Wikipedia

Talk:Amman/Archive 1

< Talk:Amman
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Largoplazo in topic It is a tourist destination.
Archive 1

Greek

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The Greek spelling Φιλαδελφια was given, but I've temporarily removed it. This is because I really think the spelling was Φιλαδελφεια, but can't quite confirm that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh Grosse (talk • contribs) 21:57, 13 October 2004 (UTC)

LA BANDERA REAL POSEE UNA ESTRELLA DE 8 PUNTAS EN EL TRIANGULO CENTRAL.++++ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.192.23.21 (talk) 21:31, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

History

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

My sources claim that the Circassians settled in the area in AD 1878 rather than AD 1887. Can someone please confirm or deny this? - Cybjorg 16:13, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Image:Ammanscape.jpg

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

This photo got a caption saying "Jabal Abdoun" but Abdoun is a place which is in the Jabal Amman area. -- Omernos 05:59, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I took this image. I changed the caption to just Abdoun if that makes more sense. When I lived in Amman, I used to know this part of town as Jabal Abdoun, I don't think it was its formal name though. It's interesting that Abdoun is classified as being part of Jabal Amman, as Abdoun stands on its own hill, and is separated from Jabal Amman by a deep wadi. Nick Fraser 06:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello Nick, it's a great photo. I am from Jordan and I loved this photo. I wanted a proper caption to it! :D -- Well, yeah people often think Abdoun is a whole different place or on it's own but it's actually part of Jabal Amman. Jabal Amman is such a great place, very nice and classy! And it views almost the oldest heritage or Amman and Royalty! -- Omernos
While it is correct that Abdoun is contained within the neighbourhood of Jabal Amman, Jabal Abdoun is indeed a hill separate from that of Jabal Amman. Jamshyd 02:38, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Tourism

I can't change the tourism section, it is vandalized —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunamasri (talk • contribs) 20:06, 12 December 2006

"lone, deranged"?

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

seems to be a little editorialistic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.215.216.32 (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

Average Temp.

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

How is the average high temp for the year higher than the average high temp for any individual month? Obviously there is an error in this somewhere. Can anyone find the correct averages and edit this page with a correction? 98.207.248.160 (talk) 05:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

The whole weather section is false. The current temperature there is higher than the stated record temp for this month. And this is not a record-breaking day. Also, record high temperature in January is 12.3c, average is 3c? No way, Amman is a warm city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.250.159.105 (talk) 23:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

The climate (weather) section is correct with regards to certain elevations (altitudes). Currently, there are no record temperatures listed for Amman in this page. Amman is a warm city in Summer, not so much in Winter. The temperatures as stated in the page vary due to elevation. The average temperature in "Al-Jubaiha" and other areas at 1000 meters elevation in the day is 7-9 degrees Celsius, while it is 1-3 degrees Celsius at night. MQ1993 (talk) 12:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

the merge

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

i don't think it's a good idea for merage it, but can you tell me why we have to merage it ? --O.waqfi (talk) 23:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

The 7 pronged star in the flag

Hi, I removed the following "It sits atop seven hills, which are represented by the seven pronged star depicted on the Jordanian flag." because the 7 pronged star refers to the seven verses of the first surah in the Qur'an, and it says so here Jordanian flag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.238.131.55 (talk) 15:58, 22 September 2009

Flag/Seal of Amman

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Why should GAM's flag be considered Amman's flag? If it doesn't matter, then why do I never see the green flag hanging on poles anymore? Instead they put a so called Seal on the poles, when a flag is supposed to be there. Amman has no flag, it is just a GAM logo. Can somebody please talk back, to see if they should be removed and not considered as Amman's Flag and Seal? Thank you. Spaza-bozo (talk) 18:46, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

confusion here: "until 1948, and 1967, when"

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

"Amman remained a small city until 1948, and 1967, when the population expanded considerably due to an influx of Palestinian refugees from what is now Israel."

There seems to be a section / phrase missing somewhere in this sentence. Any idea what should be in the sentence to make sense ?

Kgrad (talk) 03:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I see what you mean. Maybe it is better to be written like so: "Amman used to be a rather small city, but due to the high numbers of Palestinian refugees coming in during 1948 and 1967 the city increased in size." The previous sentence made it seem rather wrong in a way. Spaza-bozo (talk) 17:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Geo Coordinates

Are wrong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.186.64.225 (talk) 09:38, 1 May 2010

Population

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The population of the Greater Amman Municipality area is 5.1 million people. REF: [1] Can whoever keeps changing it to 1 million stop? I don't understand why they keep doing that. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RickHindi (talk • contribs) 23:38, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Western Amman ZAHRAN.jpg Nominated for Deletion

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  An image used in this article, File:Western Amman ZAHRAN.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 29 August 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:25, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

"First Civilization on record" ?

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Is this statement authentic and approved by archaeologists? why is the date different from the one mentioned on the site http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/%27Ain_Ghazal ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.147.64.48 (talk) 19:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Economy

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Information Technology section under the Economy is full of unverified claims. It claims that "some California-based VC firm" rates Amman as top 10 tech places in the world, surpassing Tel Aviv and Dubai. First, Tel Aviv (and Israel as a whole) IT sector only GDB is 75% that of Jordan's entire economy. Please do not write such unverified claims/lies. It also claims that 75% of Arabic content comes from Jordan (no cited source) and it claims that it is often-referred to as the "Silicon Valley of the region" (did you people really forget Dubai and Tel Aviv area light years ahead of Amman)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayefc (talk • contribs) 20:46, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Https://up.wiki.x.io/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/ABDALI-Sunrise.JPG/800px-ABDALI-Sunrise.JPG

Amman's "world city" ranking

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In the article, it states that "Amman is also ranked a Gamma global city on the World City Index." I wanted a bit more onformation on what that actually meant, so I followed the link to the global cities page and discovered that since 2012, Amman has been bumped up to a "Beta–" rank city.[1] This needs to be updated.

35.40.116.67 (talk) 00:01, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I propose that Rabbah be merged into Amman. Other than their backgrounds, the two cities are actually one and the same, it was almost like a simple name change. I also suggest a soft redirect of Philadelphia (Decapolis) to this article, for the same reason. Kj plma (talk) 03:42, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Timeline of Amman

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 14:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Use of "homonymous" in opening PP

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I really think eponymous is a better word here, but I need to know whether the governate is named for the city or the opposite. CM (talk) 15:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Archive 1

Amman article reshaped

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

What do you think about all the edits I have made? --Makeandtoss (talk) 00:32, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

A few things: firstly, a minor point - the 'notable people' section is completely unnecessary in my opinion and should probably be removed. As for the content, I can already see a problematic copyvio in the etymology section:

However the Macedonian ruler of Egypt, renamed it Philadelphia (Ancient Greek Φιλαδέλφεια) for brotherly love, by Ptolemy II Philadelphus, who reigned from 283 to 246 BC and occupied and rebuilt the city. He was supposedly given the nickname of Philadelphus, so it was named Philadelphia after him.

The sources says:

Th ancient Semetic name of Amman was first changed to Philadelphia , Greek for brotherly love, by Ptolemy the Second, who reigned from 283 to 246 B.C. and occupied and rebuilt the city. He was supposedly given the nickname of Philadelphus, so it was named Phildelphia after him.

I'm not sure how much (or if) some of the other content has been copy-pasted, but I would advise you to clean up the sections where you did not bother paraphrasing. Also, the 'districts' sub-section should be moved from demographics into the local government section and be expounded upon if possible. I notice that you did do a lot of good work in improving the history section, and certainly helped out in referencing a lot of content. However, I think the article could still improve its referencing in some sections, particularly in the geography section. Elspamo4 (talk) 13:34, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
@Elspamo4: A lot of cities have that section, so I thought why not.. I will try to paraphrase that section, but I think I did paraphrase the rest. Thank you for your feedback. Makeandtoss (talk) 22:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Amman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

Latest comment: 9 years ago43 comments3 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    Any remaining incidence of copyvio needs to be addressed.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass:  
This review is transcluded from Talk:Amman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Al Ameer son (talk · contribs) 01:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)


I will review this article. After having read it in its entirety, the article has several issues but none which can't be fixed within 7 days. I will list the issues tomorrow and I'll try to help fix some of them with you. --Al Ameer (talk) 01:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss: I've been copyediting the History section and I've noticed some material that was written dangerously close to the sources or was outright copy and pasted. I have rewritten all the material that I have found so far to be in violation of copyright and removed other copyvio violations that were not specific to the subject of Amman/Philadelphia/Ammon/Ayn Ghazal. It would be a good idea for you to go through the article and make sure there are no further areas of close paraphrasing or copy/paste. I will list the issues tomorrow or the day after, but this needs to be addressed. Another thing that needs to be worked on are the citations. They need to be detailed (author, title, publisher, year/date). --Al Ameer (talk) 03:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

@Al Ameer son: Sure, but isn't title and access date enough? Example : ref> ((cite web|url= |title= |accessdate= )) <ref
It depends. Most reliable sources will also have a clear publisher, which should be mentioned. If the source has an author, publisher and date, all of that should be included. --Al Ameer (talk) 19:41, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: Take this link as example, http://www.jordantimes.com/news/local/amman%E2%80%99s-population-rises-around-4-million-%E2%80%94-biltaji . If you could kindly do it for me so that I try applying the same format to the rest of sources. --Makeandtoss (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Sure, for that source this would be ideal: ((cite news |title=Amman’s population rises to around 4 million — Biltaji |url=http://www.jordantimes.com/news/local/amman%E2%80%99s-population-rises-around-4-million-%E2%80%94-biltaji |accessdate=2015-09-21 |work=The Jordan Times |publisher=The Jordan News |date=2014-04-24)) --Al Ameer (talk) 20:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: Thanks but what if it wasn't news, like this one ; http://cms.visitjordan.com/default.aspx?tabid=121 --Makeandtoss (talk) 20:32, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
For that site it would be: ((cite web |title=Amman: Religion & Faith |url=http://cms.visitjordan.com/default.aspx?tabid=121 |accessdate=2015-09-21 |publisher=The Jordan Tourism Board |year=2010)). General note: Tourism websites and travel guides are not the best sources because they are inherently promotional. Scholarly sources (books, journals and the like) are preferred particularly for material dealing with history. --Al Ameer (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for bothering you with my questions, but what if the content I want to add is only available on these tourism and travel guides (even though they are considered generally as accepted information)?--Makeandtoss (talk) 21:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
You're not bothering me at all, I'm glad to help. If the info is well-known, I'm sure you will be able to find it on google books. If there's anything you can't find, I can help you look for the info. --Al Ameer (talk) 21:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Review

I will detail the issues section-by-section. You could cross off items you have addressed. If you have a question or comment about a certain point you could type your reply under it. --Al Ameer (talk) 22:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

General issues

  • As I mentioned above, any incidences of close paraphrasing need to be rewritten.
  • References should be detailed, citation templates are the best route for this. The author (if any), title, url (if the source is online) publisher, date/year (if specified) should be mentioned.
  • Redudant wikilinks need to be avoided. In other words, the same article should typically not be linked more than once in the article body.
Still a lot of the redundant linking throughout the article. From a quick scan, I've spotted Queen Alia International Airport linked several times.
I hope I didn't miss anything. --Makeandtoss (talk) 10:39, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotional or biased terms need to be removed such as "remarkable", "marvelous", etc.
  • Unless context is necessary, all material in the article should be focused on Amman rather than broader subjects like Jordan, Christian/Islamic history, etc.
  • The entire article pretty much needs some copyediting to fix grammar, sentence flow and style issues. I will help you with this part though. Note: Not completely sure

History

  • It appears Amman's history stopped in 747 AD. It should be noted in either the end of the "Umayyad rule" or beginning of the "Ottoman rule" sections that Amman had been abandoned for all of that time between the mid-8th century and the late 19th-century.
  • The British Mandate and Post-independence history should be expanded to fill in the gaps. I've added some sources to the Bibliography that contain information about these periods. I will help add new material to these two sections. Other than that, the History section is fine now. I'm glad you reduced that large quote in the Ottoman era section.

Geography

  • The climate section is repetitive in some places and is filled with one or two-sentence passages. It should be restructured a bit. For instance, right after this line: Amman's position on the mountains near the Mediterranean climate zone places it under the semi-arid climate classification, you should briefly describe each season in Amman and keep all of that info in one passage. Anything that is referenced or redundant should be removed or replaced.
  • The sentence that begins with "It is known among locals that some boroughs such as the northern suburb of Abu Nser ..." should be sourced. The ref used is a mirror site of Wikipedia. A different source is needed for this sentence, or it could just be removed.
  • This stand-alone sentence "Amman's weather is comparable to the that of Damascus" should be removed, or at least sourced and then merged into the first passage.

Local government

  • This section is fine, although it is pretty short. If it could be expanded further that would be great, if not then no big deal. Note: I can expand it, but there are no sources on the internet about it.
Ok, I'll try to find something on google books.
  • The table listing Amman's mayors should be slightly restructured for layout purposes into two main columns. Note: I tried dividing them into two columns but putting them next to each other didn't work, instead they were placed on top of each other as before...
Ok.

Education

  • The first sentence says "there are as many as 20 universities in Amman". It should instead assert the exact number of universities and colleges i.e. "there are 18 colleges and universities in Amman".
  • The first and only passage in this section needs to be sourced, particularly the statements about the Applied University being the largest private university in the city and the bit about the National Orthodox School's student body composition.
  • The table listing all of the universities should be titled.
  • This section only discusses higher education in the city. Is there any info on primary and secondary education such as the number of primary and secondary schools (public and private) Amman has and the number of residents who are students? I understand it might be a difficult task finding this info, so I'm not going to make it a make-or-break issue.

Demographics

  • The first passage is fine because it is specifically dealing with Amman. However, there are some interesting tidbits that should be mentioned about the city's population. For instance, I remember reading that nearly half of Jordan's population lives in the city. Another major aspect missing here is information about the composition of Amman's population i.e. Palestinian refugees and citizens, Transjordanians/East Jordanians, Iraqi and Syrian refugees, Circassians or Armenians. Note: these information are mentioned in post-independence section
  • The religion section does not appear to be specific to Amman. It is mainly discussing the population, history and status of Christians in Jordan. This material should be removed and/or replaced by info dealing specifically with the population of Amman, not Jordan as a whole. Is there any sources out there discussing the city's religious make-up, its ethnic or religious minorities and majority?
  • Unless I missed something, the source used for the first sentence of the Religion section states that the 6% Christian population figure pertains to the country of Jordan rather than the city of Amman. This needs to be clarified. Also, I couldn't find anything in the source that says Amman has a deeply-rooted Christian community. It could very well be that I missed something while reading the source, but unless I'm mistaken then this needs to be clarified/sourced or removed.
  • The last part of the Religion section doesn't seem relevant to the demographics of Amman either. Do all of these schools of Islamic thought have a significant presence in Amman? If not, then it should be removed.
I might add some more info to the section. Also, because this section is supposed to focus on Demographics, the current ethnic, national and religious composition of the city is equally or more relevant here than in the history section. The history of each of these groups doesn't need to be mentioned in the Demographics section, but their existence and their numbers/percentage should be.

Cityscape

  • The first sentence of the Architecture section does not appear to be supported by the citation. This should be referenced or removed.
  • The last three sentences in the passage need to be sourced.

Economy

  • This section is mostly fine.

Transportation

  • This section needs to be copyedited and slightly rewritten to avoid sounding like an editorial. Words and phrases such as "it is impossible to connect some main roads together which results in the use of expensive infrastructure", "Immigration waves forced rapid construction", "becoming increasingly troublesome" and "futuristic solution" need to be reworded to read in a more encyclopedic way. If you're having trouble with this I could help reword these passages.
  • The text should avoid speculation or predictions such as "A ring road encompassing the city will be opened by the end of 2015". Material like this should be removed until the construction is actually completed. Alternatively, you could write that the ring road is currently under construction if that is the case.
  • Again, another line that is speculative is the follow: "There are also plans to construct a three-line metro system in Amman ... ". There is no indication in the text that this is even under construction, its just "plans". Therefore that entire passage should be removed until construction begins or is completed.
  • The "Bus and taxi" section is fine, although it would be good if you added the exact year when the Raghadan station was built instead of the vague "newly-built".

Notable people

  • This section is trivial and unnecessary. Amman is a large city and half the famous people of Jordan were probably born there. A new article called List of people from Amman could be created instead and a link to that article could be added to a "See also" section in this article.

Main sights

  • This section should go. Good articles shouldn't have sections dedicated to landmarks. What should be done here is the merger of the passage on Downtown Amman into the "Cityscape" section and the merger of the King Abdullah Mosque passage into the "Religion" section. As for the Amman Citadel and the Roman Theater, these should be merged into the "History" section and if they are also currently used for cultural reasons like museums, concerts, recreation, etc., then you could also mention that in the "Culture" section.

Twin cities This section is fine.

Culture

  • You need a source that says the Jordan Archaeological Museum is the "most famous museum in the city". The current source doesn't support that claim.
  • A source is needed to say Amman is one of the most "liberal cities" in the Arab world. The current Russia Times sources just supports the "one of the most westernized" part of the sentence and the ref 115 is a dead link and the archived link doesn't show anything.
  • Ref 116 is not a reliable source and shouldn't be used.
  • Neither ref 116 or ref 117 mention McDonalds so that should be removed.
  • The following line is too close to the source: The city's culinary scene has expanded from its shawerma stands and falafel joints ... Asian fusion restaurants, French bistros such as La Maison Verte and Italian trattorias. The source also doesn't mention anything about American fast-food.
  • The source doesn't say "Alcohol is widely available". Also, it mentioned that alcohol is available at nightclubs and bars and there are 222 liquor stores, so this fact on its own is redundant. It would be more noteworthy if you write: "unlike other parts of Jordan, Alcohol is widely available in Amman" or something along those lines. Either way, it would need a source.
  • The second passage of the "Lifestyle" section isn't sourced.
  • The "Nightlife" should just be merged with the "Lifestyle" section.
  • There's some repeated information in this section about nightclubs such as "Nightclubs have sprouted across Amman", "there are numerous nightclubs" and "there are 77 registered nightclubs"
  • This section needs copyediting. One thing I've noticed frequently in the article is referring to Amman as "the capital city". Those instances should just be replaced with "Amman" or "the city".
  • The line "The New York Times has praised the cuisine of Amman" is an extraordinary and odd claim. For one, the source is an opinion piece in the travel section of the newspaper so it is a stretch to say that The NY Times has made the claim. Second, the source doesn't say anything about Amman's cuisine being praised, and third the source isn't talking about a distinct Ammani cuisine, but rather about the food scene in Amman, which is different.
  • Unless it could be demonstrated from reliable sources that Amman has a distinct cuisine such as Aleppo, Damascus, Nablus, etc. then this section should be removed or parts of it merged into the "Lifestyle" section.
  • There is an unsourced sentence in the "Sports" section with a citation needed tag.
  • The "Media" section is good.
  • The "Music" section should either be merged with the "Media" section or the "Lifestyle" section.
  • The first line of the "Events" section is not backed by the source. Also, anytime there's an extraordinary claim like "the most famous" or "one of the most famous", a source explicitly supporting that claim is needed.

