Talk:Hormizd I/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 11:59, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Pleased to able to review the article. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:59, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Initial comments

 * Do you know why the Wikipedia article for mowbed (Mobad) is not spelt that way? Amitchell125 (talk) 13:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * "whose reign is through truth" - as 'truth' is linked with the article asha, perhaps the word should be included in the text somehow, e.g. "whose reign is through truth (asha)".
 * the Parthian (Arsacid) Empire - there are two links here that link to identical articles, only one is needed.
 * In the Sources section, add links for Shahbazi, A. Shapur (second source); Michael Stausberg.
 * In the 'Rise' section, I would move the link Siege of Antioch (253) to ...siege of Antioch in 253., and link Antioch within ...in the conquest of Antioch..
 * Mobad is the current term in New Persian I assume. --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:42, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Understood. --Ami

Lead section

 * ..., ruling from… - 'who ruled from' sounds a little better.
 * …his wars… - it reads slightly better if amended to 'his father's wars'.
 * Hormizd I's brief reign… - as he ruled two kingdoms, I would amend to 'Hormizd I's brief time as ruler of Iran'
 * It was also under Hormizd I… - 'also' is not needed here.

Etymology/Background

 * Consider placing the Etymology section (without a title) at the top of the Background section, as both have single paragraphs.
 * Tbh I prefer if the etymology section was a thing of its own, just like the other Sasanian articles. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. --Ami

Rise

 * ...lasting from 253... - ' and which lasted from 253'.
 * This is somewhat supported… - remove 'somewhat', (see WP:EDITORIALIZING).
 * ...the Latin Scriptores Historiae Augustae, … - remove 'Latin' (it's unnecessary detail).
 * I would start a new paragraph after Hormizd is mentioned in an inscription…, and perhaps another short one after When Shapur I was on his deathbed….

Reign

 * It is unclear why Hormizd catered to these two figures,… - this sounds odd (c/e to improve the text by replacing 'catered' and 'figures').
 * I notice that Daryaee (p. 10) says Hormizd was "associated with good rule" and that he was fearless and extremely loyal to Shabuhr I. Is this worth adding to the section?
 * I prefer not use Daryaee in this instance since a lot of the things he says is questionable. For example Hormizd ruling in Khorasan instead of Armenia, which is a first. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:01, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Understood. --Ami
 * ...Ohrmazd-Ardashir … - precede with 'the city of'.
 * ...in some instances… - any chance of being more specific here?
 * Unfortunately not, the source doesn't go more specific than that. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:01, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Understood. --Ami
 * Modern historians consider Hormizd to be its actual founder. - This appears to duplicate the previous sentence: Hormizd is credited as the founder of Ohrmazd-Ardashir …. I would combine the two, making it 'Hormizd is credited by modern historians as the founder of Ohrmazd-Ardashir...'.
 * What do you think about this? --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:17, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks fine. --Ami
 * Link Bahram I.

On hold
Hello HistoryofIran, my comments are mostly minor improvements that can be quickly sorted. Once again, your work is thorough, and you have made my work easy—many thanks. I still have to check a few references and have a final look once you have addressed the issues raised, but I don't anticipate any problems. I'll put the article on hold for a week. Best wishes, Amitchell125 (talk) 13:39, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I think that should be it. If you don't mind, I can cross the issues from now, as I assume it might be a bit problematic for you to do it when I rarely write in my edit summaries (I will try to improve in that bit). --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:23, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Feel free to go ahead - I'll check to ensure that there's nothing outstanding left to do when you're done. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:29, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * It looks like just the encyclopaedia sources that need to be given a consistent style. Happy to pass now. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2019 (UTC)