This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
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
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.
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).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
Given that (1) there is only one primary source, (2) it says nothing of the Almohads or resistance and (3) it describes the city as completely destroyed, how can this be called an Almohad victory? They were crusaders who clearly had no intention of holding the city themselves. They could have turned it over to the Portuguese but chose not to. There isn't a whiff of any Almohad victory here, just, as Claudia Naumann, says, a revenge raid with no higher purpose. Pinging @R Prazeres: for his opinion. Srnec (talk) 20:23, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well that was quick: Alejandro775 has been blocked as a sockpuppet of a familiar LTA, as I suspected. @Srnec, do you think there's enough of your work here to retain the article or should I nominate it for speedy deletion per WP:G5? R Prazeres (talk) 21:39, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leave it. I added Naumann and checked all the sourcing. It's basically a rewrite. I am not at all surprised, of course, that we were dealing with a sock. These insta-articles built around the infobox result field are a tell. Srnec (talk) 23:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@R Prazeres @Srnec This is my new account and I am the author of the article. I would like to say that I understand your hatred for the battles of the Almohads and that you are trying to find any excuse, even if it is small, to delete my article and this is clear. As for this Bokkos, I do not know him. I think he is an invented puppet, As for whether this is a Almohad victory or not, I have two sources that prove that. [1][2]The campaign against Sylvester was a miserable failure and they could not control it, and this is clear in the text, but Wikipedia, the largest platform for falsifying history in the world, will not accept these sources, even though they are clear secondary sources. I would like to say that even if you can forge Wikipedia, you will not be able to forge the preserved history books. Cresco634 (talk) 09:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
