![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Jianhe.pitzer.edu.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 13:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but are those really the best photos we can get of the Al-Hambra? No offence, but it really doens't show you enough of the interior. -- Irishpunktom\ talk 21:49, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
I have a pretty good selection of photos of the Alhambra (and Generalife) from my trip there in 2002. I offer them under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license. You can use any of them that you like for this article, and they can be found here. -- Prwood 04:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
i have just visited the Alhambra (march 2007) and i bought a book explaining the history of it. (This book was bought in Granada) In the book, it says that the name is derived from the same word in Arabic meaning red, but the red comes from the top layer of oxidised soil which is red (i saw it!). the name of the book is The Alhambra and Granada in focus. Please research this.--
Aixoise21
13:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I've always been told that the lion fountain was a gift from the jews in the city. It says in various places that it is a rare example of Islamic Animal statues, and that it was probably made by Christians as Muslims believe that it is idoltry... I don't think that either of those is correct in this case.
mmm, i don't think so , I mean why do you think the conflict between the Arab in Andalusia and in the homeland of Arab?
because of this matter. Arab andalusia started to make statues and so on! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mewoone (
talk •
contribs)
16:36, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 21:29, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I removed some adjectives that were blatantly subjective, and I think perhaps we should open a discussion on the objectivity of some of the other statements in this article.
Also, does anybody know of a trustworthy source that verifies the story about Napoleon's "crippled soldier" story, under the history section? It sounds a lot like hearsay.
Much of the information here seems to be faulty and not backed up by in-depth research. I removed several passages referring to the often-repeated yet not entirely accurate statement that Islam forbids the depiction of humans and animals. In fact, in addition to the famous lions there are several paintings in the Alhambra that clearly depict humans (frescoes in the Torre de las Damas in the Partal Palace and paintings on stretched leather on the alcove ceilings in the Sala de los Reyes in the Riyad Palace, or Court of the Lions). It should also be noted that almost all of the names used in this article are not original designations. Rather, they are post-conquest Spanish names (many of which were based on Arabic corruptions and misunderstandings) or more fanciful names applied by foreign travelers during the Romantic Period. 83.43.234.5 12:25, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
The twelve lions functioned as a clock with water flowing from a different lion each hour. The Christians of the Reconquest took apart the clock to see how it worked and it hasn't worked since.
Can we have some references for this intriguing but unlikely-sounding idea? A brief search turned up only one not very authoritative reference. If it was widely accepted as fact I feel it would be more widely mentioned. Flapdragon 16:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC) hello
As far as my basic Arabic goes, "الحمراء" means "the red", just a definite article and an adjective. It does not specify any noun -- a castle, a cat or whatever. So I'd translate that as "the red one", or something like that.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 150.214.36.10 ( talk • contribs) 18:34, 20 June 2007.
I just reverted two edits by 86.129.108.118, one of which added a grammatical error that was previously corrected back into the article and both of which put peacock terms back into the article. If, after reviewing the edits I reverted, anyone feels that this was unjust, please discuss it here, rather than edit warring. Thanks. Ketsuekigata ( talk) 01:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Beautiful and poetic writing works marvelously in brochures, travelogues and descriptive books. Here on Wikipedia, the writing style should be more objective and factual. Sentences like "the Nasrids sought to immortalize themselves through a work of beauty that seems to exist in some dream world as much as it does in this one" are completely unsupportable via external references. How can anyone today know what the Nasrids were thinking? Binksternet ( talk) 19:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Official sources earlier this year (late last year?) stated that the Alhambra is now the most-visited monument (dare I say tourist attraction?), ahead of the Prado, etc. I don't have time now to find the reference, but maybe someone can and modify the lead accordingly. Cheers! -- Technopat ( talk) 08:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
But look out! You need to make advance reservations to visit the Alhambra. On visiting last Sunday (10th October 2010) we arrived at about midday to discover that it was sold out for the day, and we could try coming back at 8am the next day when we might be able to get in. We were told that we could not reserve a ticket for the next day as reservations were booked up at least a week ahead. It was a disappointing visit to Granada. Luckily both Cordoba and Seville which were on our itinerary offered amazing monuments that made up for it... (Mike Kemp) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.247.227.61 ( talk) 06:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better to add a map to show its location? Thanks.-- GDibyendu ( talk) 18:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
WE NEED A DANG MAP-- Ryan H. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.72.41.136 ( talk) 01:24, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Rewrite and source needed:
Not fluent English, and hard to correct without a source. Red bcz the clay has penetrated the surface of the building materials? In what sense is "the fort is made" of "the red clay of the surroundings"? Is it simply a network of dirt berms? Brick baked from local clay?
