Talk:Post-imperial Assyria/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 14:34, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll pick this up... Ealdgyth (talk) 14:34, 29 January 2022 (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 (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 fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• Refs:
  • Not required, but some of your bibliographic entries give publication locations, while others do not. If you're thinking of heading towards FA - you'll need to standardize that.

Added locations to all entries. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Lead:
  • "The period was marked by an endurance of ancient Assyrian culture" ... "an endurance" is awkward to my reading - perhaps "The period was marked by the continuance of ancient Assyrian culture.."

Went with your suggestion. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "The period was marked by an endurance of ancient Assyrian culture, traditions and religion, despite the lack of an Assyrian kingdom, but also by the extinction of the Assyrian dialect of the Akkadian language, which had by the 5th century BC been completely replaced by Aramaic." ... quite the run on sentence. May I suggest breaking it into two ... maybe "The period was marked by the continuance of ancient Assyrian culture, traditions and religion, despite the lack of an Assyrian kingdom. The Assyrian dialect of the Akkadian language was completely replaced by Aramaic by the 5th century BC."

Broke it up but beefed up the second sentence a bit for clarity. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "The population density of Parthian Assyria was only comparable to the region at its height under the Neo-Assyrian Empire." I think you mean "The population density of Parthian Assyria reached heights not seen since the Neo-Assyrian Empire."

Yeah, changed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Terminology:
  • "to as a "dark age" or simply" - dark age links to a dab page

Removed the link entirely, most people are probably familiar with what a dark age is. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Neo-Babylonian:
  • "Archaeological surveys of the Assyrian heartland" - can we come up with another phrase so we don't keep repeating "Assyrian heartland"?

I agree that "Assyrian heartland" is cumbersome. Researchers use it presumably to avoid the confusion just "Assyria" could bring (map of the heartland vs. the Assyrian Empire) so I don't really know what to replace it with. It might be possible to just go with "Assyria" in at least some of the places where the article currently uses "Assyrian heartland"? Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

My thesaurus suggests "core" and "center" ... which might help a bit. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I've kept some uses of "Assyrian heartland" but also switched others (where alternatives worked just as well) up with "Assyrian core territory", just "Assyria" and "northern Mesopotamia". Ichthyovenator (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "forcefully deported, to the now prosperous Babylonia or elsewhere" do we really need "now prosperous"? If we were discussing voluntary movement, the state of prosperity of Babylonia would make sense, but I'm not seeing the relevance in the context of forced deportations

I agree that it's unnecessary; removed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "Some, such as Stephen Herbert Langdon and Stephanie Dalley, have" - some historians? archaelogists? other scholars?

Assyriologists; added. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Achaemenid rule:
  • "Under the Achaemenids, Assyria was organized into the province[a] Athura (Aθūrā).[b][17] Some former Assyrian territory was also incorporated into the satrapy of Media (Mada)." Suggest "Under the Achaemenids, most of Assyria was organized into the province[a] Athura (Aθūrā),[b][17] but some was incorporated into the satrapy of Media (Mada)." as this avoids the confusion caused by the "Assyria became Athura" totally impression the first sentence gives that is then contradicted by the second sentence.

Yeah you're right. Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "The organization of Assyria into the single administrative unit Athura effectively kept the region on the map as a distinct political entity throughout the time of Achaemenid rule." suggest moving this up in the paragraph to the parts about the province, it feels very tacked on here where we're discussing culture/language/etc

I agree, moved. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "Arbela, Lair (called Lahiru in Neo-Assyrian times), Arzuhin (called Arzuḫina in Neo-Assyrian times) and Matalubaš (called Ubaše in Neo-Assyrian times)," can we condense the "called XXX in Neo-Assyrian times" bit into something that doesn't break up the flow of the prose so much?

The names are not really necessary at all, I added them since the cities don't currently have articles under either their Persian or Neo-Assyrian names. They could either be removed outright or placed in notes, what do you think? Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Either works for me... I slightly lean remove but it's not a biggie either way. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2022 (UTC)¨

Removed them. Ichthyovenator (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Seleucid rule:
  • "The historian Diodorus Siculus mentioned in his writings" ... suggest "The historian Diodorus Siculus mentioned in his 1st century BC writings" to make it clear they aren't quite contemporary.

