Talk:Hossein Ali Mirza/GA2

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

Reviewer: Daniel Case (talk · contribs) 07:17, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I will take this as it is at the left of the list of oldest unreviewed nominations, and I owe quite a few reviews.

As usual I will print this out, read it over, do a light copy edit, and get back with my thoughts within the week. Daniel Case (talk) 07:17, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

OK ... done with the copy edit now. It wasn't too bad; basically a lot of phrasing that, while grammatical, was kind of clunky and awkward, very non-native English, and I improved that.

It's a very straightforward article; short though it is I see that it has tried to tell us what there is to tell us. I didn't find myself asking questions about things that seemed missing. Given that it's longer than the Farsi version, I have no quarrel there.

There are some things I'd like cleared up, though, and for that reason it will be on hold for the usual week or so. If English is an issue (as it was at the first, I'd be OK with making the edits myself if the nominator is comfortable with that.
 * Most of the names tend to have little to naught to add.


 * There are a lot of names given without clear context as to who they are and why they were doing what they were doing. I assume that at some point, they will be the subjects of articles and there will be links. But until then, some more explaining inline would be nice.


 * We should make clear at the beginning of the biography that as the fifth son of Fath-Ali Shah, he was fifth in line for the throne, so that his later attempt to claim it seems less out of the blue.
 * Added in the lead


 * "...almost started a war with Muscat." This is interesting, but there's not much more in the article itself (and you have to be able to make the connection between Muscat in the intro and Oman in the body ... not everyone outside that part of the world knows those two places are related). I see from the DYK nom that there may be some issues with sourcing and the extent to which it really happened. If it did, I think we need to know more about what this conflict was and how it was averted. If not, maybe we should take it out of the article. (I have not been able to access the source in full yet)
 * Regarding your first point, in the source of use, it was stated as Muscat thus the naming. moreover, it seems that my wording misled the point for it was more like a conflict that ended quickly
 * Replaced it with the tax arrears issue


 * In discussing his viziers, we might want to add per this source that he had ten in total.
 * Done


 * That source also describes the bread-price riots differently: Mirza Hada Fatai (one of those people who just pops into the story without explanation as to who he is) is not described as having issued the fatwa, but rather he who it was issued against by the Sheikh al-Islam. There does not appear to have been a similar proclamation of Nabi Khan. We should also include more details about the resolution: the bakers getting bastinadoed, and Khan's punishment coming after Khan Amin al-Dawlah came down from Teheran to investigate. As it is the two events do not seem connected.
 * Reworded


 * "plundered roads" It's in the source, so I want to be sure that what's meant here: what we'd call in the West highway robbery? Gangs of bandits that went up and down the roads between cities robbing travellers? I mean, it sounds without that clarification that they could have been stripping the pavement and selling it.
 * Indeed its regarding to bandits


 * "Ali Mirza sent troops to stop the rebels, but those defied him, too" Just want to make clear that what's meant here is that the troops mutinied? And did they do this after reaching the rebels? Or just not march on them at all? The way it's written it's hard to tell.
 * Yes they mutinied and unfortunately i do not know at what point


 * The Iranica article also gives some more detail about Ali Mirza having to cough up the 200,000 tomans as tax arrears to his father. We should include that.
 * Done


 * Again, according to the Iranica article cited, it was not Ali Mirza who was blinded but his brother (who was also sent to Arbadil). All the former got from the experience of being jailed was the cholera that killed him.
 * You're right there.

Also, there are some issues with how the sources are cited that I will enumerate tomorrow (OK, later today; I have to go to bed). The article is, as I said ...

Daniel Case (talk) 07:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

OK, just finishing up ...

In an article where we have sources in two languages, we need to more clearly indicate which source is in what language and provide the original language title as well as an English translation of that title. So, some have deficiencies in providing all the information about the source that they should:

Needs indication that source is in Farsi as well as title in that language: Edrisi, Ghaem Magami, Shamim, History group, Ghadimi Gahari Needs Farsi title: Arefi, Shahbazi Farahani, Bamdad, Khazai, Rajabi
 * Do we realy need to add the Farsi titles? I Dont find it necessary when there's already mentioned that the source in Persian.
 * It's a convention of citations that any foreign-language source citation must include not only the language but the title in the original language as well. See Template:Cite web/doc. Daniel Case (talk) 05:25, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Done

Daniel Case (talk) 19:11, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

I think i regarded all of your points, if anything is amiss ping me, otherwise, i await for your conclusion
 * OK. Good. Nothing left over. Daniel Case (talk) 07:46, 31 January 2022 (UTC)