Rammed earth? Is "the buildings now seen today" a redundancy? Are these new buildings, or has their appearance just changed? In my climate, whitewashing is regarded as something more casual than painting, presumably needing more frequent renewal; does no one bother to renew it, or has the surface eroded (from neglect or abuse?) to the point where it would look even worse it were whitewashed again? If a source in good English is not offered soon, i'm prepared to remove at least what i've quoted here.
--
Jerzy•
t
22:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
A link out to an model of the Alhambra in an application called 'Second Life' has been removed as off topic; while I don't use the application, I see a simulation of the architecture featured in this article as topical and useful to readers. What is the rational for removal? Mavigogun ( talk) 11:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Here is the Britannica article.
Please note how Irwin refutes much of the questionable material in this article in the introduction to his 2004 book The Alhambra.
1910 Britannica may be a good source for descriptions of the site, but the historical aspects of this article need to be scrutinized closely.
Aquib ( talk) 05:38, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of the fact that the Alhambra was originally built by the Jewish vizier, Yehoseph ibn Nagralla, as per the link below? Would soemone care to make the amendment?
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-lions-of-the-alhambrajews-in-moorish-spain/
Note that this is supported by the Junta de Andalucia (regional government). See the link below which states '1056-1066?. El visir Yusuf ibn Nagralla construye el Hisn al-Hamra'.
Answer = Alhambra was build by people from sindh (indus valey) who moved to arabic country during civil wars, many of these architect went marroco and spain, go and search about makli graveyard in sindh (pakistan) they had same design which they used on graves a stodework, the muslims learned it work on the stones from hindu temples which are 4000 years old, these sindhi muslim brought this culture to spain and build not a jew. ibn batuta was also in india and pakistan to learn and he came to spain with his people to work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.152.187.21 ( talk) 20:51, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/educacion/webportal/web/milenio-del-reino-de-granada/cronologia-y-linea-del-tiempo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.50.200.0 ( talk) 15:51, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
In case an editor finds it relevant, I would just like to mention that a high quality panorama with a rather attractive light of the entire complex is available. I am not a wikipedian and not knowledgeable about the topic either, so I do not feel competent in doing it myself (I am biased too as it is my photo). However, I feel, that maybe it could replace one or more other existing photos of the exterior as seen from Granada, to decrease overall image clutter on the page with many small thumbnails. -- Slaunger ( talk) 19:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Recent edits have created a mixture of large and non-standard image sizes in the gallery. One option would be to remove it altogether - the article is already heavily illustrated. Another would be to go back to the standard-sized gallery that we had up to 23 December. I can see an argument for a third option, which is to allow the two panoramas to be somewhat wider than the other images - otherwise they appear very tiny as they have a wide aspect ratio. The current arrangement has large images (bigger than the default in most cases) all at different size because of the newly-applied "packed" setting, which leaves upright images very small and panoramas very large. I am minded to remove the gallery as all the images will remain on the Commons Alhambra page where they can readily be browsed. The larger question is how many images there should be in the article: if it's less than 33, which does sound rather a lot, then removing the gallery would be the best answer. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
There's a problem in the section "Architectural details" where it's written this:
as well as innovations such as stilted arches and muqarnas
That's a huge mistake. The innovation wasn't the "muqarnas" (which existed long before the construction), but an innovation called "mocárabe", which derives from muqarnas adding a stalactite.
The article Muqarnas suffers from the same mistake saying:
When some elements project downwards, the style may be called mocárabe
The article Mocárabe writes this:
The terms mocárabe and muqarnas are similar and may be used interchangeably at times, but muqarnas do not necessarily have stalactite formations.
Untrue. If a square has a longer dimension, it's no longer a square, it's a rectangle. Different shapes has different names.
Even more, the Mocárabe article spits this afterwards:
The Nasrid used mocárabe in the Alhambra, most notably in the "Sala de los Mocárabes."
I think the removal of "muqarnas" from this text as well as fixing both Muqarnas and Mocárabe to make the distinction clear. What do you think?
Also, moving Muqarnas, which is plural, to Muqarna, the proper singular. Same as if I go to Bricks, plural, will redirect me to Brick, its singular proper noun.
Franzrogar ( talk) 07:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Alhambra evening panorama Mirador San Nicolas sRGB-1.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 22, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-10-22. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 11:53, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
The Alhambra is a palace and fortress complex located in Granada, Andalusia, Spain. Originally constructed as a small fortress in AD 889, it was largely ignored until the ruins were renovated and rebuilt in the mid-13th century by the Moorish emir Mohammed ben Al-Ahmar. Over the years it has served as the royal palace of Yusuf I of Granada and the royal court of Isabella I of Castile. The Alhambra is now one of Spain's major tourist attractions, exhibiting the country's most significant and well-known Islamic architecture, together with 16th-century and later Christian building and garden interventions.Photograph: Kim Hansen
The Royal Complex section (3.1) has issues.
Patio de Machuca; Mexuar; Fachada de Comares; Torre de Comares; Patio de Arrayanes; Baño de Comares; Patio de los Leones; Sala de Abencerrajes; Sala de los Reyes; Sala de Dos Hermanas; Patio de Lindaraja; Peinador de la Reina;
In other words, lots of problems, and I'm not sure why (based on the listed sources) this section was written like this. Can anyone support why this section is organized this way? Seeteejay ( talk) 16:47, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
What does that mean? TomS TDotO ( talk) 06:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
I found an image from the Turkish magazine Servet-i Funun No. 1347, 10 May 1917:
WhisperToMe ( talk) 03:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
User:R Prazeres, my edits here were to fix a broken wikilink at the Dome article, where a bot had mis-corrected the link Alhambra#Hall of the Abencerrajes to link instead to Alhambra#Hall of the Ambassadors, based on similar spelling. After checking the Court of the Lions article, I assumed the rooms surrounding the courtyard should not be included there because they are part of the surrounding Palace of the Lions, rather than the courtyard. If I had noticed that the Hall of the two Sisters was also mentioned in that paragraph I would have made that a separate section as well, as was done with Hall of the Ambassadors. Long story short, I changed the wikilink in the Dome article. AmateurEditor ( talk) 03:56, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm not really saying anything new but it's worth mentioning here that I've generally completed a major revision and expansion of the
Court of the Lions article, and in the process I've added a full overview of the rooms connected to the court. In my view those rooms need to be part of that article's scope either way, as this matches how this topic is treated in any scholarly overview of the Alhambra and it also allows this article (
Alhambra) to remain unburdened by large amounts of information about specific rooms. I think the scope of the topic is still pretty intuitive and unsurprising as is; the court is the centerpiece of the building and the rooms are all dependent on it to one extent or another. (The same may not be true for the Comares Palace vs
Court of the Myrtles, but that'll be for another time.) I've added "Palace of the Lions" as a second name in the lead there and the
relevant disambiguation page already directs to the Court of the Lions article as well. If there's disagreement on this issue though, I'd invite further discussion, perhaps preferably at the
Court of the Lions talk page.
Aside from that, I also invite anyone looking over the expanded article there to simply keep an eye out for any typos, awkward phrasings that could be improved, etc. (It's easy to miss these when re-reading one's own writing, especially after a long session of editing!) Cheers,
R Prazeres (
talk)
18:22, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to attempt a major revision of the lead by removing the last three paragraphs which appear to be based exclusively on the 1911 Britannica reference (Chrisholm 1911). I get why a freely-available source was used at some point, but there's been over 100 years of intense research as well as significant changes to the site itself since then, and there are various statements that don't hold up well. The information is also a little repetitive and not really written in a concise summary style per MOS:LEAD. The last paragraph is more on point but I'll try to reintegrate the same basic information in a new paragraph or two based on recent sources. R Prazeres ( talk) 18:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
In the same vein, and as per the work I've been doing elsewhere, I'm rewriting much of (but not all of) the descriptions of the Nasrid Palaces and the Alcazaba. Most of it is simply unsourced. The citations that are present either don't support any of the specifics or only support one detail (in which case I've retained them for that purpose). Some of the details are clearly contradicted by reliable sources. I've already expanded and revised the articles for the Court of the Lions and the Court of the Myrtles (which corresponds to the Comares Palace, name issues notwithstanding), which now provide detailed overviews, so I'm sticking to the basics here. I plan to also make a "Mexuar" article in the future to complete the set. That should finish most of the work I personally hoped to see on this article, but there will always be more to add/revise afterward. Feel free to raise any questions or issues about this work here, if helpful. R Prazeres ( talk) 20:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
I've added a new map based on an architectural plan from scholarly sources, to more clearly identify the different structures and locations mentioned in the article (minus some individual rooms and towers covered in dedicated subarticles). I wasn't sure about how to best insert the image, though; it should be large enough to be reasonably readable and thus useful, but I tried a few options with awkward results. I settled for now on a multiple image template that also integrates the already-present Nasrid palaces map, which seemed more helpful than the alternatives, but there may be better options. I've also left the already-present map in, but not sure if it's worth having two maps with the same scope. For what it's worth, I've also uploaded a blank version of the new map to make it easier to modify in the future. Feedback welcome. Cheers, R Prazeres ( talk) 03:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
I have created Freely interpreted floor map of Alhambra Spain and maybe it can be of use. If there is a need for, I can also create a numbered version. If anyone wants that please just ping me, thanks. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en ( talk) 19:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Jianhe.pitzer.edu.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 13:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but are those really the best photos we can get of the Al-Hambra? No offence, but it really doens't show you enough of the interior. -- Irishpunktom\ talk 21:49, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
I have a pretty good selection of photos of the Alhambra (and Generalife) from my trip there in 2002. I offer them under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license. You can use any of them that you like for this article, and they can be found here. -- Prwood 04:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
i have just visited the Alhambra (march 2007) and i bought a book explaining the history of it. (This book was bought in Granada) In the book, it says that the name is derived from the same word in Arabic meaning red, but the red comes from the top layer of oxidised soil which is red (i saw it!). the name of the book is The Alhambra and Granada in focus. Please research this.--
Aixoise21
13:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I've always been told that the lion fountain was a gift from the jews in the city. It says in various places that it is a rare example of Islamic Animal statues, and that it was probably made by Christians as Muslims believe that it is idoltry... I don't think that either of those is correct in this case.
mmm, i don't think so , I mean why do you think the conflict between the Arab in Andalusia and in the homeland of Arab?
because of this matter. Arab andalusia started to make statues and so on! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Mewoone (
talk •
contribs)
16:36, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 21:29, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I removed some adjectives that were blatantly subjective, and I think perhaps we should open a discussion on the objectivity of some of the other statements in this article.
Also, does anybody know of a trustworthy source that verifies the story about Napoleon's "crippled soldier" story, under the history section? It sounds a lot like hearsay.
Much of the information here seems to be faulty and not backed up by in-depth research. I removed several passages referring to the often-repeated yet not entirely accurate statement that Islam forbids the depiction of humans and animals. In fact, in addition to the famous lions there are several paintings in the Alhambra that clearly depict humans (frescoes in the Torre de las Damas in the Partal Palace and paintings on stretched leather on the alcove ceilings in the Sala de los Reyes in the Riyad Palace, or Court of the Lions). It should also be noted that almost all of the names used in this article are not original designations. Rather, they are post-conquest Spanish names (many of which were based on Arabic corruptions and misunderstandings) or more fanciful names applied by foreign travelers during the Romantic Period. 83.43.234.5 12:25, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
The twelve lions functioned as a clock with water flowing from a different lion each hour. The Christians of the Reconquest took apart the clock to see how it worked and it hasn't worked since.