Discussion

@Al Ameer son: Kindly check the notes... --Makeandtoss (talk) 23:24, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll begin the rest of the review which will focus on the History, Economy and Culture sections. Also, note that there is still an issue with an unsourced statement in the Climate section and several instances of redundant linking. --Al Ameer (talk) 00:00, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: By redundant linking, do you mean repetitive linking of same article or linking in general? Also, perhaps you can try to re-arrange the list of mayors into a shorter (in height) format? --Makeandtoss (talk) 12:23, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Repetitive linking of the same article. --Al Ameer (talk) 18:14, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: I had a weird encounter with some random user, he viciously insisted on that quote and some random 1878 picture, after discussion he agreed to add it to the reference.. Anyway;
  • I can't see why the metro passage can't stay. Yeah sure its plans, but why can't we mention the plans?
Because they're just plans. As an encyclopedia, we're not in the business of speculating. If they're currently building roads, you can mention that such a project is currently under construction. But if they're just plans, there's nothing to say yet. What if the plans never become real? That kind of info belongs in a business/investment flyer or even for tourists, but not an encyclopedia. --Al Ameer (talk) 22:43, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
  • I personally think the notable people section is a great addition to the article.
These sections are more appropriate for small towns or villages who have a handful or notable sons or daughters, but with a city like Amman which is a capital city and contains nearly half of the country's population, the number of notable people who were born there is naturally going to be huge. See Category:People from Amman. What is to stop another user from adding all of the people in that category to the sections's list? As a compromise, you could create an article called List of people from Amman and link it in a "Notable people" or "See also" section. Take a look at other good or featured articles on major cities such as Ahmedabad, Hong Kong, Washington D.C.. None of those articles have such sections. However, others like London and Dubai have that section but they contain only a link to a list article. --Al Ameer (talk) 22:43, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
  • I have no idea how to rephrase the road section into a more encyclopedic way
I'll copyedit it. --Al Ameer (talk) 22:43, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

--Makeandtoss (talk) 22:04, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

@Al Ameer son: Btw, do you have anything extra in mind that we could possibly add to the article? --Makeandtoss (talk) 23:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
You've done a pretty good job covering all of the bases, so as far as extra subjects that should be added, I can't think of any. However, there is some modern-day history that is missing and could be added. I will help you with this because I have found some online book sources with that kind of information. It's available in the Bibliography section. If you're interested, take a look at other good articles about cities to use as a frame of reference: [2]. I'm going to critique the Culture section tonight or tomorrow and then this review will pretty much be finished unless I find some major issues. --Al Ameer (talk) 23:52, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Kindly check an error in second book in bibliography section. @Al Ameer son: --Makeandtoss (talk) 00:25, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
  • This article has a lot of copyvio. The very first paragraph in the geography section is a direct copy-paste of this page (which it cites). I'm not sure if this is a mirror or a case of citogenesis, yet in any case it presents us with problems. I'll err on the side of caution and assume it is copyvio, and will try re-writing it using actual book sources. Elspamo4 (talk) 00:58, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Please do. There's no way I could pass the article with copyright violations, which Wikipedia takes very seriously. I've rewritten many instances already and will continue to look for more, I urge the nominator to do the same. --Al Ameer (talk) 01:01, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: @Elspamo4: The geography paragraph was there before I started editing so I assumed it was OK. I tried to look for violations but all I found was closely written content in the history section, which I have rewritten again. Notify me if you find anything else. --Makeandtoss (talk) 13:05, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: all done, but would you say I should add the district section to administrative division section as sub section or directly? --Makeandtoss (talk) 21:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
It should be merged directly under "Administrative divisions". The first passage of "Local government" and the "City council" section should also be merged. Because copyvio has been a concern, I have to make sure there is no more close paraphrasing. Once that is checked thoroughly and addressed, I'll promote the article. Until then, I have placed the nomination on hold. The Duplicate Detector is a good tool to find any instances of copyvio. Just type the article's url at the top box and the url of any given online source at the second box and then enter. You should set the minimum number of words at 3. --Al Ameer (talk) 21:56, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

