Talk:Emirate of Crete

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Emirate of Crete has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
January 24, 2011 Good article nominee Listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Middle Ages (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Greece (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated GA-Class)
MILHIST 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.
GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Arab world (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Former countries (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Piracy (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article lies in the latitude of WikiProject Piracy, a crew of scurvy editors bound to sharpen up all Wikipedia's piracy-related articles. If you want to ship with us and help improve this and other Piracy-related articles, lay aboard the project page and sign on for a berth.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Emirate of Crete/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer:   Miyagawa    talk   12:30, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll give the article a read through now and post points below as I come across them.   Miyagawa    talk   12:30, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Links in the infobox aren't working properly. Rather than linking to Byzantine Crete, the links are going to [[File:Simple Labarum.svg]]. I'm no expert with the former countries infobox, but I think if you look at Byzantium under the Komnenos dynasty (where the same images work), I'm sure you'll be able to work it out.Yes check.svg Done
  • History: Levant needs a wikilink.Yes check.svg Done
  • Conquest of crete: Drop the "however" in the first line. Flows better without it.Yes check.svg Done
  • Needs some sort of explanation of who W. Treadgold is in the paragraph, even if it's just "Historian W. Treadgold..."Yes check.svg Done
  • "According to Byzantine historians, the Andalusians were already familiar with Crete, having already raided it in the past." - perhaps "having previously raided it's shores." or something similar - the already just seems out of place.Yes check.svg Done

*"this is probably later invention" - needs an "a" between probably and later. Just re-read this line, and it's fine.   Miyagawa    talk   14:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

  • "some think that it was at the north coast" - "some historians...." otherwise inevitably someone is going to come along and stick one of those [who?] tags in there.Yes check.svg Done

Other than those points in the first portion of the article, it all looks good. Nice concise article that you might want to look at working up to FA in the future.   Miyagawa    talk   13:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for undertaking the review, and for the comments. Take your time and be as thorough as you can! I definitely intend to take this to FA eventually, once I gather some more sources to flesh it out. Cheers, Constantine 15:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Happy to mark this one up as GA. Good job. :)   Miyagawa    talk   23:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


major foe and biased interpitation[edit]

-"was one of the major foes of Byzantium." Really? And here i thought the Abbasid Caliphate was the only major foe the Byzantine Emp had until Manzikert were the Seljuk turks took over the title, until the 4th crusade with a brief crusader holdup. Then the Osman turks became it's major foe and vassallord until it's destruction. Minor foes could be ->Slavs,Bulgarians and Normands,Venice,Genua, and Emirate of Crete.

the Emirate of Crete were never a threat to the Byzantine Empire, they were merely a nucience, a small thorn on crete + a few islands , Just like the Crusades and their holy land states never were a "major foe" to the Abbasid Caliphate. In short, the choice of words is of major diffrence here.

It's allsow very intresting that the byzantines themselves thought of the Emirate like this, that they(the emirate) was just merely a small annoyance to be removed when the empire had recovered and mustered enough strengh to deal with it, nothing more.

Allsow, the useage of "Byzantium" suggest the writer/s of this article is unaware/intentionally calls the empire as "Byzantium" were as it's a latin name of the hellenistic pre-byzantine town, a more suitable name would be calling it >Constantinople< , since it's inhabitants were of greek-ortodox belif living in the middle ages (700-900etc) and not hellenistic pagans besieged by romans...

Im allsow suprised how somewhat biased this article is: it says "Byzantine historians are biased, yeat if u look u see in the article there's a hole bunch references from greek aka "byzantine" sources(!), making this hole article biased "muslim" friendly when it should hold neutral view.

Allsow, im interesting if the repeated useage of words like "booming" and "agricultural" really should be used at all, considering Crete relied more on fish as food more then agricultural food/products.

It is also possible that sugar cane was introduced to Crete at the time.[57]That's pure speculation, which is not adviced/suitable for wikipedia.

The picture painted by the few and scattered pieces of evidence from the Muslim world however is that of an ordered state with a regular monetary economy and extensive trade links, particularly with Egypt, and there is evidence that Chandax was a cultural centre of some importance.[54][55] a quite highly biased pro-muslim message here. It's like with the Vikings, they raided and traded, only they've been later on glorified by some later modern historians as some sort of innocent traders that never touched anything..

It is unclear what happened to the island's Christians after the Muslim conquest; the traditional view is that most were either converted or expelled.[19] again, there's no mention of christian cassulties/deaths, they're simply "converted or expeleld", more biased please?

-and there is evidence that Chandax was a cultural centre of some importance...Seriously? Of course it was an cultural centre of some importance..*sigh* as an automous provincial capital in the islamic world.

And let's not mention the byzantine reconquest section. It looks more like a biasd muslim fairy-tale story found in One Thousand and one Nights, with references & sources taken and writen in a biased way, rather then a non-POV wikipedia wants article to be.

--Byzantios (talk) 20:17, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Burning the boats[edit]

Burning the boars was a conventional trope reported of the Greeks as an emblem of a resolute, committed landing, with no turning back: conquer or die. The Athenian exile Cimon: "Deserted by the Egyptians, who came to terms, the Athenians burned their ships and prepared to make a stand; the admiring Persian commanders offered them free passage from Egypt, and they left by way of Libya and Cyrene." (J Barns, "Cimon and the first Athenian Expedition to Cyprus" in Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, 1953) With the Greek examples in mind, Cortez literslly did so on the Mexican shore in 1519. Is it not also a trope in the legend of Tariq ibn Ziyad landing at Gilbraltar? "To burn your boats" is idiom in the on-line Free Dictionary" and in Wikipedia's "Point of no return". --Wetman (talk) 23:48, 6 March 2013 (UTC)