Talk:Guarded Domains of Iran

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Guarded Domains of Iran/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: HistoryofIran (talk · contribs) 13:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: That Tired Tarantula (talk · contribs) 16:26, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I'll be reviewing the article over the course of this week. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 16:26, 12 July 2024 (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

First look

Criteria

• No maintenance templates: Y
• Relavent images are present: Y
• No recent edit wars: Y
• Nominator is a signifcant contributor: Y

Copyright

• No copyright violations/plagiarism: Y
• Images are free (unless a rationale is given if they are not) and tagged: Y

Prose

Broadness and focus

The article stays mostly focused (there's a couple of sentences at the end of the first paragraph of the early history section that kind of go off topic, but that's it), but I'm concerned about its broadness, since it only has a history section; most GAs about nations or societies in the past have sections about their government and culture as well, along with additional sections about different aspects of their societies, so the fact that there's only a history section is a pretty significant issue; furthermore, since this article covers both Safavid Iran and Qajar Iran and the articles for those eras have significant coverage of their governments and cultures, it seems like there's a lot of information about those topics that the article should cover.

Or okay, maybe stuff about the government's not necessary because of there being two different eras that this article covers, but there should definitely be some stuff about the culture and population in the area.

I've also given some suggestions about how the prose should be reorganized in the writing & MoS section, since there are some paragraphs that could be placed in their own sections. The geography and culture sections that I've proposed would still have to be expanded, since the information doesn't go into very much depth. I understand how you're concerned about the article potentially going off topic if some of the sources don't mention the Guarded Domains of Iran specifically, but I think that it is necessary to have some so that the article can provide more in-depth coverage of the Domains.

Writing and MoS

There are a few different paragraphs that could be put into different sections:

• The second paragraph (minus the last two sentences, since it kind of goes off-topic) in the early history section would go into a section about the Domains' name; the first sentence of the last paragraph of the Safavid era section and and the first sentence of the fourth paragraph would go there as well.
• The third paragraph of the early history section and the last paragraph of the Qajar era section would go in a geography section.
• The first paragraph in the early history section, the second paragraph of the Safavid era section, and the rest of the fourth paragraph of the Qajar era section would be in a section about the culture.

After these edits, the body of the article would look like this:

Name

The name "Guarded Domains of Iran" alluded to the decentralized administration as well as cultural and ethnic diversity of the country. According to the Iranologist Abbas Amanat, "In this notion of Iran, one may argue, there was a realistic recognition not only of its complexity but also of the inherent necessity for the central state." The concept had previously been used in the form of Eranshahr, the official name of Iran under the Sasanian Empire (224–651), which promoted the concept of Iran as a protected political unit ruled by the state and with a distinct geographical region.

Safavid annals began to utilize references to the "Guarded Domains of Iran" more frequently toward the end of Shah Abbas I's rule as a substitute for the "Sublime Safavid State" (Dowlat-e ‘Alliyeh-e Safavieh).

The term Guarded Domains developed a new political meaning during the Russo-Persian Wars in the early 18th century, when it was adopted as a practical means of demanding the defense of Iranian territory against foreign invasion.

History

Safavid era

Despite numerous military and theological assaults, the Safavid order survived as a beleaguered enclave in the Azerbaijan region and eastern Anatolia from the mid-14th century. After coming to power in Iran, the movement instilled a new Shia identity in its subjects and established an imperial state that would form the cornerstone of the country's political sovereignty. Despite the fact that the Safavid shah Ismail I (r. 1501–1524) and his successors were violent and unrelenting, the dynasty managed, in a relatively short period, to unify the diverse array of local dynasties, ethnicities, and cultures that had divided Iran since the time of the Turco-Mongol ruler Timur (r. 1370–1405) a century earlier. The Safavids thus revitalized the Guarded Domains of Iran, which starting from them would serve as the common and official name of Iran until the early 20th century.

By this period, Safavid Iran had developed a sense of confidence and security as a result of driving out the Portuguese, fending off the Uzbeks, and reclaiming Safavid land from the Ottomans. The majority of European reports of Iran in the 17th-century attest to a new era of prosperity made possible by an expanded domestic and international communication network, a rising urban population, a complex understanding of relaxation, and a developing Shia intellectual identity.

Qajar era

For political and financial reasons, controlling the Guarded Domains was essential to Qajar legitimacy and authority. Qajar assertions of having restored an imperial system of governance relied heavily on this. Under the Qajars, there were no significant changes to land practices, unlike in other historical contexts when governing the land may have led to drastic changes in land tenure or administration or in attempts to alter the natural environment. Instead, they found a purpose in their political authority through their rule of the land. In order to maintain their status as the defenders and distributors of land rights, the Qajar shahs reused the customs and structures of past dynasties.

The Qajar ruler Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar dedicated the majority his political career to establish Qajar sovereignty over the lands that were once ruled by the Safavids. His time and effort were focused on this goal for about twenty years, from the time he managed to escape Zand captivity in Shiraz in 1779 to the time he was crowned himself shah in 1796. After departing Shiraz, Agha Mohammad Khan spent years strengthening authority in northern Iran. After completing this by 1785, he focused on seizing central and southern Iran. By 1794, he had conquered Kerman and Fars and killed his most important rival, the Zand ruler Lotf Ali Khan Zand (r. 1789–1794).

In 1796, Agha Mohammad Khan conquered the majority of Khorasan and Georgia, thus gaining control over all the former Safavid lands. With his goal complete, Agha Mohammad Khan officially declared himself shah. According to the Iranian historian Assef Ashraf, "This protracted process of conquest raises various questions, including just how secure Agha Muhammad Khan's – and by extension Qajar – control over the vast regions of Iran was, as well as when, precisely, the Qajar period of rule 'began'." It is possible that he thought the conquering the former Safavid territory was essential to his legitimacy because he did not declare himself shah until after he had done so. In the contemporary history book Rostam al-Tavarikh, each year of Agha Mohammad Khan's reign is summarized in a few words, which lists the regions and territories he conquered.

In order to create prose that resembled a political slogan and acted as a encouragement to defend Iran, Abol-Qasem Qa'em-Maqam experimented with words that rhymed with mahrus. The threat posed by Russia (Rus) to the Qajar domains was considered ominous (manhus). This threat jeopardized not only the territorial integrity of the Qajars but also their honor (namus). Politically, the loss of the Caucasian provinces during the two wars with Russia (1804–1813 and 1826–1828) was devastating because it damaged the Qajar's reputation as the guardian of the Guarded Domains of Iran.

Fath-Ali Shah (r. 1797–1834) established a semi-autonomous system of princely governments under the authority of the central state. This feature, also used in the Seljuq and Safavid periods, gave new significance to the concept of the Guarded Domains. Senior princes primarily served as provincial governors at Tabriz, Shiraz, Kermanshah, Isfahan, and Mashhad, or as high-ranking officials in the growing Qajar court and army. Smaller administrations were assigned to younger princes.

After being defeated by Britain, Iran signed the Treaty of Paris in 1857, in which they agreed to relinquish all territorial claims to Herat or any other area within Afghanistan. The loss of Herat, akin to the earlier loss of the Caucasian provinces, illustrated the limitations on authority over territories that were historically and culturally part of Greater Iran. Despite their deep-rooted ties, these areas could no longer be sustained as provinces within the Guarded Domains. Iran's final borders was determined by its conflicts with Russia, Britain and the Ottoman Empire. This led to a new understanding of the "Guarded Domains", and consequently, of the extent of the Iranian lands.

Geography

The definition of the Guarded Domains' borders was almost identical to that of Eranshahr in the Sasanian-era text Letter of Tansar, as well as the description by the 14th-century geographer Hamdallah Mustawfi in his Nuzhat al-Qulub."

Momtahen al-Dowleh Mirza Mehdi Khan Shaqaqi, writing in the late 19th-century, stated that the Guarded Domains encompassed Ray, Azerbaijan, Khorasan, Sistan, Fars, Larestan, Isfahan, Khuzestan, Kerman, Balochistan, Gilan, Mazandaran, Yazd, Lorestan, Kermanshahan, Qazvin, Kurdistan, Ardalan, and Astarabad.

