Talk:Taifa of Córdoba

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no consensus -- Aervanath (talk) 16:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taifa of Cordova → Republic of Córdoba — Cordova is bad spelling; republic, I think, is more usual. — Srnec (talk) 03:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cordova is the English name of the city. Any evidence for use of "Republic of..."? It doesn't appear in the (barely referenced) article. — AjaxSmack 03:37, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- GoogleBooks. See also "Córdoban Republic". Cordova is rarely used in modern historiography. Srnec (talk) 04:04, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Or to Taifa of Córdoba? The description sounds much different from a modern republic. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:59, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Taifa of Córdoba is an improvement. Look at the Spanish interwiki. Srnec (talk) 04:38, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is no question that Córdoba is the Spanish name of the city; but it is not an improvement in the English Wikipedia, especially conjoined with an Arabic loanword. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Given we have articles about Córdoba(in Spain and others), (but not Cordova, well... we do but it is not that Córdoba); and we have an article about taifas (possibly similar but *not* a republic), then Taifa of Córdoba seems the best title, and redirects from "Republic ..." and "... Cordova" would be useful - Nabla (talk) 01:06, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- From GoogleBooks:
  - the Caliphate of Córdoba would continue to exist de jure until the year 1031, when the Cordoban "republic" was proclaimed by the "senate" of that Andalusian city, from The Formation of Al-Andalus: History and Society.
  - see page 52 in The Legacy of Muslim Spain, "Cordoban republic" mentioned and described in an essay by by Mahmoud Makki.
- Srnec (talk) 01:24, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I do not doubt for a momment that we may find reputable references to any of the 4 possible combinations of Taifa/Republic of Córdoba/Cordova. And actually I'd be fine with any of those, I'm simply pointing that Taifa of Córdoba makes more sense to me, as "taifa" is both not "republic" and also used and I believe that if there is no clear use for an English name for a location then original one is best - Nabla (talk) 01:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Use of "Republic of" seems to be mostly WP:OR. The source cited as referring to a "Cordoban republic" (notce the lowercase "r") refers to "a new political system similar to a republic."[1] [my emphasis]. Use of "taifa" would make these qualifications more apparent. — AjaxSmack 03:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Although I showed that "republic" was a perfectly acceptable term by WP standards, nobody made any attempt to show taht "taifa" was. Sources? Córdoba, during the period, was a republic because sovereignty was exercised by the res publica and not by a single individual, like, say a party king, as in all the other taifas. Taifa is no more accurate than republic. Srnec (talk) 02:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Bosworth: The New Islamic Dynasties (1996), pp. 14-18. It lists Cordova, so spelt, as a taifa state, like any other, and the Jahwarids as a dynasty like the rest (a note that Jahwar himself was "formally a member of a triumvirate" adds little; so was Augustus). Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration

this move seemed uncalled for; indeed, one minor improvement to WP would be to restore Cordova to its English name. I have therefore restored the name that existed during the move discussion. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]