Talk:Mirza Shafi Vazeh/GA1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Whiteguru in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 07:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)Reply


Starts GA Review; the review will follow the same sections of the Article. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

 


Lede

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • A reasonably good summary of the life and poetic works of Mirza Shafi Vazeh. I wonder about the inclusion of Ivan Grigoriev.

Life

edit

Birth Date

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Whereas other sources claim Mirza Shafi was born in 1794 in Ganja, a strong refutation and citation of sources is given in this section. The section concludes (sensibly) with citation by Mirza Shafi's commander-in-chief.

Early Life

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • The Russian conquest of the Caucasus features the fall of Shafi's father to impoverishment and death. Several sources are cited in rounding a conclusion that Mirza Shafi was "a kind, simple man who was Tatar by origin, and Persian by upbringing".

Education

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • It is well known that Shafi made enemies of most of the local clergy. The influence of Haji Abdullah is strong and noted with regard to Shafi's continuing education.

Teaching in Tiflis

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Multiple sources confirm that Shafi taught oriental languages and calligraphy. Here is the beginnings of a time wherein Shafi's influence on Divans of the future was slowly being transmitted. His time teaching in the Gymnasium is also cited by many sources.
Vazeh and Bodenstedt
edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Bodenstedt made Shafi famous in Europe
  • Bodenstedt's hoax is also well known.

Death

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Not many sources cite the date nor the cause of death.
  • The location is often given some name of a garden.
  • Simple, and well scribed, well sourced.

Literary Activity

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • The most important section of this article
  • Addresses the mystery of poems lost and found
  • Unfolds the history of translations
  • Unfolds the character and writing of Shafi

Legacy

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • A good history, well illustrated.

Notes and References

edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • All examined; appropriate
edit
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
  • Noted


 


End Matter

edit
  1. Is it is Broad in its coverage?
  • Yes, this is exemplary in coverage and history, yet appropriately terse and concise.
  1. Is it Verifiable with no original research?
  • Yes.
  1. Does the article meet notability guidelines?
  • Yes
  1. Does it follow WP:NPOV Neutral Point of View?
  • Yes, quite so.
  1. Is it stable?
  • 957 page views in the last 90 days;
  • This page started life on 6 May 2006
  • Page has had 195 edits by 68 editors.
  • page is considered stable, no evidence of edit warring.
  1. Top editors are
    * CuriousGolden
    * Mike hayes
    * Twofingered Typist
    * Rathfelder
    * Interfase
  1. It is illustrated by images ?
  • There are many images, well laid out and appropriate to each section.
  • The legacy section images are both apt and very well laid out.
  • First image (a crop) is in the public domain, dated 1850
  • Battle of Ganja is dated 1893, so public domain.
  • Abbas mosque in Ganja is work of Dmitri Ivanovich Yermakov and claimed to be circa 1900.
  • Gymnasium image is from Poetry of Nikoloz Baratashvili, Permission=PD-Ol
  • Page from the Chrestomathy is dated 1852, extract from филиала Академии наук СССР, 1938
  • Poems of Mirza Shafi Vazeh is dated 1890, source is above.
  • Vazeh and Bodenstedt image is dated 1850, Tausend und ein Tag im Orient, 1850
  • Three images in the legacy section are Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International, and Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license.
  • All images are appropriate to the article.

Overall

edit
  • Well scribed

Conclusion

edit