Talk:Daoud ibn al-Adid

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 22:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Cplakidas (talk). Self-nominated at 19:59, 19 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • New enough and long enough. QPQ present. Must AGF on the offline sourcing. His age is unclear, but it's clear he was prisoner a long time from the text and the fragments you shared of the source. No textual issues. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 18:34, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling[edit]

I have been wondering of the strange spelling for داود in English and found some books transcribing it with an apostrophe-like symbol, but also with the expected spelling Dawud, and Daoud on the German Wikipedia.

The other name is apparently الحامد لله, not what I saw here, الحميد الله "al-Ḥamīd Allah".

@Cplakidas: Should I respell the article? Daoud or Dawud (also Dāwūd) are better and more expectable transcriptions for the Arabic name, as they don't falsely suggest a glottal stop. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 15:05, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mahmudmasri: I also wondered at the spelling, TBH, and on reflection, I tend to agree with you. If you want to respell the article, go ahead! Thanks a lot for checking this! Constantine 16:14, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome, and it's such an interesting topic I didn't know about. Thanks for writing about it. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 16:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Daoud ibn al-Adid/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AhmadLX (talk · contribs) 23:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this over the next few days. --AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 23:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lead is too short.
  • al-Ḥāmid li'llāh and al-Ḥāmid li-'llāh
  • No diacritics per MOS (walī al-ʿahd -> wali al-ahd etc.)
  • 'Hidden Imam' should link to Occultation
  • Briefly introduce Qadi al-Fadil, Baha al-Din Qaraqush

A nice little article. I would have preferred some more detail, but given the dearth of info in the sources (I checked some of them), I think I can compromise on broadness. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 22:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AhmadLX, thanks for taking the time to review this. I think I've addressed your points. Anything else? Constantine 13:00, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No that was all from me, and this is a Pass. Nice work. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 22:38, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed