Talk:Nabi Musa

Start-up

This is pretty rough to start with, and is mainly a matter of discharging long-accumulated notes into sections. Once the bulk of the material has been dumped, (others are welcome with their ballast), the idea would be to cut and prune it into thematic divisions, and then revise it stylistically. Finally wikify.Nishidani (talk) 15:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Structure

Tiamat has organized the . I suggest the following structure is what we should aim at.

(1) Lead, defining the term (Done!)
(2) History
(3) The festival's structure
(a) Assembly and departure from Jerusalem, district represented (Hebron and Nablus has specific contingents, unless I misrecall)
(b) The journey to Nabi Musa
(c) The nature of the festival on site (3 days or five days?). Religious organisation, vows, feasting etc.
(d) The return to Jerusalem through the Jaffa gate(?) and dispersal. (4) The development of it as a symbol of Palestinian identity and nationalism.
(5)Incidental material, and the Moses' stone.

If one can gather it, details on costume etc., and folkloric beliefs associated with it.Nishidani (talk) 17:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Nishidani. Good suggestions on how to proceed with the article and then the lead's further expansion. I'll try to do my part.

I wanted to ask you though about this sentence: "Once their vows were taken, or vows that had been taken in the preceding year's procession, were offered to the festival."

Do you know what this is meant to say? I can't quite figure it out.

Thanks and great work! Tiamut^talk 03:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

My computer's connection down again, and am writing from my nephew's. You've done the page honour with this substance and wififying fine-tuning. The sentence is terrible. Apologies. The source mentioned that vows were offered, or, if made in the previous years, were offered. Now the precise nature of this is obscure (how do you reoffer a vow? I think 're-confirmed' was meant'. I put it in to alert others to a crux requiring explanation. I.e. as a trace to be expanded when we have more knowledge of the exact anthropological structure of the ritual, which involved in this instance vow taking, and renewel. By the way there is a small pamphlet put out by the Jericho office of the PNA, based on five articles written for Al-Quds in 1997, which apparently explains the makam and rituals in some detail (apart from the book published in Amman). I hope to be back more comfortably when the connection is reestablished with the server. I have quite a bit of extra stuff, but haven't had time to slip it in, because of other preparatory work on pages. Cheers and thanks once moreNishidani (talk) 18:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The actual details of how the Husaynis came to control the Nabi Musa waqf emerged in a dispute in the Islamic courts in around 1914. The details can be found in Yitzhak Reiter, Islamic Endowments in Jerusalem Under British Mandate, Routledge, 1996 pp.13-14, where the Husaynis produced a firman dated to, from memory, 1735 giving their and another family jurisdiction.

Maqam inscription

See from the British Department of Antiquities in Palestine a description of the Mamluk inscription at the site.

Onceinawhile (talk) 01:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Nice find, I have added it to the Dimra article. (One day I should go through all of those Department of Antiquities in Palestine publications online...) Leaving the full ref. below, for future reference, Huldra (talk) 21:43, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

• Mayer, L.A. (1933). "Two inscriptions of Baybar". Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine. 2: 27–33.

Definition of Pal. "local development committee" needed

Arminden (talk) 03:35, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Boltanski as source for 1920s riots

@Zero0000: Hi. I'm happy to see more or more specific material and sources added, but for now I don't see what could be wrong with a short outline based on Emma Aubin-Boltanski. She wrote for Week in Pal. on the subject she was preparing her PhD thesis for. She's a PhD social anthropologist and senior researcher at the CNRS now, which is a very hard to reach position. I did write down all there was to say in the source details: Week in Pal. is restructuring the website, original URL is not available, but this other Palestinian website received the article a few months after publication. Have a great day, Arminden (talk) 05:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: Someone's work as a student doesn't suddenly become reliable because they later gained qualifications. We accept PhD theses (often with argument) because of the examination process but we do not normally accept things published without peer review by a student before graduation. Besides that, there are major problems with it. The first is characterising the riots as "anti-Jewish" when almost all specialists on the subject have identified fears of Zionist intentions and British support for Zionism as the motivating factors. Nor is it true that the British identified Amin al-Husseini as the chief instigator. He was found guilty as an agitator but so were others including Jews like Jabotinsky. You should read at least the conclusions section of the Commission of Inquiry (link at the bottom of Palin Commission). What the British actually concluded is totally absent from your paragraph. You can do better. Zero^talk 06:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

