Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Khalid ibn al-Walid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've listed this article for peer review because i am planning to forward it for FA nomination, i want to further improve it, it must be able to pass at least GA nomination. So suggestions plz....... regards. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 20:39, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As with some earlier articles submitted, you haven't used ndashes in the number ranges and some identical citations have not been combined YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:38, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ok my bad, just fixed it. any other issues or suggestions ?

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 14:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

llywrch

[edit]

A few points:

  • There are some style issues here, minor things like the lack of a/the in places, inconsistent date format, overlinking (you only need to link to an article once). I fixed a few of these, but you may want to seek further copy editing help.
  • I may have missed where you provided this, but surprisingly for an article about a successful general, I did not notice any discussion of his tactical "style". Did he have a particular skill or resource -- other than some snippets of Mohammed's hair -- which enabled him to be so successful?
  • I may know of another source for you to draw on. Let me first examine it to see if it would be worth your time to read.

Otherwise, a fascinating subject, presented in a straightfoward manner. Good luck. -- llywrch (talk) 22:56, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Done, just added his military legacy dealing with his tactical and strategic analysis.
Any other suggestions plz ? الله أكبرMohammad Adil 15:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cplakidas

[edit]

In terms of comprehensiveness, I think the article is very well done. A special "bravo" on the campaign maps, they are really helpful. I would however strongly recommend a thorough copyediting to correct style issues (the lack of a/the noted above, as well as some weird sentence structuring which makes reading difficult). Another point is that there are a few occasions were the last couple of sentences in a paragraph are not covered by citations. If you want to go for A or FA status, they should be attended to. Also a few issues related to Hira and Iraq: Iraq in English is mostly associated with the state, not the region, which is far better known as Mesopotamia. Also, Al-Hirah (and not Hira, which is linked in the article) was not actually the capital of Iraq/Mesopotamia as a whole as is repeatedly stated, but rather of the state of the Lakhmids in "Arab Iraq" south of the Euphrates (which, IIRC, as a term postdates the 7th century considerably). Ctesiphon was the actual capital of Persian Mesopotamia. And a minor quibble: the phrase "Malik was guilty of his anti-state activities" hit me int he eye. It reminds me more of the Soviet Union during Stalin's purges than something related to the 7th-century Muslim state. It is a bit redundant there too, so I'd suggest removing it... That's what I came up in a rather quick going-through, I'll try to find some time to do a more thorough review. Best regards, Constantine 14:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions they were quite useful, i have replaced iraq with lower Mesopotamia in most of the cases, but in some cases its would make things confusing so i avoided, e.g in the section Campaigns in Armenia and Anatolia and section above it where Jazirah has been mentioned, which is actually upper masopotamia and army was sent to capture it from iraq.
Actually in arabic sources, present day iraq is refered as iraq even in 7th century while the region which is now northern iraq is refered to as 'al-jazirah
I will nominate the article for copy-editing shortly, see if u can help copy-editing it.

Regards الله أكبرMohammad Adil 11:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]