Talk:List of World Heritage Sites in the Arab states

message: Should we move this to something like "List of World Heritage Sites in the Middle East." This is because non-Arab nations like Turkey, Iran and Israel share a common heritage with Arabs.Bless sins (talk) 22:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We are currently using the classification that UNESCO uses, which seems appropriate. Anatolian Greek sites, for example, obviously were not built by Arabs. <eleland/talkedits> 22:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification

message: Hey. I saw some requested a third opinion, so here it is. I believe that this article should remain true to the UNESCO's standards. On the page where the site is listed, if you click on the Jerusalem header, it just redirects to the list of all the countries involved - and this page clearly reflects that. Now to the issue at hand: this article clearly lists Jerusalem in the Arab states list. The paper is titled "World Heritage in Arab States"; Jerusalem is listed in the index on page 2; the site is listed on page 25. UNESCO puts it in the Arab states, and that should be reflected on this page.
Hope this helps. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 15:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I also think that Jerusalem should be listed in this list as is. Perhaps we can even have this list in a chart format, where entries are first entered alphabetically, but later can be sorted by country or date (or something else as well).Bless sins (talk) 12:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Third opinion

message: I'm sorry but I can't find Israel here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_Heritage_Sites_in_Europe.Can anyone explain this or remove this sentence from the article? Thanks 77.125.74.6 (talk) 20:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: UNESCO lists it as Jerusalem, so that's how we show it here. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 12:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Israel is on the European list" 

message: Possibly it is obvious, but I don't get the point of this list. "Arab States" (which links to Arab League) seems to be a recent concept, while the sites are much older than that. So why collect all the sites in the Arab States in one list? Should we have also a List of World Heritage Sites in the OPEC states, List of World Heritage Sites in the PAMSA States,... ? bamse (talk) 08:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the article was created to reflect how UNESCO categorizes the sites. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/stat has a list of regions, one of which is "Arab States". Not that I necessarily agree with that logic, but there you go. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 13:47, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. However, looking at the first table in , the regions chosen by UNESCO are not overlapping (which does make sense), while on wikipedia it appears that some countries appear in more than one list (which is ugly in my opinion). For instance Egypt is in both, the List of World Heritage Sites in Africa and the List of World Heritage Sites in the Arab States. If the reason for the existence of this list is how UNESCO categorizes the sites (a weak reason in my opinion), we should copy the UNESCO classification one to one, i.e., with non-overlapping regions. BTW, is there a reference for what UNESCO considers as "Arab States"? Is it really the same as the Arab League? bamse (talk) 15:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This appears to be a list of those. It does not appear to have a direct attachment to the Arab League, though there is considerable overlap. But you're right that this list does overlap with the Africa one, and that should probably be resolved. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 15:57, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Other countries seem to overlap as well in the lists: Algeria, Mauritania, Tunisia, and Morocco should all be here instead. I'm currently in the process of an FL drive, so I'm working on the African list right now; but if someone would like to help out, the table format will need to be transferred to this article. Once that is done, I'll gladly switch the countries' article location. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:17, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Libya as well. Forgot it. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 19:47, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

text: No to both #1 (oops =)). This isn't a geographically or politically classified list; this is simply the way UNESCO decided to sort them out. We should be following the classification in which it is clearly given by the creator of the list in question. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 23:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, makes more and more sense to me. bamse (talk) 10:09, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

text: I wholeheartedly agree. For better are worse the world heritage system is a creation of UNESCO, so it's a mistake to deviate from their classification of the sites they designate. Chouji Ochiai (talk) 16:03, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why this list? 

message: If somebody wants to expand this list into table form like it was done with the Africa list, an old revision of the List of World Heritage Sites in Danger (particularly the "Description" column) might be useful. bamse (talk) 11:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  In case of expansion 

message: There is discussion on what should be included in this and other regional lists of World Heritage Sites. Please voice your opinion on the issue here. Thank you. bamse (talk) 15:39, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comments 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 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) 20:34, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:AbuMena.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/102, http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/191, http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/565 and other similar pages. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:44, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: There seems to be some edit warring about labeling places in Israel and Palestine.  I don't think it is the job of Wikipedia to settle complex international problems.  We need a consensus as to what the label should be in these cases. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me  15:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israel and Palestine