To editor Arminden: On the other hand, Halabi's paper is a fine source. Can you please point me to the place where Halabi says the procession was banned in 1937? I can't find it. You also added without source "The 1937 ban on the procession from Jerusalem would be largely upheld until the present day." and there is a later mention of 1937 too. The problem is that the procession from Jerusalem in 1938 was reported by several articles in the Palestine Post. These articles say that the procession was smaller than in previous years because contingents from some towns like Hebron chose to not take part. That is quite different (and more interesting) than the procession being banned (unless "banned" does not mean "banned by the authorities"). (The PP website just went down; I'll write more when it comes back.) Zero^talk 07:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

(PP is back). In 1939 there was no Nabi Musa procession but it is not reported as banned. There was also no Palm Sunday procession by the Christian churches. In 1940 it was reported that the ulemas of the former Sharia Court decided to hold Nabi Musa ceremonies but not a procession. A few days later, a small procession was reported. No mention of a ban in either article. In 1941, ceremonies but no procession. In 1942, only a local procession. The 1941–1942 articles mention pilgrims from Jerusalem with their banners, and high British official guests, but they don't actually say there was a procession from Jerusalem.
On the other hand, on 16 Apr 1943, PP reported a procession from Jerusalem. It is worth quoting: "The annual Nebi Musa celebrations began in Jerusalem yesterday when the Nablus contingent arrived in the morning and moved in traditional procession from Sheikh Jarah to Haram es Sharif via Damascus Gate. Village contingents will continue to arrive throughout today carrying banners and visiting the mosque before embarking on the pilgrimage to Nebi Musa. Jaffa and Ramle villagers arriving by train will march from the Railway Station through the Old City Suk and will link up with the Jerusalem contingent after the latter receive the banners from the District Commissioner." It also says that in the previous few years the Nablus contingent didn't come since the money had dried up when the mufti left. There is a follow-up on Apr 19. From this we learn that in 1943 there was a procession and it had government approval. In 1944 there is an eyewitness account of someone who travelled from Jerusalem with a group of dervishes who played kettledrums and cymbals. In 1945 there is something about Nebi Musa lying in "Controlled Area No. 3", whatever that means. However, permission must have been given as festivities at Nebi Musa were reported (though it says the notables came from Jerusalem by car). In 1946, large festivities in Jerusalem and Nebi Musa report, but whether anyone walked to Nebi Musa is unclear (mention of cars, buses and taxis). There was a "long procession" bringing the banners back to Jerusalem. In 1947, "the Moslem Nebi Musa procession from Jerusalem to Jericho on Friday was attended by fewer pilgrims than usual", but a large party of government and military officials attended. In 1948, no procession was mentioned. On 15 Apr 1949, PP reported "For the first time in almost eight centuries and indeed since the Nebi Musa pilgrimage was first introduced by Salah-ed-Din, there will be no Zafah procession this year".
We aren't allowed to craft an article out of newspaper reports, but they serve as a sanity check. It is certainly not true that the procession ceased in 1937, nor is it true that it was banned then. Zero^talk 08:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

To editor Zero0000: I did not go about it like with an academic paper. The computer "lost" what I had put together 3-4 times and I had to do it all over again. I won't argue every point I've put there, this might be sub-standard, but I'm not in the state of mind of proving the 80:20 rule right once more. I keep on trying to stay away, and then end up spending hours on end on 1-2 topics. This said: it's not an article focused on Hajj Amin, may he... you know what. (Yes, I readily admit: he's not a friend of mine. I deeply dislike such characters wherever they show up, and him specifically. There you go. But it has little import here.) I want to open the article when I need a reminder of the main facts about the shrine, and find them easily available. Hardly anything I consider relevant was to be found till last October. Nobody really looks up Nabi Musa to search for how many dunams were confiscated by kibbutz X, or what role this character Amin did or didn't play in this or that riot.

