Talk:Musalla complex

Proposed merge of Musalla Minarets of Herat into Musalla Complex

The minarets are what's left of the complex. They used to be part of the buildings of the complex but the minarets (and mausoleum) are all that was allowed to remain when the complex was demolished. Presently, we don't have separate articles for minarets when they are attached to a larger building (as far as I am aware). I think that should still be the case when the building they were attached to has been demolished. The minarets should be covered with the complex they used to be a part of (and there is no information at the minaret article that would/could be unique to that article). —Danre98^{(talk^contribs)} 03:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Make sense to me. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:49, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 11:16, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@Klbrain: Thank you, I'd forgotten about this. —Danre98^{(talk^contribs)} 00:19, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 06:03, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Remains of Musalla Complex

• ... that most of the Timurid 15th century Musalla Complex (remains pictured) was destroyed in 1885 by the British and Emir of Afghanistan Abdul Rahman Khan? Source: "before the whole area was levelled in 1885 for defensive reasons by the British and the Amir 'Abd al-Rahman, to counter a predicted Russian offensive. Only nine minarets and the mausoleum of the queen were spared" [1]

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mikhail Ioffe

5x expanded by Danre98 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC).

• Approved: Article 6× expanded within 7 days of nomination, long enough, neutral, well cited. Copyvio: The first sentence of the fourth paragraph of section Preservation efforts was very close to reference named "auto" (see Earwig comparison). I took the liberty of paraphrasing it for you. QPQ verified. Image tagged CC and displays well. Hook of good length, well formatted, and interesting. DYK rule D1 requires that the hook sentence be cited in the article; you only had it cited at the end of the paragraph. I verified the source on JSTOR and copied it up to move things along. All good now. Approved. – Reidgreg (talk) 23:12, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

To T:DYK/P5