Talk:'Adud al-Dawla/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will review. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This has improved considerably since the last review and the subsequent PR, but sourcing is still a problem. No copyvio/dablinks/external links. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 10:09, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

General

Actually you should call him 'Adud al-Dawla at first mention in the article and then al-Dawla consistently throughout the article. If you stick to Khusraw, I think you should refer to him as Khusraw after the first mention in the lead and the main article.

Reign

The following parts look unsourced:

Another Daylamite military officer...suppress the rebellion.
During his campaign in southern Iran...including its capital, Sohar.
In 975 Adud al-Dawla launched...who sought to reconquer to Kerman.
Unlike the rest of the Buyids...during the rest of his reign.
He then subdued the Shayban tribe...former vizier Ibn Baqiyya executed.

Administration and contributions

Looks unsourced:

Many prominent figures worked at the hospital, such as 'Ali ibn al-'Abbas al-Majusi and Ibn Marzuban.
There were two annual festivals...Nowruz, the Iranian New Year.

Family

Largely unsourced

Ancestry

Source(s)?

It shouldn't be 'al-Dawla', since every Buyid ruler had that word in their name (take a look at this also [1]). --HistoryofIran (talk) 11:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see. But then you need to stick to 'Adud al-Dawla throughout the article. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 11:29, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For your information you don't pronounce the L in Al-, it is actually spelled Ad-Dawla. Alexis Ivanov (talk) 20:23, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sainsf: Done with everything except two things; I didn't add any source on the Family section, because there already is one (established marriage ties with several rulers;[9]). I didn't add anything in the Ancestry section either because I have already mentioned the origins of Adud al-Dawla both from his father and mother's side. What do you think? --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofIran: Thank you for all the changes you have made. In my opinion it is better to be on the safe side. There is no harm in repeating the citations. And is ref. 9 the source for all information in "Family"? I need to be sure of that. Personally I don't like the "unsourced" look that attracts stupid "citation needed" tags. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:55, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sainsf: Yep, the pages written on the source are 86–93. Btw, I am very busy atm, so I will most likely add the last sources on the Ancestry section in some days. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sainsf: Actually never mind, I have just added the two sources for the Ancestry section, I just want this to end lol. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:23, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference number 23 doesn't make sense (Dunlop 2003), do you mean (Dunlop 1997) Alexis Ivanov (talk) 23:35, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - corrected it. --HistoryofIran (talk) 16:19, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, good to go now. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:45, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]