Culture

Due to its location and ecosystem, as well as the popularity of high culture and the Persian language, Iran was able to maintain its cultural identity during the period between the Islamic invasion and the establishment of the Safavid state. The idea of the Guarded Domains illustrated a feeling of territorial and political uniformity in a society where the Persian language, culture, monarchy, and Shia Islam became integral elements of the developing national identity. The concept presumably started to form under the Mongol Ilkhanate in the late 13th-century, a period in which regional actions, trade, written culture, and partly Shia Islam, contributed to the establishment of the early modern Persianate world.

The Safavids promoted a flourishing Persian culture and played a significant role in shaping Islamic philosophy and theology. They also built diplomatic and commercial connections with Europe, leading to some of Iran's first interactions with the modern Western civilization. The conversion to a state-sponsored religion, in this case Shia Islam, provided the bond required to hold together the fundamental elements of Safavid state, similar to other early states such as Spain and England. Iran was largely shaped into a geographical empire with a unique identity due to the fusion of religious and political elements by the Safavid dynasty.

In Tabriz, a book compiled from a fatwa on jihad, authored by two distinguished Shia jurists from Iraq, includes an introduction where the Qajar minister and statesman Abol-Qasem Qa'em-Maqam emphasized the importance of jihad. He argued that it was a collective religious duty to counter the "disorder brought by the Russian nation within the Guarded Domain".

(Prose ends here)

After these paragraphs are placed in different sections, they'd still have to be reorganized and reworded to be more cohesive. Anyways, the prose is going to have to be reorganized; it doesn't have to be structured in the exact same way that I suggested, but information will have to be placed in specific sections depending on what subject it's about.

---

I have some suggestions for copyediting:

Section	Location	Text	Change to
Lead	2nd paragraph 3rd paragraph	"The idea of the Guarded Domains illustrated a feeling of territorial and political uniformity in a society where the Persian language, culture, monarchy, and Shia Islam became integral elements of the developing national identity. " "Iran's loss of territory under the Qajars in the 19th century led to a new understanding of the "Guarded Domains", and consequently, of the extent of the Iranian lands. The loss of territory such as the Caucasian provinces and Herat illustrated the limitations on authority over territories that were historically and culturally part of Greater Iran. Despite their deep-rooted ties, these areas could no longer be sustained as provinces within the Guarded Domains."	"The idea of the "Guarded Domains" was formed by a feeling of territorial and political uniformity in a society with shared cultural elements such as the Persian language, monarchy, and Shia Islam." "Iran's loss of territory under the Qajars in the 19th century led to a new understanding of the Guarded Domains and the extent of the Iranian lands. There were limitations on the authority that the Guarded Domains had over Greater Iran; they lost territories such as the Caucasian provinces and Herat."
Name	2nd sentence	"The identity of the Iranian people, who deeply valued their connection to the land, was closely tied to the concept of Iran's territory."	"The Iranian people had a connection to the land that they tied to the concept of Iran's territory."
History (early history)	1st paragraph	"The idea of the Guarded Domains illustrated a feeling of territorial and political uniformity in a society where the Persian language, culture, monarchy, and Shia Islam became integral elements of the developing national identity."	See suggestions for lead
History (Safavid era)	1st paragraph	"Despite numerous military and theological assaults, the Safavid order survived as a beleaguered enclave in the Azerbaijan region and eastern Anatolia from the mid-14th century. After coming to power in Iran, the movement instilled a new Shia identity in its subjects and established an imperial state that would form the cornerstone of the country's political sovereignty. Despite the fact that the Safavid shah Ismail I (r. 1501–1524) and his successors were violent and unrelenting, the dynasty managed, in a relatively short period, to unify the diverse array of local dynasties, ethnicities, and cultures that had divided Iran since the time of the Turco-Mongol ruler Timur (r. 1370–1405) a century earlier."	"Despite military and theological assaults, the Safavid order survived as a beleaguered enclave in the Azerbaijan region and eastern Anatolia from the mid-14th century. After coming to power in Iran, the movement instilled a new Shia identity in its subjects and established an imperial state that would form part of the country's political sovereignty. Despite violence caused by Safavid shah Ismail I (r. 1501–1524) and his successors, the dynasty managed to unify the diverse local dynasties, ethnicities, and cultures that had divided Iran since the time of the Turco-Mongol ruler Timur (r. 1370–1405) a century earlier."
History (Qajar era)	1st paragraph 5th paragraph 7th paragraph	"For political and financial reasons, controlling the Guarded Domains was essential to Qajar legitimacy and authority. Qajar assertions of having restored an imperial system of governance relied heavily on this. Under the Qajars, there were no major changes to land practices, unlike in other historical contexts when governing the land may have led to drastic changes in land tenure or administration or in attempts to alter the natural environment. Instead, they found a purpose in their political authority through their rule of the land." "This threat jeopardized not only the territorial integrity of the Qajars but also their honor (namus). Politically, the loss of the Caucasian provinces during the two wars with Russia (1804–1813 and 1826–1828) was devastating because it damaged the Qajar's reputation as the guardian of the Guarded Domains of Iran." "The loss of Herat, akin to the earlier loss of the Caucasian provinces, illustrated the limitations on authority over territories that were historically and culturally part of Greater Iran. Despite their deep-rooted ties, these areas could no longer be sustained as provinces within the Guarded Domains. Iran's final borders was determined by its conflicts with Russia, Britain and the Ottoman Empire. This led to a new understanding of the "Guarded Domains", and consequently, of the extent of the Iranian lands."	"Qajar assertions of having restored an imperial system of governance relied on controlling the Guarded Domains. Under the Qajars, there were no major changes to land practices, unlike in other historical contexts when governing the land may have led to changes in land tenure or administration or in attempts to alter the natural environment. Instead, they found a purpose in their political authority through their rule of the land." "This threatened the territorial integrity of the Qajars and their honor (namus). The loss of the Caucasian provinces during the two wars with Russia (1804–1813 and 1826–1828) damaged the Qajar's reputation as the guardian of the Guarded Domains of Iran." See suggestions for lead

