Talk:M'zab

Latest comment: 7 months ago by Mnl in topic Unicode

History edit

When I look back into old versions of it, for example 22:21, 7 August 2006 it appears as a much better version than the one I found. I started with partially correcting the horrible English and layout. The old version should be restored or at least merged with the new version, as it had several facts simply removed in the new one.Norrefeldt 13:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Picture edit

Isn't that picture ... you know ... fake ? I mean whatever that building is, it's NOT 3500 years old. It's not even 100 years old. Look at the curves, look at everything. Such a building wouldn't have remained standing in a mild climate with a bit of range for 10 years, and will certainly not withstand the regular sandblasts it gets in the desert for any length of time.

Even if you assume the wood has been replaced. Wikipedia's credibility is already somewhat ... tarnished. This is not the way to go about improving it.

That is definitely not Ghardaia... it's some sort of monument or artistic expression of Ghardaia. The picture should be removed and replaced with an authentic image. 188.223.87.184 (talk) 13:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

For example, here is a recent image of the real Ghardaia: [[1]] 188.223.87.184 (talk) 13:33, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Valley? edit

I noticed that UNESCO's page specifies the name as "M'zab Valley" - if this article is intended to be about the World Heritage Site in particular then should we update the name so it is consistent with UNESCO's name? If it is not about the W.H.S., then perhaps we should separate out the information specific to the W.H.S. into a new page? AntarcticPenguin (talk) 05:04, 21 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on M'zab. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 21:33, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply


Unicode edit

In the present version of the page (2023-09-11 10:15 UTC) there are two examples of unicode glyphs in the page that seem to have been there for a while but I am not sure of their correctness, can someone more knowledgeable than me double check?

"Wəd" here:

> along the Wəd Mzab collectively

and "Σezzaba" here:

> and Ibāḍī Σezzaba continue to dominate

Thanks.

Mnl (talk) 10:17, 11 September 2023 (UTC)Reply