Talk:Tulunids

Tulunids was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 19, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
January 8, 2009	Good article nominee	Not listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 11, 2008.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the military prowess of the Tulunid dynasty of Arab Egypt was due to its multi-ethnic army composed of Turkish people, Sudanese, and Greek soldiers?

Current status: Former good article nominee

Islam: Muslim history

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Muslim history task force.

Turkey

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Egypt Mid‑importance

	Egypt portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country

My thoughts on the article

I was looking through the peer review section and found your article and, while I may not be able to give a peer review (I don't know what the requirements are but I probably don't fill them), I can at least give my opinion on the article; the article is good so far, however I think that there are: not enough references/notes from different sources in the article, the few ones you have got are not enough to cover an entire historical period; I don't agree with some of the ordering of the article; I think that you should have the layout as chronological (so the demise of the Tulunids being at the end) and the Military, Culture and Economy sections being tagged to each of their respective periods (so for example the section in Culture about Ahmad ibn Tulun founding his own capital should be placed under the Ahmad ibn Tulun section). Hope that helps. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 09:35, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thoughts. The references I have are mostly to Encyclopaedia of Islam, which is a very scholarly source that effectively and efficiently covers Muslim history. You should take a look at it. If you still disagree, please let me know.

The structure of this article seems to be in line with articles on wikipedia. Generally the history section is separated from culture and economy. See, for example, Ottoman Empire, where Economy, State, Society, Culture and Religion come after the "Fall of the Empire".Bless sins (talk) 03:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey

I'm curious as to why this article is classified in wikiproject:Turkey. The Tulunid domains do not seem to have been extended into Anatolia.Bless sins (talk) 15:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should check the article by searching the phrase "Turk". The terms "Turk"s and "Anatolia" are not the only common sets. Cheers. CeeGee (talk) 15:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you're trying to say. (I should know, as I wrote it!) However, if you look at Uzbekistan it is not classified in wikiproject:Turkey, though the country has a lot of Turks. I think Turkey refers to the modern day state locatied in Anatolia, not the historical Turkic peoples whose history occupies the whole of Middle East, Central Asia, India, parts of China, eastern Europe and Russia.Bless sins (talk) 05:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because Uzbekistan does not need to be under the scope of Wikiproject:Turkey. There are enough Uzbeks on Wikipedia, but no Tulunids. Tulunids in not today's Egypt. You can stand against Republic of Egypt being under the scope of Turkey, but Egypt geographically and historically has strong binds with Turkey and Turks. Just an example from the dozens, Ottomans ruled Egypt for hundrends of years.--hnnvansier (talk) 13:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tulunids/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi! I'll be conducting the GA review of this article, and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 18:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
The lead should be a summary of the entire article, and therefore does not need sources unless you are sourcing a direct quote or controversial fact.

In the Military section, I am not sure about the need for the bulleted list. MOS discourages lists, and I really think this information could be presented well in a prose-based format. It wouldn't need to be all that much different than it is now - simply removing the bullet points and adding a bit of flow and context is all that is needed.

Due to my concerns about the sourcing, I have not done a complete review of the prose. Once I see work (or discussion) proceeding about the sourcing, I will complete the prose review.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
I have some serious concerns about the quality and quantity of sources you are using. You seem to rely heavily on the Encyclopædia Britannica and Encyclopaedia of Islam. It is frowned upon to use generic encyclopedias (such as Britannica) for substantial parts of the sourcing in an article - in this article, for example, the entire "Demise" subsection is sourced to the Britannica article on the subject. As for the Islam encyclopedia, it is not so much the source itself I am questioning as the absolute reliance on it in this article. You have 17 seperate citations to the main article and 13 more citations to two secondary articles. That is 30 out of 38 total! While the Encyclopedia of Islam is probably a good source, there have to be other scholarly articles and books out there that address this topic. By limiting yourself to such a narrow selection, isn't it possible that you are missing a large portion of the study on this topic?

I've added a couple of fact tags where I would like to see references.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Are there no images, other than maps, that you could use in this article? Drawings or paintings from this era, or even artist's renditions of what they thought the people of this dynasty looked like?
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
I have some serious concerns about the sourcing of this article, detailed above, as well as some issues with MOS and images. I am not failing this article outright, but this article needs additional work, especially on references, before it can reach GA status. I have this page watchlisted, so any discussion and comments can be left here, although you may also feel free to contact me on my talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since I have not received any reply to the above review in the week that the article has been on hold, I am going to have to fail the article. Please feel free to fix the above issues and renominate the article at GAN. Dana boomer (talk) 17:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/IFPO/halshs-00641964/fr/
Triggered by \bhalshs\.archives-ouvertes\.fr on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 15:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 07:17, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tulunids. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:20, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Map

The Map doesn’t even show the Country Blackmamba31248 (talk) 19:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 20:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greek & Syriac languages

Egyptian was still spoken by the public in the Nile Valley. Arabic was scattered all over, but not dominant yet, Greek was still spoken in the Eastern Mediterranean the Byzantines were still there especially near Mersin, Syriac was still spoken in many parts of the Levant. Batrone (talk) 07:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]