Talk:Eretna

GA Review

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Eretna/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cplakidas (talk · contribs) 14:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Will review over the following days... Constantine ✍ 14:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

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 (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline 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:

• Thank you for reviewing Eretnid dynasty. There are a number of suggestions you made in that review that also apply to this article, but I think I forgot to address some of them here. I am going to go through your review and edit this article accordingly. I will let you know when I'm done. Aintabli (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  Removed the remaining unnecessary diacritics. Aintabli (talk) 18:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

  As a note, I will be dealing with the rest after Tuesday next week. Aintabli (talk) 05:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

  @Cplakidas, I have finished checking the aforementioned review and made the relevant changes on this page. Aintabli (talk) 04:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks Aintabli, will go through this review in the following few days. Constantine ✍ 20:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Lede

• Did some copyedits, I hope they are OK. Feel free to revert/discuss.

Early life and background

• Add regnal dates for Abaqa Khan, Suleiman Khan

 Done Apparently, I missed this at first.

• Eretna's elder brothers Emir Taramtaz and Suniktaz '...Eretna's elder brothers, Emir Taramtaz and Suniktaz,...'

 Done

• Eretna's brothers' Shiite sect 'the Shiite sect espoused by Eretna's brothers'

 Done

Now we have Eretna's elder brothers...espoused by Eretna's brothers in one sentence. Perhaps simply 'the brothers' at the end? Constantine ✍ 09:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done

• The same year, Taramtaz was executed by Abu Sa'id along with his brother Suniktaz why is one brother singled out over the other here? Perhaps simply 'The same year, Taramtaz and Suniktaz were executed by Abu Sa'id'. Also, explain who Abu Sa'id was.

 Done I added "Ilkhan" there, which should be explanatory enough.

• joining the rebellion of Qurumushi and Irinjin in 1319 'in 1319' is redundant, as the year is already mentioned to be the same

 Done Silly mistake.

• his new Chobanid master (and Chupan's son) Timurtash's appointment run-on adjectives, perhaps '...the appointment of his new Chobanid master, Chupan's son, Timurtash,...'. Alternatively, I'd suggest a different formulation entirely: Following his brothers' deaths, Eretna migrated to Anatolia,[11] and entered the service of Chupan's son, Timurtash, who had just been appointed Ilkhanid governor of the region by Ilkhan Abu Sa'id and Chupan'.

Changed to the appointment of his new master Timurtash as the Ilkhanid governor of the region by Abu Sa'id[4] and his father, Chupan. I don't remember reading that he entered the service of Timurtash right at that time (could have been before), so mentioning his appointment as the Anatolian governor "first" should be more on point. How does that sound now? Aintabli (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Fine by me. Constantine ✍ 09:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Rise to power

• Add regnal dates to the minor rulers mentioned here, such as Suleiman Khan

Added several more. Aintabli (talk) 03:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

• As in the Eretnids article, a map of the principal cities mentioned in the article would serve the reader well

 Done

Looks fine, except for Erzincan/Erzurum overlapping. Perhaps placing Erzincan over the pin and Erzurum below? Constantine ✍ 09:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done They don't overlap anymore.

• during which Eretna went into hiding 'during which time Eretna went into hiding' or a completely new sentence 'Rather than support Timurtash, Eretna went into hiding' or something similar.

 Done Chose the first option.

• Still a few instances (Tīmūrtāsh, Qarā Tatars, Ghiyath al-Dīn) where there are still diacritics.

Removed those. Sorry for that.

• and influence over the state 'and the influence over the state'

 Done

• Any idea why Timurtash did not punish Eretna for his refusal to support him during his revolt?

The Mamluks executed Timurtash shortly after (1328).

• Ulu Arif Chelebi's son Chelebi ʿAbid as a divine intermediary 'Ulu Arif Chelebi's son, Chelebi Abid, as a divine intermediary'

 Done

• The fact of Timurtash being a self-proclaimed messiah is surprising and warrants more detail.

I added a footnote with some more detail. It is indeed interesting, but I don't want to get into too much detail, because this isn't his article.

I agree that too much detail is not necessary, but it should at least be explained, since this is an exceptional claim. Nevertheless, the footnote says that the title was attributed to Timurtahs by others, whereas the text says he was 'self-proclaimed'. One or the other statement must be correct. Constantine ✍ 09:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cplakidas: I'm kind of confused, because those are not mutually exclusive. He may have had supporters who saw him as mahdi, and he could also declare himself as such. The footnote reads that his self-proclamation was attested by others. I reworded that part so that it reads that he personally had messianic claims that were supported by his followers.

Aha, now it is more understandable what you meant. Thanks. Constantine ✍ 13:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

• Does Ali Padishah warrant a WP:REDLINK?

Added a wlink and changed the spelling to "Ali Padshah," which appears to be more common.

• shortly after, Hasan Kuchak gained power in the Ilkhanid domains in the east in 1338 either strike 'shortly after' or smth like 'shortly after, in 1338, Hasan Kuchak gained power in the Ilkhanid domains in the east'

 Done Chose the second option.

• pretender of 'pretender to'

 Done

• up north this needs to be more precise; 'up north' from where?

Anatolia.

• was a godsend needs a more neutral WP:TONE

Changed to favored them in that regard.

• Still, Eretna was able to gain control of Sivas and Konya from the Karamanids Unclear what this has to do with the preceding statement about recognizing Mamluk suzerainty

Reworded. That is despite the loss of Darende to Qaraja.

