Talk:Ramle Subdistrict, Mandatory Palestine

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

British Empire Low‑importance

	British Empire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Palestine Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography

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

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

text of the article

The list is in the text of the article and the template, but it needs to be in the text of the article so that this article can be expanded with a small sentence on each of the villages. But why exactly do you care LOTRQ? How many depopulated Palestinian village articles have you worked on? Or is this just a passing interest? Either way, please do not just blank the text of the article. nableezy - 22:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add a small or large sentence on each of the villages - but there's no reason to create an unsightly and redundant duplication of lists in order to do this. And kindly keep personal commentary out of talk pages. LoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk) 22:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The template is not the text of the article, one is not "redundant" to the other. nableezy - 22:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Semantics aside, we have two identical lists, one on top of the other, which together make up more than 2/3 of the article. This is, as I wrote, an unsightly and redundant duplication of lists, that serves no real purpose. There's nothing to prevent the creation of an entry for each locality in the district based on one list or the other, but there's no point in having them both. LoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk) 22:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It isnt semantics, but however you want to ignore me feel free. nableezy - 22:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is semantics. As the page is laid out, there's one list under the heading 'Depopulated settlements", and right below it, an identical list, under the heading 'Arab localities depopulated..". From an wiki markup perspective, they are different elements, but from a textual perspective, as well as an overall article quality perspective, they are two identical lists, whose dual existence serves no apparent purpose. LoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk) 22:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Layout of the artilce

what we should be striving for is something similar to District of Acre - a history of the sub-district, it's borders, etc..., with a navigation template that allows access to the individual locality's articles. There's more to the district than a list of depopulated settlements. LoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk) 22:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes we should. nableezy - 22:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And you will note there is no duplicate list there... LoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk) 22:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That article isnt perfect, I was more saying yes we should in that we should have a history of the sub-district and its borders and whatever else. But the villages should also be covered in the text of the article. nableezy - 22:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All the localities should be (briefly) covered in the article - including ones that continue to exist. There's more to the district than a list of the depopulated settlements. But "being covered" means more than being listed twice, in an identical fashion. LoverOfTheRussianQueen (talk) 22:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]