Talk:Amman Citadel

Jordan Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jordan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jordan 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.JordanWikipedia:WikiProject JordanTemplate:WikiProject JordanJordan

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks YOU can help with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : 1958 Jordan crisis, Mohammad Hamed, Abdul Qader al-Taneer (composer of national anthem), Illegal drug trade in Jordan
Assess : by quality and by importance - Harrana, Jordanian general election, 1951, Desert castle
Cleanup : International rankings of Jordan, Jordan–Israel Mixed Armistice Commission
Copyedit : Culture of Jordan, Nabataeans, Princess Sarvath al-Hassan, 'Umayri
Expand : Six-Day War, Crown Prince of Jordan, Jordan University of Science and Technology, 1944 Jordan League, Medical education in Jordan
Merge : Jordanian protests (2011–12), November 2012 Jordanian protests
NPOV : Dabke, King's Academy, The Children's Museum Jordan
Stubs : Jordan-related stubs - As-Salam al-Malaki al-Urduni, Transjordan (region), Flag of Jordan, Abdullah Ensour's cabinet, Headwater Diversion Plan (Jordan River)
Update : Jordanian protests (2011–12), Agriculture in Jordan, Jordanian Communist Toilers Party, Jordan–Syria relations, Jordanians in the United Arab Emirates
Wikify : Jordanian art, Jordanian cuisine
Other : Category:Jordan articles missing geocoordinate data

Archaeology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Merge proposal

Propose merging Umayyad Palace into Amman Citadel.

Leaving aside the clearly ambiguous title, Umayyad Palace is an unnecessary WP:SPLIT from Amman Citadel. The latter article is short and Umayyad Palace is a stub with even less information than what is found here, so there is no benefit to having two articles, which simply divides the attention of readers and editors. The palace is one of the main structures/sites at the Citadel, so it's much more convenient to have all the information here and to focus on improving one article instead of two. Even if the topic underwent a major expansion, it should still easily fit here. If it ever does become a WP:LENGTH issue, then we could reconsider a split at that that point, but that's clearly not going to happen in the near future. R Prazeres (talk) 04:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I initially didn't notice that Temple of Hercules (Amman) and Ayyubid Watchtower (Amman) also exist as splits from this topic. In my view, all those articles can be merged back here for mostly the same reasons. (Maybe Jordan Archaeological Museum could be too, though I think a museum is more easily justified as a separate article than the subparts of the same archeological site.) The main point again: WP:SPLITs are not helpful to either editors or readers unless there is a scope or length rationale, which there isn't here; it just creates an endless number of stubs.

I'll leave my proposal as is, but I'll let other editors optionally comment on whether they support merging the other split topics as well. R Prazeres (talk) 05:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose. The citadel is an entire hill while the Umayyad mosque is one building among many including the Temple of Hercules. Each of these buildings are notable in their own right as well as the hill. Makeandtoss (talk) 17:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify: notability is not the problem here, the problem ĩs organizing the topic in a way that is useful and efficient to everyone. The fact of the matter is that all of these minor articles relate to the same archeological site and all of the current content can easily fit in one article (and possibly always will). The optimal process on Wikipedia is to expand the original main article first, then split off parts of it into new articles when it becomes too large or complex, if needed. The current situation does a disservice to the topic: it forces readers to look in 4-5 different places instead of one, and it makes future expansion of the content more difficult because it would require editors to expand and synchronize 4-5 stub/start-class articles instead of just expanding one. There is literally no disadvantage to merging the content in one article: nothing is lost, and nothing prevents a WP:SPLIT in the future if needed. R Prazeres (talk) 21:27, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge for reasons of short text and context. It is easier to maintain content well in one place rather than 4 places. That is, merge Umayyad Palace (the initial proposal) and both Temple of Hercules (Amman) and Ayyubid Watchtower (Amman) for the same reason. Klbrain (talk) 12:39, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]