Can we have some references for this intriguing but unlikely-sounding idea? A brief search turned up only one not very authoritative reference. If it was widely accepted as fact I feel it would be more widely mentioned. Flapdragon 16:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC) hello
As far as my basic Arabic goes, "الحمراء" means "the red", just a definite article and an adjective. It does not specify any noun -- a castle, a cat or whatever. So I'd translate that as "the red one", or something like that.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 150.214.36.10 ( talk • contribs) 18:34, 20 June 2007.
I just reverted two edits by 86.129.108.118, one of which added a grammatical error that was previously corrected back into the article and both of which put peacock terms back into the article. If, after reviewing the edits I reverted, anyone feels that this was unjust, please discuss it here, rather than edit warring. Thanks. Ketsuekigata ( talk) 01:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Beautiful and poetic writing works marvelously in brochures, travelogues and descriptive books. Here on Wikipedia, the writing style should be more objective and factual. Sentences like "the Nasrids sought to immortalize themselves through a work of beauty that seems to exist in some dream world as much as it does in this one" are completely unsupportable via external references. How can anyone today know what the Nasrids were thinking? Binksternet ( talk) 19:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Official sources earlier this year (late last year?) stated that the Alhambra is now the most-visited monument (dare I say tourist attraction?), ahead of the Prado, etc. I don't have time now to find the reference, but maybe someone can and modify the lead accordingly. Cheers! -- Technopat ( talk) 08:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
But look out! You need to make advance reservations to visit the Alhambra. On visiting last Sunday (10th October 2010) we arrived at about midday to discover that it was sold out for the day, and we could try coming back at 8am the next day when we might be able to get in. We were told that we could not reserve a ticket for the next day as reservations were booked up at least a week ahead. It was a disappointing visit to Granada. Luckily both Cordoba and Seville which were on our itinerary offered amazing monuments that made up for it... (Mike Kemp) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.247.227.61 ( talk) 06:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better to add a map to show its location? Thanks.-- GDibyendu ( talk) 18:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
WE NEED A DANG MAP-- Ryan H. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.72.41.136 ( talk) 01:24, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Rewrite and source needed:
Not fluent English, and hard to correct without a source. Red bcz the clay has penetrated the surface of the building materials? In what sense is "the fort is made" of "the red clay of the surroundings"? Is it simply a network of dirt berms? Brick baked from local clay?
Rammed earth? Is "the buildings now seen today" a redundancy? Are these new buildings, or has their appearance just changed? In my climate, whitewashing is regarded as something more casual than painting, presumably needing more frequent renewal; does no one bother to renew it, or has the surface eroded (from neglect or abuse?) to the point where it would look even worse it were whitewashed again? If a source in good English is not offered soon, i'm prepared to remove at least what i've quoted here.
--
Jerzy•
t
22:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
A link out to an model of the Alhambra in an application called 'Second Life' has been removed as off topic; while I don't use the application, I see a simulation of the architecture featured in this article as topical and useful to readers. What is the rational for removal? Mavigogun ( talk) 11:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Here is the Britannica article.
Please note how Irwin refutes much of the questionable material in this article in the introduction to his 2004 book The Alhambra.
1910 Britannica may be a good source for descriptions of the site, but the historical aspects of this article need to be scrutinized closely.
Aquib ( talk) 05:38, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of the fact that the Alhambra was originally built by the Jewish vizier, Yehoseph ibn Nagralla, as per the link below? Would soemone care to make the amendment?
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-lions-of-the-alhambrajews-in-moorish-spain/
Note that this is supported by the Junta de Andalucia (regional government). See the link below which states '1056-1066?. El visir Yusuf ibn Nagralla construye el Hisn al-Hamra'.