Neutrality

There is due weight, but some paragraphs have an essay-like tone; words to watch should be removed.

References

Evaluating sources

All of the sources are reliable, independent, and secondary; looks good.

Citation accuracy

The only thing that I noticed was that the first citation doesn't seem to mention keshvar or mamlakat. Everything else looks good.

Keshvar appears as "kešvar", while mamlakat also appears in this form. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Ref layout

It might be a bit simpler for the sources section to be a subsection.

Overall

Unfortunately, I think I'm going to have to quickfail this GAR because The article needs to be significantly expanded before it is broad enough to become a GA. However, this decision is not final; since I'm newer to the review process, I'm going to contact a more experienced reviewer first for some more input on this review and how the article should be improved. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 00:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi That Tired Tarantula - thanks for choosing to review this article. Respectfully, I did not add stuff like government and culture stuff on purpose. I've only meant to make this article convey information about the concept of the Guarded Domains of Iran. HistoryofIran (talk) 02:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay? Sorry, I'm a little confused. The point of a good article is for that article to provide broad, in-depth coverage of a topic so that readers can learn all the important details about that subject; this article, on the other hand, is lacking some significant areas of information that a reader would probably like to know about. I get how your goal may have been to just present a brief overview of the Guarded Domains of Iran and their history, but that's not going to present enough information to readers for them to be able to get a full understanding of the domains; being concise is good, but a lot more information can be included without the article going off-topic, so it should be added. Unfortunately, I just don't think that there's going to be enough time to add all of it during this GA. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 04:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

But the article does indeed do that. I think adding stuff like culture and government is irrelevant, since thats not part of the topic as in seen in the cited pages who expliticity talk about the concept. If the readers want to read about government and culture, then they can just click on Safavid Iran and the alikes. Also, there exists much shorter GAs than this article. HistoryofIran (talk) 10:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

