Talk:Fatimid dynasty

Preserving wide and narrow scopes of two articles

I just redirected Fatimids from here to Fatimid Caliphate (this edit), but I noticed that there are a lot of possible redirects to consider, so it might be worth opening a discussion here if there are disagreements. I'm slightly concerned that this article has extensive overlap with the Fatimid Caliphate article's topic, though I understand it's a work in progress. The Fatimid Caliphate article is more complete, has a wider scope, and has been established for a while, so we should continue to treat it as the main/overview article. As I understand, this article is intended to focus more narrowly on the Fatimid dynastic family, lineage, and maybe other details on their legitimacy, legacy after the caliphate, etc; though even this would be within scope of the other article if article size wasn't a consideration.

It's also important to note that most reliable sources use dynastic labels (Fatimids, Ayyubids, Almohads, etc) to refer to the relevant historical period, state, and dynasty, not just the dynasty specifically. Therefore a term like "Fatimids" on its own does not, in most literature, refer to the dynasty only. Relevantly, comparable sources like specialized encyclopedias (e.g. Encyclopaedia of Islam, Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World, and the like) typically summarize all of these aspects in one article. (I know this isn't news to most interested editors.)

So preserving the overview article (Fatimid Caliphate) as the starting point for most readers is important, I believe, in helping them navigate the topic. In practical terms I think this should mean that most links and redirects should target Fatimid Caliphate, unless they reasonably have a more specific scope pointing to this article. R Prazeres (talk) 19:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi R Prazeres. I agree, Fatimid Caliphate is and should remain the main article. It should cover the history of the dynasty and the state it established, but also aspects such as society, culture, economy, administration, etc. This article is about the dynasty itself; it will perforce include a historical overview that will overlap with the history section of the Fatimid Caliphate article, although I endeavor to keep it short. But it also includes information about the family's origin and the related controversies, which is too extensive to include in the 'main' article, as well as, once it is complete, at least some brief information about the Nizari imams who claim Fatimid descent, some of the notable women of the dynasty, a few more detailed genealogical trees (including members that may never get their own article), and whatever other topic concerns the family rather than the state. Constantine ✍ 18:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

That sounds great, and thanks for your work! R Prazeres (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Merge List of Fatimid caliphs (?)

I've added a link to List of Fatimid caliphs in one of the lower sections, but please feel free to revise that link to a more appropriate spot if needed. More importantly, that list article should probably be merged with this article. Now that we have an article about the dynasty specifically, there's really no reason for the list of dynastic rulers to be separate, as the information is clearly relevant here and neither the list nor this article are long enough to justify being split. I don't have time at the moment to oversee a full merger proposal, so just leaving this comment instead for now. It may be uncontroversial enough to just go ahead and make a bold merge, if interested editors also agree. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 09:39, 25 August 2022 (UTC)