Talk:Kisrawan campaigns (1292–1305)

Kisrawan campaigns (1292–1305) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 2, 2021	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 19, 2021.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the punitive Mamluk campaigns against the non-Sunni Muslim mountaineers of the Kisrawan from 1292 to 1305 helped pave the way for the region's Maronite Christian majority?

Lebanon Low‑importance

	Lebanon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lebanon-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Syria Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Egypt Low‑importance

	Egypt portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: African / Middle East / Medieval / Early Muslim

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	African military history task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)
	Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600)

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GAN

Hi Al Ameer son, what a fine piece of work. I assume that this will shortly be heading for GAN, and possibly further, in shorht order? Gog the Mild (talk) 22:08, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gog the Mild. I actually nominated it a few weeks ago. I am also working on a separate article about the Kisrawan region, but am waiting until this article passes its GAN before moving it to mainspace. That way, I could nominate both for a DYK as well. Al Ameer (talk) 17:46, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kisrawan campaigns (1292–1305)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Catlemur (talk · contribs) 10:46, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will start the review shortly.--Catlemur (talk) 10:46, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Replace Baydara with Badr al-Din Baydara in the lede and infobox.

Done. Al Ameer (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Provide an extra paragraph on the differences between the Maronites, Twelver Shia Muslims, Alawites and Druze. Were they treated differently by the rulers of the Islamic Levant? Was there a particular incentive to engage in this sort of raiding or was this a cultural melting pot of lawlessness? The 1305 campaign and Historiography sections give hints as to why things went that way but this is not enough.

I will try to elaborate on this and update you hopefully in very short time. Al Ameer (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Catlemur: I have expanded the Background and Historiography sections. Let me know if this is satisfactory, or should be trimmed or further expanded. Thanks Al Ameer (talk) 21:28, 30 November 2021 (UTC

@Al Ameer son: Very well done. Just move the wikilink for Stefan Winter to the first mention and remove the author-link from his second book.--Catlemur (talk) 09:14, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Catlemur: Done. Al Ameer (talk) 21:53, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilink:punitive expedition, Latakia, Homs, pincer movements.

Done. Al Ameer (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"A 4,000-strong garrison of Turkish troops was stationed in the city." - Why were Turks stationed in an Arab city?

Changed it to "Mamluk troops", if this suffices. I found the distinction "Turkish", used by the source, as useful to separate them from the local Druze Buhturids who were also technically Mamluk troops, but other than that it is not necessary. The Mamluks were a military ruling caste of manumitted slave soldiers (and their descendants) who were ethnic Turks or 'Turkified' Circassians and even Mongols and Slavs. Arabic was the language of the state, the Muslim religion and the spoken language of most people in Egypt and the Levant, but the term 'Arab' at that time generally referred to Bedouins/Arab tribesmen or people who were descended from such tribes. Tripoli had been a Frankish city until its capture by the Mamluks and the ethnic identity of its residents in the few years afterward is not clear. Al Ameer (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Provide a copyright tag that proves that File:BattleOfHoms1299.JPG is public domain in the US.

Done now, I believe. Al Ameer (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The blurb under File:BattleOfHoms1299.JPG is too long, it essentially repeats what has already been said in the article proper. Something along the lines of "An illustration of the 1299 Battle of Wadi al-Khaznadar" would suffice.

Shortened. Al Ameer (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add a category related to the persecution of the Maronites to the article. I found Category:Persecution of Christians by Muslims, perhaps there is a more suitable one.--Catlemur (talk) 19:57, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Created Category:History of the Maronites and added Category:Persecution of Christians by Muslims. Al Ameer (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Catlemur: Thanks for taking up this review. Please excuse the delay, I had not added the review page to my watchlist. Al Ameer (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I read through the article again and noticed that you use both Kisrawan and Keserwan. Are they the same region? If that is the case it would be nice to use one name consistently. If not, please clarify what's the difference between the two.--Catlemur (talk) 10:02, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Catlemur: 'Kisrawan' is the name used by the sources in this article and I believe the common name overall. 'Keserwan', I presume, is the transliteration of the colloquial name for the region. Spelling is consistent now. Al Ameer (talk) 19:09, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail: --Catlemur (talk) 21:12, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 10:00, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

( Comment or view )

( Article history links:

)

