Talk:Mustafa ibn Ali al-Muwaqqit

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 10:11, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that astronomer Mustafa ibn Ali wrote mostly in Ottoman Turkish rather than in Arabic, in order to make his field more accessible in the Ottoman Empire?
  "By writing in the Ottoman Turkish language about astronomical matters, he was actually aiming to make astronomical works easily understandable for everyone" (Aydüz 2017, p. 225 )
  ... he wrote almost all his works on astronomy and geography in Turkish rather than Arabic ... By writing in Turkish he was able to reach a greater audience (i. e., beginning students of astronomy and timekeepers) as indicated by the number of extant manuscripts and late copies (Fazlıoğlu 2007)
  • ALT1:... that one of Mustafa ibn Ali's works includes geographical information on 100 major cities, including their coordinates, qibla directions, and distance to Istanbul?
    Source: "Written in 1525, it was presented to Sultan Süleymān I and included astronomical and geographical information such as the distances to Istanbul (as the crow flies) of 100 major cities stretching from China to Morocco, their longitudes and latitudes, their qiblas (directions toward Mecca), and their shortest and longest days (Fazlıoğlu 2007)

• Reviewed: Lauren Boebert

Created by HaEr48 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:55, 4 July 2020 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Fine and interesting article! Everything is in order, both hooks are interesting as well as in-line sourced, and QPQ is done. Hook 1 seems to be a bit more accessible. I have made some minor fixes. I think this is good to go. Applodion (talk) 17:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the review, Applodion. Just a point of clarification, by " Hook 1" do you mean the first/top hook or the alt1 hook? HaEr48 (talk) 18:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

@HaEr48: Indeed, I meant the top hook. Applodion (talk) 18:21, 5 July 2020 (UTC)