Talk:Lusail
Add topic | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of Lusail be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. Wikipedians in Qatar may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other websites. |
Untitled
[edit]this new article about Lusail city in State of Qatar Qatarson 06:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lusail. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060129183645/http://www.lusail.com/ to http://www.lusail.com/
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) 06:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Plant
[edit]Which plant species is Lusail/Wassail? Hawawshibread (talk) 00:15, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- One of the links on Qatar's GIS website spells the plant's name as "wasal" which is apparently Juncus rigidus, a shrub native to the region. But the text file from the GIS is ambiguous and only says it is "the local name of a plant that grows in many regions in Qatar" so I'm not entirely sure. Elspamo4 (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]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) 09:25, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Promotional piece
[edit]The entire article reads like a promotion. Very few things talk about the current state of the city, instead the majority talk about future plans. Most cities have future development plans, but the entire article isn’t focused on them. All the information on future plans should be moved to a section dedicated to that and replaced by information on the city’s current status. Taxman457 (talk) 14:02, 3 November 2026 (UTC)
- I decided to WP:BOLD and make some NPOV edits and moved a lot of the future plans to a separate section. Many of them appear to have been announced many years ago so it might be better to remove them entirely and then they can be replaced with current information. Taxman457 (talk) 16:48, 3 November 2026 (UTC)
- As one of the main contributors to this article, I don't really see promotional material from what I added. It is, however, based largely on primary sources and heavily outdated since I've written most of these sections some years ago. They do need updating and rewriting with reliable secondary sources, so I'm in support of any changes you have to make. When it comes to removal, though, do you think that's the best option? For example, some information about Lusail's various can only be found in the district planning and guidelines documentation. And it is presumably still accurate and objective, so I don't see a reason to remove that information (for example). But my opinion is obviously biased, so if you're proposing removal of these, I'm all ears. Elspamo4 (talk) 21:37, 4 November 2026 (UTC)
- Also wanted to note the changes you've made so far have been good. It removed a lot of speculative claims (mostly added by me). I think most of the work that remains is in updating the article since a lot of is speculation/tentative plans. Elspamo4 (talk) 21:45, 4 November 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah I didn’t actually remove much other than small sentences that weren’t NPOV. I mostly just moved stuff. But the truth is articles should be balanced with more space given to more important topics. So future plans say something about the city, but it shouldn’t be the majority of the article. Taxman457 (talk) 17:29, 8 November 2026 (UTC)
- That's true. At the time, most of the substantial sources were about future plans, since the city was still mostly under construction, so that's what I added to the article. Since then, there's been major changes that I haven't had the chance to update. Hopefully once I get my PC working I'll be able to update the article, or maybe someone else will. But I agree, most of the content I added needs to be updated and the article should be more balanced between its current status and future (now past) plans. Elspamo4 (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah I didn’t actually remove much other than small sentences that weren’t NPOV. I mostly just moved stuff. But the truth is articles should be balanced with more space given to more important topics. So future plans say something about the city, but it shouldn’t be the majority of the article. Taxman457 (talk) 17:29, 8 November 2026 (UTC)
- Also wanted to note the changes you've made so far have been good. It removed a lot of speculative claims (mostly added by me). I think most of the work that remains is in updating the article since a lot of is speculation/tentative plans. Elspamo4 (talk) 21:45, 4 November 2026 (UTC)
- As one of the main contributors to this article, I don't really see promotional material from what I added. It is, however, based largely on primary sources and heavily outdated since I've written most of these sections some years ago. They do need updating and rewriting with reliable secondary sources, so I'm in support of any changes you have to make. When it comes to removal, though, do you think that's the best option? For example, some information about Lusail's various can only be found in the district planning and guidelines documentation. And it is presumably still accurate and objective, so I don't see a reason to remove that information (for example). But my opinion is obviously biased, so if you're proposing removal of these, I'm all ears. Elspamo4 (talk) 21:37, 4 November 2026 (UTC)