Talk:Ismail I of Granada/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Aza24 (talk · contribs) 01:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HaEr48! I'm excited to review your article. My process is pretty simple: I'll give comments/suggestions section by section, usually mostly on the prose. At the end I'll give general comments, such as something being overlinked or MOS errors. I'll also do a quick ref review and image review at the end. You should expect comments on each of the sections in the next 24 hours. 48 hours at the most. Cheers! Aza24 (talk) 01:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, some comments:

Lead

I know you use AH dates in parenthesis throughout the article, there inclusion in the lead for Ismail's birth and deaths dates, or perhaps the infobox, might make sense as well.
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 15:56, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Very well written lead, I read the article first before reading it and it seems to be summed up well.
Thank you :) HaEr48 (talk) 15:56, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Background

I see you use the reign ("{{reign...") template for the first ruler you mention, Sultan Muhammad II, but not the others? Best to use for all or none.
My idea is that the template comes with a hint (if you hover over the "r.") explaining what it means. Like wikilinks, I think it's helpful to appear in the first instance, but it might be redundant if it keeps appearing. I hope it's okay. HaEr48 (talk) 15:55, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good Aza24 (talk) 03:58, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since you mention a lot of names in the first 2 sentences that by the time I got to "Abu Said was a member of the dynasty...." I wasn't sure who Abu Said was. Perhaps add "His father, Abu Said, was a..."
Added "Ismail's father, ..." and slightly edited the paragraph. HaEr48 (talk) 15:55, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe add what the capital was: "Málaga was the second largest city of the Emirate of Granada after the capital, Granada, and its most important..."
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 15:55, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

"and the Nasrid rule in Málaga was still unstable" maybe link the Nasrid dynasty here? Since you have only linked it in the lead so far.
Well spotted. I decide to mention and link it even earlier. HaEr48 (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gotta love Ibn Khaldun :)
Could one or two examples of "pro-Christian tendencies" (in "as well as the suspected pro-Christian tendencies of Nasr and his vizier.") be provided? I'm not sure what that would be off the top of my head, since the suspected tendencies surely wouldn't be anything too obvious.
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Initially, he faced an attempt to restore his predecessor..." would perhaps "coup" be more appropriate here?
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if the "pro-Ismail" were led by anyone notable mentioned earlier in the article?
Just his father Abu Said (new mentioned), as well as later in the campaign Uthman ibn Abi al-Ula (mentioned at the appropriate point). HaEr48 (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Infante" is a title, correct? Could that be linked to the appropriate article? (since I don't think the average reader would be familiar with it)
Done, good point. HaEr48 (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since you have the reign of the other rulers in this article, perhaps add that of Ferdinand IV in parenthesis as well?
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rise to power

Why is "katib" italicized?
Because it is a foreign word (per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC). 22:13, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
"This became known to the" might be more clear as "The negotiations became known to the..."
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 22:13, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rest of this section looks great.

Reign

Defending the throne

"Ismail laid siege to Guadix in May 1315 but left after 45 days." I wonder if this line can be clarified with something like "but left unsuccessful after 45 days"
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 22:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The line: "Peter invaded Granada again in 1317" could use some more clarification, or nuance. At the very least it should be "Peter invaded Granada again later in 1317" but I would suggest adding something like "The treaty did not hold (The peace did not last?) and Peter would invade Granada again later the same year."
The truce in the preceding paragraph was in 1316, and March 1317 was its expiration, so Peter invading Granada again does not contradict it. Added some clarification in the preceding paragraph about the truce.HaEr48 (talk) 22:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"in exchange for a 'second/new' truce" maybe?
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 22:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"At this point, Peter's intention was probably not the restoration of Nasr but rather the total conquest of Granada, and he declared, "I would not be...." perhaps "total conquest of Granada, since he declared..."
The source does not link it that way, I hesitate to do it for fear of doing WP:SYNTH. HaEr48 (talk) 22:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Invaded in May of what year? (1318?) Clarification may be worthwhile here
Done, it was May 1319. HaEr48 (talk) 22:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidation

Is the leader of Murcia known?

Yes , and even a wikilink is avaliable (Don Juan Manuel). HaEr48 (talk) 22:26, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is Jofre Tenorio the same as this person on the spanish wiki? Might be worth linking across the wikis.

Yes, I added an English language stub, so the link is blue now. HaEr48 (talk) 22:26, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rest of the section looks great.

Death

Why is Ismail suddenly referred to as the Sultan after the first sentence of this section?

It is because the cousin mentioned in the same sentence is also named Ismail, I believe referring to him another way is helpful to avoid confusion. HaEr48 (talk) 22:27, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough Aza24 (talk) 03:58, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

This section looks great, wouldn't some info on his use of cannons be appropriate here? Surely it affected future rulers' battles?
Added a few sentences in Legacy about cannons. HaEr48 (talk) 23:02, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General

There are quite a few times where refs are not in the order they should be (in ascending order). This happens especially in the "Defending the throne" section with "21,10" "22,21" etc.
The no symbols in prose and ref layout below are easily resolved by addressing the issues above. The article is extremely thorough and well written. Aza24 (talk) 06:34, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Ref 40, 29 and 24 should be "pp."
Done. HaEr48 (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not finished yet

@Aza24: Thank you for the very helpful feedback. Looking forward to continue working with you! HaEr48 (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Looks good

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

GAN - Pass

@HaEr48: After doing a quick source and image review, glancing through your changes and the article as a whole, I see no reason it would fail any of the criteria. Very well written and frankly, an engaging and enjoyable read! Congrats – will promote soon :) Aza24 (talk) 03:58, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aza24: Thank you for the review! HaEr48 (talk) 04:45, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]