![]() | Battle of Azaz (1030) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 10, 2020. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hey @ Cplakidas: I added some new information with new sources to the Background section and as a result, a lot of the previously cited information has been left uncited. I added citation needed tags to those sentences and would have had added the citations themselves, but I don't have complete access to the sources you used. Could you add those citations whenever you have the chance. On another note, I have further info to add here and hopefully we can nominate this article for GA soon. Cheers -- Al Ameer ( talk) 23:23, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Gog the Mild ( talk · contribs) 22:16, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Constantine. A couple of initial thoughts:
Hi Gog the Mild, thanks a lot for taking on this. Please be as thorough and nit-picking as you can, above and beyond GA requirements :) Cheers, Constantine ✍ 12:34, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
More to follow. Gog the Mild ( talk) 19:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
OK. A fine article. It's at or close to GA standard. As requested I will now go through being picky. Make of my suggestions what you will.
Is that "nit-picking" enough for you?
Gog the Mild (
talk)
09:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
@ Cplakidas: According to Zakkar, citing Yahya of Antioch, the treaty between Nasr and Byzantium was the “restoration of the 969 treaty”. We should plug the Treaty of Safar article here. Could you do this as I’m not sure if we should link it in the Background section and reference it again in the Aftermath or only link/reference it in the Aftermath section. — Al Ameer ( talk) 14:17, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
P.S. I added whatever else I could from the Arab side—take out or copyedit as you see fit. There's one more thing (other than linking the Treaty of Safar), but I'm not sure where or how best to integrate it or if it should be added at all. Zakkar (pp. 117–118) writes "Psellus' report of this battle is most interesting, describing as it does the tactics employed by the Kilabis in contrast to the heavy movement of the Byzantine army. These tactics reveal the nomadic character and method of fighting." And Kamal Salibi in his Syria under Islam: Empire on Trial, 634-1097, Volume 1 (p. 85) writes of the Kilab (and the Tayy for that matter) "Their chief military asset, in fact, was their Bedouin swiftness of movement", though Salibi was not discussing the Battle of Azaz, just about the Syrian Kilab in general during this time period. It might be useful for context to explicitly mention this aspect as it gives insight for the average reader to how a small Bedouin force, because of its high mobility and flexibility, could defeat a much larger conventional standing army. Bianquis (p. 122) also notes the Mirdasids' tactics in this regard was more effective than those employed by the Hamdanids in their wars with Byzantium. -- Al Ameer ( talk) 16:37, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
![]() | Battle of Azaz (1030) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 10, 2020. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hey @ Cplakidas: I added some new information with new sources to the Background section and as a result, a lot of the previously cited information has been left uncited. I added citation needed tags to those sentences and would have had added the citations themselves, but I don't have complete access to the sources you used. Could you add those citations whenever you have the chance. On another note, I have further info to add here and hopefully we can nominate this article for GA soon. Cheers -- Al Ameer ( talk) 23:23, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Gog the Mild ( talk · contribs) 22:16, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Constantine. A couple of initial thoughts:
Hi Gog the Mild, thanks a lot for taking on this. Please be as thorough and nit-picking as you can, above and beyond GA requirements :) Cheers, Constantine ✍ 12:34, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
More to follow. Gog the Mild ( talk) 19:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
OK. A fine article. It's at or close to GA standard. As requested I will now go through being picky. Make of my suggestions what you will.
Is that "nit-picking" enough for you?
Gog the Mild (
talk)
09:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
@ Cplakidas: According to Zakkar, citing Yahya of Antioch, the treaty between Nasr and Byzantium was the “restoration of the 969 treaty”. We should plug the Treaty of Safar article here. Could you do this as I’m not sure if we should link it in the Background section and reference it again in the Aftermath or only link/reference it in the Aftermath section. — Al Ameer ( talk) 14:17, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
P.S. I added whatever else I could from the Arab side—take out or copyedit as you see fit. There's one more thing (other than linking the Treaty of Safar), but I'm not sure where or how best to integrate it or if it should be added at all. Zakkar (pp. 117–118) writes "Psellus' report of this battle is most interesting, describing as it does the tactics employed by the Kilabis in contrast to the heavy movement of the Byzantine army. These tactics reveal the nomadic character and method of fighting." And Kamal Salibi in his Syria under Islam: Empire on Trial, 634-1097, Volume 1 (p. 85) writes of the Kilab (and the Tayy for that matter) "Their chief military asset, in fact, was their Bedouin swiftness of movement", though Salibi was not discussing the Battle of Azaz, just about the Syrian Kilab in general during this time period. It might be useful for context to explicitly mention this aspect as it gives insight for the average reader to how a small Bedouin force, because of its high mobility and flexibility, could defeat a much larger conventional standing army. Bianquis (p. 122) also notes the Mirdasids' tactics in this regard was more effective than those employed by the Hamdanids in their wars with Byzantium. -- Al Ameer ( talk) 16:37, 26 September 2019 (UTC)