Talk:Bombardment of Algiers (1683)

	Algeria portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Algeria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Algeria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.AlgeriaWikipedia:WikiProject AlgeriaTemplate:WikiProject AlgeriaAlgeria articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Maritime / African / European / French

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	African military history task force
	European military history task force
	French military history task force

June 2023

@Qaayush529: the source that I removed is not only unreliable. The fact that it's used in other parts of the article should not be used as justification to keep it, especially when whatever is attributed to it is contradicted by reliable sources. M.Bitton (talk) 08:10, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

M.Bitton How do you define what's reliable or not . I'm sure the one who made the article in the 1st place must have known it better. What makes your sources reliable. The point is the article is taken from the source you just removed Qaayush529 (talk) 08:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's very simple: please read WP:RS. Who created the article and what has been added since then don't change the fact that the source in question is unreliable and contradicted by reliable sources. M.Bitton (talk) 08:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton Again why do you think it's not RS . Its not like it's a orginal research.

And if it really is the case , then we will have to rewrite the whole article itself. All of it is taken from there and we have no other describing the whole scenario Qaayush529 (talk) 08:21, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the WP:RS? If so, please tell me what makes you think that it's reliable (publisher, author, etc). I have no issue with rewriting the article and basing all of on it on proper reliable sources, though, that's something that should be done in small steps. M.Bitton (talk) 08:25, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Qaayush529: please refrain from edit warring, especially when a discussion is ongoing. Ignoring the question as you did and reinstating what you think should be there is not how Wikipedia works. M.Bitton (talk) 09:45, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Going back to the questions: who is the author and what are his credentials? what makes you think that "http://www.vallee-du-ciron.com" is a reliable publisher? M.Bitton (talk) 09:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]