I note this sentence in the AB review for the 2001 extension "The sites representing Mudéjar art in Aragón proposed for inscription were 157 in the first nomination proposal. This number was subsequently reduced by the State Party to 64, and then, after further negotiations with ICOMOS, to 6 sites. These sites are proposed to be added to the four sites of Teruel which are already on the List, making the total of 10."
Unfortunately the Nomination File for this extension hasn't been provided on the UNESCO Web site -unusual for one as late as this though the lack of the original 1986 nomination for Teruel is normal)
So - the 6 additional sites are fully accounted for without including a site in Daroca -
Tower and church of Santa María in Calatayud
Church of Santa Tecla in Cervera de la Cañada
Church of Santa María in Tobed,
Remains of the Palacio de la Aljafería in Zaragoza
Tower and Church of San Pablo in Zaragoza
La Seo Cathedral in Zaragoza.
No site in Daroca Town is inscribed -100%!!!!! The nearest is Sta Maria in Tobed 33kms away from Daroca. But ones in Daroca were included in the original 157 extra nominated sites and (probably) the reduced 64. This (Spanish) Wiki page lists all 157 under a section titled "Otros monumentos mudéjares de Aragón no incluidos expresamente en la declaración de Patrimonio de la Humanidad"
("Other Mudejar monuments of Aragon not expressly included in the World Heritage inscription") https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arquitectura_mud%C3%A9jar_de_Arag%C3%B3n
.There are 5 locations in Daroca.
If one looks at Web sites mentioning "Daroca", "UNESCO", "Patrimonio Mundial" etc a large number of hits are returned! It appears that at least some of the non inscribed Mudejar sites (including those in Daroca) are simply referring to the UNESCO inscription of Mudjar Architecture in general and climbing on the bandwagonsince they also have "Mudejar Architecture"! If you read the azulejo in the photo above it doesn't actually claim that the building it is situated on is inscribed and could be said merely to refer to the inscription in general! Pedantic? Certainly!
Interestingly - nowhere on the Web have I been able to discover any newspaper etc articles bemoaning the reduction of locations from 157 to a mere 6 . Somewhere one might have thought that Daroca or elsewhere would have expressed disappointment - but one gets the feeling that the decision was made to "bank" the extension as a job well done and continue almost as if all 157 had been added!!