User talk:Nonnavbat/sandbox

your addition to the etymology section is concise and informative

the placement of your sources are confusing, I can't tell if they are addressing the line after or before. When you're writing a citation it should come at the end of the sentence before the period.

You are also using two different types of citations. I think you should just stick with the numbers instead of the in-text citations.

This sentence "(Mackie p85) The earliest datable textile can be traced back to the Umayyad caliphate, ascribed to Marwan I or II, though there is general consensus the tiraz was intended for the latter caliph as it makes more sense, historically." should have a semicolon after "Marwan I or II" instead of a coma. And get rid of "as it makes more sense, historically" because it sounds too casual.

You should just make this sentence "The Umayyad caliphate was not the only empire to experience a shift in design and in their language of symbolism;" a sentence and end it with a period.

also clarify who you are talking about in this sentence "Once Islam was introduced and accepted, the Muslim rulers replaced figures with their names and text which praised God."

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Charfriedman (talk • contribs)

Prof. Neumeier comments

Hi Nonna, a few comments:

--First of all, I can see that you made some revisions to address your peer reviewer's comments, which I appreciate.

--I see "The tiraz textile, from the caliphate of Abu’l-ʻAbbas Ahmad, is embroidered with kufic script holding sentiments of blessings and glory to the caliph" up at the top, and it seems to describe an object at the MET, where do you intend to put this text? Is it supposed to accompany an image?

--For the sentence in Etymology, I would just cut "to luxury textiles before 1500 CE" because it sounds like the word is generally for all luxury textiles around the world before 1500, which is not the case. This is what I suggest: "The word tiraz can be used to refer to medieval textiles that bear an Arabic inscription, or to the band of text itself,"

--Same question for first sentence of History and Culture section: "While the term tiraz is applicable to any luxury textile predating 1500 CE, it is primarily attributed to medieval articles of clothing with Arabic inscription" (Is this what Phillips writes? If so, leave it as is--but say "an Arabic inscription" in any case, and maybe specify "luxury textile from the Islamic world". My comment on the etymology section still stands because you do not want the information to be too repetitive.

--I really like how you discuss the transition from Sasanian to Umayyad imagery on coins, etc. (and it may be cool for you to add images of a Sasanian vs. Umayyad coin to compare, but I know you have already added quite a few images), but you should rewrite the sentence "The Umayyad caliphate was not the only empire to experience a shift in design and in their language of symbolism." because it sounds like the Sasanians also had a shift in their language of symbolism, which is not what you are trying to say, I think. You want a transition sentence that says something more like, in some ways, the idea of tiraz developed from an inherited visual language of power from the Sasanians.

--Your peer reviewer is right that you should add any citations in parantheses to the footnotes, like the page number at the end of the sentence "In Ibn Tulun's reprisal, he ceased the mention of al‐Muwaffaq on tiraz inscriptions, which emphasized the importance of the tiraz in the political context and its influence on one's courtly status in the public's eye."

And a few edits to the text:

--"these textiles would originally bare" TO "bear" (spelling)

--"The earliest datable textile can be traced back to the Umayyad caliphate, ascribed to Marwan I or II; though" TO "The earliest datable textile with a tiraz band can be traced back to the Umayyad caliphate, ascribed to the ruler Marwan I or Marwan II, though" (I know your peer reviewer said you should put a semicolon there but I do not think that's right)

--"and text which praised God" TO "and text that praised God"

--"not the sole item which" TO "not the sole item that" (https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/which-versus-that-0)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by E Neumeier (talk • contribs)