Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sayf ol-Dowleh/archive1

Sayf ol-Dowleh

 * Nominator(s): Amir Ghandi (talk) 15:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

This article is about... Soltan Mohammad Mirza, better known as Sayf ol-Dowleh, an Iranian prince of the Qajar dynasty and thirty-ninth son of Fath-Ali Shah, king of Qajar Iran. He was the governor of Isfahan, a city in central Iran which through the constant wars was damaged greatly. He contributed to its restoration with rebuilding the Safavid pavilions and even building a palace of his own design. His governorship was short-lived, and through a series of civil war between 1834-1835, he was removed from his position. He spent many of his years travelling and writing poetry, and died in 1899 in Malayer. Amir Ghandi (talk) 15:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.


 * "better known by his honorific title Sayf ol-Dowleh". Is it known what this means in English? Similarly in the main article.
 * 'Sword of the Dynasty' is a literal transilation.


 * "He was the governor of Isfahan" When?
 * Added the years.


 * "banditry along the roads". Roads within the city?
 * No, roads to, and from the city.


 * "Mohammad Bagher Shafti". Perhaps a one or two word introduction?
 * Done


 * "a famine followed, worsening the situation." The last three words are arguably redundant.
 * Amended.


 * Second paragraph of the lead - could some (or all) of the events mentioned be dated?
 * "Mohammad Shah ousted him". Who is Mohammad Shah? Is there a link? Could he be introduced?
 * "Unusually for his time, Sayf ol-Dowleh only married once, and later divorced his wife". Which of these was unusual? And, again, is there a date for either event?
 * "divan" is misspelt.
 * The Persian spelling is divan while the arabic one is diwan.

This is just from the lead and I am getting the impression that the article has not been adequately prepared for FAC. Has the advice on the main FAC page been followed - "Editors considering their first nomination ... are strongly advised to seek the involvement of a mentor"? Why has the article not gone through peer review prior to nomination?


 * I thought that rule is only applied to a nominator's first ever nominee, because earlier this year I had another article first peer reviewed and then FA nominated.
 * It is not a "rule", it is a strong recommendation. Apologies for having missed your previous nomination. The bit I missed out of the quote above is "... and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion ..." The recommendation is there to try and avoid the situation which has arisen here - a nomination which has had a lot of work put into it, but which clearly isn't up to FAC standards. I appreciate how a barrage of negative comments can be demoralising to a first or second time nominater. (Or, for that matter, a fiftieth time nominator.) I would suggest withdrawing, and either getting a mentor to go through this with you, or running it through PR, or both. (You may also consider GoCER.) Gog the Mild (talk) 17:10, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess I better withdraw then, thanks for the review, in any case. Amir Ghandi (talk) 17:15, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Currently I am leaning oppose. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2022 (UTC)