 | Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj 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. Review: July 17, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 14 June 2024 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
- 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
Bruxton
talk
05:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
( )
- ... that Shagdarjavin Natsagdorj was appointed director of the Institute of History at the Mongolian Academy of Sciences just two years after being accepted as an apprentice there?
- Source: Ishdorj, Ts. (12 September 2008). Шагдаржав Нацагдорж: Их түүхийг эрхэмлэсэн эрдэмтэн [Shagdarjav Natsagdorj: A scientist who values great history] (in Mongolian). Archived from the original on 31 May 2013. Retrieved 16 May 2024.
Created by
AirshipJungleman29 (
talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 19 past nominations.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC).
-
New, long enough, wonderfully written, and interesting throughout; QPQ done. The source apparently verifies the hook (I used automatic translation on the Mongolian text), but I cannot determine the quality of the source, as the publisher is not identified -- if it self-published, as it looks, I have reservations about its usability anywhere in the article, and especially for sourcing the hook. Also, assuming the source is reliable: the hook is fun and all, but the article has much more interesting facts, which seem to be quoted to much more reliable sources -- how about something on his refusal to criticize Genghis?
Dahn (
talk)
18:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review
Dahn! The source may be self-published, but its author, Ishdorj, Ts., was a reputable Mongolian historian. Now, being a 20th century Mongolian historian means that you're not very prominent on Google, but you can still find evidence of his subject-matter expertise at links such as
[1]
[2] and
[3]. He is also mentioned in a
New York Times article and
was the recipient of a medal for his contributions to scholarship. After finishing the article, I had actually found more details on his avoidance of censorship, and now we have a new paragraph! As for another hook, how about ALT1: ... that
Shagdarjavin Natsagdorj's remarks at an academic conference led to a communist purge and contributed to the
Sino-Soviet split?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
20:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- I am not doubting Ishdorj's qualifications, but the problem with self-published sources is that they are generally (or universally) below the RS threshold, regardless of who the author is; we generally cannot trust their content to have been edited by anyone, and we technically can't even tell it's an actual article by Ishdorj (it probably is, and as such written in a blog-ish manner, but still...). I won't insist that you remove it from the article, but I would suggest that it should not be used for the front-page hook. Therefore:
-
for a very interesting ALT1.
Dahn (
talk)
20:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review
Dahn! The source may be self-published, but its author, Ishdorj, Ts., was a reputable Mongolian historian. Now, being a 20th century Mongolian historian means that you're not very prominent on Google, but you can still find evidence of his subject-matter expertise at links such as
[1]
[2] and
[3]. He is also mentioned in a
New York Times article and
was the recipient of a medal for his contributions to scholarship. After finishing the article, I had actually found more details on his avoidance of censorship, and now we have a new paragraph! As for another hook, how about ALT1: ... that
Shagdarjavin Natsagdorj's remarks at an academic conference led to a communist purge and contributed to the
Sino-Soviet split?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
20:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: AirshipJungleman29 ( talk · contribs) 16:42, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: SnowFire ( talk · contribs) 19:54, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
I'll go ahead and take this one. (Trying to get my reviews-to-noms ratio cleanly ahead of par... we'll see if it works.)
SnowFire (
talk)
19:54, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Usual disclaimer goes here that any prose suggestions are just that, suggestions, and you should feel free to push back or revise if you prefer the wording as is (unless something's REALLY wrong, which it usually isn't).
- thereafter he primarily wrote on pre-modern topics, especially Qing-era Mongolia and the struggle for Mongolian independence
- Nit: Strictly speaking, the
modern era starts in 1500 or so (and some of his works are on, like, the 1800s), although the term "modern" really means whatever you want it to mean. Is there some other term than "pre-modern" that could be used? (It's fine if not, the general idea is clear enough.)
- Changed to "early modern topics" with a link to the appropriate section of History of Mongolia
- Nit: Strictly speaking, the
modern era starts in 1500 or so (and some of his works are on, like, the 1800s), although the term "modern" really means whatever you want it to mean. Is there some other term than "pre-modern" that could be used? (It's fine if not, the general idea is clear enough.)
