Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Suleiman the Magnificent

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 04:36, 22 January 2008.

[edit] Suleiman the Magnificent

previous FAC nomination

Check external links

Suleiman has been a GA for some months now as part of an ongoing effort by myself to get it to FA. It has been submitted to peer review, though it didnt get much of a response. I believe the article is well written, broad in its coverage and well sourced, supported by a good number of relavant images. Hopefully any problems can be ironed out here. Thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

• Support. The article has improved since the FA began and now appears to meet all of the criteria. Karanacs (talk) 19:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

*Oppose. There are a few WP:MOS things that need to be fixed, and some of the prose is a bit choppy. There are also areas that need to be cited still.

• • Per WP:MOSQUOTE, quotations should not be offset from the paragraph unless they are more than 4 lines long.
  • Rather than link to the Great Alfold, I think the (see Ottoman Hungary) should be incorporated into the prose in this sentence
  • Need a nonbreaking space between a number and its qualifier (for example, 25,000 men)
  • The see also link for Ottoman wars in Europe should be at the top of that section instead of the bottom
  • Per WP:DATE, month-day combinations should be wikilinked so that date preferences will work
  • "As Kinross notes"... who is Kinross? Can you at least include a first name here?
  • Can you cite this, please "He also issued a firman, formally denouncing blood libel against the Jews. In doing this, he set a precedent that was followed by emperors after him, including the firman against the Damascus affair." Moved to administrative reforms, with source.
  • "come to their age" -> should be "come of age"
  • Need citations for much of the first paragraph of Hurrem Sultan section -> "breaking with 300 years of Ottoman tradition"; "first former slave to gain legitimacy"; "astonishment of observors"; "breaking another atradition"
  • Need a citation for "Since these were his dying words, Suleiman became convinced of Ibrahim's disloyalty "
  • "Hurrem was aware that should Mustafa succeed he would have his brothers strangled, who were all her sons" -> can this be rephrased so as not to be so awkward? Rephrased to Hurrem was aware that should Mustafa succeed in becoming the Sultan, her own children would be strangled.
  • add wikilink to Anne Bolyen please
  • Does the long quote about Mustafa's demise need to remain as a quote or can it be summarized?

Karanacs (talk) 18:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions Karanacs, I've tried to complete most of them. I'm not sure what you mean by suggestions 2 and 3 however. What do you mean by "the (see Ottoman Hungary) should be incorporated into the prose in this sentence" and also what do you mean by a nonbreaking space between number and qualifier? With regard to the large quote on Mustafa, I actually think it serves the article well, to highlight that despite his achievements he could also be an extremely ruthless Sultan, the description of his sons murder seems to highlight this well. If you still disagree perhaps I can shorten it. Thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 20:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, please note that the reviewer is supposed to strike his or her own comments; that ensures that we actually understand each other. I just verified that the changes were good, so it's okay to leave them stricken. Here's the guideline on non-breaking spaces (sorry, I should have included that before). The "(see Ottoman Hungary)" note in the section Conquests in Europe, right after the words "Great Alföld". Generally, we don't include a (see xxxx) in the text of the article; it either appears at the top of the section, in the See Also section, or is incorporated into the paragraph. I agree with you that the story of Mustafa's death definitely should be in the article, but I think you could paraphrase it and not have the direct quote. You're really close - thanks for being so prompt! Karanacs (talk) 02:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that, this is my first FA nomination, not use to convention here. I've added some non-breaking spaces, but wanted to confirm whether I simply add it in all instances where a number preceeds a non numerical character e.g. "In 1541 the...", "In late 1553 or 1554...", "dating from 1526 list 40 societies with over 600 members." etc. Should the spaces in all these examples be filled with the non-breaking code? On the (see Ottoman Hungary) thing, I understand what you mean, I've simply removed the link, if this is a problem let me know. I'll get thinking how to reduce the Mustafa quote also, thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I've trimmed the quote, paraphrasing the beginning and quoting a few lines from the end. Also, please confirm whether non-breaking code should be applied in cases such as those mentioned above. I ask because from a quick glance at other FA articles, I cannot see consistent usage of this in all number/letter instances. Thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 14:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry it took me a bit to come back. It needs to be used when you have a number and a unit, so in the example sentences you listed only 40 societies and 600 members would need the nonbreaking space. Hope that helps - I know it's confusing. Karanacs (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, ok I undid the hard spaces I added after the years and left the one on the 600 members and 40 societies. If you notice, I also got rid of the see Ottoman Hungary link completely since I found it unnecessary. Thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 20:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

• Support - well written article. The article does seem a bit small though. It'd be nice if there was an expansion in the cultural achievement section.Bless sins (talk) 05:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comments (1) Norwich is not listed in the references. (2) "which led to a humiliating night": what do you mean? (3) "An early description of Suleiman was provided by the Venetian envoy Bartolomeo Contarini a few weeks following his accession. Venetians wrote down their descriptions of the new sultan and their predictions of what his reign might mean to Europe." "Venetians" or "The Venetian"? You should go from the general to the specific, not from the individual to the many. Switch the sentences around, if many Venetians wrote about Suleiman, and then use Contarini as your specific example. DrKiernan (talk) 09:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits and comments. With regard to point one, the sentence with that reference was not added by me, in fact I consider it pretty slap dash with whoever adding it making no effort to integrate it into the prose. Since it was not a major conflict, I have chosen to remove it. On the second point, I elaborated on the treaty and the conflict behind it in a more relavant place i.e. the wars over Hungary, whilst adding more references also. On the third point, I never added that sentence and it seems pretty superflous so I've simply removed that also. Please let me know if these are ok. --A.Garnet (talk) 22:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Support Yes, that's great, thanks. DrKiernan (talk) 08:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

