Talk:Daud Shah Bahmani

Daud Shah Bahmani is currently a Royalty, nobility and heraldry good article nominee. Nominated by Noorullah (talk) at 22:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Anyone who has not contributed significantly to (or nominated) this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)

Short description: Ruler of Bahmani Saltunate

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

India Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was last assessed in August 2024.

Age of sources

@Noorullah21 The sources used in this article are not very recent; ideally something better than Haig could be used, but the main issue is directly citing Briggs-translated Ferishta, which should never be done; while Ferishta is frequently cited by scholarship in this area, what is and isn't essential or factual from it (including dates and Briggs' antiquated transliterations) should be determined, by the nature of it being written four centuries ago, by the writers of recent scholarship themselves, not the editor of this article. As it seems most direct citations of Ferishta here are reinforced by ones to more recent work, removing these citations shouldn't be much of a problem, while the rest of the content supported by them, if not paraphrased by recent sources, should be removed. Problems with sourcing, including the mentioned Ferishta issues, the lack of more recent scholarship, and in addition the one somewhat-recent source, Iranica, not supporting the text, should be resolved before this is nominated to be a GA. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 03:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you're talking about... the cohesion here and slight WALL makes what your saying difficult to read.

You're saying the sources are not recent..? Can you reword and reiterate this more clearly? Noorullah (talk) 04:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the sources are not recent.

Ferishta should not be directly cited as it was written four centuries ago. Elaboration provided above. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 04:38, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Flemmish Nietzsche I see.

I think Haig is still WP:RS, as he is on google scholars.

You're right about Ferishta -- though typically primary sources can be cited [when backed up with secondary sources]. Noorullah (talk) 04:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]