Talk:Siege of Mosul (1743)

Learn more about this page

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Siege of Mosul (1743) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Iraq

	Iraq portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq 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.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force

The article

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The article is a direct translation of the following article in French, which is linked in the introduction: http://www.academia.edu/13154137/Moshtagh_Khorasani_Manouchehr_2015_._Milit%C3%A4rstrategie_und_Feldz%C3%BCge_des_Nader_Shah_Afshar_1688-1747_._Karfunkel_Combat_Nr._11_pp._42-51

According to the wikipedia article on identifying reliable sources "Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications." So let us examine his credentials; http://independent.academia.edu/ManouchehrMoshtaghKhorasani and his work has been included in various outlets, example: http://www.teheran.ir/spip.php?article1970#gsc.tab=0 The last link being the one that the translation is from.

Also I do not "think" the sources in the article are reliable but know them to be reliable. I am shocked that someone who clearly knows nothing of the historiography of the period could question those sources in his ignorance and then go on to say I might "think" they are reliable, but..... Parsa1993 (talk) 23:56, 15 November 2015 (UTC

The "article" you are referring to is a blog. Blogs are not acceptable to be used as a source in a wikipedia article. Please see WP:RS. Making assumptions about what other editors may know or not know is not acceptable. Please act civilly and do not edit war over this article. You @Parsa1993 have edit warred at 4 reversions by re-inserting disputed materials after making three hard reversions. Let us please discuss the validity of using blogs as resources in this particular article. Working in a collaborative manner with other editors is the best thing for this article and for wikipedia. Zpeopleheart (talk) 00:28, 16 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

It is abundantly clear that you have not read my comments above where I use WP:RS in conjunction with links to various sources to demonstrate the validity of my argument. Parsa1993 (talk) 00:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Add topic