Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chagatai Khan/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 16 October 2024 [1].

Chagatai Khan

edit
Nominator(s): ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Chagatai, the second son of Genghis Khan and Börte (and the third to be brought to FAC). He lived a fairly good life—probably better than any of his brothers—and was the only one to get a state named after him personally; not even Genghis managed that. If successful, this nomination will be used in the WikiCup. I hope you enjoy. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

image review

edit

Support by CMD

edit

Surprisingly short article for the founder of a Khanate! Shows you something about Mongol records I suppose.

  • Very interesting to see the Tsagaadai Khan transliteration in the image. I suggest that this nametag is included in the alt text as well, so screenreaders may share this interest.
    • I had an idea that this should be done, but I wasn't entirely sure.
  • Speaking of that transliteration, it's not in the lead note on transcriptions. A quick google seems to indicate it is not unheard of.
    • It is a Mongolian transliteration which has fallen out of use as worldwide scholars interact more and standardised forms have emerged. I could remove Ca'adai for the same reason.
      • Is there a particular reason not to include old prominent transliterations in the note, appropriately noted as outdated?
        • I have added.
  • The lead somewhat begs the question as to who excluded him from succession. It also implies that there was a sort of formal succession. Is this how the sources word it? Assuming the default is passing along to the eldest male, the body also doesn't explicitly explain why he was in contention, ie. why Jochi wasn't, given his legitimacy was apparently accepted.
    • Succession relied both on the thoughts of the previous ruler and the skills/experiences/popularity of the next. All a ruler's primary sons, and even occasionally his brothers, were eligible. As mentioned later, although Ögedei was Genghis's successor, the support of key figures such as Chagatai were essential in ensuring his accession. I have clarified that Genghis excluded Chagatai from succession in the lead; would more detail in the body be helpful?
      • More succession detail in the body would be helpful. Questions that immediately come to mind are what were societal expectations around succession, what happened to Jochi's position, what happened during the two year(?) transition from Genghis to Ögedei.
        • I have added details on these topics.
  • "first son definitely", should this be "definitively"?
    • I think both work, but changed.
  • Do we know the mothers of Balgashi, Sarban, Yesu-Mongke, and Baidar?
  • Do we know how he built (or commanded to be built) and maintained these roads?
    • No to both, sadly. Blame the records.
  • Is it possible to get more clarity on which parts of the narrative exactly Atwood disputes? The way the Siege of Guranj paragraph is written, I came away with the impression the story of Jochi Chagatai disunity being solved by Ögedei was historical fiction, but the next paragraph implies that it was at least partially true.
    • That is the difficulty—even if Atwood is correct in his theory of revisionism/propaganda, it is entirely possible that divisions between Jochi and Chagatai did delay the capture of the city. I have tried to focus a little; let me know if that works.
  • Given the land ruled is described as reaching a river in Transoxiana, "governors of the sedentary lands in Transoxiana" has an unclear geographic scope.
    • I think "settlements" is more understandable, even if it loses a tiny bit of accuracy.
      • I think the more immediate question is, did Chagatai lack control of just the cities in Transoxiana, or within all his territory? (Was his territory synonymous with the concept of Transoxiana?)
        • Just the cities in Transoxiana, which I think the text implies.
  • It should be made clearer that Khorasan was not a sedentary city.
    • Done.
  • "mother of his heir Güyük", I assume this was Ögedei's heir, but are talking explicitly designated heir, presumptive heir, or eventual heir?
    • The latter two; Ögedei did not have an explicitly designated heir.
      • Could the text say "presumptive heir" then? Perhaps earlier succession info would also help contextualise this. Relatedly, what is the "However," in the next sentence for. The word is a chekhov's gun for Ögedei's succession that is never resolved.
        • Edited appropriately.
  • "Yesülün accused one of his stewards", the subject of "his" is unclear, I thought it was Batu.
  • "Chagatai was succeeded" should probably specify succeeded "in central Asia" or similar, given the text already covers succession as senior Genghisid prince.
  • "Although Chagatai's loyalty to nomadic customs meant that he constructed no more than pools for waterfowl, storehouses, and small villages". Didn't he construct a highway system through western China?
    • Clarified all; for the latter, I presume they were military constructions which served well in the short-term but were not necessary for trade or other non-military movements.

