Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a23147404bf5b23b

Jump to content

Talk:Timurnama

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by AirshipJungleman29 in topic Did you know nomination

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 19:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

  • ... that by using Timur as the subject of the fourth poem (Timurnama) of his Khamsa (quintet), its author Hatefi implied that the Turco-Mongol conqueror was a second Alexander the Great? Source: "Hatifi wrote a Khamsa (‘Quintet’) in emulation of the Khamsas of Nizami Ganjavi and Amir Khusrau Dihlavi, but replaced the earlier poets’ romances of Alexander/Iskandar with an epic about Timur, thus implicitly identifying Timur as another Alexander." (Melville, p. 1124)
Created by WatkynBassett (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 24 past nominations.

WatkynBassett (talk) 21:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC).Reply

    General: Article is new enough and long enough
    Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
    Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: Looks good to me! Interesting quote for an interesting piece of literature by an author and era that I'm personally unfamiliar with. That being said, do you have a source for "(it) is often viewed as the most important work by Hatefi"? This doesn't seem to be sourced to me. That's the only thing that stood out to me and I can change this to a green tick when this is addressed. Cheers! BaduFerreira (talk) 05:55, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

      • @BaduFerreira: Thank you for this valuable review! I certainly forgot to add a sentence and a reference for this claim in the body of the article; I much appreciate you catching this. I have added the respective sentence and a reference to an open access source. I hope this addresses your concern. Thanks again! WatkynBassett (talk) 06:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply