Talk:Qalawunid dynasty

Duplicate content, redirect

Large portions of this article (maybe all of it) appear to be copied from existing articles such as Qalawun, Al-Ashraf Khalil, and others, or copied with minor adaptions. In addition to those, this history is already covered at Mamluk Sultanate and (in less detail) at Bahri Mamluks. There is no good reason to have a fourth article covering this same material; see WP:CONTENTFORK. (Note: I made a similar comment at Talk:Baybars.) The term "Qalawunid" merely refers to a subset of the Bahri Mamluk sultans, and most of them belonged to this subset anyways (certainly most of the important ones after Baybars), so I'm redirect this to Bahri Mamluks, where there's plenty of room to expand.

If there is any information here that is not covered elsewhere and that is supported by citations to reliable sources, it can be moved to existing articles (the pre-redirect version is available here). However, there are some dubious statements here that look like POV problems, possibly WP:OR; I can't tell if they simply come from other existing articles, but they likely don't belong on Wikipedia as is. R Prazeres (talk) 01:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also just noticed that "Qalawunid" was already defined and placed in bold at Bahri Mamluks, per WP:RASTONISH, and that Qalawunids and Qalawunid were already redirected there months ago, so any WP:SPLIT should have been discussed at Talk:Bahri Mamluks and should be discussed there in the future. R Prazeres (talk) 05:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pinging Srnec, who added mention of the term Qalawunid at Bahri Mamluks and redirected those terms there ([1], [2], [3]), in case they have an opinion about this (i.e. about redirecting this to Bahri Mamluks; see above). Feel free to ping any other interested editors. R Prazeres (talk) 16:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

forget it do whatever you want it's not like my opinion will change anything this website is awful 18Carlox32 (talk) 13:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]