Talk:Ismail II of Granada

Did you know nomination

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 The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Ismail II of Granada deposed his brother to take the throne, but less than a year later he was dethroned and killed by his brother-in-law?
  Source: For example, Fernández-Puertas 1997, pp.16–17.
  • ALT1:... that after Ismail II was assassinated, his body was dumped in public, but one day later he was buried in the royal cemetery of the Alhambra? Vidal Castro 2004, p.353

• Reviewed: Ludwig Finscher

5x expanded by HaEr48 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems: - AGF if ALT1 used; original hook verified

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Good to go, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 14:55, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vice regent (talk · contribs) 02:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Claiming this article for review. Will start reading it soon.VR _talk 02:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

HaEr48, good job on this article! It's well-written, verifiable, stable, NPOV, well-illustrated and appears comprehensive. After a first reading, one main issue stands out to me: "Abu Abdullah Muhammad" is sometimes referred to as "el Bermejo", sometimes "Muhammad" and sometimes "Muhammad VI". I would suggest adopting a single name for this person. The article also sometimes refers to "Muhammad V" as "Muhammad", adding to the confusion. One choice could be to use the laqab for each of them. I'm assuming that's how the Granadan court probably distinguished them.iVR _talk 20:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Vice regent, thank you for your review. I understand your point, I updated all references to Muhammad V after the introduction of Muhammad VI/el Bermejo to include the regnal numeral, so I hope that clarifies the person. As for Muhammad VI, the article uses "el Bermejo" before his accession as Muhammad VI, which is not ambiguous. Using laqabs might violate MOS:MULTIPLENAMES because none of them had any laqab during the lifetime of Ismail II, similarly with using "Muhammad VI" before his accession. I am intrigued by you said about how the Granadans themselves distinguished them, so I checked Ibn al-Khatib's al-Lamha (which I have access to) there it seems that they are distinguished by their title and relation, e.g. "the sultan", "his (e.g. the sultan's) cousin", "his in-law", which might be too troublesome for our Wikipedia article because the reader will have to keep track of everyone's relation and who the reigning sultan was. HaEr48 (talk) 00:08, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your edit. I have also made some edits. If you feel they are counter-productive, feel free to revert them. My only hesitation with el Bermejo is that it might be an exonym. I personally prefer to call people what they wish to be called, but if reliable sources use el Bermejo then that's what we should use. I notice that Muhammad_VI_of_Granada#Origin says the name is also attested in Muslim sources, but its not clear to what extent it was used by the Granadans.VR _talk 00:32, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Article passed.VR _talk 02:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)