Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of campaigns of Suleiman the Magnificent/archive1

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

The list was not promoted by The Rambling Man 11:13, 17 July 2011 [1].

---

List of campaigns of Suleiman the Magnificent

List of campaigns of Suleiman the Magnificent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/List of campaigns of Suleiman the Magnificent/archive1

Nominator(s): Kebeta (talk) 16:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets FL criteria. The article was created by Nedim Ardoğa in 14 December 2009, and hasn't changed much untill 1 March 2011, when I started editing. During that process we had some disagreementes, which I hope are over now. Anyway, I will notify him of this submission. I also received some feedback by listing it at Peer review, but for some reason that Peer review wasn't archived properly. This is my first potential FL, so we will see how it goes...Kebeta (talk) 16:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments from —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 20:48, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

• Is the table meant to be sortable (according to the accompanying text)? I see no sorting function.

Can you help me further here if you can?

Sorting function added. Someone else will have to check if there is a mistake in the implementation.

Thanks, and done with you help.

• It may be a bit redundant to use both 10-digit and 13-digit ISBN numbers for the references. The current formatting also breaks the ISBN locator when clicked.

Do you suggest that I delete 13-digit ISBN numbers?

I usually prefer 13-digit numbers over 10-digit because they are more universally compatible. If you have issues converting between 10-digit and 13-digit ISBN, use this converter tool. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 21:16, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

done

• The second sentence of footnote 1 begins awkwardly with "however" and "although" together. I believe "later" should be spelled as "latter".

I think it's better now.--Kebeta (talk) 08:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 18:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments – A couple of style issues exist at the start. First, I don't see a reason for Campaigns to be capitalized; it's not a proper noun, and isn't capitalized in the title. Second, there shouldn't be any bold links. Fortunately, Suleiman's name is given again later in the opening sentence, so it should be easy to move the link's location. "The total duration of these campaigns adds up to the ten years and three months." Remove second "the" and the flow will be better. Also, you could replace "adds up to the" with "was", which would make this tighter as well. His main opponent was Ferdinand I from the House of Habsberg, and Tahmasp I of Safavid Persia." This is two opponents, so that word should be plural ("opponents") in the sentence. "none of later campaigns achieved the decisive victory...". Add "his" or "the" before "later campaigns". "Although the period of greatest Ottoman military accomplishmentes, the period of Suleiman is also known...". Typo in "accomplishmentes", and this seems wordy as a whole. How about "Although the period of Suleiman saw the greatest Ottoman militart accomplishments, it is also known..."? In the photo caption, is "comparation" meant to be "comparison"? Even if so, I think the latter makes more sense in that context. Usage: Two things from here. First, add "by" in "sortable pressing the arrows symbols." Second, in "These does not include...", make the first word "This". Table, Campaign 3: Minor point, but the comma in "29 August, 1526" should be removed. Campaign 4: Apostrophe needed at end of Ottomans in the first sentence. Do the same for campaign 5. Add a space after reference 20 following "laid siege to Vienna." Campaign 5: Remove "the" in "into the Ferdinand's held Hungarian territory." Of course, if he was usually called "the Ferdinand", disregard this comment. Do the same for "The other result of the Suleiman's...". Although stoped at Koszeg and failed to conquer Vienna, since Ferdinand and Charles evade an open field battle". First, "stoped" needs another p. Second, "evade" should be "evaded". Third, a word or two is missing at the start. It should be either "Although he stopped" or "Although he was stopped". "concluded a year leter with Ferdinand in 1533." Try "concluded a year later with Ferdinand" instead. This fixes a typo, and removes a redundancy in the writing; we know the battle was in 1532, so it should be obvious when the treaty happened. Campaign 11: Add "the" in "During Ottoman–Safavid Wars"? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks Giants2008 for your help here...it is very difficult when one is not a native Enlish speaker. Anyway, I think that I have fixed all your remarks. Thanks!--Kebeta (talk) 17:20, 13 June 2011 (UTC) All right, most of the comments above are done. I saw a couple that were still outstanding, which I moved here, and picked up on a couple of new issues that are left over from the prior edits. A word seems missing from "that would secure the newly Ottomans possession." Also, add an apostrophe at the end of Ottomans, like Ottomans'. Or should it be "Ottoman possessions"? Add "a" in "After taking few minor places". You know what I did in the capped comments? I put "militart" instead of "military" for one of them near the end of the lead, and it would up in the article. It's in the last sentence. For table 4, the last "Ottomans'" in the note doesn't need the apostrophe, unlike the first one where it was added. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 18:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC) I think it's all fixed now. I am not sure for the first point (to insert 'from'), is this correct now?--Kebeta (talk) 19:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC) No, that's not what I had in mind. I was thinking more along the lines of "that would secure the newly (missing word here; perhaps "obtained" or something like it?) Ottoman possessions." Or you could go with "that would secure the new Ottoman possessions." Other things look resolved. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC) Done. BTW, there were some minor changes in the article per discussion on talk page.--Kebeta (talk) 18:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments - really quick run through....