• Support Excellent article, which it's been a great pleasure to read (& make a few edits, mainly for style & links). A couple of comments:
  • For consistency you should use either modern Turkish spelling or English spelling: you can't have both Chelebi (English) and Cihangir (Turkish: in English it would be Jihangir).
  • Number style must be consistent, too: I changed four hundred ships whilst personally leading an army of 100,000 to 400 ships ...; but there may well be other cases.
  • The "historic would" can be a bit annoying: eg he would die in 1566.

But these are minor points. Obviously a lot of work has gone into making this such a good article. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 13:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

PS The list of subjects studied in the medreses reads slightly awkwardly:

studies in grammar, syntax, logic, metaphysics, philosophy, tropics, stylistics, geometry, astronomy, and astrology.

This may well have come straight from Kinross's book, but—at the very least—the highlighted terms should be explained. I imagine he was referring to what is usually called rhetoric, as taught by the mediaeval scholastics. The subjects mentioned correspond almost exactly to the trivium & quadrivium. Whether they need to be listed so exhaustively in this context is open to doubt. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 18:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits Ndsg, they are welcome indeed. I've made a few edits based on your suggestions. I changed Cihangir > Jihangir (since "Suleiman" is itself English, may as well keep it consistent), I changed a few of the "woulds", but I dont see many of them as problematic. With regards to the topics, your right, they were lifted from Kinross, but I've edited out the more complex subjects and left the ones editors are probably more familiar with. I hope these edits are ok. Thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

You're more than welcome. The woulds are a matter of taste, I suppose—& in any case the text reads pretty well now.

I wonder whether Education might deserve a section to itself: it's not really Administration, is it? Anyway, it's your call. Good luck! --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 19:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

PS It would help if you specified what all those artists & craftsmen mentioned under Cultural Achievements actually did. One important artistic field—calligraphy—is implicit in the magnificent tughra illustrated in the article. Perhaps some mention of miniature painting & work with precious metals etc? Unfortunately the article on Ottoman miniatures is little more than a stub at present. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 19:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I elaborated slightly on the work of craftsmen Ndsg, but unfortunately I no longer have access to some of the sources I originally wrote the article with (e.g. Clot, Atil had good sections on the cultural aspects of Suleimans reign). I'll leave a note on WP:Turkey again to see if some editors can bring more sources forward. --A.Garnet (talk) 21:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

PPS What happened to Jihangir? He's mentioned only once, then disappears from the story! --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 18:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I made a note of Jihangirs sad fate. --A.Garnet (talk) 21:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

In Succession I've changed mutes to eunuchs: is that correct? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 19:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I restored the use of mutes since it was a direct quotation (though I think I forgot to close the quote last time round). Thanks again for the help, --A.Garnet (talk) 21:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! I think the article as it now stands is definitely FA material. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 22:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

PS You didn't comment on my suggestion about a new Education section. I've now made 3 subheadings in the admin reforms section: see what you think of the new layout. I won't be offended if you revert them, but I think they improve the navigation & readability of the article. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 22:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I do not feel a three paragraph section requires additional sub-headings. I think the section flows well enough to stand on its own. Let me know what you think, --A.Garnet (talk) 16:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Well, I've told you what I think! But I don't want to make a federal case out of it, so do what you prefer. After all, you've done most of the work on this article. But first consider: how quickly would a reader interested in education under Suleiman find the paragraph on education? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 17:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Well since the section is not that large, and some of the headings are not the best description (for example "Legal code" can basically apply to everything, in "Minorities" there is also discussion of criminal legislation) I will revert to the prior version. --A.Garnet (talk) 17:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

That wasn't quite my point. Of course you could find the paragraph on education if you knew it came under Administrative reforms, but that begs the question. How would you find it from the nav box if you were coming fresh to the article for the first time? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Kinross, the source used for that section, places educational reforms within the context of administration. I dont think it could be placed anywhere else or requires a sub section to guide readers here. Thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 00:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 21:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Minor question regarding the following:

  When, in 1544, Spain declared war on France, Francis asked for help from Suleiman, who sent a fleet headed by Barbarossa. When Barbarossa defeated the Spaniards and managed to retake Naples from them, Suleiman bestowed on him the title of Beyler Bey (Commander of Commanders).

  According to the sources I have, it was Francis who declared war, not the Spanish; and Barbarossa, while indeed attacking Neapolitan cities, never captured Naples itself. I'm curious as to where these details originate. Kirill 21:35, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm curious as well since I already picked up on the discrepancy between the two articles. A search in the history shows User:Kaisershatner added the info in 2005 so it will need checking. I'll get working on it. Thanks, --A.Garnet (talk) 22:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the dubious information and rewrote the paragraph. Also added a see also to the Italian wars article to clarify. --A.Garnet (talk) 22:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.