Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Al-Mu'tadid/archive1

Al-Mu'tadid

 * Nominator(s): Constantine  ✍  18:24, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

This article is about one of the most (and virtually the last) capable Abbasid caliphs, and definitely an interesting figure: passionate about "women and buildings", known for his cruel and ingenious punishments and fiscal stringency, and the greatest Abbasid warrior-caliph. During his decade-long rule, by virtue of constant campaigning and adroit diplomacy he managed to stabilize the state and restore many lost territories. His reign also saw the culmination of the dominance of the Turkish military, but strangely also the start of the emergence to power of the secretarial bureaucracy. During his reign (and that of al-Muktafi, which was essentially a coda to al-Mu'tadid's) the Abbasids were truly for the last time an imperial power to be reckoned with. I've worked on this article on and off since 2013, gathering material from many sources. It passed the MILHIST ACR back in 2016, and has seen various mostly minor additions and copyedits (lately a GOCE copyedit by User:Gog the Mild) since. I am confident that the article is fairly comprehensive, but any suggestions for further improvement are, of course, welcome. Constantine  ✍  18:24, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Image review


 * Suggest bumping up all maps to at least 1.3


 * File:Iraq_Ninth_Century.png: what is the source of the data presented in this map? Nikkimaria (talk) 17:37, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Sources added by the map author Constantine  ✍  12:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Sources review

 * Quality and reliability
 * The sources appear to be of the required standards of quality and reliability.


 * Verification
 * A sample of spotchecks reveals no evident problems of verification or close paraphrasing


 * Formatting
 * Is there a reason for the capitalization of Brill in the list of sources (Kennedy 2003, Sobernheim and Zetterstéen)? Otherwise the formatting is uniform and consistent.

Brianboulton (talk) 15:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Regarding Brill, IIRC, I had found this capitalized when I first started using these sources, and copied it over to the various articles after. Changed now. Constantine  ✍  10:07, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Support by Gog the Mild

 * One of the maps lacks alt text.
 * External links and the other standard FAC checks are fine.
 * There are no duplicate links.
 * I copy edited this for GoCE, which needed very little doing.
 * While copy editing I brought up several non-copy edit issues on the talk page, all of which have been satisfactorily addressed.

So, for me, the article is one alt text away from a support.

Gog the Mild (talk) 17:49, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, rather embarrassing, that. Fixed. Constantine  ✍  10:05, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I have done similar. And that was all I could find to pick at. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

FunkMonk

 * Interesting we are getting so many nominations about the Arab caliphates lately. No collusion? I'll have a look soon. FunkMonk (talk) 12:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * "al-Mutawakkil was murdered" Do we know by who?
 * Added.


 * "the elite Turkish troops" Link to something?
 * I've linked to Turkic peoples with my previous change, and moved the link to the ghilman slave-soldiers up. Ideally there should be an article about "Turks/Turkish slave-soldiers in the Abbasid Caliphate" eventually..


 * Abbasid should be linked at first mention outside the intro too.
 * Done.


 * I wonder if the ethnicity of Ahmad ibn Tulun should be mentioned, as the rest of the paragraph that mentions him also deals with other non-Arab rebellion in the Caliphate. Maybe also mention who were Persians, and that the Zanj were African, but perhaps not if the sources don't dwell on the ethnic issue.
 * You are right that this is important, especially since Ibn Tulun was precisely from this group of Turkish soldiers who came to dominate power, and a herald of future developments..


 * "a keen horseman and took care to inspect both his troops and their mounts in person" Who said this, and does it need to be a quote rather than paraphrasis?
 * I've tried to rephrase.


 * "Eventually, in 889, Abu'l-Abbas was arrested and put in prison on his father's order" Do we know why?
 * Not known. As stated right before, the reason why the relationship between the two suddenly deteriorated is a mystery..


 * Just something you probably can't do anything about, but it is a bit confusing that the subject is referred to by (three?) different names as the article progresses. Especially since some of the names of different rulers are somewhat similar, I had to read some paragraphs over a few times. Not sure what could be done about this, since it is probably not a good idea to refer to him by a single name throughout.
 * The only viable alternative would be to refer to him by his regnal name throughout, but even in the secondary literature, when his early life is described, the kunya is very frequently used..


 * "[t]he role of 'ghazī caliph" I wonder if this term should be used and explained before the quote.
 * Rephrased and explained right before the quote.