-
adopt a less hardline stance
- Optional nit: There are various styles of writing on Wikipedia, with one debate being "what you'd write in a book for experts" vs. "what you'd write to make Wikilinks and where they go very clear for beginners." I would suggest being a little less concise here and instead saying "to adopt the
New Turn Policy, a less hardline stance." Which makes the wikilink much more clear while also teaching a little bit about MPR history. But it's up to you.
- Changed as you sugget.
- Optional nit: There are various styles of writing on Wikipedia, with one debate being "what you'd write in a book for experts" vs. "what you'd write to make Wikilinks and where they go very clear for beginners." I would suggest being a little less concise here and instead saying "to adopt the
New Turn Policy, a less hardline stance." Which makes the wikilink much more clear while also teaching a little bit about MPR history. But it's up to you.
- A decade later in 1955, Owen Lattimore and Urgunge Onon published an English translation of this work—the first translation of a biography of a revolutionary figure, it would establish Natsagdorj's reputation in the English-speaking world.
- Nit: Strictly speaking, the source only verifies that it was the first English language biography of a Mongolian Revolution figure. It doesn't verify it established his reputation, but I suppose it indirectly does in the sense that Service was still talking about it approvingly in 1979. That said, 20th century Mongolian history was an obscure topic in the West, so we're really talking more like "reputation in the English-speaking community interested in Mongolia" if we wanted to be hyper-specific. It's fine for a GA, but mentioning this now in case you wanted to take this to FAC later as something that could possibly use some clarification or better sourcing.
- You've missed the other source, which states: "In English, Academician Natsagdorj's work is known principally by his biography of the revolutionary hero Siikhbaatar...
- I checked that source. It was just a nitpick but to clarify, it's just I read something different from that sentence than what you intended. (An obscure figure might still be best known for one thing, and I think "establish reputation" was implying that Natsagdorj wasn't obscure. But it's fine.)
- You've missed the other source, which states: "In English, Academician Natsagdorj's work is known principally by his biography of the revolutionary hero Siikhbaatar...
- Nit: Strictly speaking, the source only verifies that it was the first English language biography of a Mongolian Revolution figure. It doesn't verify it established his reputation, but I suppose it indirectly does in the sense that Service was still talking about it approvingly in 1979. That said, 20th century Mongolian history was an obscure topic in the West, so we're really talking more like "reputation in the English-speaking community interested in Mongolia" if we wanted to be hyper-specific. It's fine for a GA, but mentioning this now in case you wanted to take this to FAC later as something that could possibly use some clarification or better sourcing.
- Although he initially wrote on both modern and pre-modern history, he increasingly came to focus on the latter.
- Nit: I'm not sure this is a fixable problem, but right now in the "Academic" topic paragraph, we go from 1954 to 1973, then time travel back to 1941 and mention "oh yeah he focused on older stuff." You could maybe swap the order somewhat? Up to you though, it's not a big deal.
- Rearranged
- Nit: I'm not sure this is a fixable problem, but right now in the "Academic" topic paragraph, we go from 1954 to 1973, then time travel back to 1941 and mention "oh yeah he focused on older stuff." You could maybe swap the order somewhat? Up to you though, it's not a big deal.
- His pioneer work on archiving the bureaucratic minutiae of Qing-era Mongolia met with an eager welcome from European scholars
- Lattimore was an American... I see that it's mentioning London & Bonn, but I think this is too specific. "Western" scholars perhaps?
- Changed.
- Lattimore was an American... I see that it's mentioning London & Bonn, but I think this is too specific. "Western" scholars perhaps?
- Natsagdorj was also an important figure in Mongolian literature, becoming the chairman of the Mongolian Writers' Committee, in which capacity he strengthened the writers' union and encouraged the exploration of new genres.
