Talk:Urwa ibn al-Zubayr

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

GA Review

Passed. Constantine ✍ 11:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is
transcluded from Talk:Urwa ibn al-Zubayr/GA1
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cplakidas (talk · contribs) 17:33, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b. (
    lists
    )    :
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a. (reference section):
    b. (citations to
    reliable sources
    )    :
    c. (OR):
    d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a. (major aspects):
    b. (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
    b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Will gladly take this on, but it will be some days before I get to it. Constantine ✍ 17:33, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • To save time, I did some minor copyediting and link addition, feel free to change, revert, or discuss.
Thanks for the edits; your ce, like Al Ameer's, is always helpful. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the lede it should be added that the Umayyads were based in Syria
Done. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Abd Allah ultimately decided to die fighting,[2] whose body al-Hajjaj struck on a cross reads odd; Would suggest splitting after the comma.
Agreed. I modified the sentence but didn't split out of fear of choppy sentences. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • He returned to Mecca to bury him and offered funeral prayers over him. the he/him here is a tad unclear.
Fixed. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • correspondence through letters nitpicking, but is any other way possible?
I think I've fixed this one too. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Urwa now settled in Medina when is 'now'?
Clarified. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Briefly introduce/contextualize the various scholars mentioned, e.g. Joseph Schacht, Watt (with full name), Andreas Goerke, etc.
Done, but I might have screwed up some definite articles there ;) AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • residents of Hajar where is Hajar?
Clarified and linked. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Provide a brief explanation of what hijra is.
Done. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • He suspects that Urwa's reputation as an authority Who is the 'he' here?
Clarified. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The historians of early Islam you mean the modern historians of early Islam?
Yes, specified. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I assume no relevant images exist? Perhaps a map of the caliphate during his time, to at least give some context?
Added Second Fitna map. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • All sources are high-quality academic
    WP:RS
    , by some of the top modern scholars of Islamic studies. Not an expert on the topic, so cannot comment as to coverage of scholarly range of opinion, but a number of different opinions are mentioned in the article.
As far as I know, Shoemaker is the only scholar from the skeptical camp who has published a detailed work on the subject. If I find more, I would be glad to add of course. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Goerke et al 2012 appears not to be used in the article.
That article was their response to Shoemaker's criticism, and I had wanted to refer to it briefly, but then ended up not using it out of fear of overusing the work of these two scholars (i.e. Goerke and Schoeler). Hidden for now. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anthony and Bewley references lack location.
Fixed. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Spotcheck reveals no issues, AGF on offline/snippet/paywalled sources.

That's it. Excellent article, comprehensive and informative, well written and understandable by a non-expert, with impeccable references. A pleasure to review :) Constantine ✍ 13:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the through review Constantine, and for the appreciation, of course :) I think I've addressed all of the points. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Changes look good, AhmadLX, passing now. Constantine ✍ 11:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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 BorgQueen (talk) 01:42, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by AhmadLX (talk). Self-nominated at 17:25, 12 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Urwa ibn al-Zubayr; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: No - Not done
Overall: @AhmadLX: Good article. Needs a QPQ though. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Onegreatjoke: Thanks for reviewing . QPQ is now done. After saving my review, I realized that it was your nom ;) AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 19:09, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Onegreatjoke The qpq was done over 10 days ago. Is there anything else missing here? AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 14:50, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No it's good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:20, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Modern historians -> modern Western historians

Hello 156.196.169.59, I'm not sure whether I understand the rationale given in your edits [1][2] changing "modern historians" to "modern Western Historians", but even if only Western historians "have debated the authenticity of the Urwa corpus of traditions" (which I think is a questionable statement), I don't see why it would be relevant to mention that in this context? What difference does it make, in this particular context, whether the historians doing the research are 'Western' or not? ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 15:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously "modern historians" means those who publish
WP:RS. It is irrelevant if they are "Western" or "Eastern" or Martian. If it is only what the IP calls "Westerns" that publish stuff on this subject that meets our RS requirements, then Western = modern. I'm going to restore modern. If the IP wishes to change that, they will have to show "Eastern" RS which differ from the "Western" RS on the matter. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 17:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Urwa_ibn_al-Zubayr&oldid=1210807618"