Talk:Peroz I/GA1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Cplakidas (talk · contribs) 11:59, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Will review over the following days. Constantine ✍ 11:59, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Unaddressed comments from above:

• They swiftly adopted Iranian imperial symbolism and titulature. Their coins also imitated Sasanian imperial coinage. I would recommend merging the two sentences, as they are about the same phenomenon and use the same source.

• Be consistent in using location in the book references or not (recommend you do). Y

I'm not even sure to how to find out the location of a reference, it is be supposed to be the location of the publisher? HofI

This can be left undone. AM

• Try to find ISBNs for the referenced volumes of the Encyclopaedia Iranica. Y

How do I do that? HofI

Not needed as the source is online. AM

• Is Daryaee 2000 from a print volume, or online? If the former, add the details, if the latter, mark it as such. Y

I've no idea tbh. HofI

• Link historiography. Y
• Unfortunately, the image does not seem to be in the public domain. Y

• Amend his eldest son to Yazdegerd’s eldest son, for the sake of clarity. Y

• an accord: - there should be a semicolon here (see MOS:COLON). Please amend the article where it occurs elsewhere a couple of times.

• The map appears to be unsourced, and therefore should be replaced.

Y

• Link chronicles; power vacuum. Y
• Why is "Iranian Huns" in quotes?

They weren't necessarily of Iranian stock (that bit is still disputed), they are just referred as 'Iranian' Huns for practical reasons due to their cultural/linguistic/administrative similarity with them if I'm not mistaken. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understood HistoryofIran. Other readers may wonder about the quotes as I did, so I definitely think as note of explanation (based on your reply to my query) is warranted here. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

N Not yet sorted. AM

• used as a casus belli - could this be rephrased in plain English? Y
• manpower – 'enough manpower'? Y
• who declined – 'which declined'? Y
• He then offered peace to the king of the Kidarites, Kunkhas, and his sister in marriage, but sent a woman of low status instead. This sentence is a little difficult to unpick (tweaking and his sister in marriage would help). Y
• After some time Kunkhas found about Peroz's swap – was it a swap, or simply a deception? Is the length of time known? Also, I would have started the following paragraph with this sentence. Y

Deception I think. Yes, unfortunately. I don't seem to understand the third line? --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The third paragraph would start as After some time Kunkhas found about Peroz's deception, and in turn attempted to trick him, by requesting him to send military experts to strengthen his army. When a group of 300 military experts arrived at the court of Kunkhas at Balaam (possibly Balkh), they were either killed or disfigured and sent back to Iran, with the information that Kunkhas did this due to Peroz's false treaty. Thoughts? Amitchell125 (talk) 12:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC) Y[reply]

• Do all “modern historians agree”, or just the three authors cited? Y

Not yet sorted. AM

Well the event is quite obscure and not many historians bother analysing it, so can't really say ”all” I guess. Changed it ”many”. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:39, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Unable to raise the other ten – is redundant imo, as the rest of sentence implies this. Y

• Assuming the link to ‘Armenian rising’ in a previous section is correct, remove the link to Battle of Avarayr, as it’s a duplicate link. Y
• Looking at the map, it appears to originate from an unsourced image (i.e. this), and unless the source is known, it’s not suitable for use here. Y
• which eventually resulted in her martyrdom – I'm unclear how her martyrdom came about. Y

Thoughts ? [1] --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• His policies were unacceptable – for clarity's sake I would amend this to ‘Varsken’s policies were unacceptable’ (assuming the name is correct).Y
• Adhur Gushnasp was soon defeated – is a year available for this event? Y

This happened in 482 as well. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:37, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth adding the year, as During the summer... occurs later in the paragraph, also without referring to the year concerned. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:58, 12 June 2021 (UTC) Y[reply]

• I would avoid guerrilla warfare as a way of explaining Vahan’s tactics, as the phrase dates from the 19th century. Consider amending to something like ‘where they avoided a head-on confrontation with the enemy’. Y

Not yet sorted. AM

Is that really neccessary? The word is still regularly used in scholarly sources. I feel like ‘where they avoided a head-on confrontation with the enemy’ doesn't really explain it as well as 'guerrilla warfare'. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:30, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's what I would do, but I understand your POV. AM

• Unlink Afghanistan (MOS:OL). Y
• I’m unclear on four of Peroz's sons or brothers. Why is there uncertainty about who was killed?

No idea tbh - that bit isn't mentioned. --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:46, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would amend the text to make it clear that you are quoting Potts, so to avoid the text sounding unclear (which imo it does at present). Amitchell125 (talk) 12:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

N Not yet sorted. AM

• The last sentence should imo be placed further up in the section (perhaps as a note after near the Oxus). Y

• Remove the link to Kavad I (as it has already been linked in the text). Y
• Add a comma after According to Payne. Y
• Remove Indeed (see MOS:OP-ED). Y
• The last paragraph is off-topic and imo should be removed (or moved to another article).

Imho it should stay, since it tells how the rivalry between these two empires concluded and the fact that the defeat and death of Peroz I still hunted the Sasanian family and was one of their reasons for ending the Hepthalites. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• he did not attempt – ‘Peroz did not attempt’ is better (which means amending Peroz's reign to ‘his reign’). Y
• At the same time – it’s not clear what time is being referred to here. Y
• I would amend the caption to clarify why the image is placed in this section. Y

• Link iconography. Y
• to have the city of Perozapat ... constructed. 'Built' sounds better, as cities are not really single constructions. Y
• the basilica was not constructed by Peroz – ‘commissioned by Peroz’ (or ‘ordered to be built’)? Y
• the modern historian Stephen H. Rapp suggests that is unneeded detail. Y
• terminus ad quem should be in italics (if you want to use it, I’d rather plain English was used instead).

• receiving – 'received' sounds better, as the paragraph is referring to historical events in the past tense. Y
• Peroz depicts himself – amend to 'Peroz depicted himself'. Y

• Unlink Afghanistan again. Y

• Hewsen is not cited in the article, and so should not appear in the Bibliography. Y
• Add an ISSN number (0078-2696) for Alram.

Err.. there's an ISSN number for Jstor articles? --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The ISSN number applies to the journal, and exists whether or not the article appears in JSTOR. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:05, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

N Not yet sorted. AM

• Dédéyan' s book should read ‘History of the Armenian People’. Y

Sorry but doesn't it do that already? --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Title case required (MOS:CAPTITLE, I've done it for you) AM

• Full citations for the books are needed. Consider using https://archive.org/details/GhazarParbetsisHistoryOfTheArmenians/mode/2up and https://archive.org/details/b24750281_0002 as links. Y

An enjoyable article. I'm putting it on hold for a week until 19 June to allow time for the issues raised to be sorted out. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 20:53, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick start—if you cross out on completion, I'll tick to say I agree. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:07, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HistoryofIran: I notice that there are still a number of outstanding points still be addressed (some are minor ones). Please could you sort these or discuss them with me, to avoid the article being failed in a couple of days' time? They are highlighted with a small cross, I'll remove these when they become unnecessary. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 06:52, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HistoryofIran, apart from the map issue we are now dealing with minor points, which can probably be foregone. Just the map to be sorted? Amitchell125 (talk) 18:16, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Amitchell125: Sure. I am trying to find a source which depicts a map of the Byzantines in that era, but unfortunately to no avail. I just replaced it with another made by Cplakidas, based on sources. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:00, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We've now got a GA on our hands here, anything else is icing on the cake. Passing now, congratulations. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:13, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]