Wikipedia:Peer review/Shahrbaraz/archive1

Shahrbaraz edit

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because i would like to get it to Good article status.

Thanks, HistoryofIran (talk) 21:29, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Doing... I am starting a peer review of this article. Madalibi (talk) 02:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments by Madalibi edit

Hello! This is an excellent and well-written article, and it should pass the GA review easily once you take care of a few problems:

  • References. They are well formatted, but they point to no list of books. Could you add a bibliography that will make the footnotes work? Also, the format should be consistent throughout. I suggest you adopt the simple Harvard format for all the books you cite, including Pourshariati's.
  • Links. The article appears heavily overlinked. As the relevant section of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking has it: "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead." In other words it's not necessary to link on every instance of a name: only once after the lede — or at the very most once per section — should be sufficient.
  • Miscellaneous:
    • He was married to Mirhran, the sister of the Sasanian king Khosrau II, whom Shahrbaraz had two boys with. This makes it sounds as though he had two boys with king Koshrau II! Could you rephrase?
    • During Shahrbaraz's later life, he joined the Sasanian army where he became spahbed of Nēmrōz. In a section called "early life," the phrase "During Shahrbaraz's later life" appears a bit odd. Do we know around what year (or by what year) he became spahbed?
    • {Tq|Disappointed by Shahrbaraz's failure, Khosrau II sent a messager bearing a letter to Kardarigan.}} It would help the uninitiated reader if you could tell us briefly who Kardarigan is.
    • In 628, the feudal families of Persia secretly mutinied against Khosrau and joined Shahrbaraz. Here the transition is abrupt and therefore difficult to follow. Last time we heard of Shahrbaraz, he was stationed in northern Syria with his troops after helping Heraclius. You should probably explain how, in 628, he was in a position to be "joined" by the feudal families of Persia.
    • Kavadh was then released by the feudal families of the Sasanian Empire... This is the first time we hear of Kavadh. Once again we need context, mostly who he was, why he had been imprisoned, and how the feudal families had the power to release him.
    • This divided the resources of the country which resulted in a devastating plague in the western provinces of Persia, killing half of the population... I don't understand how a division of resources could cause a plague.
    • Shahrbaraz then changed the contents of the letter, making it state that Khosrau II wanted 400 officers killed, ensuring that Kardarigan and the rest of the army remaining loyal to him. The sentence seems to be missing something...
    • What was the "Parsig faction"?

Just make sure that you briefly explain the people, institutions, and events that you mention (a few words are usually sufficient), then the GA review should be a breeze. Ok, that's all I can do for now. I hope this helps! Madalibi (talk) 13:37, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review :), and unfortunately, we don't know what year he became spahbed. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:40, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! Your recent edits have clearly improved the article. I will give the page a closer second reading sometime this week to see what other issues I can find. Incidentally, I just noticed that the French version of the page, though shorter, is also interesting and well referenced. It even cites some very old secondary sources, including one by the Armenian historian Sebeos that I think you might find interesting. It writes our man's name as "Schahr-Barâz or Shahrvarāz" and claims (also by citing Pourshariati) that he died in 630, not 629. Could you clarify that? Anyway the French version contains a few interesting details that you could perhaps include in the article, even if your version is already more detailed. Do let me know if you need help with the translation.
Meanwhile, I also recommend that you install a script that automatically detects duplicate links: go to Wikipedia:Highlight duplicate links and follow the instructions on that page. After you install the script, the item "Highlight duplicate links" will appear near the bottom of the "Tools" menu on the left. When you click on it, it will tell you that there are still 45 duplicate links in the article! :)
Keep up the good work! Madalibi (talk) 14:39, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Shahrvaraz" is another version of the name, while "Schahr-Barâz" is the French version of "Shahrbaraz." The Cambridge History of Iran (page 178) says that Shahrbaraz died in 629. The Pourshariati source says that the Muslim conquest of Persia began in 628, and not in 633, so if were to write 630 as Shahrbaraz's death date then we would need to mention about the Muslim conquest of Persia may have been in 628 on many articles, meaning that many of them would need to be completely rewrited. Since the theory of Pourshariati is not really accepted among scholars (yet?), then i think it is better to list his death date in 629. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]