Talk:Rabat

Both this article and Marrakesh state that they are the third largest city in Morocco. Oops. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.59.206 (talk) 19:25, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Now both claim to be the fourth largest. --146.90.158.110 (talk) 23:14, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Throughout articles about Maroc here on wikipedia, a lot of effort has been made to translate names into English. This is appreciated, but as an ex resident of Maroc, and a native English speaker, it is very annoying that many many street names have been Anglicised, when all English speakers in Maroc happily use French or Arabic names. Thus, I would never use the phrase "Hassan Tower" preferring instead to use the French "Tour Hassan". Similarly, I would use "Avenue Mohammed Cinq" rather that "Mohammed Cinq Avenue" even when talking with fellow English speakers.

I would like to see this reflected in wiki articles on Maroc - does anybody have any thoughts on this? --Roxy the dog (resonate) 00:34, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hah. I assume that's a no. Roxy, the dog. barcus 15:27, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 13:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rabat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081011034826/http://www.commune-tunis.gov.tn:80/fr/mairie_cooperation1.htm to http://www.commune-tunis.gov.tn/fr/mairie_cooperation1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Decent sources seem to exist for all.(not sure about this one), , , , . Doug Weller (talk) 13:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Ville de Rabat.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:08, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:GALLERY and WP:IMAGELOCATION, "Gallery" sections are discouraged and images should be placed close to relevant text. So I've removed the gallery section and either moved some of the images to other places in the article or added new images to cover some of the topics. Since many of the images concern landmarks and monuments, I've added a smaller gallery with more specific images for that particular section. I've moved one of the images of downtown Rabat to the infobox to make it a little more representative of the city as a whole. For future reference, here is a version of the page before the gallery was removed. R Prazeres (talk) 03:59, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Siège Maroc Telecom à Rabat.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

@Skitash you removed my addition of the name in Tifinagh for being „Not closely related to the subject“ could you please explain what you mean by that? are you unhappy with the source or do you believe no matter the source Rabat should only be written in Latin and Arabic writing cause they are „more related“ to Rabat? Bananakingler (talk) 14:59, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi. We must include a single non-English equivalent per MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV. Going by the objective criterion at WP:MLN, we'd consider looking at the linguistic majority or the most commonly used name. Skitash (talk) 15:23, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

„ may be included in the lead sentence,“

that is not the lead sentence but the infobox.

"When the subject is closely associated with more than one non-English language, the lead sentence should normally not single out one of them. In such cases, all non-English equivalents should be placed together in a single explanatory footnote (or in a "Names" section or similar), rather than in the text of the first sentence, in order to avoid clutter and disputes over which language to feature. Separate languages should be divided by semicolons; romanizations of non-Latin scripts, by commas. Do not boldface non-English names not normally used in English. Some non-English terms should be italicized. These cases are described in the Manual of Style for text formatting."

since Rabat is the capital of Morocco an Amazigh Arab nation it makes certainly sense to represent both scripture.

Do you prefer another location for the Tifinagh? Bananakingler (talk) 16:28, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@Skitash do you have any substantial reason? It is dificult for me to assume you are not WP:Stonewalling if you do not engage in any kind of discussion.

Please answer within the next 10 days. Bananakingler (talk) 20:48, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

"may be included in the lead sentence" No because the infobox is lede-adjacent and is supposed to summarize what's in the article. I don't see any substantial reasoning on your end as to why Berber languages are "closely associated" with the subject and should be included, especially given that 92.5% of Rabat's inhabitants are Arabophone as opposed to 4.6% being Berberophone per the most recent census. Skitash (talk) 21:36, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with adding the Tifinagh name in the lead or infobox. It is indeed a co-official language, so there isn't much of a leap to make here. Demographics alone is not a clear criteria and would likely be a quagmire if applied to other topics. Per MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV and other guidelines, we should simply move all the linguistic stuff in the lead sentence to a footnote so as to avoid inline clutter — which is probably necessary anyways here, given the amount of already-present material in parenthesis.

The only other issue we normally get with Tifinagh names is the lack of agreement on what the standard spelling should be, resulting in WP:OR, but I'm satisfied that the cited source is sufficient for our purposes here. R Prazeres (talk) 21:44, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, it is a co-official language of the state as a whole, however that doesn't necessarily make it "closely associated" with Rabat itself, as MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV stipulates. Skitash (talk) 21:52, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Again. MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV solely targets the LEAD sentence this is meant to prevent the article from getting clustered. Not to prevent official languages of the nation to be mentioned at all. Bananakingler (talk) 22:22, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

No because the infobox is lede-adjacent

ok? But it is still not the lead. So it is not meant or targeted by MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV.

is supposed to summarize what's in the article.

