Talk:Aššur-etil-ilāni

Untitled

Are you sure about this? This does not appear to match some info from other articles. A source citation would be useful. -- The Anome 13:10, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I have no idea when chronicle (BM 25127 I assume?) mentions or likely refers to Assuretelilani fighting Sinshariskun, let alone in the year 623. A source is necessary here, until then I thought it was better to remove that part as there is no prove that the two ever fought each other. Djaser 18:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, in the meantime let's put the disputed text here until whoever added it comes up with their source:

According to the chronicle, in 623 Ashur-etil-ilani was defeated and killed in battle against Sin-shar-ishkun near Nippur. It appears that Sin-shar-ishkun, who was his main rival, was considered the legal successor, at least in Babylon.

--ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 19:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Are secondary sources allowed for this topic? I'm afraid I don't know enough about Wikipedia guidelines, but I have a few books with me that claim that claim confidently that Sin-shar-ishkun definitely fought Ashur-etil-ilani. Specifically, Georges Roux writes in Ancient Iraq, 1980, p. 375: "Then, war broke out between Ashur-etil-ilani and his brother, and it lasted for three years, with several towns of Southern Mesopotamia passing from one hand to another. In 623 B.C. Ashur-etil-ilani was killed in battle near Nippur, and Sin-shar-ishkun became King of Assyria." Am I allowed to use this as a source? Shades97 (talk) 20:35, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 08:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Basic GA criteria

1. Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
2. Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
3. Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
4. Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
5. Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch (e.g., "awesome" and "stunning").
6. Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
7. Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation – not applicable.
8. Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations – not applicable.
9. All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
10. All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
11. Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
12. No original research.
13. No copyright violations or plagiarism.
14. Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
15. Neutral.
16. Stable.
17. Illustrated, if possible – not applicable.
18. Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright – not applicable.

For reviews, I use the above list of criteria as a benchmark and complete the variables as I go along. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 08:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments

I remember when I studied ancient history eons ago that there was doubt and even controversy about the last years of Assurbanipal with differing views about the date of his death ranging from 631 to 627/626. Personally, I always favoured 631 for the very reason given here – the final contemporary evidence. A figure like Assurbanipal would have continued to be recorded somehow if he had lived another four or five years, and so it is logical to assert that he died c.631 and was then succeeded by Assuretillilani. Anyway, the sources you've cited cover the question more than adequately.

I made a few tweaks as I went along but there was nothing of any great significance. The article is very well written. The narrative is to the point and is importantly within scope, avoiding the obvious pitfall of over-speculation about an enigmatic subject like Assuretillilani. It easily passes GA. Good work. No Great Shaker (talk) 11:05, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@No Great Shaker: Thank you very much for taking the time to look over this article, and for passing it! It is a bit of a shame that we don't know more about Assuretillilani, who is easily the most obscure of the Sargonid kings, but what can you do. On 631 vs 627, I absolutely agree. I still see 627 or 626 sometimes, but in recent works 631 appears to finally be the favored date - had Assurbanipal been alive four years longer we probably would have known and if Assuretillilani became king only in 627 and ruled southern Mesopotamia for four years (until 623), how could Nabopolassar be making inscriptions in Babylon already in 626? Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)