Talk:Selimiye Mosque, Edirne

Islam: Mosques Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Mosques task force.

Turkey Low‑importance

	related topics 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.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mosque

looks gothic to me--J intela (talk) 09:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Selimiye Mosque. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check

}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:22, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing Chronology in 'Exterior'

Orhan Pamuk was born in 1952. Who is Sai? A friend of the original architect? The original architect died 1588.

"The author of Other Colors, Orhan Pamuk mentioned that he saw a connection between the wish of the central dome and the centralizing political and economic changes made by the empire, but the idea was later objected by another book written by Sinan’s friend, Sai, claiming that Sinan had taken his inspiration from Istanbul’s Hagia Sophia."

How could Sai (who probably died 200 years before Pamuk was born) object to Pamuk's idea? Also, what book?

I don't know anything about this mosque so I'm not going to try to edit the article but I suggest something like:

Historians cite that the architect (Sinan) compared his dome to that of Istanbul's Hagia Sophia to conclude that was Sinan heavily inspired by its single central dome [citation #5], but the central dome may also represent the centralizing political and economic changes made by the empire. [citation #4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.251.157.201 (talk) 21:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources, tone, and repetition

Multiple entire paragraphs of the article are unsourced. Some are well-written and relevant, but also repetitive, but the lower paragraphs in the "exterior" and "interior" section have an unencyclopedic tone that repeatedly attribute grandiose symbolic and religious meanings to the architecture, without citing sources. See

WP:NOTESSAY, among other guidelines. I can trim and replace some of this material, but this will mostly involve removing the most paragraphs rather than looking for sources to justify what looks like original research. Some material I wrote earlier for Classical Ottoman architecture#The Selimiye Mosque

could be inserted here as starting points, but beyond that there is abundant information about this mosque in reliable sources, including many scholarly books in English (though not all editors may have easy access to these, unfortunately).

I've done some preliminary clean-up of the article layout, aiming for clearer organization of information. I've also cleaned-up the images; as seems to be common with some similar articles, there was a huge number of repetitive images with no clear purpose or curation. If you add images in the future, please see

WP:GALLERY). R Prazeres (talk) 17:09, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: After the comment above, I made some further major revisions to the text to update it with sources and sourced information. Please see this edit. R Prazeres (talk) 22:43, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I should also add: that edit was a little complicated (I even had some trouble with the visual editor at one point) and there may be some copy-editing left to do. Please keep an eye out if possible for any further typos or format errors I may have missed. I will do the same. R Prazeres (talk) 03:43, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]