This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tunisia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Tunisia. For more information, visit the project page.TunisiaWikipedia:WikiProject TunisiaTemplate:WikiProject TunisiaTunisia
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
Having just categorized this page, then changed it to a disambiguation page having seen the banner on this talk page, I looked at the history and see that its purpose and format has changed a few times. I suggest discussing options here and seeking concensus before making any further changes. Derek Andrews (talk) 23:30, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My initial reaction is that Wikipedia:Broad-concept article would be the correct format to use here, replacing the bullet lists with regular paragraphs and wikilinks. I will check first to see if there are any other articles that already do this under another name. Derek Andrews (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Derek Andrews: I like the idea of a WP:BCA rather than a DAB page. I think that would be much more useful to readers. It shouldn't need more than a screen or so to give a broad-brush story of Roman involvement in Africa from the Punic Wars through the establishment of Africa (Roman province) and the acquisition of Egypt (Roman province), to decline and the Vandal and Muslim conquests, leaving little Roman trace but some titular bishoprics. Narky Blert (talk) 13:16, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Classical scholars often refer to "Roman Africa" as a cultural entity, so I like the idea of making this a proper overview article. It's fine to have the more specific articles on provinces as defined by proconsular assignments, but if your RS doesn't specify that way and speaks simply of "mosaics from Roman Africa," then linking to something other than a BCA is potentially misleading or an inaccurate to the intention of the source. Should definitely not be just a dab. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
