Talk:Neom

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2021 and 15 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lamya alzahrani.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Should it be capitalized, NEOM?
Smooth alligator (talk) 21:09, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

I think it would make sense to also mention a similar city built (planned?) in Abu Dhabi Masdar City
 * I undid the move to all caps for now. MOS:NAMECAPS is clear the places are capitalised per "standard usage". Sources clearly use all caps, but e.g. the BBC refers to "NEOM" as a zone here and here as a city "Dubbed NEOM"  which sounds more like a project/working title. I agree sources are caps (although there's sources with normal placename capitalisation too   ) so if consensus decides this should be an exception so be it but we're not there yet. Caps is clearly emphasis which we wouldn't go along with for a city, but as a projectname it should be acceptable. If the article is re-scoped as a development project or zone then caps should be immediately used. More opinions welcome.  Widefox ; talk 23:51, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Since the scope and ambition is similar, I've added Masdar mention to the see also section. prokaryotes (talk) 14:56, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Infobox
Should we add the Infobox settlement, or too early? prokaryotes (talk) 15:10, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Ancient sites
Are there any ancient sites located in this area? If so, it would be worth a mention. prokaryotes (talk) 16:15, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Remove Inspiration Section
Should that inspiration section be removed for now? It's a little strange, it's just Vice taking a photo from a video. It doesn't reference any designers actually getting inspiration from Gardens by the Bay. There's even a picture of Gardens by the Bay in this article. Unless there's someone significant who is part of the Neom project mentioning Gardens by the Bay, it probably should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:ED06:E00:9468:9BE0:F2FF:D94F (talk) 03:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You're right, coverage about secondary sources is undue. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 03:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I totally disagree; NEOM used pictures from Gardens by the Bay  in their promotional videos, without giving  Gardens by the Bay  any  credit. Media (Vice) then found out. Someone (=the people behind Neom?) have since been very keen to hide this fact. Huldra (talk) 22:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * But is the image necessary for the article? The point is already clear without it, unless it is useful to represent what the project will look like. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 13:31, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think most people have any idea as to how Gardens by the Bay looks like, and as pictures of that place is the only indication of how NEOM will eventually look; yes, I think it is very relevant to the article, Huldra (talk) 21:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Singapore image
Why are we using an image of Singapore when the information we give is literally "leaving commentators to note that 'using an actual shot of Singapore to depict an upcoming construction project in Saudi Arabia is an odd choice'". Can we at least remove the image of Singapore? It just seems bizarre. This is an imaginary city in a desert, not a highly-developed city in Southeast Asia. Brycehughes (talk) 00:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi User:Brycehughes; Have you seen the brochures/videos for Neom? With the first ones, virtually the only illustrations were ...from the Gardens by the Bay, Singapore. Without any accreditation to them. I agree it is bizarre, but it isn't this article which "invent" the bizarreness; that was Neom, Huldra (talk) 23:24, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Huldra, I know Neom used the images of Singapore. That doesn't mean we must nor should use them. I believe it's misrepresentative to use this image, which is pretty much what the paragraph is saying. Are you not open to removing the image but keeping the paragraph? Brycehughes (talk) 08:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * User:Brycehughes, hm, my first understanding was that the Gardens by the Bay were an inspiration, and that Neom would look something like it. However, the latest pictures  I have seen of the plans don't look like that at all. The problem is that we don't have any (un-copyrighted) pictures of what it actually look/will loke like. And its not as if the article is suffering from too many pictures. I suggest that when we have pictures of what it actually looks like (or will look like); then we can remove it, ok? Huldra (talk) 21:22, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi Huldra, I really think we should remove it now, because it's misleading. Like you said, the latest pics don't look anything like the Gardens by the Bay. I'd argue that no images are better than unrepresentative images. Unless anyone else wants to weigh in here, mind if we go the WP:3O route? Brycehughes (talk) 13:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I welcome a third opinion, Huldra (talk) 22:22, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Brycehughes@Huldra I think it makes the most sense to remove the picture now, since having no pictures is better than having one confusing picture. If anything, I think it makes more sense to include the image of Singapore when there are additionally usable pictures of current plans for Neom, or eventually pictures of Neom itself. This would give visual context for the criticisms of the initial plan images without causing confusion. Blueshiftofdeath (talk) 13:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Huldra, we okay with this? Remove the image but keep the paragraph. Seems like a decent compromise. Let me know. Thanks, Brycehughes (talk) 15:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Brycehughes@Blueshiftofdeath, I have removed the picture, Huldra (talk) 21:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * , cheers. I'll keep an eye out for free images if they ever materalise. That is, assuming this city ever materialises... but that's a topic for a different day. Anyways, thanks. Brycehughes (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * could we just use a free image of the Tabuk province desert? This one is public domain from wiki commons, and shows exactly where neom/the line are supposed to be

