Talk:Haftvād

Class C Iran project

Can I ask why this article got a C for quality by the Iran project? I looked at the criteria, and I think it exceeds those listed for the C grade. I checked and researched all references carefully, and I provided nearly comprehensive information on Haftvad. He's a minor character in Persian mythology, and there isn't much general information about him other than what I listed. In terms of importance (as far as the project Iran criteria go), I'd say it's a low. LauriePierce (talk) 03:00, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry too much about those quality ratings. They are generally not a very reliable measure for anything, and you shouldn't measure the recognition of your contributions by them. I get the impression many people just put in a "C" as a kind of default because they can't be bothered to perform an explicit check of the criteria needed for "B" (which I believe the article meets). I'm not a member of that wikiproject and generally don't do article rating, otherwise I'd do the reassessment. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

"ibid"

Just for clarification: the "ibid" currently in fn 5 and 6 do refer to the previous footnote of Shahbazi, right? In that case, let me fix the footnote code a bit, because the "ibid" technique should generally be avoided (it breaks too easily if anybody should ever add another footnote in between). Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes--it refers to the Shahbazi article. Thanks for fixing it--I'll watch how you do it. Like I said, this is my first foray into doing anything on Wikipedia, so it's a big learning curve for me. Also, I'm assuming by your other changes that you're only supposed to link to other wikipedia articles the first time a term/name is mentioned in the article? LauriePierce (talk) 23:28, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, as a general rule (but with some flexibility, of course, for instance if you have a term linked in the intro and then it only re-appears much further down in the text, a repeated link might still be a good idea.) For repeated footnotes, I used the technique of giving the footnote a name as a html attribute.

BTW, would you be interested in seeing your first article mentioned on Wikipedia's main page one of these days? Check out how to nominate it for the "did you know" section. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks--good to know about linking terms. I'll check out the link on nominating the article.LauriePierce (talk) 05:37, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I checked out the nominating information but it's too confusing! It looks like it would take me as long to nominate the article as it did to write it. :) LauriePierce (talk) 05:47, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I've filed the nomination for you; see Template talk:Did you know. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:13, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! LauriePierce (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Title spelling

Since we are using the spelling with the macron ("Haftvād") throughout the text (and I suppose it's conventional academic transliteration), should we also have the page under that title? The spelling without the macron would remain as a WP:redirect. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:39, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I thought about that, but I noticed when I tried to link the "Naga" page I had problems since the macron showed up as wierd symbols--I think maybe the macrons are problematic in some browsers? "Haftvād" is a more correct transliteration of the name, but for a broad-audience resource like Wikipedia I think the other option would be fine (i.e., taking the macron out of the name throughout the article). I'm not sure how transliteration is usually handled in Wikipedia.LauriePierce (talk) 05:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I would use whichever was the most commonly used spelling in English translations. A good example is Shōwa period.-RHM22 (talk) 16:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)