Talk:Alamut Castle

Cultural References
In fact, the base of operations in the videogame "Assassin's Creed" is Masyaf, not Alamut. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.209.216 (talk) 03:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree (with the template) that some of the examples here need more descriptive text. Perhaps some should also be removed, but it would seem a better option to organize them a little: (a) chronologically, and (b) by medium (books, video games, films, etc.). The parade of examples is useful in the sense that it illustrates the impact "Alamut" has had in (mostly Western) culture - which is an important point in the previous section of the article. Filursiax (talk) 21:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Names
Should we really use the term "Hashhashin"? I'm changing it to the historically correct and academically accepted "Ismaili". I will try to add a reference to the Bernard Lewis book on the topic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FelixRex (talk • contribs).


 * But the term Hashhashin at least has the virtue of making it quite clear which particular group of Ismaili you are talking about - Hassan-i-Sabah's group. --Gwern (contribs) 17:13 13 December 2006 (GMT)


 * Ismaili is too unspecific. Hashashins were a faction of Ismailis. Funkynusayri (talk) 10:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Vagueness
What was "unusual" about the fortress's water supply? 76.23.157.102 (talk) 00:55, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I too was perplexed by this vague unexplained reference. A bit of research revealed a very recent article by Iranian TV that mentions this very subject! ' Ð ’ n ''talk 13:30, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Since this article reads: In fact, the Seljuqs and Crusaders both employed assassination as a military means of disposing of factional enemies. Yet during the Alamut period almost any murder of political significance in the Islamic lands became attributed to the Ismailis.[46]

Shouldn't we provide some examples of Crusaders using assassination of political rivals? When making somewhat irrelevant statements like the one above, it should at least be accompanied by examples. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.155.56.25 (talk) 04:08, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Relevance
It seems that this article is mainly on the subject of the Ismali, and not Alamut. may i please question the relevance of all the ismali stuff in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.29.237 (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Zaydis and accuracy
As there was no Muslim religion in AD 602, there were thus no Zaydi missionaries then to take over Alamut. Thus, this whole article and many associated with it are utter rubbish as far as accuracy goes. They should be completely begun over again by people who are qualified to write about them, and checked for accuracy by other qualified individuals. Just junk here!Daniel Sparkman (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That's rather extreme, isn't it? It's probably just a typo. It was added by recently, so I've left him a message. Adam Bishop (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Grandson of Gengis Khan died at Alamut, the defenders starved extremely
Information from a well-researched article in a Polish paper. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcin862 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Alamut Castle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305015800/http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/35631.html to http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/35631.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:56, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Legends and folklore - orientalist
The term "orientalist" is used 4 times in the section, without reference to Said (I guess that's what the author is thinking of). There are other authors who would wholly or partially disagree with Said's argument. As Said uses the label it is inherently critical to certain tendencies in Western historical, literary etc. writing. NPOV would seem to advise us to avoid such labels, or at least explain them and state the authority which uses the label. Thus, the present text says: "The infamous Assassins were finally linked by orientalists [sic] scholar Silvestre de Sacy..." This makes it sound as if "orientalist" was a neutral label, on a par e.g. with "historian". Wouldn't it be better to either strike this out, or say smth about that SdS, according to /Author XXX/, tends to exoticize Middle Eastern history and should thus be regarded as an "orientalist" (ref. Said). Smth along those lines...? Filursiax (talk) 21:24, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The section appears to be a combination of POV, editorializing and minority views presented as if they were the correct view, if not the majority view. It is written rather well so it probably does not attract much scrutiny unless one has read some of the varying scholarship or history. A review and at least some editing and additional citations would appear to be needed but may require too much time and effort to attract an interested user to work on it. Donner60 (talk) 08:07, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:06, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Assassins2-alamut.jpg