- Was he really "important"? GTranslate comes up with "he was a good writer" which is a little different from "important." Even if the article said he was important, I don't think this is a strong enough source to carry such a powerful claim. I'm also skeptical of the translation as the "expansion of genres" - do you know Mongolian? My suspicion is that something is being lost in translation here.
- Removed the "important"; the "expansion of genres", as clarified by the following quote, refers to the depiction of the lives and work of historical figures from an artistic, not ideological, viewpoint.
- Can you include that more explicitly in the article? That really helps, I think the prose should just say so outright.
- Removed the "important"; the "expansion of genres", as clarified by the following quote, refers to the depiction of the lives and work of historical figures from an artistic, not ideological, viewpoint.
- Was he really "important"? GTranslate comes up with "he was a good writer" which is a little different from "important." Even if the article said he was important, I don't think this is a strong enough source to carry such a powerful claim. I'm also skeptical of the translation as the "expansion of genres" - do you know Mongolian? My suspicion is that something is being lost in translation here.
- Natsagdorj was also influential in the cultural sphere, writing plays, stories, and screenplays for a general audience.
- He even authored theatrical plays and screenplays, like Polo's Adventure, Khongorzul and Govi's Epic.
- I don't have access to the Schwarz 1974 source, but does that back these statements up? The web source merely says "He has written several screenplays such as..." without any indication of how influential they were. Also, is "screenplays" really accurate? I don't know any Mongolian and am just trusting Google Translate, but that strikes me as doubtful. Was he really writing screenplays? If so, were films produced based on them (a la Queen Mandukhai the Wise mentioned earlier)? Screenplays that sit around unproduced are a little less impressive an achievement, lots of people do that. My suspicion is that it's at least possible is a word with multiple valid translations and in-context it really meant "[play] script".
- I don't really understand the screenplays thing. Even if they weren't made into films, are they not still screenplays? Could you please explain?
- If he wrote screenplays, it's fine. But checking the Schwarz source now (I found it), it only says "author of several plays and articles on literature", as well as writing short stories. I'm just worried that Google Translate messed up. Also, I think GTranslate is definitely wrong on "Polo's Adventure"... if you look at the original, there's something called “Марко Пологийн адал явдал” in the previous list of books which translates as "The Adventures of Marco Polo". I think his screenplays (?) are just “Хонгорзул” (=Thistle = Khongorzul) and “Говийн тууль” (=Gobi's epic = Govi's Adventure).
- I don't really understand the screenplays thing. Even if they weren't made into films, are they not still screenplays? Could you please explain?
- I don't have access to the Schwarz 1974 source, but does that back these statements up? The web source merely says "He has written several screenplays such as..." without any indication of how influential they were. Also, is "screenplays" really accurate? I don't know any Mongolian and am just trusting Google Translate, but that strikes me as doubtful. Was he really writing screenplays? If so, were films produced based on them (a la Queen Mandukhai the Wise mentioned earlier)? Screenplays that sit around unproduced are a little less impressive an achievement, lots of people do that. My suspicion is that it's at least possible is a word with multiple valid translations and in-context it really meant "[play] script".
- which offered original arguments contrary to the prevailing theories
- This is rather mysterious - what arguments? What prevailing theories? Was this just the same thing as the 1960s deal where he spoke positively of Genghis and the state was still afraid of annoying the USSR? Or was he going off the grid and making totally new arguments?
- I don't know—the source doesn't say. Would it be better to cut it?
- I think we can keep "original arguments" but it's probably better to cut "prevailing theories" unless we know what theories they were, yeah.
- I don't know—the source doesn't say. Would it be better to cut it?
- This is rather mysterious - what arguments? What prevailing theories? Was this just the same thing as the 1960s deal where he spoke positively of Genghis and the state was still afraid of annoying the USSR? Or was he going off the grid and making totally new arguments?
- Natsagdorj, who had one daughter, N. Ariungua, died in 2001.
- Break this sentence up, him having a daughter has nothing to do with his death. Also, did he have a wife? Maybe something like "Natsagdorj died in 2001. He was survived by his daughter, N. Ariungua." (presuming she didn't pre-decease him, which it doesn't sound like it from Ishdorj's speech.)
- Done.
- Break this sentence up, him having a daughter has nothing to do with his death. Also, did he have a wife? Maybe something like "Natsagdorj died in 2001. He was survived by his daughter, N. Ariungua." (presuming she didn't pre-decease him, which it doesn't sound like it from Ishdorj's speech.)
The sole image in the article appears to be appropriately tagged. It's too bad we don't have better information on the date since if he's truly "very young" in it, it'll eventually be in the public domain (grumble grumble URAA Restoration Date nonsense whining goes here). SnowFire ( talk) 20:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC) Also, one quick other one:
- Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj was born in 1918 in Amgalanbaatar, near the Mongolian capital of Ulaanbaatar.
- Googling for "Амгаланбаатар" turns up a whole lot of nothing; people, but practically nothing on a place, with the closest being the not-very-reliable-sounding "Tourist Info Center"
[4] which does not bother to give the place a location and mostly calls it Maimaa and makes it sound like a historical location (and I'm not even sure that it was meant as a synonym for the location). Nothing on Google Maps either. Are we certain this is a real-but-extremely-obscure place, and not just a typo? Or given all the people named Амгаланбаатар cropping up in Google, that GTranslate hiccuped, and the original sense was "he was born to a father named Амгаланбаатар, and was born in the Capital Region?"
SnowFire (
talk)
21:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Mongolia is a country with poor coverage on the internet, which has undergone massive political, social, and economic change over the past century. It is perfectly plausible that if Амгаланбаатар existed, it was renamed, absorbed by a larger urban centre, abandoned entirely, or possibly all three. As the Mongolian seems clear, I am reluctant to hypothesize otherwise.
- I agree with you now - the "Biographical Sketches" in Schwarz 1974 says he indeed was born in Amgalanbaatar. (It is strange that this location seems to have dropped off the map - I suspect you're probably right that it's since been renamed.)
- Mongolia is a country with poor coverage on the internet, which has undergone massive political, social, and economic change over the past century. It is perfectly plausible that if Амгаланбаатар existed, it was renamed, absorbed by a larger urban centre, abandoned entirely, or possibly all three. As the Mongolian seems clear, I am reluctant to hypothesize otherwise.
- Googling for "Амгаланбаатар" turns up a whole lot of nothing; people, but practically nothing on a place, with the closest being the not-very-reliable-sounding "Tourist Info Center"
[4] which does not bother to give the place a location and mostly calls it Maimaa and makes it sound like a historical location (and I'm not even sure that it was meant as a synonym for the location). Nothing on Google Maps either. Are we certain this is a real-but-extremely-obscure place, and not just a typo? Or given all the people named Амгаланбаатар cropping up in Google, that GTranslate hiccuped, and the original sense was "he was born to a father named Амгаланбаатар, and was born in the Capital Region?"
SnowFire (
talk)
21:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments
SnowFire; responses above.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
21:52, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good. Just two or three quick issues left. But yeah, all the other GA criteria are fine as expected, unless the recent article move counts against stability! But not really. Neutral, citation style is fine, not a copyvio, not close paraphrasing except when the source is thin so there's nothing else to do but repeat it, etc. SnowFire ( talk) 00:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ AirshipJungleman29: - I made some minor edits myself ( diff), since they were largely nits anyway. Take a look and see if they work for you.
- I'm still not 100% sold that the "expansion of genres" sentence in
[5] is connected to the bit about him being willing to push past ideological barriers, but it seems logical to assume his overall stance would have probably affected his work as chairman.
SnowFire (
talk)
08:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your edits
SnowFire, they look good to me. Anything more need to be done?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
09:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, it was really just those minor issues left. Nice work! SnowFire ( talk) 09:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your edits
SnowFire, they look good to me. Anything more need to be done?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
09:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
|
| Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj 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. Review: July 17, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
|
| A fact from Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 14 June 2024 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| |
- 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
Bruxton
talk
05:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
( )
- ... that Shagdarjavin Natsagdorj was appointed director of the Institute of History at the Mongolian Academy of Sciences just two years after being accepted as an apprentice there?
- Source: Ishdorj, Ts. (12 September 2008). Шагдаржав Нацагдорж: Их түүхийг эрхэмлэсэн эрдэмтэн [Shagdarjav Natsagdorj: A scientist who values great history] (in Mongolian). Archived from the original on 31 May 2013. Retrieved 16 May 2024.
Created by
AirshipJungleman29 (
talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 19 past nominations.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC).
-
New, long enough, wonderfully written, and interesting throughout; QPQ done. The source apparently verifies the hook (I used automatic translation on the Mongolian text), but I cannot determine the quality of the source, as the publisher is not identified -- if it self-published, as it looks, I have reservations about its usability anywhere in the article, and especially for sourcing the hook. Also, assuming the source is reliable: the hook is fun and all, but the article has much more interesting facts, which seem to be quoted to much more reliable sources -- how about something on his refusal to criticize Genghis?
Dahn (
talk)
18:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review
Dahn! The source may be self-published, but its author, Ishdorj, Ts., was a reputable Mongolian historian. Now, being a 20th century Mongolian historian means that you're not very prominent on Google, but you can still find evidence of his subject-matter expertise at links such as
[1]
[2] and
[3]. He is also mentioned in a
New York Times article and
was the recipient of a medal for his contributions to scholarship. After finishing the article, I had actually found more details on his avoidance of censorship, and now we have a new paragraph! As for another hook, how about ALT1: ... that
Shagdarjavin Natsagdorj's remarks at an academic conference led to a communist purge and contributed to the
Sino-Soviet split?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
20:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- I am not doubting Ishdorj's qualifications, but the problem with self-published sources is that they are generally (or universally) below the RS threshold, regardless of who the author is; we generally cannot trust their content to have been edited by anyone, and we technically can't even tell it's an actual article by Ishdorj (it probably is, and as such written in a blog-ish manner, but still...). I won't insist that you remove it from the article, but I would suggest that it should not be used for the front-page hook. Therefore:
-
for a very interesting ALT1.
Dahn (
talk)
20:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review
Dahn! The source may be self-published, but its author, Ishdorj, Ts., was a reputable Mongolian historian. Now, being a 20th century Mongolian historian means that you're not very prominent on Google, but you can still find evidence of his subject-matter expertise at links such as
[1]
[2] and
[3]. He is also mentioned in a
New York Times article and
was the recipient of a medal for his contributions to scholarship. After finishing the article, I had actually found more details on his avoidance of censorship, and now we have a new paragraph! As for another hook, how about ALT1: ... that
Shagdarjavin Natsagdorj's remarks at an academic conference led to a communist purge and contributed to the
Sino-Soviet split?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
20:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: AirshipJungleman29 ( talk · contribs) 16:42, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: SnowFire ( talk · contribs) 19:54, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
I'll go ahead and take this one. (Trying to get my reviews-to-noms ratio cleanly ahead of par... we'll see if it works.)
SnowFire (
talk)
19:54, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Usual disclaimer goes here that any prose suggestions are just that, suggestions, and you should feel free to push back or revise if you prefer the wording as is (unless something's REALLY wrong, which it usually isn't).
- thereafter he primarily wrote on pre-modern topics, especially Qing-era Mongolia and the struggle for Mongolian independence
- Nit: Strictly speaking, the
modern era starts in 1500 or so (and some of his works are on, like, the 1800s), although the term "modern" really means whatever you want it to mean. Is there some other term than "pre-modern" that could be used? (It's fine if not, the general idea is clear enough.)
- Changed to "early modern topics" with a link to the appropriate section of History of Mongolia
- Nit: Strictly speaking, the
modern era starts in 1500 or so (and some of his works are on, like, the 1800s), although the term "modern" really means whatever you want it to mean. Is there some other term than "pre-modern" that could be used? (It's fine if not, the general idea is clear enough.)
-
adopt a less hardline stance
- Optional nit: There are various styles of writing on Wikipedia, with one debate being "what you'd write in a book for experts" vs. "what you'd write to make Wikilinks and where they go very clear for beginners." I would suggest being a little less concise here and instead saying "to adopt the
New Turn Policy, a less hardline stance." Which makes the wikilink much more clear while also teaching a little bit about MPR history. But it's up to you.
- Changed as you sugget.
- Optional nit: There are various styles of writing on Wikipedia, with one debate being "what you'd write in a book for experts" vs. "what you'd write to make Wikilinks and where they go very clear for beginners." I would suggest being a little less concise here and instead saying "to adopt the
New Turn Policy, a less hardline stance." Which makes the wikilink much more clear while also teaching a little bit about MPR history. But it's up to you.
- A decade later in 1955, Owen Lattimore and Urgunge Onon published an English translation of this work—the first translation of a biography of a revolutionary figure, it would establish Natsagdorj's reputation in the English-speaking world.
- Nit: Strictly speaking, the source only verifies that it was the first English language biography of a Mongolian Revolution figure. It doesn't verify it established his reputation, but I suppose it indirectly does in the sense that Service was still talking about it approvingly in 1979. That said, 20th century Mongolian history was an obscure topic in the West, so we're really talking more like "reputation in the English-speaking community interested in Mongolia" if we wanted to be hyper-specific. It's fine for a GA, but mentioning this now in case you wanted to take this to FAC later as something that could possibly use some clarification or better sourcing.
- You've missed the other source, which states: "In English, Academician Natsagdorj's work is known principally by his biography of the revolutionary hero Siikhbaatar...
- I checked that source. It was just a nitpick but to clarify, it's just I read something different from that sentence than what you intended. (An obscure figure might still be best known for one thing, and I think "establish reputation" was implying that Natsagdorj wasn't obscure. But it's fine.)
- You've missed the other source, which states: "In English, Academician Natsagdorj's work is known principally by his biography of the revolutionary hero Siikhbaatar...
- Nit: Strictly speaking, the source only verifies that it was the first English language biography of a Mongolian Revolution figure. It doesn't verify it established his reputation, but I suppose it indirectly does in the sense that Service was still talking about it approvingly in 1979. That said, 20th century Mongolian history was an obscure topic in the West, so we're really talking more like "reputation in the English-speaking community interested in Mongolia" if we wanted to be hyper-specific. It's fine for a GA, but mentioning this now in case you wanted to take this to FAC later as something that could possibly use some clarification or better sourcing.
- Although he initially wrote on both modern and pre-modern history, he increasingly came to focus on the latter.
- Nit: I'm not sure this is a fixable problem, but right now in the "Academic" topic paragraph, we go from 1954 to 1973, then time travel back to 1941 and mention "oh yeah he focused on older stuff." You could maybe swap the order somewhat? Up to you though, it's not a big deal.
- Rearranged
- Nit: I'm not sure this is a fixable problem, but right now in the "Academic" topic paragraph, we go from 1954 to 1973, then time travel back to 1941 and mention "oh yeah he focused on older stuff." You could maybe swap the order somewhat? Up to you though, it's not a big deal.
- His pioneer work on archiving the bureaucratic minutiae of Qing-era Mongolia met with an eager welcome from European scholars
- Lattimore was an American... I see that it's mentioning London & Bonn, but I think this is too specific. "Western" scholars perhaps?
- Changed.
- Lattimore was an American... I see that it's mentioning London & Bonn, but I think this is too specific. "Western" scholars perhaps?
- Natsagdorj was also an important figure in Mongolian literature, becoming the chairman of the Mongolian Writers' Committee, in which capacity he strengthened the writers' union and encouraged the exploration of new genres.