But there are clearly many sources about the Domains' culture, as seen in the articles about the Savafid and Qajar eras; they're just not in the article right now. Besides, this article frequently describes how the Guarded Domains of Iran had a shared cultural identity (however, it also sort of achieves this through an essay-like tone, so the history section might have to be reorganized a bit, anyways), but it never actually describes that identity . I'm aware how there are a lot of GAs that are shorter, but those still describe multiple different important aspects of the subject they're about. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 17:50, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but they're not in a context about the Guarded Domains as far as I am aware. Unfortunately, the used citations here does not go into much depth about the identity bit. I could add info about the culture of Iran under the dynasties between 1501-1925 from other sources, but I feel like that is random and unnecessary, more fitting for other articles. If I start adding that bit of info, then it's not much about the concept anymore, but more Iran in general. Also, if I add that, then what's stopping me from adding the history of Iran between 1501-1925 too? Do you have a suggestion on how this could be done without straying too much away from the main topic? HistoryofIran (talk) 22:27, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Doesn't it already describe the history of Iran between 1501-1925? Information about the culture should be added, because this article is already saying how there was a cultural identity forming, but it doesn't actually illustrate much about what that identity was or how it influences Iran now. The main topic is the Guarded Domains of Iran in general, not just its history, so it should have information about different aspects of it. The article doesn't have to go into a ton of detail about those aspects, but it should at least include them. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I was referring to the political history of Iran. I've added some more info about culture/religion [1] [2], is this the type of info you meant? HistoryofIran (talk) 01:36, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but I'd prefer for it to have its own section. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 07:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd also like for it to have more specifc details about the cultural aspects; there could also be a separate section for the legacy of the Domains to document how they influenced present-day Iran. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 07:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but I'd prefer for it to have its own section.

I'm not sure how that would work. I can do another sweep in my files and see if I've missed anything.

I'd also like for it to have more specific details about the cultural aspects; there could also be a separate section for the legacy of the Domains to document how they influenced present-day Iran.

That's the issue, I don't think there is one. I'm more or less scraping the barrel in terms of the info specifically about the Guarded Domains. One of the sources I've cited a lot is from 2024 - in other words if this was a year ago then this article would have been with even less details. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, there are many different times in the article where it mentions different parts of a cultural identity being established, so those could be moved over to the legacy section and compared with practices in present-day Iran. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 18:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll add more about this in the section about writing and MoS. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 18:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

After looking at the article some more, I am willing to give it a chance. However, it is going to have to be significantly restructured and parts of it are going to have to be rewritten, so it still might be difficult to finish within the scope of this GA reivew. I have some more comments about this in the broadness and focus and writing and Mos sections above. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 19:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but this makes the article look very disjointed in ways that I don't think can be saved, such as "The term Guarded Domains developed a new political meaning during the Russo-Persian Wars in the early 18th century, when it was adopted as a practical means of demanding the defense of Iranian territory against foreign invasion." which is connected with "In Tabriz, a book compiled from a fatwa on jihad, authored by two distinguished Shia jurists from Iraq, includes an introduction where the Qajar minister and statesman Abol-Qasem Qa'em-Maqam emphasized the importance of jihad. He argued that it was a collective religious duty to counter the "disorder brought by the Russian nation within the Guarded Domain"." The latter does not make much sense on its own (why I guess is why it's omitted, but why remove info?). And the info in the proposed "Name" section is more an explanation of the concept (similar to most of the article), which I guess goes hand in hand with the name.

The proposed "Culture" section now also has the info of the origin and concept of the Guarded Domains.

I want to emphasize that adding info is not an issue for me, but rather what type of info, because I think it's problematic in an article such as this. HistoryofIran (talk) 20:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to add the second part of that paragraph earlier. Currently, it looks disjointed because it'd still have to be reworded in order for the sections to be cohesive and some content will have to be moved around. I don't see how adding info would be problematic in this case, since I think that adding more about the culture and geography's going to have to be necessary in order for this article to be in-depth enough to become a GA. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 22:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but what about the stuff I mentioned at "Culture" and "Name"? I'm very concerned about those two. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

That can be edited in order to be more cohesive; adding information would help with cohesion as well. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 07:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Hmm I think I have an idea not too different from your suggestions. I should get it done today. I'll ping you so you can let me know what you think. HistoryofIran (talk) 04:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay thanks. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 16:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, I guess I got it almost done. Want to add a bit more to Culture, specifically about the Qajars since the Safavids are mentioned. HistoryofIran (talk) 03:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

@That Tired Tarantula: Thoughts? HistoryofIran (talk) 03:34, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

It looks better and I'm glad that it's been expanded, but I'm still iffy about its organization. It's definitely broader, but some things look like they'd be organized better if they were placed in different sections, and the article still makes a lot of broad statements (eg. "the culture changed over time") without giving many details. There is also a problem with tone. I'm going to have to think about this some more. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm continuing the review and will probably finish it up in three days or so. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 08:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Noice. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, it's probably going to take a day or two longer since I have some schedule conflicts, but I'm going to try and work on it more tomorrow. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 20:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