Answer = Alhambra was build by people from sindh (indus valey) who moved to arabic country during civil wars, many of these architect went marroco and spain, go and search about makli graveyard in sindh (pakistan) they had same design which they used on graves a stodework, the muslims learned it work on the stones from hindu temples which are 4000 years old, these sindhi muslim brought this culture to spain and build not a jew. ibn batuta was also in india and pakistan to learn and he came to spain with his people to work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.152.187.21 ( talk) 20:51, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/educacion/webportal/web/milenio-del-reino-de-granada/cronologia-y-linea-del-tiempo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.50.200.0 ( talk) 15:51, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
In case an editor finds it relevant, I would just like to mention that a high quality panorama with a rather attractive light of the entire complex is available. I am not a wikipedian and not knowledgeable about the topic either, so I do not feel competent in doing it myself (I am biased too as it is my photo). However, I feel, that maybe it could replace one or more other existing photos of the exterior as seen from Granada, to decrease overall image clutter on the page with many small thumbnails. -- Slaunger ( talk) 19:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Recent edits have created a mixture of large and non-standard image sizes in the gallery. One option would be to remove it altogether - the article is already heavily illustrated. Another would be to go back to the standard-sized gallery that we had up to 23 December. I can see an argument for a third option, which is to allow the two panoramas to be somewhat wider than the other images - otherwise they appear very tiny as they have a wide aspect ratio. The current arrangement has large images (bigger than the default in most cases) all at different size because of the newly-applied "packed" setting, which leaves upright images very small and panoramas very large. I am minded to remove the gallery as all the images will remain on the Commons Alhambra page where they can readily be browsed. The larger question is how many images there should be in the article: if it's less than 33, which does sound rather a lot, then removing the gallery would be the best answer. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 15:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
There's a problem in the section "Architectural details" where it's written this:
as well as innovations such as stilted arches and muqarnas
That's a huge mistake. The innovation wasn't the "muqarnas" (which existed long before the construction), but an innovation called "mocárabe", which derives from muqarnas adding a stalactite.
The article Muqarnas suffers from the same mistake saying:
When some elements project downwards, the style may be called mocárabe
The article Mocárabe writes this:
The terms mocárabe and muqarnas are similar and may be used interchangeably at times, but muqarnas do not necessarily have stalactite formations.
Untrue. If a square has a longer dimension, it's no longer a square, it's a rectangle. Different shapes has different names.
Even more, the Mocárabe article spits this afterwards:
The Nasrid used mocárabe in the Alhambra, most notably in the "Sala de los Mocárabes."
I think the removal of "muqarnas" from this text as well as fixing both Muqarnas and Mocárabe to make the distinction clear. What do you think?
Also, moving Muqarnas, which is plural, to Muqarna, the proper singular. Same as if I go to Bricks, plural, will redirect me to Brick, its singular proper noun.
Franzrogar ( talk) 07:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Alhambra evening panorama Mirador San Nicolas sRGB-1.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 22, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-10-22. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 11:53, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
The Alhambra is a palace and fortress complex located in Granada, Andalusia, Spain. Originally constructed as a small fortress in AD 889, it was largely ignored until the ruins were renovated and rebuilt in the mid-13th century by the Moorish emir Mohammed ben Al-Ahmar. Over the years it has served as the royal palace of Yusuf I of Granada and the royal court of Isabella I of Castile. The Alhambra is now one of Spain's major tourist attractions, exhibiting the country's most significant and well-known Islamic architecture, together with 16th-century and later Christian building and garden interventions.Photograph: Kim Hansen
The Royal Complex section (3.1) has issues.