Absolute classic move by Ögedei with that cup. The navbox at the bottom says he was the "Khan of Chagatai Khanate", I suppose that's a tricky anachronism to avoid. CMD (talk) 08:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matarisvan (source and prose review)

edit

Hi AirshipJungleman29, my comments:

  • Link to Al Altan (Alaltun) as done for the other Genghisid siblings?
  • "by his father, Balgashi, Sarban": suffix "as well as" after "his father", so we know that these are Chagatai's named sons and not those given little regard.
    • Done both.
  • Could we add some details here on the siege of Otrar, say a small paragraph?
  • When did Chagatai and Ögedei join Genghis at Samarkand, and when did the city surrender? Consider adding?
    • I've added some details on the siege of Otrar, but not that of Samarkand, because the latter was extremely short and Chagatai wasn't that involved in it anyway.
  • How did he utilise the Uighur officials in his realm, as we have mentioned here?
    • Administration, as I believe the article outlines.
  • In the biblio, link to Hodong Kim and Peter Jackson?
    • Done.

That's all from. Will try to do a source review soon. Cheers Matarisvan (talk) 10:12, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from PMC

edit

Will comment within a week or so. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • "masterful knowledge of Mongol traditions, his strict fidelity to Mongol custom and law" - saying both traditions and custom feels redundant here; they're a bit the same
    • They're actually not, and refer to technically different things that I written articles on yet. I think I'd like to keep the redundancy for when/if I get around to that.
      • If tradition and custom are such distinct concepts wrt the Mongol empire, I might use the Mongol words instead, because for most English-language readers, tradition and custom are so close to the same thing that it's redundant to say both.
        • Fine, I've simplified.
  • "Because Genghis felt..." the third clause in this sentence gets in the way of the overall flow, I think. Maybe split to two sentences, or trim clause 3 down?
    • I've just removed it, it wasn't that useful and you're right it spoiled the flow.
  • I actually have no commentary until Taliqan and Mutukan's death
  • Dates for Taliqan siege and Mutukan's siege and death (even rough estimates would be useful)
    • I've added "summer 1221" for the fall of Taliqan with a new source; Bamiyan is indistinct enough that we don't know.
  • "on the request of" should be "at the request of"
    • Done.
  • "an important element" I think you could trim to "importantly" but I won't fight about it
    • Yeah, was a bit wordy.
  • I'm curious about the image used here - Marco Polo isn't mentioned anywhere in the article. What's the context for him writing about a baptism that never happened?
    • Christians liked to think that other people were Christians idk?
      • Mm...is there any sourcing that discusses Polo visiting Chagatai, just so that it's mentioned in the text? As a reader when I see that caption I want to know more. If there's not, that's fine, it is what it is.
        • No, not really; as with many peoples, he noted down legends and rumours about their histories and lives, some of which were true but most of which were false. This seems just another one.
  • Ögedei managed to get around this restriction by finding a very large cup. I am howling. I love Ogedi. People have never changed, once, in all of history.
    • It's a great anecdote, isn't it?
  • "complained to the khagan" this title isn't mentioned anywhere else in the text
  • "sought to convince Chagatai" did she succeed? "his approval was critical to her becoming regent" the future tense there makes this read a bit ambiguously, I parse it either as "she would need it to become regent" or "she got it and it was one of the big reasons she became regent"
    • Clarified both.

That's really all I have. Another interesting and tightly-written biography. I look forward to the eventual FT for sons of Genghis Khan. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SC

edit

Comments to follow - SchroCat (talk) 08:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • "He was infamously strict in interpreting the law": As this is an opinion, I think it would probably be best to identify whose it is inline
  • "either killed or enslaved Otrar's entire population": I thought the Christians (and some merchants) were spared?
  • "Such hyperbole is probably far from the truth": again, I think it best for an inline attribution here
  • "whom he relied on": technically "on whom he relied"...

That's my lot. A nice read. - SchroCat (talk) 12:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks SchroCat, I've adjusted all apart from the second point, for which see above. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

edit


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Chagatai_Khan/archive1&oldid=1251599361"