Talk:Banu Ghaniya

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Berbers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Berbers 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.BerbersWikipedia:WikiProject BerbersTemplate:WikiProject BerbersBerbers
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Spain

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Distant relatives of the almoravids? Their first leader, Muhammad ibn Ali ibn Ghaniya, was the son of the 5th almoravid emir Ali ibn Yusuf.--Asqueladd (talk) 17:34, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Hengzhi Cao.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

Merge Banu Ghaniya invasion of North Africa into Banu Ghaniya.

Banu Ghaniya invasion of North Africa has been a stub for a long time with only one citation. There is plenty of room in this article (also a stub until recently) to cover those events here. Given that the main historical significance of the Banu Ghaniya is their campaigning against the Almohads in North Africa, it's logical and more convenient for Banu Ghaniya to simply be the main article on the entire topic, instead of splitting this across two pages. If at some point in the future this article becomes too long, then it might make sense to split the topic again. R Prazeres (talk) 19:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. M.Bitton (talk) 21:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]