Talk:Tomb of Artaxerxes III

This is a Tomb in a historic city!!!Not have Why should Not have not a dedicated page? M.k.m2003 (talk) 23:04, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Please read WP:GNG - you need to establish that this tomb is notable. In other words, it should have significant coverage in reliable sources, without original research. Maybe you might want to draft this and develop an article, then submit it to articles for creation? Red Phoenix ^talk 02:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

@Red Phoenix: at the moment the redirect gives readers information not just about the tomb (which is covered in more detail there) but about its context, without which the tomb can't be fully understood. What should be done is enlarge the text there to the point where it actually needs a separate article. I'm not sure why @M.k.m2003: isn't doing that. Context is extremely important in archaeology and history (and most of life in fact). Doug Weller talk 12:00, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

My purpose in trying to start a discussion here was to facilitate discussion and let M.k.m2003 express why he feels this needs a separate article, and to allow counterarguments to be made so that reasoning can be clear. I'm not an expert in archaeology and in general am someone who prefers quality over quantity of articles—in part for exactly what you said about context, no less—so I'm most in favor of Doug Weller's methodology. M.k.m2003, does Doug's reasoning make sense, or do you have further concerns? It's not that the tomb should not be mentioned, it's that there's only really enough to mention it in context. Red Phoenix ^talk 22:24, 29 July 2019 (UTC)