Looks good, some minor typos: expanse of Eretna 'expense of Eretna' and Eretna was able to gain control of Konya from the Karamanids as well as Sivas on an unknown date 'Eretna was able to gain control of Konya from the Karamanids, as well as Sivas, at an unknown date' or (depending on which of the cities the unknown date refers to) 'Eretna was able to gain control of Konya from the Karamanids, as well as Sivas (at an unknown date)'. Constantine ✍ 09:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

"On" should also be good, but I changed it to "at" anyways. Aintabli (talk) 21:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

• He still insisted the last person mentioned is Hasan Kuchak

Replaced "He" with "Eretna". Aintabli (talk) 03:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

• 1341 is regarded by some scholars this implies that other scholars disagree. How are they and why? Does this refer to ...also marking the beginning of Eretna's independent reign further down?

On a second thought, this isn't necessarily a disagreement. Eretna issued his own coins in 1341, but both sources mention that he sent an embassy to the Mamluks to secure his status as a local deputy. We can count this as a misunderstanding on my part.

• Bayanjar's son Bayanjar has not been mentioned so far and the reader would be unaware of his significance.

Added a footnote about him.

• Eretna initially faced a defeat 'Eretna initially faced defeat'

 Done

• Eretna hid near the opposite side of a hill. Eretna led a final attack ... what does 'near' mean here? Perhaps simply 'Eretna hid behind a nearby hill and led a final attack...'?

 Done

• This news helped Eretna even more as this entire part is actually redundant.

Removed.

Reign

• After the battle and Hasan Kuchak's death, Eretna assumed the title sultan, dispersed coins in his name, this contradicts the earlier statement that he already did that in 1341. And 'dispersed' is likely the wrong verb; 'minted and distributed' or simply 'circulated'?

Changed to circulated coins in his name once more

Still left with the contradiction about the sultan title. Constantine ✍ 13:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Added without any backlash.

• khutbah is not an English word, so it needs italics and a short gloss, as does laqab and kumbet. Use the {{transl|ar|}} or {{transl|fa|}} template. Ditto for taqwīm

 Done

• was attested in his coins 'is attested' as modern scholars still use these sources to attest to it.

 Done

• On the map in this section, it is rather unhelpful to anyone without enough knowledge of Anatolia's geography who cannot superimpose the shape of Eretna's domain on Anatolia. There are some alternatives in Commons, I strongly suggest using one of them, e.g. [1] or [2].

I can't see the sources for any of the maps, so I am hesitating to use them. I can superimpose names of the neighboring states (and geographical places) to the current map in the future. Would that be okay?

Certainly. The lack of good maps for late medieval Anatolia is a perennial problem on WP. Anything you can do to improve the situation would be great! Constantine ✍ 13:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

• Add regnal dates to Malek Ashraf, Al-Nasir Muhammad

 Done

• Al-Nasir Muhammad has not previously been mentioned. He should be linked, and briefly explained what his position was.

 Done

• take Darende from them 'take Darende from the Mamluks'

 Done

• And the Dulkadirid ruler avoid starting a sentence with 'and'. Smth like 'Furthermore, the Dulkadirid ruler'

Removed "And".

• from south from the south

 Done Aintabli (talk) 04:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

• in 1350, capturing Konya mention that Konya was the Karamanid capital. I also note that further up you already have Eretna was able to gain control of Sivas and Konya from the Karamanids. Does this mean he had lost Konya in the meantime or is this an anachronistic reference?

Probably, he may have lost it in between. The sources are very unclear about most events, so I will need to make up OR otherwise. But this way, it can be read both ways, as a foreshadowing or as if he took it and then lost after but recaptured. I'm not sure if Konya was the Karamanid capital at that time, which is not included in the sources. I will have to wait until I start working on the Karamanids.

Fine for now. Constantine ✍ 13:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

• Briefly introduce al-Maqrizi (occupation, chronology)

 Done

• often experimented with various methods of claiming legitimacy in an atmosphere in which long-standing concepts of legitimacy were ceasing to exist is almost verbatim from the cited source. Please avoid this per WP:CLOP.

 Done

Hmmm, not sure the rephrasing is comprehensible; perhaps the best choice would be to include an attributed quote from the work. Constantine ✍ 13:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Added the quote. @Cplakidas: let me know if there is anything else. Aintabli (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

• appointed mamluks gloss mamluks here to avoid confusion with the Mamluk sultanate

 Done

• Link Ala al-Din Ali?

 Done Aintabli (talk) 05:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

That's it for a first pass, a fairly comprehensive article. Good job! Same as with the previous article, I will put in on hold to allow the issues to be addressed, will then do a second read-through and look at copyvio issues. Constantine ✍ 20:12, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Aintabli on the images:

• KÖŞKMEDRESE 1931.jpg, if it is indeed by Albert Gabriel, is not PD and ineligible for use in Wikipedia. I have tagged it in Commons for deletion, as unfortunately it is still copyrighted.
• Historical Atlas of Iran - Plate No. 17.jpg is unclear to me. The PD notice is for Iran, but if I understand correctly it asserts that the work entered PD in 2001 (30 years from publication). Since to be hosted on Commons, a work has to also be PD in the US, per Help:Public domain this does not appear to be the case. Constantine ✍ 15:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

  I didn’t upload either of them, so I especially have no clue about the Iranian one. But I removed both. Aintabli (talk) 16:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

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.