Talk:Fakhr al-Din Iraqi/GA1
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Mike Christie in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 16:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Image is appropriately tagged; sources are reliable.
"which is mostly written in the form of a ghazal". Suggest "most of which were written in the form of a ghazal". Similarly in the body you have "The divan of Iraqi is mostly written in the form of a ghazal": suggest "The divan of Iraqi is mostly written in the form of ghazals"."the leader of the Multani branch of the Suhrawardiyya": suggest "a Sufi sect" or "a Sufi order" at the end of the sentence, to help readers avoid having to click through."Iraqi settled in Konya": not a well-known location, so perhaps "in what is now Turkey"? Or "in Anatolia", as you have it in the body?
- Done. Added the latter. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:25, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
"Although the work was written in same style of Iraqi's era" is Chittick arguing that the divan may have been composed later, or just the introduction?
- The latter. I've made it more clear now. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:36, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
"Many of the stories in the Muqaddima give context for Iraqi's ghazals, but lacks historical importance": what do you mean by "lacks historical importance"?
- Changed it a bit, thoughts? [1] --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:50, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
'They focus a lot on Iraqi's shahidbazi ("perhaps excessively" according to Feuillebois), i.e. "one who gazed upon the image of the divine witness in the faces of boys."' Is there a link for shahidbazi? I am not at all sure what the quote is trying to say by "in the faces of boys". Is this a reference to homosexuality? Or to the innocence of children? Or something else?
- Rewrote it, should make sense now. [2]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:56, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Presumably the Nafahat al-uns and the Habib al-siyar have biographical information about Iraqi, but we don't say that.
- Respectfully, the section is about the historiography of Iraqi, so surely it is relevant? This bit not only refers to the Nafahat al-uns and Habib al-siyar, but also later sources in general, which should adress what is left. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, I don't think I was clear -- what I meant was that I suspect the sentence should read "Later sources rely heavily on the information from the Muqaddima for their biographical details about Iraqi. These sources include..." I don't think it's clear as written what it is these sources are relying on the Muqaddima for. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:11, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Respectfully, the section is about the historiography of Iraqi, so surely it is relevant? This bit not only refers to the Nafahat al-uns and Habib al-siyar, but also later sources in general, which should adress what is left. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Like this? [3] --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
I'll read through again when you've addressed these; I think a bit more copyediting is needed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:41, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Hi again Mike. Thank you very much for yet another review! --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:25, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Last fix looks good; passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Incidentally, I'm not at all sure I'm getting the alphabetization right when I add these to the GA pages -- please correct any mistakes I make. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)