Patio de Machuca; Mexuar; Fachada de Comares; Torre de Comares; Patio de Arrayanes; Baño de Comares; Patio de los Leones; Sala de Abencerrajes; Sala de los Reyes; Sala de Dos Hermanas; Patio de Lindaraja; Peinador de la Reina;
In other words, lots of problems, and I'm not sure why (based on the listed sources) this section was written like this. Can anyone support why this section is organized this way? Seeteejay ( talk) 16:47, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
What does that mean? TomS TDotO ( talk) 06:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
I found an image from the Turkish magazine Servet-i Funun No. 1347, 10 May 1917:
WhisperToMe ( talk) 03:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
User:R Prazeres, my edits here were to fix a broken wikilink at the Dome article, where a bot had mis-corrected the link Alhambra#Hall of the Abencerrajes to link instead to Alhambra#Hall of the Ambassadors, based on similar spelling. After checking the Court of the Lions article, I assumed the rooms surrounding the courtyard should not be included there because they are part of the surrounding Palace of the Lions, rather than the courtyard. If I had noticed that the Hall of the two Sisters was also mentioned in that paragraph I would have made that a separate section as well, as was done with Hall of the Ambassadors. Long story short, I changed the wikilink in the Dome article. AmateurEditor ( talk) 03:56, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm not really saying anything new but it's worth mentioning here that I've generally completed a major revision and expansion of the
Court of the Lions article, and in the process I've added a full overview of the rooms connected to the court. In my view those rooms need to be part of that article's scope either way, as this matches how this topic is treated in any scholarly overview of the Alhambra and it also allows this article (
Alhambra) to remain unburdened by large amounts of information about specific rooms. I think the scope of the topic is still pretty intuitive and unsurprising as is; the court is the centerpiece of the building and the rooms are all dependent on it to one extent or another. (The same may not be true for the Comares Palace vs
Court of the Myrtles, but that'll be for another time.) I've added "Palace of the Lions" as a second name in the lead there and the
relevant disambiguation page already directs to the Court of the Lions article as well. If there's disagreement on this issue though, I'd invite further discussion, perhaps preferably at the
Court of the Lions talk page.
Aside from that, I also invite anyone looking over the expanded article there to simply keep an eye out for any typos, awkward phrasings that could be improved, etc. (It's easy to miss these when re-reading one's own writing, especially after a long session of editing!) Cheers,
R Prazeres (
talk)
18:22, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to attempt a major revision of the lead by removing the last three paragraphs which appear to be based exclusively on the 1911 Britannica reference (Chrisholm 1911). I get why a freely-available source was used at some point, but there's been over 100 years of intense research as well as significant changes to the site itself since then, and there are various statements that don't hold up well. The information is also a little repetitive and not really written in a concise summary style per MOS:LEAD. The last paragraph is more on point but I'll try to reintegrate the same basic information in a new paragraph or two based on recent sources. R Prazeres ( talk) 18:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
In the same vein, and as per the work I've been doing elsewhere, I'm rewriting much of (but not all of) the descriptions of the Nasrid Palaces and the Alcazaba. Most of it is simply unsourced. The citations that are present either don't support any of the specifics or only support one detail (in which case I've retained them for that purpose). Some of the details are clearly contradicted by reliable sources. I've already expanded and revised the articles for the Court of the Lions and the Court of the Myrtles (which corresponds to the Comares Palace, name issues notwithstanding), which now provide detailed overviews, so I'm sticking to the basics here. I plan to also make a "Mexuar" article in the future to complete the set. That should finish most of the work I personally hoped to see on this article, but there will always be more to add/revise afterward. Feel free to raise any questions or issues about this work here, if helpful. R Prazeres ( talk) 20:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
I've added a new map based on an architectural plan from scholarly sources, to more clearly identify the different structures and locations mentioned in the article (minus some individual rooms and towers covered in dedicated subarticles). I wasn't sure about how to best insert the image, though; it should be large enough to be reasonably readable and thus useful, but I tried a few options with awkward results. I settled for now on a multiple image template that also integrates the already-present Nasrid palaces map, which seemed more helpful than the alternatives, but there may be better options. I've also left the already-present map in, but not sure if it's worth having two maps with the same scope. For what it's worth, I've also uploaded a blank version of the new map to make it easier to modify in the future. Feedback welcome. Cheers, R Prazeres ( talk) 03:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
I have created Freely interpreted floor map of Alhambra Spain and maybe it can be of use. If there is a need for, I can also create a numbered version. If anyone wants that please just ping me, thanks. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en ( talk) 19:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)