User talk:Dodalv/sandbox

Article Review and Suggestions
Overall, it is an interesting article. It discusses why the observatory was founded and what caused its closure. Further, it has a number of good sources. However, there are couple of inconsistencies and redundant statements. The inconsistencies have to do with the years (which I believe are a result of typos). At the start of the origins section, it says the observatory lasted from 1038 to 1194, but in the Consequences section it says that the observatory lost its funding and was closed in 1092. Similarly, if the observatory was built to improve the calendar, then why did Omar Khayyam wait until 1076 to work on it? There are couple of redundant/repeated sentences as well. The Origins section states the observatory was founded to reform the calendar (and that Omar Khayyam was the one reforming it) three times, which seems unnecessary to me.

Beyond these, I have a few suggestions that could improve the article a bit. I would suggest adding more about the observatory itself. It might be useful to discuss what instruments were used, the calendar they were reforming, other astronomers that worked there, etc. (if such information can readably be found). The name of the second section, Consequences, is a little misleading. It discusses the closure of the observatory as opposed to what consequences it has, so I would suggest changing that name. I also suggest rewording the first sentence in the Consequences section. "Khayyam's era of peace, prosperity, and science..." makes it sounds like Khayyam is responsible for the era of peace and prosperity, or the main figure causing it. In the following sentence, "The peace and prosperity of the Islamic Golden Age held over Seljuk ruled Isfahan for eighteen years while Khayyam worked at the observatory creating the reformed Persian calendar" I would add an 'as' between 'over' and 'Seljuk.' It is kind of confusing without it. Since it is so long, breaking it up might work better. I would also suggest changing 'reform' to 'reformation' in "The reform of the calendar..." Lastly, I would also suggest bolding the section titles to make them more noticeable.

That is all I have. I hope this suggestions are helpful. It is, after all, an decent draft and an interesting topic. --Rarrell (talk) 21:19, 17 April 2018 (UTC)