Talk:History of the Levant
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- probably because "History of the Levant" would be a better title.
Somebody added a PDF version of the article. Not sure that this is a good idea, since a) waste of disk space and bandwidth if done for every article b) PDF version will soon be out-of-date.
? I fail to see the logic in having a pdf version of the very same article. Anon is right this will be out of date in a short time. --mav
- Two questions. Would it be desirable to have online conversion to PDF format on Wikipedia server ? Does the PDF format have additional merits over HTML for Wikipedia ?
--Kpjas
- 1: Doubtful. 2: Articles that use non-ASCII characters could have a better chance of appearing correctly, as the font outlines can be embedded in a PDF. That's conceivably a marginal nicety. For this article it's completely useless, and the PDF isn't even from the printer-friendly version. There's zero need for it. --Brion VIBBER
A definition of the word "Levant" would be nice. --Auric The Rad 20:55, Nov 25, 2003 (UTC)
Contents[hide] |
[edit] Rewrite of the Stone Age
I have completely rewritten the article on the "Stone Age" going back to Middle Paleolithic period (90,000 BCE). Does anyone know if Acheulian hand-axes have been found in the Levant?
John D. Croft 15:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Egypt?
In the "See also" section, there is a link to the article History of Egypt. Egypt is located in North Africa, and is not in the Levant. So why does this article that's about Levantine history have a link to Egyptian history?--Gramaic 05:39, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
The article itself includes much discussion of the entire Ancient Near East that doesn't belong. It encourages confusion as to the denotation of the term "Levant," and also reinforces the impression that the Levant was just the empty, undeveloped, or backward area where "empires" met to trade and fight.
I assume the inappropriate links share their origin with the inappropriate text. And I suspect that origin has something to do with the article once having a different title.
--Americist 18:57, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Wow! I was going to comment on the same thing when I find that someone pointed this out over 2 and a half years ago and the article is still as bad as ever. Articles like this that are terrible and not improving should just be deleted.Heathcliff (talk) 16:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
- Heh, if you think that this article is terrible, you need to go click on "Random article" a few times. :) Compared to most articles on Wikipedia, this one is pretty good.
[edit] Merge with Levant
As well as merging with Syro-Palestine I think it would be worth thinking about merging this article with Levant. Levant isn't particularly long and an edited version of the current article could function neatly as a subset of that article. Any thoughts? Saganaki- 00:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] References?
Please include references, footnotes, something I can refer to obtain more information (elaboration). Goodnight3455 17:17, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Not a word about Arabs?
Arabs existed in Levant since the Nabatean migrations, and probably earlier. Where is that meantioned in this article??