So only information that is already mentioned in the article is supposed to get into the infobox? So where else would you Accept Tifinagh to go? Since Rabat is the capital of an Amazigh-Arab Nation, the Local Name in Arabic as well As Moroccan Tamazight must be mentioned somewhere. It is the official language.

I don't see any substantial reasoning on your end

my substantial reasoning is well explained. Morocco has two official Languages. Arabic and Tamazight. Therefore the Moroccan Tamazight name must be included somewhere. I suggested the infobox. However I’m fine if you got a besser solution.

on your end

WP:ONUS does not mean I have to accept WP:Stonewalling. Bananakingler (talk) 22:18, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

"It's an official language" is not a good enough rationale for including Berber in the lede or infobox. You would have to demonstrate how Berber languages are "closely associated" with the topic of Rabat, not that Berber is an official language of Morocco.

As for your argument that "MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV solely targets the LEAD sentence," Template:Infobox settlement explicitly says that the "native_name" parameter should include the "Settlement name in the dominant local language(s), if different from the English name."

Your accusations of WP:STONEWALLING are incorrect as that would involve "opposition to a proposed change without (a) stating a substantive rationale based in policy, guidelines and conventions," which definitely isn't the case here. Skitash (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

is not a good enough rationale for including Berber in the lede or infobox.

why is not good enough for the infobox?

You would have to demonstrate how Berber languages are "closely associated" with the topic of Rabat, not that Berber is an official language of Morocco.

1. it is (one of the) indigenous languages of Morocco. You can check out the 2023 RfC if you have a problem with that.

2. It is closely associated because it is the official language of the nation including the city.

"Settlement name in the dominant local language(s), if different from the English name."

again. Look at the RfC 2023.

are incorrect as that would involve "opposition to a proposed change without (a) stating a substantive rationale based in policy, guidelines and conventions," which definitely isn't the case here

Before my “accusation”, I did not accuse you but stated how it seemed objectively to the uninvolved reader, you did in fact ignore my arguments, reverted and did not engage in any discussion. This can of course be classified as Stonewalling.

I’m asking you again: would you prefer the Tifinagh to be together with Arabic in the infobox or in a different position? Please stop ignoring my question and answer it so we can continue. Bananakingler (talk) 16:26, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

So @Skitashyou got anything to add to this or should I get third opinion? Bananakingler (talk) 22:39, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Nope. You can go ahead and request the 3O. Skitash (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Perfect. I hope this time it will actually be a neutral person and not an editor with a history of deleting Tifinagh. Bananakingler (talk) 16:18, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi, @Bananakingler, I'm sorry I am declining this 3O request because another editor ( R Prazeres ) has already opined in this discussion. Katzrockso (talk) 02:55, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Since except for skitash every user in this discussion is in favor of adding tifinagh, I will readd it. @Skitash please refrain from edit warring. Bananakingler (talk) 10:08, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

That's absolutely not how it works. No 3O was ever given and no consensus was reached, and unilaterally adding your change while accusing me of edit warring is not how consensus works. Skitash (talk) 12:18, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Enough is enough. 3 users are in favor of adding it. You are the only one against it. Get a RFC and follow the due process if you still insist on disagreeing. Bananakingler (talk) 12:41, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Like I said, that's not how consensus works at all. You should be the one seeking proper consensus given that the WP:ONUS is on you for wanting to make the disputed change. Skitash (talk) 12:47, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Thank you for your response. I think there are a few points worth clarifying. Lead vs. infobox: MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV applies to the lead sentence. It allows one foreign name in the text when the subject is closely associated with a single non‑English language; when there are multiple, they should be grouped in a footnote or a “Names” section to avoid clutter. This does not restrict the use of names elsewhere in the article. Infobox parameters: The `native_name` field in {{Infobox settlement}} is for “name or names in the local language”. A 2023 RfC clarified that it may also be used for names used by Indigenous communities, regardless of whether they are the dominant group. There is no requirement that the language be spoken by a majority of the city's population. Status of Tamazight: Article 5 of the 2011 Moroccan constitution recognises Tamazight (Amazigh) as an official language alongside Arabic. Tamazight is used on road signs and in official publications, so it is clearly relevant to readers. Based on these points, I propose that: In the lead sentence we avoid clutter by placing the Arabic and Amazigh names in an explanatory footnote per MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV. In the infobox we use the `native_name` parameter to list both the Arabic and Amazigh names via {{lang}}. I hope this clarifies why the Amazigh form merits inclusion; comments welcome. Bananakingler (talk) 22:58, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@Skitash

This is a larger issue that is happening across wikipedia, but i will adress them here.