• Why there?
• Had it become a wider Muslim tradition, or did it stay just a local, Palestinian one? (I was hugely surprised by James Finn's report. He did have his bias, but he didn't make up facts, just commented them in his own way. Pilgrims from Tartaria, India and China?! Were they on the hajj, on business, or did they bother "just" for Al-Aqsa and took in Nabi Musa as an added value? When & why did they all disappear again?)
• Who started the tradition? Who then gave it its shape and importance, Saladin? Baibars? Now I see the Ottomans are in the run for important details, or is that a mistake, a misreading? Maybe it had died out, and they revived it around 1820 or 1850 (this is another question; it seems contradictory as of now: already before the Tanzimat?!), but what had been the scenario earlier on?
• Connection to Christian calendar: why? I appreciate the Ottomans brought in "thousands of soldiers and even artillery" to keep the mob under control, but that was in their last century of power, with Tanzimat and all. Why a Muslim pilgrimage is set according to the Orthodox Easter calendar speaks for itself; but who did do it? What was the official explanation (just for the fun of it)?
• Which Christian calendar? I found out & added: the Orthodox one. How exactly does it overlap with the Easter week? It seems that the answer is: mainly on Good Friday and Easter eve. What I didn't have the energy to finish: how did it overlap spatially? Apparently the Muslim procession did go down Via Dolorosa and out from Lions Gate (one source though has them exiting from Damascus Gate, which makes less sense), but that's before Holy Week. What about during Holy Week, when the Old City, and especially Via Dolorosa, is full with Christians? Or is it, considering that Via Dolorosa is a Catholic thing, in time adopted by the Orthodox, but when? (Catholic Holy Week hardly ever coincided with the Nabi Musa festival, but in some years it probably fully overlapped, unlike the Orthodox.) 'Cause that's what interests me: how much did they step on each other's feet. The miracle is that the one "event" we know of was with Jews, not Christians. Or were there such as well, just less publicised?
• How did it gain its political, nationalistic character? I've learned a lot from both Halabi and Boltanski. Halabi is more academic, but he wrote 8 years after Boltanski, so I guess he took from her. Or maybe not. Anyway: Ottomans change the choreography in the 19th, Hajj Amin takes it several notches higher, British occupation as the catalyst by giving Palestine a new administrative reality and autonomy: these are major facts, and the Nabi Musa festival was a serious magnifying glass for these hugely important facts. I learned a lot by reading through the sources, and have added it to the article (not as carefully as one might, but as much as I had the energy to do it and redo it over and over again).
• When was it held, when not, who and when stopped it, how was it done in each period and how is it done today. As to: why it was disrupted? Who & when did it speaks for itself, there will always be spin doctors to try and "fix" that, so not my main focus.

I'm more than happy if you add those facts you mention. I really didn't focus on the riots, there's a whole I/P article on that, which I'm not very much interested in. I'm not. Did the "red-haired Jew" spit on the Hebron flag, as said by its bearer? Did speaker X or Y whip up the largest mob? Who did piss in the soup more, Jabotinsky or the non-Zionist old believers? I don't care much, and if I will some day, I won't look it up under Wiki: Nabi Musa. For me it still did bring into focus one aspect: Jabotinsky or no Jabotinsky, the Old City was the realm of Orthodox, traditional Jews, and they had been the majority there for a while by constant immigration from Eastern Europe, no Zionism, just religion and messianism. Complicates the I/P discussion a bit.

Please check how many hours I've spent on this s... subject. I can't spend more, and I definitely shouldn't. I can of course just read and keep files for myself, but I find it more decent to place it online. I know for a fact that it's far from finished, but rely on the certainty that others will deal with improving it. Sometimes I'm doing some improvement work myself, some other times I don't and just do the raw collection of facts; I think both is OK and legitimate, if it doesn't introduce major flaws or biases, which I'm trying not to. I know very well what's insufficiently documented, poorly sourced, etc., but my main issue here is that some main facts are still unclear, some pieces are missing in the big picture, and maybe nobody does have them, but maybe I just didn't find the sources. That' is what I'm unhappy with. Boltanski's Week in Pal.? Of course it's... Week in Pal. level. But it came out in Dec. 2005, and she got her PhD in 2007, so I guess she had it mostly together by then. And a PhD candidate is not a student. For all I know, she could have been teaching at university already, I don't know. We have so many far poorer sources than that. It will be removed and replaced by someone else when they find her thesis, or the thesis as a book chapter, or another author altogether. I truly hope I'll be doing smth else by then. And know more about what Nabi Musa truly is about, because it's a crazy story, and not because of the mufti. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 14:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

