This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
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.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on the Oriental Orthodox Church 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.Oriental OrthodoxyWikipedia:WikiProject Oriental OrthodoxyTemplate:WikiProject Oriental OrthodoxyOriental Orthodoxy
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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on December 2, 2018.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
The sentence, "His rule was initially dated to 999–1015; but, based on paleographical grounds, it is now dated more broadly, to the 9th or 10th centuries." Leads me to suspect that, throughout, you are doing what way too many people do: down-shifting your century counts. I.e., calling the 900s the ninth century, when it is the tenth century; and calling the 1000s the tenth century, when it should rightly be called the 11th century. Either that or the paleography shifted everything a century back in time. The article is extensive, and you HAVE done a lot of research. (Now if only someone could do the same for the other two (2) Christian kingdoms of Medieval Nubia. But this confusion of centuries Must be cleaned up. Or straightened out. For every historical piece in the 'pedia.
But thank you for what you have done.
Getting this entry going for "Good article"-status
I have now spent over a half year working on this entry, putting a lot of time in researching, reading and writing. I think now it has reached a status where it can get nominated as a "Good article". This is why I initiated a "Peer review", and I would like to ask people to check my entry to see if it is ripe to be honoured with that status. Thank you very much, LeGabrie (talk) 15:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In the section Foreign trade we have this sentence: "The contacts with the The extend of the trading relations with Christian Ethiopia are uncertain." Can anyone clear up what is intended? Perhaps @LeGabrie: can explain? Jodosma(talk)18:06, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
A high quality, well written, rigorously referenced article giving a thorough overview of a little known topic. A huge amount pf work has clearly gone into it and it shows A richly deserved Good Article Gog the Mild (talk) 17:09, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Poncet is missing a publisher and location. (W. Lewis and London)
Tsakos and Kleinitz is missing a date of publication.
Prose.
"According to John, the Alodian king was aware of the baptisms of Nobadia in 543 (Miaphysite branch) and Makuria around 568/569 (Melkite branch)." Mention of the two branches makes no sense other than to the most technical of experts. You need to explain the terms, and/or link them, or at a push delete them.
"such as those in Musawwarat es-Sufra, for example." You can use "such as" or "for example"; using both is redundant.
"Droughts, which occurred in Africa between 1150 and 1500,". This reads oddly, it suggests that droughts didn't occur outside this period.
The last paragraph of Causes of decline is a little long. Is it possible to split it?
"with 150 "captaincies" residing on both sides of the Nile". You need to explain what captaincies are. (People? Places? Tribal groups?)
Copy edit.
I have done some minor copy editing as I have gone along. If you don't like anything let me know and we can discuss it.
In your block quote the ellipses shouldn't be in brackets.
@Gog the Mild Concerning point four: the thing is that the whole paragraph is about the same topic, i.e. the arrival and settlement of the Arabs. It also doesn't seem to be that much longer than paragraph one of the "Aftermath" chapter or the "Geographical extent" paragraph/chapter. LeGabrie (talk) 18:46, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@LeGabrie: No worries. It is not a fail issue. If I were the author I would break it. But I can see why you prefer not to. Ping me when you have finished work on the article. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:51, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"together with some "famous necklace of pearls and rubbies"". If "some", then "necklace" should be plural; if singular, use 'a' instead of "some". (PS rubies, not rubbies.)
