- 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) 19:29, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Abdur Rahman Peshawari
... that the Turkish soldier and diplomat Abdur Rahman Peshawari was a Muslim nationalist born in Peshawar who went to aid Ottoman Turkey in the Balkan Wars as a volunteer medic?Anadolu- ALT1:... that the Turkish soldier Abdur Rahman Peshawari was appointed as Turkey's ambassador to Afghanistan due to his knowledge of Pashto and Persian? Anadolu
5x expanded by Mar4d (talk). Self-nominated at 13:06, 10 June 2020 (UTC).
It is a very interesting article, well referenced, and generally within the policy. Expansion happened recently, but it hasn't met the 5x criteria because the March 2020 version (before the June expansion) has 2,754 characters of text, while the current one has 10116. To be ineligible, it needs 2,754x5 = 13,770 so unfortunately more content is needed. Note that only the text counts for the 5x calculation; images, captions, infobox templates, references, etc. do not. Let me know if it is still possible to expand the content.
Both hooks are verified, but I prefer the ALT1 because the fact asserted is more concrete. I would suggest rewriting sentences like "His career in the future of the newly-created Turkish state ended prematurely when he was shot in the back during an assassination attempt in Istanbul in 1925" and "He left a respected legacy in Turkey" to be more neutral and less editorialized, but for the most part this article is well written. HaEr48 (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- @HaEr48: That's so close. Is there still time to expand this to meet the threshold?VR talk 14:09, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, in my experience nominators are given time to still expand the article in these kind of cases, so I am giving the nominator some time here. HaEr48 (talk) 14:12, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks HaEr48 and Vice regent for your comments. HaEr48, thanks in particular for taking the time to review the article, I appreciate it thoroughly. I seem to have made an error in the way I calculated the 5x expansion and would like to apologise.
- Yes, in my experience nominators are given time to still expand the article in these kind of cases, so I am giving the nominator some time here. HaEr48 (talk) 14:12, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- @HaEr48: That's so close. Is there still time to expand this to meet the threshold?VR talk 14:09, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- Although there are some informative excerpts in Faiz Ahmed's book, which could be used to salvage another extra couple of lines, I'm not entirely confident if I have the time or focus to be able to bring the article to the required threshold you noted. Could you perhaps set a deadline, failing which, this DYK can be closed with no further action? I feel if I have that as a reference instead, I just might be able to get around to it. Mar4d (talk) 16:06, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Mar4d: Okay. I'd say, 1 week from this comment? Thank you and all the best! HaEr48 (talk) 16:55, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- @HaEr48: Sounds fair. Thanks, Mar4d (talk) 16:57, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- @HaEr48 and Vice regent: I hope we have crossed the threshold of 5x now. Please feel free to review, and suggest copyedits in light of the additions. Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Mar4d: now it is long enough to be 5x expansion. In general the text is within policy, with regard to referencing and neutrality. The nominator does not need QPQ, because it appears to be just the first nomination. I struck the top hook because it's too long and less concrete, if you still want to use a variation of it I suggest shortening it and discarding less interesting information, e.g.
- ALT2: "... that the Peshawar-born Abdur Rahman Peshawari volunteered as a medic in the Ottoman Empire during the Balkan Wars?"
- which is simpler to digest by a reader scanning the main page. The current ALT1 is fine so we can use that too. Let me know what you think. HaEr48 (talk) 21:00, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Mar4d: now it is long enough to be 5x expansion. In general the text is within policy, with regard to referencing and neutrality. The nominator does not need QPQ, because it appears to be just the first nomination. I struck the top hook because it's too long and less concrete, if you still want to use a variation of it I suggest shortening it and discarding less interesting information, e.g.
- @HaEr48 and Vice regent: I hope we have crossed the threshold of 5x now. Please feel free to review, and suggest copyedits in light of the additions. Cheers, Mar4d (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- @HaEr48: Sounds fair. Thanks, Mar4d (talk) 16:57, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Mar4d: Okay. I'd say, 1 week from this comment? Thank you and all the best! HaEr48 (talk) 16:55, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Good to go (ALT1 or ALT2). HaEr48 (talk) 05:49, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I came by to promote ALT1 but the hook fact does not appear in the article. Instead, the article says that he was appointed due to his knowledge of the region (especially the Indo-Afghan frontier) and because he was well known in the Turkish Army
. His knowledge of the languages is not singled out as a reason for his appointment, nor is it sourced. Yoninah (talk) 20:26, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: Thank you for noticing, and sorry I overlooked the issue. It does appear in the Anadolu source "Due to his fluency in Pashto, Persian, and English he was later appointed as ambassador of Turkey in Afghanistan from 1920 to 1922", but you're right it is not single out in the article. Besides, looking at the book source ("Afghanistan rising", p. 176) looks like he was not a full ambassador, but rather chargé d'affaires (this is a slightly different rank even though casually it is often used interchangeably). Probably a more generic "envoy" would be appropriate. Mar4d Can you sort it out? Or we might also choose ALT2. HaEr48 (talk) 20:40, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah HaEr48: Thanks both for your comments. As mentioned by HaEr48, his fluency in Pashto and Persian (as the reason for ambassadorship) is mentioned in the Anadolu reference here. It ties in with the preceding reference about his knowledge of the "Indo-Afghan" region as one of the reasons for his selection as Turkey's diplomat. I've added the word "additionally" to maintain the context. Secondly, the ambassador-envoy confusion stems from the sources, several of which use the first terminology over the latter. As I have alluded to in this section, the reason his position was titled "envoy" was because Turkey did not become a republic until 1922. I've tweaked the lead to take note of this as suggested. Lastly, I will concur with HaEr48 and prefer ALT2, mostly because it is both well-worded and notable. Hope this helps, Mar4d (talk) 00:41, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
- But ALT2 is not hooky. ALT1 just needs a little tweak, like:
- ALT1a: ... that the Turkish soldier Abdur Rahman Peshawari was appointed as Turkey's ambassador to Afghanistan in part due to his knowledge of Pashto and Persian? Yoninah (talk) 09:51, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah HaEr48: Thanks both for your comments. As mentioned by HaEr48, his fluency in Pashto and Persian (as the reason for ambassadorship) is mentioned in the Anadolu reference here. It ties in with the preceding reference about his knowledge of the "Indo-Afghan" region as one of the reasons for his selection as Turkey's diplomat. I've added the word "additionally" to maintain the context. Secondly, the ambassador-envoy confusion stems from the sources, several of which use the first terminology over the latter. As I have alluded to in this section, the reason his position was titled "envoy" was because Turkey did not become a republic until 1922. I've tweaked the lead to take note of this as suggested. Lastly, I will concur with HaEr48 and prefer ALT2, mostly because it is both well-worded and notable. Hope this helps, Mar4d (talk) 00:41, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
