Talk:Fatimid conquest of Egypt/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 09:37, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I will have a look at this over the next few days. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:37, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

I have done some copy editing, which you will want to check.

• "however": only three uses, which is fine. However, optional, delete the second and third examples.
  • Done
• "The Ikhshidid elites preferred to negotiate with him" "preferred" compared with what?
  • Done
• A "letter of guarantee" is a banking technical term meaning something different from what you have here. Perhaps 'formal statement of guarantees'? "writ of safe-conduct" as you use later, is very good. And consistency would be nice.
  • Done
• "The surrender terms" This is the first mention of a surrender. Possibly introduce earlier? Perhaps 'The Ikhshidid elites negotiated Egypt's surrender with him'?
  • Good point. Done
• That's a loooong lead. Can I suggest some trimming.
  • did some minor trimming, but this will be difficult. Give me a couple of days to test around.
• "practically independent" Do you mean 'almost but not quite completely independent' or 'for all practical purposes indepnedent'?
  • Ahhh, good question. Clarified.
• "On the Fatimid side ... " Strongly recommend adding this sentence to the preceding paragraph.
  • Done
• "Over the next decades, the balance of power gradually shifted in the Fatimids' favour: while the Fatimids consolidated their regime, the Abbasid Caliphate, weakened by constant power struggles between rival bureaucratic, courtly, and military factions, and deprived of its outlying provinces by ambitious local dynasts, ceased to exist as a political entity; after 946, the Abbasid caliphs themselves were reduced to powerless pawns of the Buyids." A slightly long sentence.
  • Split up and rewritten (was not very happy with the opening)
• "... to make the Fatimids more attractive to the Egyptians" This seems to end in the air. Possibly add 'as rulers', 'as potential rulers', 'as potential overlords' or similar?
  • Good point, clarified
• "it coincided with an invasion of the Qarmatians" What were the Qarmatians invading?
  • Clarified
• "with the Ikhshidids unable to confront them" Do you mean something like 'unable to bring them to battle'?
  • Clarified
• "the overland routes from Egypt to Iraq were practically cut off" You can cut a route, but you can't cut it off. You can cut off Egypt from Iraq. (English: a screwed up language.)
  • Leftover from a previous version where Egypt was cut off, thanks for catching this.
• "who had been fighting with the Byzantines in southern Italy" Just checking that that shouldn't be 'were fighting'.
  • Changed and added a linl
• "The Israeli historian Yaacov Lev" Why is Lev's nationality relevant?
  • It isn't, I put it in for variety. Removed.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

• "Unlike the rashly undertaken expeditions" I assume that a consensus of the sources supports "rashly"?
  • Yes. Walker, whom I reference, sort of says it himself: "With a caution that was not characteristic of his immediate predecessors, al-Mu'izz organized...", and I later quote Lev to clarify why: "their first armies dispatched against Egypt lacked discipline" as they were still in essence 'revolutionary', tribal, and hence undisciplined armies. For the civilized Arabs of the lowland and coastal cities, the Kutama soldiery were something like Russian Civil War-era Bolshevik troops occupying Paris.
• Canard (1965) seems a little early to have an ISBN.
  • It is. The ISBN was added by another user to the template, and refers to a later reprint. Fixed now.
• "Following the failure of the initial military options" Do you mean 'their initial invasion attempts'? If so. it may be clearer to say so.
  • Good point, done.
• "by agents of the Fatimid missionary propaganda" This seems to me to need a word on the end: Perhaps 'effort', 'agency', 'initiative' or whatever.
  • Done.
• "before being hounded" I am not sure what you mean by this. ('hounded from office'?)
  • Clarified.
• Optional for GA, but a map showing the main sites mentioned, similar to that in Fatimid invasion of Egypt (919–921) would be very helpful.
  • There is no good basemap, unfortunately, as the campaign stretched from Tunisia to Egypt. I will try to rig something together though prior to moving this further.
• "The religious audience" seems vague. Could you identify who was being promised salaries a little more precisely?
  • Clarified.
• "the Imam–Caliph" Why the upper case initials?
  • Influenced by the source. Changed.
• "carrying a banner proclaiming al-Mu'izz" 'carrying a banner proclaiming al-Mu'izz caliph'?
  • Indeed.
• "The Fatimids were more successful ... " Strongly recommend adding this sentence to the preceding paragraph.
  • Done.
• "paying a million silver dirhams as ransom" Ransom or indemnities?
  • Clarified.

Nice work. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:26, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Gog the Mild, I think the comments above have been addressed. Anything else? This will go on to ACR and FAC sooner rather than later, but I always appreciate your suggestions. Constantine ✍ 21:14, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Apologies Constantine. Things have become a bit busy recently. I am aware of this and will get back to it soon. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:49, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Constantine: That all looks good. It meets all of the GA criteria, and frankly I am rushed off my feet at the moment, so I am passing it. I especially like the edits you have made which I didn't suggest. Give me a ping when it goes to ACR and I will have a further, more detailed, look then. Things I would suggest are reducing the lead; and adding a map of just Upper Egypt showing the locations of the various locations referenced in the article from there - so far as I can see they bunch moderately tightly bunched. But you might want to simply throw it at ACR and see what they think there. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:52, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I will see what I can do. No worries, I was happy to get you as GA reviewer in the first place :) Constantine ✍ 20:54, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed