Template talk:Marrakesh

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Morocco This template is within the scope of WikiProject Morocco, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Morocco 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.MoroccoWikipedia:WikiProject MoroccoTemplate:WikiProject MoroccoMorocco articles Help expand the project: edit history watch purge You can help! يمكنكم أن تساهموا Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Mounir Charïbi Assess : Rate the Unassessed Morocco articles and Unknown-importance Morocco-related articles. Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to articles in Category:Morocco articles missing geocoordinate data Photo : See requested photographs in Morocco Stubs : Morocco stubs Other : Translate from Arabic: Sellam Ameziane, Mrebih Rebbu

I've tried to fix a few of the red links (Badi to El Badi, etc), but it seems to me some of them are a little unnecessary? I understand the point of listing all the city divisions etc, whether there is an article or not, but is there any need for such an exhaustive list of (non-article) landmarks/hotels that don't seem to be of any note? Sotakeit (talk) 11:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Sotakeit: removed some. Most red links do not exist --Tachfin (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A much later comment here, but I was editing the template for other items and I figured it is probably time to remove a lot of the excessive red links as per WP:EXISTING, and do some minor re-structuring to adjust as needed. The navbox is arguably unwieldy and many of the items are unlikely to be notable enough to become pages, and in some cases it's not clear what the lists are based on. Of course, links can always be re-inserted in the future. I'm using my best judgement to leave (or in some cases add) red links that I think feasibly deserve their own pages (based on the fact they they're mentioned in e.g. scholarly books and guidebooks), or, in the case of the city gates, where I'm not sure yet which items are notable and which aren't (I'd have to read through some sources, which I won't do unless/until I plan on creating some of those pages). Cheers, Robert Prazeres (talk) 06:58, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]