologizing Berber history "Ajbar Machmuâ" Colección de Tradiciones, via historian Don Emilio Lafuente y Alcántara published Madrid 1867.
• That he was an Arab of the Sadaf tribe: "The Obituaries of Eminent Men" by the 13th century Kurdish Chief Judge of Egypt & Damascus Ibn Khallikan via the 19th century William McGuckin Baron de Slane, published 1838.
• Lastly, that he was an Arab of the Banu Lakhm tribe: "The History of the Mohammedan Dynasties in Spain" p. 294, by the 16th/17th century Moroccan historian Ahmed Mohammed al-Maqqari via the 19th century Pascual de Gayangos y Arce published 1840 & 1843.
• That Tariq ibn Ziyad was of Berber, Arab or Persian origins has always been the historically balanced view.Mazighe (talk) 04:36, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

. Taric (Tarik) has never been part of the Amazigh (Berber) anthroponymes and this name means absolutely nothing. In fact, he was Wisgothe prince heir, grandson of King Alaric, whose throne was usurped by an imposter. Taric was a refugee in Tamazgha (North Africa) where he trained units of agar-Berber mercenaries to reclaim his throne in Spain. There are so agar, Jews and Berbers also came to Spain in the year 711 it does not emphasize that no one had heard about neither Islam (the there was not at that time) or the Koran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adbouz (talk • contribs) 09:58, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tariq ibn Ziyad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080103220336/http://www.gibraltar.gov.gi:80/gov_depts/port/port_index.htm to http://www.gibraltar.gov.gi/gov_depts/port/port_index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article has claimed a death date of 720 ever since its inceptions in 2004, but this was never sourced. From the biography section, it emerges that little or nothing is securely known about his later years after the Iberian campaign, so one wonders how such a precise death year could possibly be known. I've added a "citation needed" tag, for the moment. When looking for sources, please watch out for the danger of circular sourcing. On Google books, I've so far found no source making this claim and published before 2004, the time it was first introduced here – but there are now multiple books from after that year that echo the claim, suggesting they all got it from here. What we do find in sources from before 2004 is an estimate of "c. 720", which may well be plausible. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This must be sourced, otherwise it's original reseaerch. Doug Weller talk 06:42, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's been some dispute about the strength of the sources in the Origin section. The references there look incomplete. But, in case anyone made the same mistake I did, the full references are actually given in the Literature section. I'm wondering if it might be a good idea to refactor the references on this page to make a clear link between the shortened references and the full ones, such as using anchors. It's a little complicated since the existing footnotes have explanatory notes alongside page numbers. I'm not going to change anything without input from other editors since there's already some consistency in the existing reference style and I don't want to force the use of specific templates if other editors object. clpo13_(talk) 16:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tariq ibn Ziyad. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070222101917/http://www.nadorama.com/content/view/106/51/ to http://www.nadorama.com/content/view/106/51/

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: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:05, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This medieval miniature has repeatedly been inserted on this page as a depiction of Tariq. I have repeatedly removed it because it had no proper source and there was no evidence where it's from and whether it really does mean to depict him. I now researched its provenance a bit further and I now can confirm that it does indeed represent Tariq.

This picture is from Ms. 7415 in the Spanish National Library in Madrid, fol. 27. This [4] article (Rosa María Rodríguez Porto (2006): María de Molina y la educación de Alfonso XI: Las semblanzas de reyes des Ms. 7415 de la Biblioteca Nacional. Quintana: Revista de Estudos do Departamento de Historia de Arte 5: 219~231), on p. 227, provides this source and identifies the contents as "Rodrigo y Tariq". This is from a medieval compendium of biographies of historical rulers. One of the features of this book is that it regularly presents pairs of pictures of two rulers on the same page, whose reigns are then described underneath. The manuscript is dated to c. 1312.

This website features a much higher resolution copy of our miniature, with the context of the surrounding page, including the opposite image depicting Roderic.

An online text of the work, though from a different manuscript and in a slightly different textual version, is available at e-spania. Scroll for the text saying "Rodrigo, el postrímero rey de los godos, fue perdido en la batalla de Sangonera"; this corresponds to the text just underneath our picture. The text speaks of the fight between Tariq and Roderic, so it is indeed obviously plausible that this picture is meant to represent Tariq. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:05, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, this said, I leave it open if we should use the picture and where in the article. As per my thoughts at WP:PORTRAIT, I'm not convinced it should be at the top of the article, as it's still an entirely imaginary and not very high quality depiction from an era and culture separated from Tariq's own time by more than half a millennium. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:15, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in favor. Any image of Tariq is going to be imaginary. — LlywelynII 12:55, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

has an article on Tangiers (q.v.) that gives Tariq's name as Ṭāriḳ b. Zīyād al-Laithī. Any idea where the nisbah comes from and if it's worth mentioning in the article? — LlywelynII 12:55, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]