To editor Zero0000: Sorry, I had lost it. I'm not enjoying it anymore most of the time. Those damned crashes definitely don't help. I wish I could find answers in the articles, not be forced to work out the answers tiny piece by tiny piece myself. Anyway: yes, there was a mess in that edit. I have removed all what isn't in the sources, and that amounts to what you said. I just can't find the source I read yesterday, which offered a list of Arab powers Hajj Amin had contacted during the revolt, which indicted him in the eyes of the British, so I cut out the sentence about it. It certainly isn't Halabi, and the fact that his paper is photocopied, not a Word file, and thus unsearchable, makes looking through it a pain you-know-where.

As you know, I'm always in favour of putting in good, plausible information even if it's not 100% up to some obscure Wiki standards. Besides, are there even such strict rules as not to quote newspapers, or just a "softer" guideline on how many % of the sources should be secondary, or how to be more cautious about primary sources? In any case, the PP collection (I didn't figure out at first what that stands for; not my best day), so as a collection over several years, not just a quick note on page 25 in one of the issues, looks perfectly valid as a source to me. Boltanski actually puts it very much like that, too: "With the exile of the mufti in 1937 and the repression of the revolt during 1936-1939, the mawsim lost its political dimension. The festivities continued, but on a lesser scale. In 1951, shortly after the assassination King Abdallah, the Jordanians decided to suspend the celebrations in Jerusalem. The faithful continued to celebrate the mawsim in April, but only at the sanctuary in the desert." So it's backed up perfectly. Her short sentence seemed to contradict the "popular" version (Visit Palestine, Hebrew Wiki's unsourced summary, etc.): "1937: The festival of Nabi Musa was prohibited. After 1948: After the WWII, Jericho was controlled by Jordan first then Israel. The mosque was used as a military base." (Visit Palestine), and I had nothing to fill in the missing info from Boltanski's overly brief & vague sum-up. So please, do add the PP info, as it is credible and fills in a gap others don't, and probably won't in the future either, as it's not as "sexy" as 1920 or the 30s revolt. The Visit Palestine bit about a military base is also interesting, but completely useless as such, as it doesn't even make it clear who did create a base there: the Jordanians, the Israelis, or both; and whether the area was a of-limits being declared a military area, or the building itself was taken up by troops. Still, there is something there and should be followed up, but not by me. Thanks, Arminden (talk) 17:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Zero0000: See what happened? Another full Wiki working day for me :)

I've fixed what I could, added what else I found in the process. The rest I'll leave to you and other friendly colleagues. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 23:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I thought that perhaps "banned in 1937" meant banned in 1937 only rather than 1937 and later. But in fact the festival went ahead in 1937 and the mufti took part. There were "disturbances", but nothing very serious. Zero^talk 14:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

The mufti did take part in 1937? So his escape by rope from the Haram and flight came later in the year? Interesting. Quite a master in brinkmanship. But please, do add the PalPost details, preferably on the Riots page. I saw that many, including the Lonely Planet guide (none better for individual tourists in practical terms) repeats the 1937 ban story. Maybe there is smth to it that we can't detect from the usual sources, or it's yet another myth. Don't forget the context: after the Arab general strike and a year of bloody revolt. Maybe the authorities just put up discreet administrative obstacles, checkpoints, movement restrictions between districts, financial obstacles, who knows. I've concentrated on what I most care about: when did it take shape (Saladin - myth or more?), when was a formal procession from Jerusalem included, etc. Halabi insists that there has been no Jerusalem - Nabi Musa procession before the mid-19th c. But many of the pilgrims probably did come from Jerusalem. How shall we imagine what happened? Ad hoc small groups walking down the road? And if the maqam was so badly ruined by 1820, has it been a festival there on a set date in the decades/centuries before the renovation, or was it just a place to stop & pray if you went by? Maybe there wasn't more than a small Jericho- and Bedouin-centered event there before 1850? And quite essential: who did introduce the Easter date? How come there were participants from half a continent away in Finn's time? Right now, we have a huge gap, which people probably overlook: 1269 (Baibars) to 1820s (renovation) or 1850s (new rules, choreography centered on Quds). Over half a millennium of - what? I want to understand the phenomena, maybe more than this or that event. Arminden (talk) 21:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, the mufti was deposed from the Supreme Muslim Council late in the year (October, I think) whereas the festival is at Easter. Zero^talk 03:34, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Important open questions

