Talk:Masjid al-Haram

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Masjid al-Haram article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 31 days

Saudi Arabia Top‑importance

	Saudi Arabia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Saudi Arabia 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.Saudi ArabiaWikipedia:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaTemplate:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture High‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Islam: Mosques Top‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles 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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Mosques task force.

Temple of Hubal

It used to be the Temple of Hubal in Pre Islamic Era worshipped by the Quraysh Tribe 171.76.85.13 (talk) 03:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Name

My arabic fellows, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't "haram" mean forbidden? EntityRrr (talk) 17:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How many minarets?

The fact box stipulates 7, with 6 minarets under construction. Elsewhere it says that after the two last minarets were built, the number is eleven.

What is correct? Mumroos (talk) 17:37, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Incidents" section

Please discuss here whether to include such a section or not, and what it should contain if so. We've had enough edit-warring for one day. R Prazeres (talk) 01:12, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For my own view: I don't mind a section that briefly summarizes the overall safety concerns and the most important incidents, with a hatnote link to Incidents during the Hajj, which covers most of the relevant topics already. But given the existence of the latter article and the fact that there's 1600+ years of history to cover here, keeping in mind WP:RECENTISM, it should not become a collection of crime and safety miscellanea. R Prazeres (talk) 01:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable. Now that I think of this, one should merge these additions to Hajj#Incidents & Incidents during the Hajj. Inclusion of these contents seem unwarranted here. – Garuda ^Talk! 01:37, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The only thing that doesn't fit in the scope of Hajj incidents is the Mecca crane collapse, and that's already mentioned clearly in the history section, where any other major incidents could be mentioned as needed. So after all, I see no reason for an "Incidents" section or equivalent here. R Prazeres (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the record: On an ordinary day I would not mind for such a section to be created. However, last night, the IP in question was a disreputable sock of Hindutva editors Notatall00 (talk · contribs) and Loveforwiki (talk · contribs) whose main motivation for adding the section was revenge for having their non-consensus edits reverted in another article 2025 Prayag Maha Kumbh Mela. See [1] [2] [3], not to mention WP:NPA WP:ADVOCACY and WP:NOTHERE attacks such as [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] that led me to assume that they are nothing but socks who deserve only WP:DENY, which in my understanding, warranted the reverts. For further info, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Legal threat. Borgenland (talk) 03:54, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I saw that. Another reason to move this to a talk page discussion. If editors do want something of this nature they can say so here and get a proper consensus. R Prazeres (talk) 16:47, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]