MOS:FOREIGNEQUIV states:

"When the subject is closely associated with more than one non-English language, the lead sentence should normally not single out one of them. In such cases, all non-English equivalents should be placed together in a single explanatory footnote (or in a "Names" section or similar), rather than in the text of the first sentence, in order to avoid clutter and disputes over which language to feature. Separate languages should be divided by semicolons; romanizations of non-Latin scripts, by commas. Do not boldface non-English names not normally used in English. Some non-English terms should be italicized. These cases are described in the Manual of Style for text formatting."

Morocco is a nation with very explicitly 2 official languages (Arabic and Standard Moroccan Tamazight). The policy was explicitly done to avoid massive edit conflicts, as has been happening across the wikipedia pages of Moroccan cities between you and various other users.

You have in previous edits relied on arguments like "only 4-5% in Rabat speak Berber" but this is a completely arbitrary declaration by you and not present in wikipedia policy or customary practice. The cities of Helsinki,Tampere or Turku in Finland possesses marginal Swedish populations (Tampere less than 1%), and yet it's Swedish name is included, simply due to the official policy of wikipedia. This is the standard across wikipedia with all countries that possess more than two official languages such as Belgian cities (See Bruges, and Liège, both of which are majority dutch and french speaking respectively, yet both possess Dutch and French names). This remains true for various other countries and their cities such as Belarus (Russian and Belarussian), Kosovo (Albanian and Serbian), Kazakhstan (Russian and Kazakh) and so on, regardless of population percentages (Pristina has less than 2% Serbs), they all have both languages in their respective wikipedia pages when it comes to cities.

These reversals are arbitrary and contrary to established wikipedia policy and norms, with no precedent anywhere else on wikpedia. Whatever748 (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi. You have not demonstrated how Berber languages are closely associated with this topic (Rabat). Please do so without referring to the broader unrelated topic concerning the official languages of the state, as "the subject" in question here is Rabat and not Morocco. As for your examples, see WP:OTHERCONTENT. The pattern you're seeing is definitely not a rule or a "standard practice across wikipedia" as there are numerous articles where this isn't the case, e.g. Aktau, Bat Yam, Sursee, etc. Skitash (talk) 00:22, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Berber is one of the official languages of Rabat. That in and of itself is enough to establish relevance.

As for your examples, in Bat Yam there is no official language other than Hebrew as Hebrew is the sole official language of Israel, and Sursee is written as Sursee in French, German, and Italian, so this example is genuinely of utterly no relevance whatsoever, and i am not sure why you cited it.

Morocco has two official languages, and following official policy i included both in the lead in a notes section. Please, citing official wikipedia policy rather than arbitrary standards explain why you have removed these changes.

Whatever748 (talk) 00:44, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

I second @Whatever748, since Morocco recognizes both Arabic and Berber are official languages, Moroccan cities should have the name included in these 2 languages. It's not about how many people in that city speak that language; otherwise, do we removed Arabic from the name of cities with majority Berber speakers? The policy is quite clear on this one! Rap no Davinci (talk) 09:47, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

"Berber is one of the official languages of Rabat" That is impossible as official languages apply at state level. Berber being listed as an official language in the Moroccan constitution doesn't make Berber closely associated with every city and settlement, especially in the case of Rabat, where Berber speakers are only 4.6% of the population. As for Bat Yam, Arabic is considered a special language in Israel, yet Bat Yam doesn't include it given Hebrew's dominance locally. Since you're insisting on using examples from other countries, Kurdish is official in Iraq but doesn't appear in Basra or Baghdad. Guarani is official in Paraguay yet doesn't appear in San Lorenzo, Concepción, or Fernando de la Mora. It's all about the close association of a language, not symbolic national recognition. You're conflating the national policy of a government with the local linguistic reality.

Furthermore, the "native_name" parameter in Template:Infobox settlement is explicitly clear in noting that the parameter should reflect the "Settlement name in the dominant local language(s), if different from the English name." National co-official status alone doesn't override that requirement or local demographics. Without evidence of close association/dominance in Rabat specifically, it doesn't belong in the infobox or lede. Skitash (talk) 13:21, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

I've stated my position on this in the previous discussion above, but at this point I would recommend one of you open an RfC on this. The issue has come up here twice in one month, let alone previous back-and-forths, as well as in other Moroccan city articles. It's due for some wider community input so we can move on with more clarity one way or another. (If you want help drafting the RfC question, feel free to ping me below or ask on my talk page.) R Prazeres (talk) 17:17, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

@R Prazeres I agree, and thank you for your offer of technical help, i'll see if I have to use it. In the next few days i'll be a bit preoccupied but i'll move to open an RfC on this and other similar issues later in hopes we can find consensus and compromise on these constantly debated topics. Whatever748 (talk) 20:42, 2 February 2026 (UTC)