To sum up what is not very clear yet.

MAQAM, PILGRIMAGE

• Why there? Different theories, need systematic presentation.
• Since when a tradition? Comment: Baibars probably went to Nabi Musa because of an already existing tradition.
• Date set by the Christian calendar: since when? Current explanations?
• Customs during festival and their evolution in time: what was done when.
  • In which historical periods was it held, when not, who stopped it & when: what went on betwen Baibars and 19th century? Over 500 years missing!
  • Procession from Jerusalem: in which historical periods? What went on outside those periods? Just local festival?
• Ottoman reconstruction, new customs: 1820s or 1850s? (Already before the Tanzimat?!)
• A Muslim tradition beyond Palestine? How come, when? See Finn's report and Indian subcontinent Isma'ili sects mentioned.
• Connection to hajj, Jerusalem pilgrimage, possibly other business travel and pilgrimage patterns & customs?

INHABITANTS, LANDS

• Inhabitants: what on Earth are we talking about?! The maqam needs a keeper, but that's one man and maybe his immediate family, if indeed he doesn't drive in from Jericho. So what is it all about? There has never been a village there. Did the PA define NM as a district, and the dozens of inhabitants mentioned here are the Bedouin living in the area? Is someone trying to establish a village there? Figures don't describe reality, but can attempt at pretending to do so.
• Confiscated land: I'm sure Israel confiscated Palestinian land around there, but what's the connection to Nabi Musa? Was it waqf land, or such belonging to some administrative unit called Nabi Musa? If the latter: what does it consist of? It certainly doesn't concern the plot around the shrine, there's nothing there apart from graves. Again: reality check. Arminden (talk) 15:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

No festival before 1820s? Really? (1820s or 1850s?)

"Around 1820, the Ottoman authorities had to almost fully rebuild the shrine complex, which had, over the previous centuries, fallen into a grave state of dilapidated disrepair.[see Murphy-O'Connor] In addition, they promoted a festive pilgrimage to the shrine that would always coincide with the Orthodox Christian celebration of Easter, creating a counter-balance to the Christian ceremonial activity in the city.[see Murphy-O'Connor] This 'invention of tradition', as such imaginative constructs are called,[see Hobsbawm] made the pageantry of the Nabi Musa pilgrimage a potent symbol of both political and religious identity among Muslims from the outset of the modern period.[see Friedland & Hecht, Murphy-O'Connor]"

Questions:

• "Around 1820" looks dubious, not 1850s? O'Connor is not always reliable. Here too, he has the Muslim procession LEAVE Jerusalem on Orthodox Good Friday, while more reliable sources have them return on Maundy Thu. and have a procession through Jerusalem at the VERY END of the festival week. Also, he claims that the Brits prohibited it in 1948 - they left on May 15, the civil war was in full swing, somewhat unlikely that they bothered about Nabi Musa a month before leaving. One cannot rely too much on his details.
  