WikEdits5 (talk) 21:24, 14 February 2023 (UTC)


 * You should add that, though is it possible to draw/add a faint line where the city is supposed to go? Justanotherguy54 (talk) 12:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Controversy?
https://www.businessinsider.com/saudi-woman-gets-30-years-prison-criticizing-neom-megacity-twitter-2023-6?utm_source=reddit.com Victor Grigas (talk) 01:16, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Full Area List
I have noticed that the general coordinates of the projects are not shown here. I would love it if we could add them. That said, I can't seem to find any official word on where the projects (especially the Gulf of Aqaba projects) are located. The Line and Sindalah are easy to spot by their construction works, and I recognize the shape of the canyon that Leyja is located in, but the others are left pretty ambiguous. There are a few unofficial markers on Google Maps, but I'd really appreciate it more if it were clearer where all these projects are going up.

- AAEexecutive (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Etymology
It looks that someone who has written a chapter about etymology doesn’t know Arabic language. The word Neom is created adding a letter “n” for “new” to the word “day” in Arabic /‏يوم /So Neom means “A New Day”. 49.190.240.166 (talk) 01:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


 * 49.190.240.166 (talk) I think the official "What is NEOM?" video states that it's "Neo" plus the crown prince's initial "M." Let me see if I can find the link to that video.
 * -AAEexecutive (talk) 18:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Not a video, but it's straight from the official website, a little more than halfway down next to the big seal. https://www.neom.com/en-us/about AAEexecutive (talk) 18:18, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Sindalah, Saudi Arabia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Removal of academically sourced, "Cooperation with Israel" section
Hi, I noticed you removed my new section added here: "Despite historically antagonistic relations, Israel is anticipated to have a major role in the development of NEOM, with Saudi Arabia expressing an interest in Israeli intellectual capability to this end. Israel has also reciprocated this. Saudi Arabia hopes to to establish an economic partnership with Israel to promote economic development of Neom. In particular, Saudi Arabia is interested in improved economic relations with high-tech industries in Israel required for the technological vision of Neom. According to a report in an Israeli newspaper there is evidence of coordination between Arab businessmen and diplomats in Tel Aviv, with companies in Israel ready to secure billions of dollars worth of contracts. The Saudi Arabian government is also reported to be involved in such communications. As such, analysts have pointed to Neom as an impetus for potential normalisation between Saudi and Israel."

Your stated reason was, that this was "speculative" and had "unreliable sources".

The sources are:

Both are from academic journals. More sources also exist. As such I contest your reasoning for removing the edit and suggest it is re-instated. If you do not agree, please explain how this is "speculative" when it is based on source material, and why the sources are "unreliable" when in fact they are reliable.

I look forward to your reply. (contribs) אב דהן <b style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0038b8">(talkpage)</b> 17:14, 11 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Again, the sources seem to lack credibility. You can provide the “more sources that exist”. Cergun62 (talk) 11:17, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The two sources cited are peer-reviewed journals. As such they are credible, and you have not explained to me why they are unreliable. You have merely given a claim without evidence, you merely contradicted me. Please provide evidence for their "lack of credibility" rather than merely stating it.