- Was he really "important"? GTranslate comes up with "he was a good writer" which is a little different from "important." Even if the article said he was important, I don't think this is a strong enough source to carry such a powerful claim. I'm also skeptical of the translation as the "expansion of genres" - do you know Mongolian? My suspicion is that something is being lost in translation here.
- Removed the "important"; the "expansion of genres", as clarified by the following quote, refers to the depiction of the lives and work of historical figures from an artistic, not ideological, viewpoint.
- Can you include that more explicitly in the article? That really helps, I think the prose should just say so outright.
- Removed the "important"; the "expansion of genres", as clarified by the following quote, refers to the depiction of the lives and work of historical figures from an artistic, not ideological, viewpoint.
- Was he really "important"? GTranslate comes up with "he was a good writer" which is a little different from "important." Even if the article said he was important, I don't think this is a strong enough source to carry such a powerful claim. I'm also skeptical of the translation as the "expansion of genres" - do you know Mongolian? My suspicion is that something is being lost in translation here.
- Natsagdorj was also influential in the cultural sphere, writing plays, stories, and screenplays for a general audience.
- He even authored theatrical plays and screenplays, like Polo's Adventure, Khongorzul and Govi's Epic.
- I don't have access to the Schwarz 1974 source, but does that back these statements up? The web source merely says "He has written several screenplays such as..." without any indication of how influential they were. Also, is "screenplays" really accurate? I don't know any Mongolian and am just trusting Google Translate, but that strikes me as doubtful. Was he really writing screenplays? If so, were films produced based on them (a la Queen Mandukhai the Wise mentioned earlier)? Screenplays that sit around unproduced are a little less impressive an achievement, lots of people do that. My suspicion is that it's at least possible is a word with multiple valid translations and in-context it really meant "[play] script".
- I don't really understand the screenplays thing. Even if they weren't made into films, are they not still screenplays? Could you please explain?
- If he wrote screenplays, it's fine. But checking the Schwarz source now (I found it), it only says "author of several plays and articles on literature", as well as writing short stories. I'm just worried that Google Translate messed up. Also, I think GTranslate is definitely wrong on "Polo's Adventure"... if you look at the original, there's something called “Марко Пологийн адал явдал” in the previous list of books which translates as "The Adventures of Marco Polo". I think his screenplays (?) are just “Хонгорзул” (=Thistle = Khongorzul) and “Говийн тууль” (=Gobi's epic = Govi's Adventure).
- I don't really understand the screenplays thing. Even if they weren't made into films, are they not still screenplays? Could you please explain?
- I don't have access to the Schwarz 1974 source, but does that back these statements up? The web source merely says "He has written several screenplays such as..." without any indication of how influential they were. Also, is "screenplays" really accurate? I don't know any Mongolian and am just trusting Google Translate, but that strikes me as doubtful. Was he really writing screenplays? If so, were films produced based on them (a la Queen Mandukhai the Wise mentioned earlier)? Screenplays that sit around unproduced are a little less impressive an achievement, lots of people do that. My suspicion is that it's at least possible is a word with multiple valid translations and in-context it really meant "[play] script".
- which offered original arguments contrary to the prevailing theories
- This is rather mysterious - what arguments? What prevailing theories? Was this just the same thing as the 1960s deal where he spoke positively of Genghis and the state was still afraid of annoying the USSR? Or was he going off the grid and making totally new arguments?
- I don't know—the source doesn't say. Would it be better to cut it?
- I think we can keep "original arguments" but it's probably better to cut "prevailing theories" unless we know what theories they were, yeah.
- I don't know—the source doesn't say. Would it be better to cut it?
- This is rather mysterious - what arguments? What prevailing theories? Was this just the same thing as the 1960s deal where he spoke positively of Genghis and the state was still afraid of annoying the USSR? Or was he going off the grid and making totally new arguments?
- Natsagdorj, who had one daughter, N. Ariungua, died in 2001.