@Al Ameer son: Is that a side note or are you saying I should do that for all the references? --Makeandtoss (talk) 22:14, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

  • The lead contains the unreferenced statement "With the exception of Persian Gulf cities, Amman has a faster growing economy than any other Arab city.". The Brookings' Metropolitan Policy Program released an economic performance report for 2013-14 that shows cities such as Cairo, Alexandria and Casablanca ahead of Amman. Perhaps I wasn't thorough enough in looking for sources, can either of you verify this statement? Maybe its status as a regional business hub could be referred to instead if no suitable sources are found. Elspamo4 (talk) 22:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
@Elspamo4: I couldn't verify it, so unless it can be proven by a reliable source, this sentence should be removed. Thanks for finding that.
@Makeandtoss: You should do that for all of the references. I've already checked Refs 1 through 43. I found several instances of copyvio and rewrote them. You could start from Ref 43. Here's one example of copyvio caught by the Duplicate Detector (Ref 47): [3]. The material in bold print needs to be rewritten. --Al Ameer (talk) 22:17, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: What about the phrases that are mere coincidences? --Makeandtoss (talk) 17:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
@Makeandtoss: If by "phrase" you mean two-word phrases, I wouldn't worry about those. If you notice three or more words that are exactly the same as the source, the wording should be rewritten. --Al Ameer (talk) 17:54, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: Here's an example: 'of the population' .. --Makeandtoss (talk) 18:07, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Common phrases like that are fine. I guess three words is a bit much. It's fragments like this (of which there are many) that are the problem: "positioning itself as a hub for business and new projects are continually transforming the city's skyline following the 2003 iraq war". That's an exact copy of what the source says. --Al Ameer (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: So this one is all good? http://tools.wmflabs.org/dupdet/compare.php?url1=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wiki.x.io%2Fwiki%2FAmman&url2=http%3A%2F%2Frt.com%2Fnews%2Fmedia-jordan-breaking-taboos%2F&minwords=3&minchars=13 Elsampo4, I will try finding a reference.

And if we could delete some of the talk page, as it is getting quite troublesome to reply --Makeandtoss (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

@Al Ameer son: Done, I found only one sentence concerning BRT, which I have rewritten. All good now --Makeandtoss (talk) 20:44, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
@Makeandtoss: The source you added for the lead [4] doesn't really justify that statement. Something like "Amman has one of the highest rates of economic growth in the region [or 'Middle East']" might work though. Elspamo4 (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
@Elspamo4: I can't find anything, so I guess it has to be rephrased into 'Amman has a high rate of economic growth' --Makeandtoss (talk) 21:09, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Ok I rewrote a few more lines I thought were too close to the source, but as far as copyvio, that matter now appears to be addressed. Last major issue is the references:

  • Refs 63, 84, 85, 92, 96, 99, 100, 102, 104, 106, 113, 124, 125, 139, 144, 145, 147, 149, 151 and 156 are all dead links! And if they're not dead links, they're homepages or redirects. These obviously need to be fixed, or the material that they support needs to be removed/replaced, otherwise the refs would be meaningless.
  • Refs 29, 82, 85, and 151 need titles (the last three are actually dead links and should be replaced anyway)
  • All sources that are in Arabic should have the following parameter added to their citation template: ( |language=Arabic ).
  • Ref 101 is unreliable and needs to be replaced.
  • General note: Travel and tourist websites should not be used because they're inherently promotional and not the most reliable for encylopedic facts. So far, I'm fine with them, but after this review, they should be gradually replaced with scholarly sources. If the article is to ever advance further than GA, these types of sources won't do. --Al Ameer (talk) 22:42, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

@Al Ameer son:(After editing references the number you used to mark them might have changed)

  • Concerning reference 84: Concerning mayors of Amman, I tried searching for another reference but all I found is the same list from Arabic wikipedia article of Amman.
  • I managed to find archives for other references and in some cases, completely replaced them.--Makeandtoss (talk) 19:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
@Makeandtoss: Thank you. The article still has some issues (i.e too much usage of travel sites) that I think should be dealt with, but none that I believe prevent me from passing this nomination. Congratulations and thank you for your patience and hard work on improving this article, I hope you continue this good work for other Jordan-related subjects. Cheers --Al Ameer (talk) 18:33, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
@Al Ameer son: Great! I will try to find an alternative to these sites. Thank you too for helping me out here --Makeandtoss (talk) 20:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

