Talk:Yahballaha III/GA1

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

Reviewer: simongraham (talk · contribs) 23:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this. The topic looks interesting and the article, at a cursory level, of good quality. simongraham (talk) 23:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Criteria
The six good article criteria:
 * Well written
 * the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
 * it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout etc.


 * Verifiable
 * it contains a list of all references, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
 * all inline citations are from reliable sources;
 * it contains no original research; and
 * it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.


 * Broad in its coverage
 * it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
 * it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.


 * Neutral
 * it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.


 * Stable
 * it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.


 * Illustrated
 * images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
 * images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Review
More to follow. simongraham (talk) 00:41, 5 December 2020 (UTC) Well done. These are minor amendments in a very well researched article. simongraham (talk) 02:07, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The article is 86% written by one author, Governor Sheng, and, although over a third of the edits are WP:MINOR, it is stable. Layout follows MOS:LAYOUT. The topic is relevant, covered with a good level of depth and well written.
 * The image is relevant and in the public domain but lacks evidence that of US licensing.
 * The lede is split into three short paragraphs. It would read better as one.
 * The lede is very short. It would be good to have more detail on his life and achievements here to encourage readers to explore further.
 * The birthplace Koshang has no article. Is it related to Dongsheng? At least one source lists him as being a native of Beijing.
 * The link to Ongud goes to the people group rather than a geographic location. Do we know the geography where he was born?
 * Link persecution.
 * Add a link to Christianity among the Mongols.
 * "They still tried to reach Palestine, traveling through Armenia and Georgia and then by the sea, however, they were recalled by the Patriarch, who wanted to give them leadership over the Church in China." This reads like a run-on sentence. Consider splitting it into two. Consider linking Palestine. Remove capital from Church.
 * "After the death of Patriarch Denha I, the Nestorian chose Yahballaha as his successor in November 1281" There needs to be a noun after the adjective Nestorian.
 * Remove the titles from, for example, King Charles II of Naples, King Edward I of England, King Philip IV of France and King Hethum as WP:NCROY.
 * Remove second link to Arghun.
 * The link English King sends the reader to the Kingdom of England. Is this right?
 * "Yahballaha's life was saved by Hethum II, who paid a ransom to free him from prison,[15][20] and in 1296 Yahballaha returned to his seat in Maragheh." Are the citations in the right place? It seems odd to have two in the middle of the sentence and none at the end.
 * "Yahballaha enjoyed Ghazan's support until the end of his reign." Do we have any more information on why Ghazan had such a volte-face?
 * Link circumcision.
 * "However, the union was rejected by the Nestorian bishops" Is there a date for this or any more detail?
 * "Although personally on good terms with Yahballaha, he was unwilling or unable to end the persecution, and even carried them out himself, with the persecution in 1306 being remembered as the fiercest." The word persecution is singular so this needs rewording for clarity.
 * "Yahballaha tried unsuccessfully to prevent the massacre of Christians in Erbil." This seems out of place in the narrative. Is this the same persecution that happened when he was there? Can this be made clearer?
 * Is there anything that could be added to a See also section?

Reply
Can't start working on the article immediately. I'll start soon. --Governor Sheng (talk) 21:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Ok, in your review you stated that "the lede is split into three short paragraphs" and that "it would read better as one", then bellow that you commented that "the lede is very short" and that it should be expanded. Now I have expanded the lede. Does it look good now? --Governor Sheng (talk) 00:17, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for responding to my review and for all your work on this article. As I said, these are minor amendments and so the expansion does not need to be much. Please take a look at MOS:LEAD. simongraham (talk) 17:53, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I have and I have adjusted the lede accordingly. Thank you. --Governor Sheng (talk) 14:48, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Yahballaha's birthplace. A number of authors locate his birthplace in Koshang.

"The History of Mar Yahballaha and Rabban Sawma is an anonymous Syriac narrative, consisting in the biography of the Catholicos of the Church of the East, Mar Yahballaha III (born Marqos, Koshang, ca. 1248–d. Maragha 1317)..."

- Borbone

"A Chinese bishop, Yahballaha, born at Koshang in north China..."

- Smith

Filoni, whom you cite, was probably mistaken, as Rabban Sauma, who accompanied Yahballaha was born in Khanbaliq, which is modern Beijing.

"The reason that they were found in Knanbaliq (present day Beijing) as well as in Dunhuang may well indicate that Christian communities existed in these two places. The Church of the East in Khanbaliq had their metropolitans in the 13th century. According to The History of Rabban Sauma, Khanbaliq had a Metropolitan, as Sauma, when he decided to become a monk..."

- Tang & Winkler

Regarding Koshang itself, we cannot know for sure where this city was located. Some identify Koshang as Olon Süme, but a number of authors lately disapproved of this theory.

"Based on the number of days mentioned in Rabban Sauma's chronicle, it thus seems unlikely that Olon Sume can be identified as Koshang. [...] The available data to solve the location of Koshang and King George's capital thus seems insufficient to come to definite conclusions."

- Halbertsma

Unfortunately, we thus cannot tell the exact geographical location of Yahballaha's birth. What we know is that he was from the Ongud tribe, and they lived in present-day Inner Mongolia, and apparently were of Turkic, not Mongol, origin. --Governor Sheng (talk) 14:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Where am I supposed to add links to the Persecution of Christians and Christianity among the Mongols? Any suggestions? --Governor Sheng (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

The link from the English king to Kingdom of England is correct, but at the time, England was controlled by the French, ie Norman kings, who held possessions in France, where they originated. --Governor Sheng (talk) 15:19, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Regarding this sentence – "Yahballaha's life was saved by Hethum II, who paid a ransom to free him from prison,[15][20] and in 1296 Yahballaha returned to his seat in Maragheh.", no. 15 ref is used as a general reference, for both parts of the sentence, while I used no. 20 ref for the way in which Hethum saved Yahballaha. I will correct this. --Governor Sheng (talk) 15:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Review of new lead
Please ping me when you would like me to review your other changes. simongraham (talk) 10:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The lead is now three long paragraphs, 4211 characters (21% of the total article).
 * Link persecutions.
 * Suggest reducing "Instead, they were recalled by Patriarch Denha I of the Church of the East who wanted to give them the leadership over the Church in China and for that purpose consecrated Markos as the bishop of Katay and Ong (Northern China and the Ongud tribe, respectively), giving him the name Mar Yahballaha and at the same time, he named Bar Sauma sa'ora (visiting bishop) for the Eastern countries and a general vicar. However, both of them opted to remain in monasteries in Mosul, considering themselves unworthy of the new titles." to "Patriarch Denha I of the Church of the East recalled them and consecrated Markos as the bishop of Katay and Ong, with the name Mar Yahballaha." and removing "Bar Sauma started his diplomatic mission in 1287, visiting the rulers of the Byzantine Empire, Naples, Florence, Genoa, France, England and Pope Nicholas IV. His diplomatic mission ended in 1288." as this article is not about Bar Sauma.
 * Should "incline towards Muslims" be "Incline towards Islam"?
 * Is the "Il-khan" the same as the "khan"?
 * "bearly" should be "barely"

Status query
simongraham, Governor Sheng, where does this review stand? It's been over five weeks since there was a post to this page; as far as I can tell, Governor Sheng has made two sets of edits (January 4 and 10), but nothing regarding any progress has been noted here, and there's no indication of which issues have been addressed at this point. Can we have a status report? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:59, 29 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Greetings. I have managed to fix almost all of the issues, except finding more information on the rejection of the union by the Nestorian bishops. I'm still looking for more details. --Governor Sheng (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for all your work on this. The article is now ready to reassess. simongraham (talk) 17:16, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Assessment

 * 1) It is reasonable well written
 * the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct
 * it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and word choice.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable
 * it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
 * all inline citations are from reliable sources;
 * it contains no original research;
 * it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage
 * it addresses the main aspects of the topic;
 * it stays ffocused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.
 * 1) It has a neutral point of view
 * it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
 * 1) It is stable
 * it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
 * images are (relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 * 1) Overall:
 * This article meets the criteria to be a Good Article. Congratulations.
 * Pass/Fail: -- simongraham (talk) 17:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail: -- simongraham (talk) 17:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)