 * "Qatr al-Nada died soon after the wedding" Do we know why?
 * Al-Tabari merely mentions that she died ("On Rajab 7, 287 (July 8, 900) al-Mu`tadid's wife, the daughter of Khumarawayh b. Alimad b. Tulun, died and was buried in the castle of al-Rusafah.", without further comment, and I haven't been able to find anything else on this..


 * Hi FunkMonk! On the nomination, on my part it is simply that after six years I feel I know the topic and its wider context well enough to be certain that I have not overlooked any major aspects (and Ro4444, who has an even better knowledge of the period and the primary sources, has confirmed this). I've literally been learning about the early Muslim world as I've been writing articles for WP. I've addressed the points you raised above. Anything else? Anything that can be improved, apart from and beyond FAC requirements? Constantine  ✍  16:00, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll read the rest of the article soon. Looks spiffy so far! FunkMonk (talk) 17:52, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Looking forward to the rest of your suggestions. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  19:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * A few more comments below, but more will come as I read along. FunkMonk (talk) 14:58, 1 April 2019 (UTC)


 * "with Amr mobilizing the anti-Alid sentiments" You have not presented or linked the Alids until this point in the article body.
 * "with Amr mobilizing" Amr hasn't been linked or presented until this point either. Perhaps some text was moved around at some point without changing the order of inks.
 * Both excellent points, fixed.


 * "made contact with the Kutama Berbers" You could state where, it would be pretty far from all formerly mentioned events.
 * Added.


 * "engaged in major building activities in the capital" Anything we can show pictures of?
 * Nothing, unfortunately. Most of the Abbasid-era buildings were destroyed in the Mongol sack of Baghdad; being made of brick, they did not leave many archaeological remnants either.


 * inserted his name in a list of rebels to be executed" I would add "al-Sarakhsi's" instead of "his name" for clarity.
 * Good suggestion, done.


 * Link Mamluk?
 * Done.


 * "great detail the tortures inflicted by the Caliph on prisoners" Anything that could be briefly mentioned? Since this apparently a notable issue.
 * Added a couple of examples.


 * " at the age of either 40 or 47" The infobox says "aged 48 or 41".
 * Fixed.


 * Where are we with addressing these comments? -- Laser brain  (talk)  19:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * it had slipped my attention. Will deal with them right away. Thanks for the heads up. Constantine  ✍  19:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Support - looks good to me now. FunkMonk (talk) 21:47, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments from Tim riley
Excellent article. Two very minor points about the prose:
 * The article is written in BrE, it appears ("adviser" "centre", "maximise", "rumours") but there is an inconsistency in ise/ize endings: "maximise" but "characterized", "legitimize", "militarized" etc. If you prefer the "ize" form – unusual in BrE these days, but by no means wrong – note that the Oxford English Dictionary treats "maximize" similarly to the other "ize" words.
 * Fixed, thanks for catching that.


 * "any of his supporters who Abu'l-Abbas could lay his hands on" – this could do with polishing, it seems to me – "who" should be "whom" and "could lay his hands on" seems a touch informal for an encyclopaedia.
 * Rewritten, please have a look.
 * Exactly what was needed, I think.  Tim riley  talk   19:46, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Those two small quibbles apart I have no suggestions and I look forward to supporting the promotion of this article.  Tim riley  talk   08:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Tim riley, thanks for taking the time to review this. If there are any other comments or suggestions, quite beyond the requirements of FA, for the improvement of the article, please feel free to let me know. Constantine  ✍  17:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Support. The article seems to me to meet the FA criteria. Highly readable, well and widely sourced, excellently illustrated and, as far as a layman can tell, comprehensive. Enjoyable and instructive: just what a Wikipedia FA should be. –  Tim riley  talk   19:46, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support by CPA-5

 * The vizier then tried to dominate al-Muktafi Shouldn't it be The Vizier?
 * Indeed. Corrected.


 * out of the total expenditure of 7915 dinars per day, some 5121 are entirely military Shouldn't it be "out of the total expenditure of 7,915 dinars per day, some 5,121 are entirely military"?
 * MOS:DIGITS is flexible for four-digit numbers, and it is a direct quote from the source, which does not use commas


 * Caliphate outside the metropolitan region of Iraq By MOS:OVERLINK most people know some informations about Iraq.
 * Hmmm, I am not so sure. People have "heard of" Iraq, but I wouldn't place much credence to the notion that they have any information about it, particularly in the setting of this article (as opposed to the recent past). Since Iraq in this context is quite distinct from the modern country, I've changed the link to Iraq (region), after restoring its original content. redirecting it to Lower Mesopotamia

Looks good. Cheers CPA-5 (talk) 16:37, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  13:29, 12 April 2019 (UTC)