750-1516

Latest comment: 8 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion
  • I've merged the section "Abbasid to Ottoman period" to the neighboring sections. The section was unnecessary, redundant and awfully (but unsurprisingly) short. It was essentially a 2-sentence section about Amman's lack of history between the Umayyads and the Ottomans. Anything about the Circassian resettlement belongs in the Ottoman era section, while the 8th-century earthquake could be merged with the Umayyad period (it may have happened a few years after the Umayyads were overthrown but that's not enough to warrant a completely new section). These are the kind of unecessary stub sections that are frowned upon in GA, A-class and FA reviews. If a decent amount of content could be found to fill in this gap, then I see no problem with having a separate section, but that is not the case currently.
  • Any tour guides still being used for the History section should be removed or replaced by now. Their reliability or credibility is dubious when it comes to historical matters and it is clear there are plenty of reliable, alternative sources.
  • There's no need for all of those quotes within the citations. The information they're citing is not disputed and is not controversial, so the quotes are unnecessary and even distracting. --Al Ameer (talk) 21:51, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Tell me if I missed something? Makeandtoss (talk) 22:31, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss and Al Ameer son: Folks, "awfully short" or otherwise means nothing, that's aesthetics, here we're talking history, a huge time span that covers some 750 (!) years, and is essential in understanding Amman. Even the 15th c. mention is NOT Ottoman by a full century. You cannot do that. I suppose you don't like the fact that Amman was no more for so long, but that's neither here nor there, this is not some beauty or athletic contest, it's history, facts, an encyclopedia! Besides, there are remains at the Citadel who look Crusader and/or Ayyubid. Rather than removing valid edits already done by others = me :-) better go ahead and research this medieval episode, which is missing so far altogether.
Please remember: history, especially remote periods, should have nothing to do with one's pride, ideology, etc., and anyhow all that MUST not interfere with relating history, which is facts, not emotions.
The Circassians are of course part of the [late] Ottoman period, no doubt.Arminden (talk) 13:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 13:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

This paper claims evidence of lime kilns from the Fatmid and Abbasid periods. I won't edit here, so feel free. Zerotalk 13:56, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Great! Thanks Zero. Kilns by themselves are no proof for sedentary settlement, but are an addition. So are the Crusader/Ayyubid walls and/or towers at the Citadel - maybe a short episode during the Crusades, maybe more. That's worth the effort. Aesthetic castlings with existing article material is not.
The best proof that this paragraph is not redundant and that people mistake history for the World Cup or the Guinness Book, is that story about Amman being among the oldest continuously inhabited cities of the world. Take out this 750-1516 paragraph again, and that fantasy shows up again as well. The Middle East is full of cities older than most other cities elsewhere, Amman is certainly among the oldest, but "continuity" is a 19th-century fixation on fictitious "eternal nations".Arminden (talk) 14:12, 26 December 2015 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 14:12, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