- Break this sentence up, him having a daughter has nothing to do with his death. Also, did he have a wife? Maybe something like "Natsagdorj died in 2001. He was survived by his daughter, N. Ariungua." (presuming she didn't pre-decease him, which it doesn't sound like it from Ishdorj's speech.)
- Done.
- Break this sentence up, him having a daughter has nothing to do with his death. Also, did he have a wife? Maybe something like "Natsagdorj died in 2001. He was survived by his daughter, N. Ariungua." (presuming she didn't pre-decease him, which it doesn't sound like it from Ishdorj's speech.)
The sole image in the article appears to be appropriately tagged. It's too bad we don't have better information on the date since if he's truly "very young" in it, it'll eventually be in the public domain (grumble grumble URAA Restoration Date nonsense whining goes here). SnowFire ( talk) 20:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC) Also, one quick other one:
- Shagdarjavyn Natsagdorj was born in 1918 in Amgalanbaatar, near the Mongolian capital of Ulaanbaatar.
- Googling for "Амгаланбаатар" turns up a whole lot of nothing; people, but practically nothing on a place, with the closest being the not-very-reliable-sounding "Tourist Info Center"
[4] which does not bother to give the place a location and mostly calls it Maimaa and makes it sound like a historical location (and I'm not even sure that it was meant as a synonym for the location). Nothing on Google Maps either. Are we certain this is a real-but-extremely-obscure place, and not just a typo? Or given all the people named Амгаланбаатар cropping up in Google, that GTranslate hiccuped, and the original sense was "he was born to a father named Амгаланбаатар, and was born in the Capital Region?"
SnowFire (
talk)
21:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Mongolia is a country with poor coverage on the internet, which has undergone massive political, social, and economic change over the past century. It is perfectly plausible that if Амгаланбаатар existed, it was renamed, absorbed by a larger urban centre, abandoned entirely, or possibly all three. As the Mongolian seems clear, I am reluctant to hypothesize otherwise.
- I agree with you now - the "Biographical Sketches" in Schwarz 1974 says he indeed was born in Amgalanbaatar. (It is strange that this location seems to have dropped off the map - I suspect you're probably right that it's since been renamed.)
- Mongolia is a country with poor coverage on the internet, which has undergone massive political, social, and economic change over the past century. It is perfectly plausible that if Амгаланбаатар existed, it was renamed, absorbed by a larger urban centre, abandoned entirely, or possibly all three. As the Mongolian seems clear, I am reluctant to hypothesize otherwise.
- Googling for "Амгаланбаатар" turns up a whole lot of nothing; people, but practically nothing on a place, with the closest being the not-very-reliable-sounding "Tourist Info Center"
[4] which does not bother to give the place a location and mostly calls it Maimaa and makes it sound like a historical location (and I'm not even sure that it was meant as a synonym for the location). Nothing on Google Maps either. Are we certain this is a real-but-extremely-obscure place, and not just a typo? Or given all the people named Амгаланбаатар cropping up in Google, that GTranslate hiccuped, and the original sense was "he was born to a father named Амгаланбаатар, and was born in the Capital Region?"
SnowFire (
talk)
21:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments
SnowFire; responses above.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
21:52, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looks good. Just two or three quick issues left. But yeah, all the other GA criteria are fine as expected, unless the recent article move counts against stability! But not really. Neutral, citation style is fine, not a copyvio, not close paraphrasing except when the source is thin so there's nothing else to do but repeat it, etc. SnowFire ( talk) 00:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ AirshipJungleman29: - I made some minor edits myself ( diff), since they were largely nits anyway. Take a look and see if they work for you.
- I'm still not 100% sold that the "expansion of genres" sentence in
[5] is connected to the bit about him being willing to push past ideological barriers, but it seems logical to assume his overall stance would have probably affected his work as chairman.
SnowFire (
talk)
08:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your edits
SnowFire, they look good to me. Anything more need to be done?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
09:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, it was really just those minor issues left. Nice work! SnowFire ( talk) 09:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your edits
SnowFire, they look good to me. Anything more need to be done?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
09:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)