... that the punitive Mamluk campaigns against the non-Sunni Muslim mountaineers of the Kisrawan in 1292–1305 helped pave the way for the region's Christian majority? Source: Harris, William (2012). Lebanon: A History, 600–2011. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 72. ISBN 978-0-19-518-111-1.Salibi, Kamal S. (September 1957). "The Maronites of Lebanon under Frankish and Mamluk Rule (1099–1516)". Arabica. 4 (3): 300.
- ALT1: ... that the Alawites of the Kisrawan disappeared from the historical record after the punitive Mamluk campaigns of 1292–1305? Source: Harris, William (2012). Lebanon: A History, 600–2011. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 72. ISBN 978-0-19-518-111-1.

Reviewed: Veronica Volkersz and Phil Silvers Archival Museum.
Comment: The Kisrawan campaigns (1292–1305) article was improved to GA status on 12/2/2021, while the Kisrawan article was moved to mainspace on 12/2/2021.

Moved to mainspace by Al Ameer son (talk). Self-nominated at 22:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

@Al Ameer son: Interesting articles about how a region came to be. Hook interesting for sure, and the GA is indeed a well-written and well-sourced article. An entire section in Kisrawan is uncited but I assume it's due to the section prose being effectively just summarizing the campaign article. Both ALT0 and ALT1 are interesting, but I think ALT1 is more fitting for readers who may not be aware that Lebanon has a significant Maronite Christian presence. No significant copyvio by Earwig. You are missing the QPQs with your 208 DYKs though, so ping me when that's done and we can pass the hook(s). Juxlos (talk) 05:18, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Juxlos: Thanks for the review, both QPQs now added. --Al Ameer (talk) 18:56, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

good to go then. Juxlos (talk) 15:06, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Al Ameer son and Juxlos: looks likes major sections of Kisrawan are unsourced—those should be sourced, since Kisrawan is a standalone article. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 18:00, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I missed those. Will add them by end of day. —Al Ameer (talk) 18:54, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Theleekycauldron:@Juxlos: Missing citations added now. Al Ameer (talk) 21:02, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tweaked ALT0 to T:DYK/P5

Recent additions

@Savipolo: Thank you for your recent additions. I had to copyedit and reorganize them, but they are informative and generally relevant to this article as it pertains to the demographic makeup of the Kisrawan prior to the Mamluk assaults. However, there are sourcing issues that need to be resolved. First, we need the specific page numbers for the al-Muhajir source. Second, we need the full reference info for Ibn al-Athir. Are you citing the edited, English translation or the Arabic? If so, please provide the name of the book's editor, a url link if available, and the year the edited book was published. Thank you, --Al Ameer (talk) 19:25, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Al Ameer son: After some thinking, the information I added (in the last edit), although relevant, were a bit redundant. It looks much better now to me, unless you want to re-add them. And thank you for writing the article.

Edit: I forgot to provide you with the sources. My bad.

Source for al-Muhajir quotation: https://archive.org/details/skrdieh_lau_20160823_1030/page/n141/mode/2up

Source for Ibn al-Athir, English translation:

The Chronicle of Ibn Al-Athir for the Crusading Period from Al-Kamil Fi'L-Ta'Rikh.: The Years 491-541/1097-1146 the Coming of the Franks and the Muslim Response (By D.S. Richards)

URL=https://books.google.com.lb/books?id=ox0oASDvKEkC&pg=PA389#v=onepage&q=Tripoli&f=false (p. 149) --Savipolo (talk) 11:21, 8 December 2021‎ (UTC)[reply]

@Savipolo: Thank you. Unfortunately, I cannot read Arabic very well, could you please provide the specific page numbers from the al-Muhajir source for the information you added to the article? Al Ameer (talk) 17:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Al Ameer son: Sorry for the late reply. The pages that cover the topic are 139-141. Savipolo (talk) 21:11, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Savipolo: Thanks, just added. Al Ameer (talk) 03:36, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Savipolo: Thank you for the addition of the 'Banu al-Awd' as one of the parties. Please add this to the article text with a citation to the source. --Al Ameer (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Al Ameer son: The source is unfortunately in Arabic, it is not available in English. Ibn Taymiyyah mentions Banu al-Awd in this page (https://shamela.ws/book/7289/13993#p1) and claims they're the ones who ordered them to fight and gave fatwas.Savipolo (talk) 19:44, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]