@Arminden: What are you talking about? I don't care one iota that Amman lacked a history of habitation for roughly a millenium. If I did care, which would be silly, wouldn't I be in favor of the additional section? Please refrain from stating your false assumptions regarding my editing. Besides it being untrue, it only serves to create a hostile and distracting editing environment when this should be a civil and productive discussion.
As for your dismissal of my reasoning above, it's not simply about aesthetics or the section being too short, it's that it lacked substance. You have two sentences that would be more useful as context for the larger, neighboring sections than as a separate section in between the Umayyad and Ottoman periods. Even if the gap is 1,000 years, it's a 1,000 years of nothing so why should there be a separate section? It's a common sense edit, nothing more, nothing less. However, as I said above, if more info could be found about this long period of time, that changes things. I'd like to thank @Zero0000: for the info above, but this still isn't enough for a badly-named section called "Abbasid to Ottoman period". Instead, it should be merged with the "Umayyad rule", which in turn should be renamed to "Middle Ages" or "Early Islamic era". --Al Ameer (talk) 18:21, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, thought I managed to find SOME reason for your edits and be friendly, not the opposite. It's your literal comment ("awfully short"), not my far-fetched interpretation.
If it's factually wrong, it is not acceptable, period. Abbasid, Fatimid, Crusader, Ayyubid IS NOT OTTOMAN, no matter how short the event. A Jordanian is not "a bit Saudi" because Saudi Arabia is nearby and larger anyway, either. So NO, you cannot make those changes and be logical & accurate at the same time. If you don't care about being logical & accurate, then I won't stay in your way, that would make no sense & life is too short.
Umayyad is not "Middle Ages", in the Middle East that term is seldom used at all and often it's reserved for the European intrusion = Crusades. Nor is it identical with "Early Islamic era", that would leave out the Abbasids and Fatimids. Nor can you actually combine those three, since the Ayyubids had a very significant input, while the Abbasids and Fatimids can hardly be discerned by archaeologists. So no, none of your options are reasonable, sorry.
Other options you can change to: Abbasid to Mamluk period [bad, no Mamluks are even mentioned here, AND mixes Early Islamic with Crusader and Middle Isl.]; Abbasid to Ayyubid period [bad, lets the Mamluks disappear from history, etc., etc.]; and so on. There seems to be a WP rule which is very much also a common sense one: if it's not WRONG, leave it alone. As it is now, it's certainly not WRONG, while all other options are wrong. Voila. I'm out, do as you like. Arminden (talk) 18:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)ArmindenArminden (talk) 18:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Arminden, you have hinted five times that my editing is biased. It is not. I don't give a flying f if Amman has a 1000 years period of no history. Now, care to expand that section you are trying to stuff here? Because in its current length, it is not enough...Makeandtoss (talk) 23:45, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
I agree with User:Al Ameer son. Merging sections and naming them 'Early Islamic Rule' per WP:BODY. Makeandtoss (talk) 21:23, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
We could also use "Medieval period" as an alternative, but that might have the same issue as "Middle Ages", in that it is perhaps Euro-centric (I have often seen that term being used to describe that era in Islamic history though). In any case "Abbasid to Ottoman period" is not a good option at all; it's an odd title and I don't see a need to mention the Ottomans twice in section headings. Also, most of the information in the section is rather speculative as to which state or dynasty is credited with the various constructions around the citadel. And just for the record, I never said the Ayyubids, Abbasids, etc were part of the Ottoman era, my comment was about the original two sentences that only mentioned that the Circassians resettled the city in 1878 after a period of a millennium-long abandonment/occasional seasonal usage by Bedouin. And again it wasn't just that it was awfully short (2 sentences), it was that it lacked the substance to form its own section (it was better off as a contextual introductory sentence for the Ottoman era section). --Al Ameer (talk) 05:44, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Amman/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Rated Start
  1. Cite sources for facts stated. WP:CITE
  2. Implement properly formatted references. WP:CITET
  3. Expand the article.

Last edited at 07:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 07:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:25, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:08, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Amman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Population Figures

Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The populations figure given here (in the infobox and the lede) for the city of Amman are suspiciously close (a few hundred people out of four million) to the population figures for the governorate of Amman. On the other hand, in the article for the country of Jordan, the city of Amman is given a population of 1.1 million. Something is wrong here. Can someone who is familiar with the material/sources figure this out and fix it? LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 15:30, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Indeed I have previously thought about this.. In Jordanian media and mayoral statements, when they refer to Amman, they treat Amman as a city the size of a governorate. Its very very confusing, and its been a such a common practice that I am completely connvinced with that notion. The lack of sources diffrrentiating and explaining has worsened the issue. --Makeandtoss (talk) 21:16, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Okay, well, this source (which is the one given for the figures on largest cities on the page for the country of Jordan) has 4.1 million people for the governorate of Amman and 1.8 million for the city of Amman. Is there any reason why can't we use this and update the figures in this article accordingly? LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 12:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
The sources uses the 2015 census as reference. The census makes no distinction between the city and the governorate. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Amman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:08, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Untitled

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article reads in many places more like a tourist advertisement for Amman rather than an accurate article. For example, increasingly talking about how 'westernised' the city is (by what measure?) and its culinary scene as somehow outstanding? There is a massive degree of bias here which is very unhelpful — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.185.41 (talk) 14:19, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Refounding of Amman - two sources

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Two excellent sources on the re-founding of Amman

Onceinawhile (talk) 06:35, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:22, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

It is a tourist destination.

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Can someone expand this sentence? I tried to check the source but I don't access to it. So however does can they say something like 'it's a major tourist hub' or just any descriptor instead of this dry, weird proclamation. Julia Domna Ba'al (talk) 10:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

I just removed it, as it seems so trivial that a national capital would attract tourists that it doesn't rise to the level of significance that would call for it to be mentioned in the lead. (Unless it's to note that it's one of the world's major tourist destinations, I suppose, but I don't think Amman is one of those.) Largoplazo (talk) 11:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
  1. ^ http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Global_city
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Amman/Archive_1&oldid=1263602557"