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "Though Assyria remained in the shadow of Babylonia during the time of Seleucid rule,[25] there were significant developments in Assyria as well." ... clunky. Suggest "Though Assyria remained in the shadow of Babylonia, there were still significant developments in (insert what general areas there were developments in - political, cultural, economic?)"

Changed to "Though Assyria remained in the shadow of Babylonia, the region was far from wholly neglected" which should be clearer and less clunky. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "between the Parthians and the Roman Empire." ... except it's not the Roman Empire in 96 BC. Bad Ichthy, no biscuit!

:(

Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Organization and revival:
  • "several small and semi-independent kingdoms of Assyrian character and large Assyrian populations" suggest "several small and semi-independent kingdoms of Assyrian character and large populations"

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "density of settlements that is only comparable to what the region was like under the Neo-Assyrian Empire,[26] for the first time since the 7th century BC." clunky - that last phrase feels very "tacked on". Suggest perhaps "density of settlements that is only comparable to what the region was like under the Neo-Assyrian Empire." or if you just must have the date "density of settlements that is only comparable to what the region was like under the Neo-Assyrian Empire in the 7th century BC."

The date isn't really necessary, removed it. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "en Assorr-heden ("Ashur has given a brother, a late version of the name Aššur-aḫu-iddina" is there a missing close quote - aka "en Assorr-heden ("Ashur has given a brother", a late version of the name Aššur-aḫu-iddina"?

Yeah, I missed a " here. Fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Archaeological evidence:
  • "official governmental seats under any of the succeeding empires" - does this mean ALL the succeeding empires i.e. through Parthian times, or just the two that are introduced at the start of this paragraph? It's a bit confusing

This means ALL succeeding empires; the palaces that were used in some cities (i.e. Assur) for instance under the Parthians were new buildings. Unsure how to clarify in the text. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not getting anything beyond adding a parenthetical... which seems clunky. Maybe "under all of"? Ealdgyth (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I've changed it to "that any of the old Assyrian palaces were ever again used as official governmental seats after the fall of the Neo-Assyrian Empire" which is as concise and clear as I could get it, does that work? Ichthyovenator (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • link for "the Great Iwans at Hatra"

Linked, it doesn't have an article yet, though. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • "from the Kuyunjik mound" link or description?

Linked and added an explanatory note at its first mention (under "organization and revival"). Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • link "strategos", "Hermes"

"strategos" is already linked under "organization and revival" and "Hermes" is already linked under "Seleucid rule". Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• • as is a Roman aquila (eagle standard) - okay... that's ... surprising. Any background on that?

Looks like I sadly misinterpreted this. The journal article called it an "eagle mount" but it seems like that means a military belt fitting. I've fixed the error and added some more detail. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:41, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I was pretty sure I'd have run across a mention of a surviving eagle - and our Aquila (Roman) article does agree that none are surviving. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Language:
  • "This is not to say that there is no resemblance or relation whatsoever.." this sounds a bit like editorializing to me... suggest rewording

Reworded. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• Religion:
  • link "syncretized"

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• General - is there anything we can say about culture - literature? art? daily life? daily life? economy? society? demography?

The number of sources and archaeological finds from post-imperial times is significantly less than for preceding periods, which means that it is difficult to determine a lot beyond broad historical developments and individual factoids. I think this might also explain why Assyriologists tend to not focus on this period a lot (for example the 2017 A Companion to Assyria which is cited quite a lot has a section on economy, society and daily life for every Assyrian period except the early and post-imperial ones). I think the only portion of the post-imperial period where society could be explored in any detail is Parthian Assur but it's criminally understudied. AFAIK the only real comprehensive look is the 1933 Die Partherstadt Assur by the people who excavated the Parthian portions of the city but it's 89 years old (WP:AGEMATTERS), published in Nazi Germany, written in German (not fully confident in my abilities to translate significant portions) and mostly concerned with just the finds themselves. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:26, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• I've done some copyediting - please make sure I haven't changed the meaning of anything seriously.

Copyedits look good. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

• I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:14, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ealdgyth: I think I've responded to (but not resolved) everything. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:42, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

As an aside, do let me know if I am getting too agressive on the copyedits. Or if I'm starting to be annoying. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Definitely not too agressive or annoying. I've amended the article based on your round of replies. Ichthyovenator (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

LOoks good, passing this now...Ealdgyth (talk) 18:36, 31 January 2022 (UTC)