I have made some further copy edits. Could you please check them carefully and ping me if there are any you are not happy with. Once that is settled I think that we are done. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:26, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild I think the nomination is still officially halted, since the bot hasn't added a GA icon to the article. Also didn't receive a notification on my Talk page that the nomination succeeded. LeGabrie (talk) 12:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@LeGabrie: Strange. I overwrote the 'on hold'. It is gone from the nominations list. Perhaps the bot is working slowly. Give it another 24 hours and if it doesn't resolve itself I will leave a message with the powers that be. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Why is Aρογα transliterated Aroua? Should the Greek be Aρουα? I tried to find these terms through Google and came up with nothing. What is the source for the Greek? Several sources I check describe "Alodia" as the Greek name, as opposed to Arabic Alwa. Srnec (talk) 14:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Was Greek lettering used as a fudge because Nubian is not widely supported? Perhaps somebody experienced with FAs should look at this, since we can't use Greek and call it Greek when we are representing Nubian, but I'm not sure Old Nubian should be in the lead if enough devices can't render it properly. Srnec (talk) 14:05, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Srnec (talk·contribs) "Alodia" appears in the records of John of Ephesus, but "Aroua" appears in native Nubian sources (one document from Qasr Ibrim and a graffito from Faras) written in Greek, that's why I chose "Aroua". How the kingdom was called in Nubian is still not certain, though it was probably similar to "Aroua" or "Alwa". LeGabrie (talk) 12:33, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's not how I read it. I see Aroua as one of the "Old Nubian elements" noted by Lajtar in the vocabulary of the inscription. Pierce makes this explicit by calling it "Gk/ON" in his list of Nubian-language toponyms. (It is like España in the sentence, "I am from España". It does not become the English name of the country by being used in an English sentence.) In any case, Aρογα is clearly wrong. ⲁⲣⲟⲩⲁ corresponds to Aρουα. Srnec (talk) 16:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Srnec (talk·contribs) "I see Aroua as one of the "Old Nubian elements" noted by Lajtar in the vocabulary of the inscription." That's speculation of yours tho. "Makouria", the other toponym mentioned in the text, is clearly Greek, not Nubian, since the Nubian name for Makuria was Dotawo. Furthermore, a few months ago I was in contact with Mr. Lajtar and he told me that the native name of Alodia is still not precisely known. If you still find a source that explicitly suggests an endonym you are of course free to add it. LeGabrie (talk) 17:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed the formatting of the Greek and Arabic. Alodia is obviously a transcription of the actual Greek name Ἀλοδία, which I found several cites for; I included one from a Byzantist who presumably knows whereof she speaks. There are also citations for Ἀλουα (not Ἀρουα) on the internet but they're less trustworthy to the point where it's not worth mentioning until a better cite is found.
If there are Nubian inscriptions featuring the name Aroua in Nubian or Coptic, that's great and should be included but A) those languages aren't Greek, B) those languages don't use Greek script, C) if it is medieval Greek you should include the word's aspiration and accent marks, and D) you'll need citations in the text. It's probably better if all of the name material were gathered into a single #Name section just under the lead. In any case, "Aroua" in some graffiti wouldn't be a reason to ignore "Alodia" in the sources; the article should include both. — LlywelynII02:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, LeGabrie (talk·contribs), 1st, thanks for all the work and love put into this page. 2nd, try to use the proper ʾ or ʿ mark for Arabic transcriptions since a simple ' could be either one of them. You can find them in the Arabic menu at the bottom of the edit page. 3rd, is there a reason the page didn't mention the alternate name forms found on the German, French, &c. versions of this article? If it was just to keep the lead clean, I'd say it's another reason to think about adding a #Name section. — LlywelynII03:30, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
LlywelynII (talk·contribs) The term "Alodia" actually doesn't appear in a single source, but is made up by modern scholars out of the ethnonym "Alodeans" as it appears in John of Ephesus report of their Christianization. I quote a private conversation I've once had with Prof. Adam Lajtar: "I would suggest to abandon the name Alodia as suspect. In many cases it is just a creation of modern scholars made out of the ethnonyms "Alodeans/Alwades"" (2018). I suggest we stick to "Aroua", as is this the certain name of the kingdom in Nubian Greek, attested in a graffito from Faras and a letter from Qasr Ibrim.
Names like "Alodien" in German or "Alodie" in French are just indigenizations of "Alodia". The attested historical names remain Alwa (Arabic sources and a Greek papyrus from the sixth century, see Pierce 1995), Aroua and John of Ephesus "Alodeans". LeGabrie (talk) 13:13, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Edit: I just rechecked John of Ephesus and apparently, in one passage the state is explicitly referred to as "Alodia": "The narrative of Longinus entering the Alodian country and how he converted them with gladness and baptized them." Don't know if the translation is 100% faithful or if in the Greek original it's "in the country of the Alodeans" but ayway, the Nubian-Greek name has priority. LeGabrie (talk) 18:26, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you everyone for making this article featured on the main page. It is important as it brings up some of our most forgotten historical tragedies. Dagana4 (talk) 16:38, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
,_early_1900s,_Central_Africa,_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo,_Pende_people,_wood,_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG){kind=small}
Pass
Gog the Mild (talk) 12:26, 20 May 2018 (UTC)