Talk:Zaara

Although it's quite interesting, I'm not entirely sure if this article should exist next to Sahara. It seems that it mainly consists of extensive quotes (well-referenced though) making clear that it indeed, as said in the introductory paragraph, is an archaic variant of Sahara. As such, I think it might do to mention this older variant in the main Sahara article, along with some sources. The way it is now, this entry might be more suitable for an etymological dictionary than for a general purpose encyclopedia (see 'What Wikipedia is not'). — mark ✎ 09:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Why Create Zaara?

(Note to Mark: you wrote your comment while I was still writing this! :) Too fast for me. I expected this objection, and this is my reasoning). I first noted this article was missing when I found an unfulfilled internal link in the article on the English Mastiff. I began researching Zaara and stayed puzzled for quite a while before finding enough material to learn that it referred to a large desert in Africa -- pronounce it Za'ara to yourself, and the connection to Sahara became clear. Though I could not verify the etymology in online dictionaries or encyclopedias, the maps found online made clear that Zaara and Sahara are geographically identical; and from there, the 1816 book about the wreck of the Medusa provided a text confirmation.

This spelling, Zaara, merits an article independent of Sahara because there literally is nothing I could find in any other online research resource. I looked in modern and antique encyclopedias, thesauri, and dictionaries. Schoolchildren and other interested parties looking for Zaara presently have nowhere else to go; this article will fill that need.

The format of the article was chosen to illustrate how Zaara was used as an example of all that was dreadful in the common parlance of the 18th and 19th centuries (and possibly before, as well, but I have no references for that yet). There is no room for that kind of a tangent in Sahara, yet the material is good enough to deserve Wiki inclusion and to take Zaara beyond being merely a dictionary-like definition entry, to being an article with some substance. I added an internal link to Zaara at the bottom of Sahara, and vice versa. I copied the categories from the Sahara article. I have some public domain maps to illustrate the article in the future. -- Lisasmall 09:49, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I added the subhead "Literary references" at the suggestion of admin Obli, who put the cleanup blurb on there; this will be accompanied shortly by "Cartographic references" to explain the maps (but I need some time to do this). Also rephrased the intro paragraph a little for clarity. -- Lisasmall 11:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Lisa (is that your name?), sorry for being too fast! (And thanks for your note on my talk page.) I saw you adding the wikilink over at Sahara when it was still red (i.e. when this article didn't exist yet) and I then watched with interest what kind of article it would become. That's why placed my above comment so soon on the talk page.

Upon reading your explanation, I agree with you that this interesting article can have a place here; I'm looking forward to the maps and I'll see if I can help with the referencing system. It might be better, for example, to use an inline citation format like Tucker (1803). Any reader interested in the full citation will take look under the References, where he can find the external link; that way, there would be no need for duplicating the link. — mark ✎ 12:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Obli Cleanup

Thanks for the cleanup suggestions, Obli, sorry to misidentify you (twice!) as an admin. Picking up this thread off our talk pages to here (but am I wrong to do so?). I'm confused by your change of the HTML blockquote tag to the colons used on wiki talk pages. I read the Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page, and the blockquote seemed to be required. Search that page for "block" to see what I mean. Shouldn't it be blockquote coded?

Sorry to be confused also about your comment re internal quotes: what made me insert the cleanup tag was mainly the use of external links in the middle of the text, try to make links like this [1] , without a description. Do you mean without giving the name of the source (such as the title of the book)? And you meant example.com, right? (Because this is a live link to exampe.com, which I don't think you meant, but I'm so new at this, you have to lead me around). When done, who takes cleanup blurbs off? Will some admin figure it out automagically? -- Lisasmall 11:35, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

You can take it off yourself if you feel the article needs no more cleanup, no bureaucracy needed :) The blockquote tag does the same same as adding a colon before a text, to i figured it'd be better to use, since it's wiki markup.

Like this

About stating the source, it can be stated in the text, bu not as the link description, sorry if I was not clear on that. You could compare them to footnotes if you want, just a little number in the middle of the text that doesn't disrupt the flow of the text.

You wouldn't happen to have a public domain image to upload? I'd imagine this article would make a nice addition to the front page "Did you know...?" (a section that spotlights new articles).

Obli (Talk) 11:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you don't mind, I'll put it back into blockquote which is what the Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page requires (and it's nicer because it indents both sides, not just the left). Yes, I have some maps that will be perfect for this, hope to add them tomorrow, no time today -- thanks for the encouragement!  :) -- Lisasmall 02:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)