No stress! Even if it's more than that, please take your time. HistoryofIran (talk) 21:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks! That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 01:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

As part of the GA drive, claiming this one to assist as an experienced reviewer. I'll take a look over later today and provide any helpful advice I can! —Ganesha811 (talk) 12:51, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Okay, even though the GAN backlog drive said that this review was quickfailed (I removed it earlier, but I didn't realize how it was put back), I reconsidered that decision after talking more with the nominatior and have worked on it some more; sorry, I am not quite ready for everything to be looked over yet, but I'll probably finish it up in about two days. Is that alright with you? That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 03:33, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to reply - no problem! Ping me when you're ready for me to take a look. —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:20, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll work on it more tomorrow and should be ready by then. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I've been working on it and will probably be ready within a few hours. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:23, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the review taking a lot longer than I thought it was going to.

Unfortunately, I think I am still going to have to fail it because of issues with the article's broadness and neutrality; I like how it's been expanded, but I think that it still has a long way to go in order to become broad enough. As far as neutrality goes, I think that there's a lot of times where the article tends to say stuff like "this is significant because it caused that," while it'd probably be better to just say that "this caused that," since it's more concise and makes the tone more encyclopedic, since it states just the facts. Anyways, I think that this article definitely has potential to become a GA in the future, but it's going to take a while to decide which content will be necessary for the article and where and how it will be added for it to be up to standard.

@Ganesha811, thanks for helping with reviewing the article; are there any details that you've noticed about this GAR that could be a concern and do you think that this was the right decision?

That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 06:24, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't understand. What exactly needs to be expanded? You requested a Name, Geography and Culture section, which I created and expanded. The main focus of the article still has to be about the concept. As for its neutrality, that can easily be fixed if you point it out. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:36, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I tend to disagree with your decision. I think you raised some good points in the review and did a thorough job, but as far as I can see, HistoryofIran addressed your concerns through work on the article. For neutrality, your concerns seem to be more to do with prose than neutrality - reading over the article, I don't see any issues of non-neutral language or perspective. There are some prose tweaks I would make, but nothing unencyclopedic. It's sourced to reliable works and well-formatted. The article is about the former Iranian self-conception/national identity as the "guarded domains", not about a specific state. My only major comment, in fact, would be that the "Culture" section seems disconnected from the actual topic of the article and could probably be removed entirely. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the feedback. As of now, I'll probably just place it on hold for a week so that it can be copyedited. As far as the culture section goes, I think that the first paragraph is appropriate, since it talks about Iran's culture in general, but I agree, the second and third sort of talk more about the history than the culture. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 21:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

That would make the Culture section incredibly short, why not just remove it altogether? And what exactly needs to be copyedited? HistoryofIran (talk) 01:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Maybe some more information could be added to it? But if not, I'm fine with getting rid of it. I've noticed some words such as "signifcant" and "important" in the article, so those should be removed for the most part; they're kind of scattered, but I think they're most noticeable in the first paragraphs of the sections (particularly the History section's subsections). That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 07:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I've removed the Culture section [3] and made some small copyedits [4] [5] [6]. That felt too easy, I assume there is more? I re-read the article a few times but couldn't see anything else? HistoryofIran (talk) 16:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, I didn't mean that "signifcant" and "important" had to be removed in general; I meant that those and words like them should be removed where they're used in ways such as "this was significant to that." Sorry, I should've clarified more. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm also formally putting the GA on hold now for a week. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@That Tired Tarantula at this point, if there are any remaining concerns, I think you should be as specific as possible, quoting the sentences you want to see changed and why. Personally, I don't see anything standing between this article and GA status currently. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay. I've made a chart with my suggestions in the Writing and MoS section. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 20:33, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@That Tired Tarantula: Done. Though I did it slightly different with the 7th paragraph; I kept the Russia, Britain and Ottoman bit as I think its important, and wrote "such as the Caucasian provinces and Herat." instead of "they lost territories such as the Caucasian provinces and Herat.", since the latter is already shortly beforehand. Thoughts? HistoryofIran (talk) 01:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

It looks good! I just noticed a little typo in the edit for the 7th paragraph of the Qajar era section (the word "in" should be behind "such as"); I'll go ahead and fix it. Otherwise, the article's ready; I'm passing the review. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 22:45, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.