Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurra-yi Khuttali/archive2

Hurra-yi Khuttali

Nominator(s): Amir Ghandi (talk) 11:54, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am renominating this article after it failed the first nomination only because of a lack of engagement from reviewers. This article is about a minor figure in the history of the Ghaznavid dynasty, the dynasty that ruled what is modern day Afghanistan and eastern Iran. Hurra-yi Khuttali was a princess from this dynasty and is regarded as the most politically active woman of her era because she interfered in the succession of her brother. Small details are known about her life, therefore the article itself is quite short. Amir Ghandi (talk) 11:54, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ThaesOfereode

Hi Amir, it looks like you have Arabic transliterations in the {{Lang}} template. Unless the Arabic script is used, you should use {{translit}} instead. Other issues below:

"free woman" → 'free woman' per MOS:SINGLE (also want single quotes around "agnomen").
- Done
Deitalicize established loan words like "amir", "harem", and "sultan". All of these are common enough terms in English that they don't need italics.
- Done
First instance of amir should be delinked to avoid a WP:SEAOFBLUE violation (i.e., before Mas'ud of Ghazna)
- Done
Any reason you picked the spelling "Seljuq" over the more common "Seljuk"?
- Force of habit; changed it to Seljuk

More to follow later. ThaesOfereode (talk) 12:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Airship

As always, the following are suggestions, not demands:

"considered the most prominent woman in Ghaznavid politics" this is not quite what the body says—that an action she took was the most prominent by a woman in Ghaznavid politics.
- Changed it
Not sure if "in modern Afghanistan" needs to be in the lead.
- Deleted
Two consecutive sentences starting "she was" could be combined.
- Done
"a direct cause for" "a direct cause of" sounds more natural.
- Done
"who was deemed unfit" this omits that she was one who deemed Muhammad unfit.
- Deleted
" Her letter was one of the main reasons for Mas'ud's usurpation of the throne." a bit vague, you could go into more detail about what actually happened.
- Done
"the Ghaznavid dynasty, who were a dynasty of Turkic origin" could be simplified to something like "the Ghaznavids, a dynasty of Turkic origin..."
- Done
"she sought to learn sciences" this is slightly ungrammatical, probably needing a "the", and also a little unclear—which sciences?
- This was originally 'other sciences' beside theology, but one reviewer commented that theology is not a science, so I omited the 'other'. I'll add 'other' again since the source itself considers theology a science.
The map provided is not that useful—a better one would show the Ghaznavid territories, which are referred to more often, instead of intricate details of Khwarazm. File:Ghaznavid Empire (map).jpg seems ideal, if you can find a source that verifies it.
- Done
"The latter" is unnecessary—it wouldn't be the person who's died, would it?
- Replaced with 'He'.
"patriotist" is not a word, is "patriotic" meant? If yes, I suggest "nationalist" instead as more suitable.
- I myself prefer 'patriotic' since the source uses it
"the rebels killed Ma'mun because of his submission" if the whole rebellion broke out because of the submission, I would suggest mentioning that at the start of the sentence, not the end.
- I reworded the sentence. Thoughts?
You could mention that Muhammad and his brother were twins.
"inviting him" is a bit oddly phrased, would suggest "encouraging him" or similar.
"Mas'ud marched east to claim the throne, and continued to receive letters from Hurra and his mother regarding the situation in Ghazna. On his arrival in 1030 in Ghazna, Mas'ud captured Muhammad and took the throne." these sentences are quite clunky; try to trim to reduce duplication.
"who had assumed total power in Ghazna after Muhammad's ascension to become the real power behind Muhammad's government" this also essentially says the same thing twice.
The last paragraph of the "Biography" section needs a thorough copyedit—it really lacks clarity.
Too many commas in the last sentence of "Assessments". ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:25, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I seem to be the only one to have completed a review last time around, so here is my support again. FunkMonk (talk) 16:24, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]