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:04, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

*Don't start the article with "This list..." - we haven't done that for quite some time. Done. Ottoman Turkish language is quickly overlinked. Done. So is Turkish language. Done. "to Arabian..." -> "to the Arabian..." Done. Note 1 needs a ref. This note (not note 1 anymore) was inserted by another user and I wasn't able to find a reference for it. Now is hidded until referenced. I have found the reference for this.--Kebeta (talk) 19:20, 18 June 2011 (UTC) "later Holy Roman " -> "later the Holy Roman" Done. "Most of his campaigns..." who is "his" here? You mentioned three people previously. I guess you mean "Most of Suleiman's campaigns...." Done. "from 1529–1566" prose - "from 1529 to 1566" Done. "Under his rule, ..." once again worth re-iterating "his" is "Suleiman's". Done. "Shortly after Suleiman's death, Ottoman Empire entered ..." -> ", the Ottoman Empire..." Done. "Anyway, the reign of Suleiman is the ..." not encyclopedic to start with "Anyway..." Done. zenit->zenith. Done. "The table's columns (except for Images ..." and notes. Done. "Terminal date" is not conventional English. What do you mean? Is it Beginning and end of campaign? Would it be better to say "Campaign dates"? Done.

• It's not immediately clear per WP:ACCESS where campaigns were. A non-expert may be unaware that Belgrade is in Europe. We need a symbol as well as a colour for this kind of thing.

• Color in Campaign now present location (Campaigns in Europe, Near East & Mediterranean). Is this OK now?

• No, you need a symbol as well as a colour to denote a particular property. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

• I am not sure how to do this (symbol). Do you have an example of this on some other FL article?--Kebeta (talk) 08:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

• Try List of Los Angeles Lakers seasons, the main table uses colours and symbols. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

• Bold shouldn't be used to denote something significant, those who are sight-challenged won't necessarily be able to pick it up.

• Now the important or significant location is bold and in bigger font (not small font as the rest of the Campaign path). Is this OK?

• On my browser, the text is the same size. It shouldn't use just bold, perhaps put an asterisk next to the significant location and add it to the key. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

• Well, on my computer the text of the important or significant location is bold and in bigger (normal) font, but I am OK with an asterisk next to the significant location. How do you propose that I do this. For example, Campaign path: Filibe (Plovdiv)–Niš–Belgrade*–Semendire (Smederevo). Something like this?--Kebeta (talk) 08:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

• Don't change the font size, but do add the symbol. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

• Gallery of opponents is unnecessary. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

• I already removed one redundant section from the same user which created "Gallery of opponents". I had some problems with him in this article, so I wouldn't remove this section (not to cause an edit war). Any other suggestions regarding this point or regarding something else within the article?--Kebeta (talk) 11:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Oppose. This is a VERY worthy topic for Featured Content. However this article is far from doing the subject justice. It's exactly the sort of thing I love to read about, history, battles in the Orient, can't beat it. And I have even been to Istanbul, and my father lived there for several years working with their military (and also said they were the bravest soldiers in the Korean War). What's more, the article itself for Suleiman is FA. So I...want this thing to win a war. But it is just not there.

1. The table is a very poor way to cover the content. Would be much better covered as individual sections of prose (don't WORRY about if it "looks like a list or an article". Worry about what way to show content helps the reader best...then give it to FA if that works...or take it here (they will allow a lot more article in a list, than Sandy will a list in an article). This would also, then allow showing a time-line for all the campaigns as a single wide-view left to rihght graphic. And allow putting maps and images and opponents within each campaign section. But the main prose stuck in the table, just doesn't belong in table cells.

2. More minor, but the table itself looks kind of confusing with the colors of the geography, with the campaign path in small writing above the prose, and then with having a caption by each image (wich makes the images have to be micro size). Numbering is a wasted field (you already have chronology and it is even sortable).

3. (Minor) Infobox is a waste. You don't have a bunch of fact data like a city article or an element, where people will come and scan for a fact only like population of the city and not want to go read prose. But then having an infobox makes you make your great picture small (bad).

4. First map is displayed too small to be usable (better to center it, above first section and display large). It's also confusing with all the different colors and having a lot of content irrelevant to Suleiman. Instead, just show the empire when he came to power and the additions that he made in a different color.

5. (Minor) Don't like the "List of" title. It is excess verbiage. Why not just call it "Campaigns of". It is not like a discography or something where there is some possibility of confusion with the article.

6. 'The campaigns of Suleiman are a series of campaigns by Suleiman...' This is a redundancy that Malleus always calls out.

7. Also, do we need to Wikilink BOTH Ottoman Turkish and Turkish in the first two sentences (as languages)? Try to keep the lead as smooth and friendly for the newbie as possible. The goal is to engage him and draw him into the article (or at least make him feel that he can grasp the lead even if the article is too tough for him).

8. I'm not sure the solution, but if we can somehow clean up the start, it would help. "The imperial campaigns[1] (Ottoman Turkish: سفر همايون, Sefer-i humāyūn)[Note 1] of Suleiman the Magnificent[Note 2]" is what make people say Wiki is not reader friendly. First half-sentence has a footnote, two notes, foreign glyph writing also spelled out phonetically). Couldn't ALL that etymology and word stranslation and footnote/noting go in one note?

9. The "usage" section for the table is kinda painful also.

10. I didn't pick over the prose much, but there seem to be issues in preciseness or writing. For instance "stretched to the Arabian Peninsula". Well, the big deal, was stretching to the Gulf of Aden or Yemen. But Arabian Peninsula is that whole thing including the Levant and the Turks were there before StM rose to power.

P.s. Please don't take this too hard. It is the only way I know to engage. I love that you love your topic and want you to show it well! And the Turks were by far the bravest POWs in the Korean War.TCO (reviews needed) 05:37, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.