• Beyond 1820s or 50s: Wasn't it an older tradition, from the time of Baibars or thereabout? The competition with Christian pilgrims and their presence in Jerusalem is much older, and fits the Mamluk period far better (counter-Crusade).
• Was there no set date before 1820? So no festival, just people coming in whenever they happened to be around?
• Of Friedland & Hecht, Google Books only offers irrelevant snippets. Does anyone have the book, to give us a full-text quote? As of now, it brings almost nothing beyond what we get from other, online accessible sources. Arminden (talk) 00:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

And here is the answer, at least for the 16th century, with less detail for later times: <ref>{{cite book |last= Cohen |first= Amnon |title= Al-Nabi Musa – an Ottoman festival (''mawsim'') resurrected? |pages= 34-44 |editor= David J Wasserstein, Ami Ayalon |work= Mamluks and Ottomans: Studies in Honour of Michael Winter |publisher= Routledge |series= Routledge Studies in Middle Eastern History |year= 2013 |edition= reprint |isbn= 9781136579172 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=SMGSTgfU7CQC&pg=PA34 |access-date= 22 April 2021}}</ref> I have already used another article from this book as a source for the Baibars inscription (goes beyond Meyer's), and there might be more very useful material. Arminden (talk) 02:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

@Arminden: Information from this source should definitely be incorporated here. I just added a quick snippet, but not sure if schedule will allow me to continue expansion anytime soon. Al Ameer (talk) 03:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Boltanski again

To editor Arminden: Articles by students before graduation are not acceptable sources. I also noted several major problems with Boltanski's article. It all has to go, no question. Zero^talk 15:07, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

@Zero0000: like I said, we started from considering Boltanski's main recommendation as being her PhD thesis, which is post-graduation. To make sure, I did a quick search. The result is even better. She's published in peer-reviewed journals on this specific topic in 2003 and 2005. The Week in Palestine article is from the end of 2005. Only her PhD thesis is from 2007, the articles came out before.

So perfectly legit in terms of academic qualification.

Again, I'm not sure that WP requires the same level of RS as an academic paper. Many WP fields don't go that far. Here it's necessary to find reliable sources because most sources are vague and skip 550 years of history. What journal or book the info comes from is not always by itself the right criterion for this kind of problem.

Look up: https://cv.archives-ouvertes.fr/emma-aubin-boltanski

Two publications: one with details and abstract, and one with full text under "File":

1. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00290664

Emma Aubin-Boltanski. Salâh al-Din, un héros à l'épreuve : Mythe et pèlerinage en Palestine. Annales. Histoire, Sciences sociales, Armand Colin, 2005, pp.91-107. ⟨hal-00290664⟩

2. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00292258

Emma Aubin-Boltanski. La réinvention du mawsim de Nabî Sâlih : Les territoires palestiniens (1997-2000). Archives de Sciences Sociales des Religions, Éditions de l’EHESS, 2003, pp.103-120. ⟨hal-00292258⟩ Arminden (talk) 21:00, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Look, it is very simple. If you can find sources that satisfy the reliability rules, use them. At the moment you have put in multiple citations to a source that is hardly more than a blog post written by a student. It isn't good enough. I'm reluctant to go through and remove everything cited to this source because it would leave the article in a mess. But I'm perfectly entitled to do that. I'm bringing this here instead of attacking the article with an axe to give you the chance to correct your error. Zero^talk 02:55, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Scientific Evidence

Is there any more scientific evidence to support the claims that MoSeH's (Musa's) body is in the Tomb at Nabi Musa? (one person having a dream and claiming it is there can be said to be evidence [witness, etc.] if that witness/evidence is substantiated by further credible proof; however, if not, then the person is not a credible witness.)

I noticed that with the Christian claim that his body is at the Tomb on the top of the mountain peak now called "Siyagha" that the tomb is found empty and, as far as I am aware, no biological materials have been discovered (blood, or tissue, etc.).

I am not aware of any Zionists, or Judaists making any claims similar.

Thank you for your time, and I hope this is approached peacefully.

Respectfully, Zion.BenYaHoshuWaH (talk) 00:36, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Suggest to add an updated image

Nabi Musa (near Jericho)

If you think it is helpful to make the entry more colorful and interesting 05:21, 20 April 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agmonsnir (talk • contribs)

Sure. Why not? That's added. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Agmonsnir (talk) 05:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Area of Settlements

Is it fine for the area to be converted to acres or hectares? i feel these would be more familiar to the English speaking wiki Roboduckdragon (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)