 * As for other sources:
 * Jamilah, M., Fikra, H.U. and Harza, Z., 2019. Facilitating conditions of Saudi Arabia–Israel normalization in 2015-2018. Journal of Diplomacy and International Studies, 2(01), pp.38-51.
 * Black, I., 2019. Just below the surface: Israel, the Arab Gulf States and the limits of cooperation. eprints.lse.ac.uk
 * Yaari, Michal. "Israel and Saudi Arabia: On the way to normalization." Israel's relations with Arab countries: The unfulfilled potential (2020): 57-71.
 * Madakam, Somayya, and Pragya Bhawsar. "NEOM smart city: The city of future (the urban Oasis in Saudi desert)." Handbook of smart cities (2020): 1-23.
 * Kibrik, R., Goren, N., & Kahana-Dagan, M. (Eds.). (2021). Israel's Relations with Arab Countries: The Unfulfilled Potential. Mitvim, the Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies.


 * The above contains a mix of Academic and institutional publications. There are even more of course. In particular I draw your attention to the second source of the additional sources I have listed above, the London school of Economics Middle East Centre Report, which states on page 22,
 * "The $50bn NEOM project, on the country’s northwest coast near the borders of Jordan, Egypt and Israel, seemed certain to attract Israeli interest and expertise."

- Link


 * In fact you denied the original sources credibility without evidence, despite their being peer-reviewed sources in famous academic journals such as Asian Affairs. Also what do you mean by "seem" - do they lack credibility or not? So I will ask you for a second time - and this time please do not deflect or merely contradict me as this is not productive - why do you insist the original two sources are unreliable and not credible?

<b style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0038b8">(contribs)</b> <b style="color:#0038b8; background:#FFFFFF">אב דהן</b> <b style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0038b8">(talkpage)</b> 16:10, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0038b8">(contribs)</b> <b style="color:#0038b8; background:#FFFFFF">אב דהן</b> <b style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0038b8">(talkpage)</b> 16:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Bothe the “Pakistan Journal of Law” and “Asian Affairs Journal” are by no means “famous”.
 * “The development of Neom, therefore, is likely to increase Saudi Arabia’s need for technological development and its interests in improved economic relations with high-tech industries in Israel”
 * this from one of the paragraphs of the Asian Affairs source. Again, the sentence has a speculative tone.
 * same with the following:
 * “The $50bn NEOM project, on the country’s northwest coast near the borders of Jordan, Egypt and Israel, seemed certain to attract Israeli interest and expertise”.
 * If you have any article from a reputable and credible source like Reuters, NYT, or BBC, or even a Saudi source Like Arab News, you can provide it. Other than that, the sources you provided are not enough to support the claims. Cergun62 (talk) 17:35, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * News websites are in fact less credible than peer-reviewed academic journals... If you are seriously willing however to contest this and the other journal as reliable sources, we can take them to the RS's noticeboard.
 * However I'd like to thank you for engaging a bit more and explaining your reasoning.
 * As far as the wording seeming "speculative", then the lack of linguistic certitude apparent in the prose of the sources is not reason to blank the entire section; I am happy to change the wording of the section to reflect the sources as need be, or you could've even made such edits yourself.
 * Nevertheless, I am happy to come to a compromise and reword the section to reflect the wording in the source material - please indicate if you would be happy with this compromise. <b style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0038b8">(contribs)</b> <b style="color:#0038b8; background:#FFFFFF">אב דהן</b> <b style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0038b8">(talkpage)</b> 19:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * A compromise it is, then. Cergun62 (talk) 20:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Just rewrite it while pointing out that it's speculation. Using words like "It has been speculated" should do the job. Cergun62 (talk) 20:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
 * How does this sound?
 * "Suggestion of Israeli Cooperation Despite historically antagonistic relations, Israel is speculated to have a major role in the development of NEOM, with some suggesting that Saudi Arabia could be expressing an interest in Israeli intellectual capability to this end. Israel is suggested to have also reciprocated this. In line with this, Saudi Arabia is said to hope to establish an economic partnership with Israel to promote economic development of Neom. In particular, analysts suggest that Saudi Arabia may be interested in improved economic relations with high-tech industries in Israel required for the technological vision of Neom. According to a report in an Israeli newspaper, there is supposedly evidence of coordination between Arab businessmen and diplomats in Tel Aviv, with companies in Israel said to be ready to secure billions of dollars worth of contracts. The Saudi Arabian government is also supposedly involved in such communications. As such, analysts have suggested Neom as a potential impetus for normalisation between Saudi and Israel."
 * Go ahead and add it the the international relations section. Thank you for engaging in this discussion. Cergun62 (talk) 16:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC)