User:Millsnaps/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Seljuk Empire (going to pick this one)
 * Article Evaluation Lead Section:
 * Seljuk's name is introduced in a rather abrupt way in this lead section. The lead simply says "Seljuk gave his name to both the empire and the Seljuk dynasty" without providing any context for who Seljuk was and from where he derived this power. Therefore, the lead section should provide some context for who Seljuk was, though the entry will go into greater detail on this topic in the section titled: "Founder of the Dynasty."
 * In a similar respect, thought the name "Turghil Beg" and his brother are hyperlinked, I have no clue who these figures are. One word describing their position or where they were from would place these important names into context.
 * Only one mention of a First Crusade is provided in the lead section. The fact that there were multiple crusades should be alluded to because these are discussed as separate sections under this Wikipedia page.
 * The lead section should also discuss the governance of the empire and the division of the empire. In addition, the "legacy" of the empire as described in the concluding section of the article is incongruent with what the lead suggests is the legacy of the Seljuk empire. The lead implies that this legacy is based in the development of a "Turko-Persian tradition" whereas the legacy section suggests that the Seljuk's brought "revival, energy, and reunion" to Islamic civilization.
 * I would like to see a time period in the opening sentence so that the reader automatically has perspective on when this empire was situated.
 * There is another discrepancy between the discussion on the "founder of the dynasty" (a section) and the lead. The section on the "founder of the dynasty" does not discuss the founder's relationship to the Oghuz Turks, whereas this is a focus in the lead.
 * The lead needs to allude to the fact that art will be included in the article and provide room for the reader's understanding of the role that the Sultans (as named in the family tree) played in the Empire. Content:
 * Based on the conclusion and its reference to astronomy, language, and rich civilization, I would appreciate hearing more about these three things and how they played a role within the Seljuk empire
 * What about wealth and finances in the Seljuk empire? Trade? Clearly, it was an expansive empire, so I would like to hear more about how such an expansive empire operated on a more technical level in the day-to-day.
 * I appreciate the division of the section titled "expansion of the empire" by ruler, but more clarity could be introduced here. Why is this the best way to detail the history of the expansion of the empire (by ruler)? In addition, some of these sections go into too much detail on the personal lives on each of these rulers as to where it gets confusing how their rule relates to the expansion of the empire.
 * The governance section is not detailed enough, especially when looked at next to this list of several rulers. Did the systems of governance not change under each ruler? In addition, what is the specific relevance of choosing a photo of a coin to display in this section?
 * I would like to gain additional understanding of what happens after the conquest of the Seljuk empire by the Khwarezm and Ayyubids. The imposing list in the middle of this (second-to-last) section also seems out-of-place.
 * The section on Seljuk art is bizarre. Far too many images with no explanation as to what the significance of each piece of art is. Substantial research has to be done on these artworks.
 * Also, what was the role of religion in this empire and how does it relate to the creation of these artworks? It's worth examining, especially considering that the opening sentence of the Lead presents the empire as a Sunni Muslim empire. Sources and References:
 * Most sources appear to be reasonable sources. However, I want to point out one that seems questionable because it might not actually be an independent source:
 * Jackson, P. (2002). "Review: The History of the Seljuq Turkmens: The History of the Seljuq Turkmens". Journal of Islamic Studies. Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. 13 (1): 75–76. doi:10.1093/jis/13.1.75.
 * Relatively old sources:
 * Michael Mandelbaum, "Central Asia and the World", Council on Foreign Relations (May 1994), p. 79
 * Grousset, Rene, The Empire of the Steppes, (Rutgers University Press, 1991), 574.
 * Stephen P. Blake, Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City in Mughal India, 1639–1739. Cambridge University Press, 1991. pg 123: "For the Seljuks and Il-Khanids in Iran it was the rulers rather than the conquered who were "Persianized and Islamicized" Images and Media:
 * Evaluate the purpose of the image of the coin under the section "governance."
 * The image of the Mausoleum does not bother me as much. However, I would attach a hyperlink to the word "mausoleum" to reduce any confusion for the reader. On another note, it is worth evaluating the extent to which this image relates to the expansion of empire... though it relates to Sanjar, does it actually belong in this section?
 * The images of the maps are useful (just for putting things in a geographic perspective)
 * Both paintings on this wikipedia page that have images of (painted) figures appear to be orientalist works. I would definitely re-evaluate this and choose instead to incorporate works that are not orientalist representations. Organization and Writing Quality:
 * Frequent use of passive voice
 * The "First Crusade" and "Second Crusade" sections are the only sections that appear to come out of nowhere, at least with respect to the titles. I would probably merge these two into one section that's titled "Conflict & Crusade" or something of that sort. Otherwise, all of the titles when taken together are notably less cohesive. Tone and Balance:
 * The tone presented is very neutral.
 * There's no strict/clear presentation of minority or majority viewpoints. It does, however, clearly state that one fact is disputed under the Sanjar section, which I appreciate & view as something that loans additional credibility to the article as a whole.
 * Perhaps I can add more of this sort of thing (acknowledging the limitation of disputed facts) as I work through the article Talk Page Discussion:
 * I expected the Talk Page to be slightly longer. There are not many discussions present here.
 * This entry on Wikipedia has captured the interest of many projects, including Wikiproject Religion, Wikiproject Iran, Wikiproject Turkey, etc...
 * Some of the conversations include:
 * "Issue with Turko-Persian label" (allegedly a "narrow" term)
 * "Seljuk Flag"
 * A complaint about the dynastic template (I am assuming this is the family tree/line of Sultans)
 * ... And general, relatively vague conversations about the spelling of Seljuk and how the empire should be referred to  Overall Impression:
 * There is much work to be done on this text, and potential means of improvements are discussed above
 * This piece's strength arises from the extent to which it covers. It does not go into enough detail on everything that it covers, but it manages to discuss many topics under one umbrella, the umbrella being that of the Seljuk empire. It is not as though I am working with no information whatsoever!
 * Sources
 * Bloom, Johnathan and Sheila S. Blair. The Grove Encyclopedia of Islamic Art and Architecture. "Saljuq." Oxford: Oxford University Press: 2009. Bloom, Johnathan and Sheila S. Blair. The Grove Encyclopedia of Islamic Art and Architecture. "Illustration." Oxford: Oxford University Press: 2009.  Farhad, Massumeh and Simon Rettig. The Art of the Qur'an: Treasures from the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts. District of Columbia: Smithsonian Books, 2016.  Hillenbrand, Robert, ed. The Art of the Saljuqs in Iran and Anatolia: Proceedings of a Symposium Held in Edinburgh in 1982. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 1994.  Whelan, Estelle. "Seljuk Art and Architecture." Dictionary of the Middle Ages, edited by Joseph R. Strayer, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1989. Gale In Context: World History, link.gale.com/apps/doc/BT2353202623/WHIC?u=mlin_m_wellcol&sid=WHIC&xid=cccba8d4. Accessed 28 Apr. 2021.  Starr, Frederick. "The Tremors Under the Dome of Seljuk Rule." In Lost Enlightenment. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016.

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Islamic Golden Age
 * Article Evaluation
 * The article is thorough, but has a very scarce evaluation of art. The art section under arts and culture only has one sentence.


 * Sources
 * al-Tawil, H. (2016). Islamic art and architecture in the golden age. In Facts on File (Ed.), World history: a comprehensive reference set. Facts On File. Credo Reference: https://ezproxy.wellesley.edu/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/fofworld/islamic_art_and_architecture_in_the_golden_age/0?institutionId=774
 * Simonton, Dean Keith (05/01/2018). "Intellectual Genius in the Islamic Golden Age: Cross-Civilization Replications, Extensions, and Modifications". Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts (1931-3896), 12 (2), p. 125.
 * Salman, Wafaa'. "A Flowering of Arts and Wisdom." Calliope, vol. 10, no. 6, Feb. 2000, p. 14. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A62346679/ITOF?u=mlin_m_wellcol&sid=ITOF&xid=dad2de08. Accessed 21 May 2021.

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Fatimid Art


 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is quite good, especially the lead section and also just the general variety of art discussed. However, my primary concern is with the fact that only one manuscript is discussed throughout the entire article. It could benefit from having more than one article discussed.


 * Sources
 * Bloom, Johnathan M. "Arts of the City Victorious: Islamic art and architecture in Fatimid North Africa and Egypt." New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007.
 * Shalem, Avinoam. Oliphant : Islamic Objects in Historical Context. Leiden: BRILL, 2004. Accessed May 21, 2021. ProQuest Ebook Central.

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Ghaznavid dynasty


 * Article Evaluation
 * Hardly any discussion on art whatsoever, only includes an image of Ghaznavid jugs. This period occurred during a time in which manuscripts were certainly being produced, so I would have expected to see something on this topic as well.


 * Sources
 * "Ghaznavid dynasty." In Britannica Concise Encyclopedia, by Encyclopaedia Britannica. Britannica Digital Learning, 2017. https://ezproxy.wellesley.edu/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/ebconcise/ghaznavid_dynasty/0?institutionId=774
 * A. C. S. Peacock (2018) Firdawsi’s Shahnama in its Ghaznavid Context, Iran, 56:1, 2-12, DOI: 10.1080/05786967.2018.1426195

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Almohad Caliphate


 * Article Evaluation
 * Generally, one of the better articles that needs fewer edits. The lead could be edited to mention something or another about the artistic contributions of the caliphate, however, and the manuscript section could be more thorough. Generally challenging to find sources pertaining to relevant manuscripts.


 * Sources
 * Buresi, Pascal, et al. Governing the Empire: Provincial Administration in the Almohad Caliphate (1224-1269) : Critical Edition, Translation, and Study of Manuscript 4752 of the Ḥasaniyya Library in Rabat Containing 77 Taqādīm ( Appointments ), BRILL, 2012. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/well/detail.action?docID=1081562.\