Talk:Jubail

---

Satellite image/map

The satellite image of Jubail is back-to-front. It needs to be flipped over. In addition, north is now on the right so a 90 degree rotation is also required. NH.

NASA's copyright policy: "Any editing or otherwise altering of the work may not be covered under the original license, and therefore would require permission of the copyright owner." -- Eagle^amn 22:51, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

NASA have that disclaimer on their site because they sometimes host stuff from other sources (ESA, national laboratories, universities, etc). This particular image was taken from the Space Shuttle, so it's public domain. NH is quite correct about the NASA original being flipped - looking at this google image and this page shows how things should look. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:05, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I do agree the image is not correct (I am from the Eastern Province). I was just not quite sure if it was ok, under NASA's copyright policy, to edit the image and still claim the policy applies to it. If it is OK, it should be mirrored (rotation is not necessary, I think). -- Eagle^amn 23:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I've flipped the satellite image. --NormanEinstein 15:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I added a map showing the location of Jubail, so I've removed the map request template. --NormanEinstein 20:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Self-promotion

Holy crap, this article reads like the last paragraph on a Forture 500 company press release. This is a pretty aggressive sales job that may have been written by the King himself - it even says "we"!! I would like to see some more fact. --SirLamer 00:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed promotion part, so there's a higher percentage of fact now :) Nethency 12:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Weather page is to be added

The article is not protected. Not sure why you've added this template when you can, and are, editing the article? --regentspark (comment) 17:29, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

• Not done: {{edit protected}} is not required for edits to unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 00:27, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

He's trying to protect the article in the (policy-violating) version he prefers. It's a behavior I've seen before, where new users think that if they put up that or one of the actual lock-templates that suddenly the article can't be edited. Whiterataj does need to stop adding that info. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jubail. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150709090614/http://isg-jubail.org/ to http://isg-jubail.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Al Khater.

Nothing about Al Khater? --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii (talk) 21:21, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Jubail has too much 🔥 season

Al jubail strong summer season place 86.99.181.16 (talk) 18:59, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Relevance of nearby cities

The mentioning of nearby cities and places are not relevant for a Wikipedia article and removing should be considered 87.123.242.139 (talk) 01:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't think though or else why they're more like it in other city articles (trust me I'm not kidding). Also, It has very useful links تنعيم ٩ (talk) 19:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)