This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nezak Huns article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article. |
![]() | Nezak Huns 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: August 15, 2023. (Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Page views of this article over the last 90 days:
|
From a comprehensive review of Chinese chronicles, Inaba concludes Nishu to have been both a personal name and epithet across multiple Turkic groups., for some specificity and text–source integrity. This would include the use of "comprehensive review" and tossing in an unknown "Inaba" (the source author), as well as "concludes". If this person, the article unknown, states of doing a comprehensive review with a conclusion this needs citations.
The "except" would have to be pretty exceptional- I agree; reframed.
The last sentence in the "Etymology" needs rewording or an inline citation [..] If this person, the article unknown, states of doing a comprehensive review with a conclusion this needs citations.- There is an inline citation?
Inaba 2010, p. 196-197.Read the last paragraph of p. 197.
tossing in an unknown "Inaba"- Nice observation. Amended.
the use of "comprehensive review"- It was probably Rezakhani, commenting of Inaba's paper. But until I find the citation, I have removed the adjective.
Despite, the Nezaks might have survived as a local chieftaincy in or around Kapisi for a few more decades- On what basis, do we speculate to such effects?
The Alchon-Nezaks probably took back Zabulistan from the Sasanians by the end of the 6th century CE.- Ditto.
@पाटलिपुत्र: Coinage of the Nezak Shah by Matthias Pfisterer and Katharina Uhlir. TrangaBellam (talk) 04:03, 2 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
TrangaBellam (talk) 12:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)ReplyAny precise or absolute chronology is naturally unrealistic given the dearth of chronological anchors and hoard finds. However, it is fair to infer that the Śrī Ṣahī derivatives followed soon after the Alkhan native Sakra issues,71 aft er the Alkhan retreat and the Nezak conquest of Gandhāra. There is no reason to assume that the Śrī Ṣahī regular silver and copper issues, along with their local derivatives, would be produced in the late seventh century, as Vondrovec and Göbl had suggested. The most compelling piece of evidence is the appearance of the derivative Alkhan lunar bull tamgha and Alkhan-type crowns on the Nezak Śrī Ṣahī issues. There would be no reason to assume that either the tamgha or crown would have been deliberately inserted on Gandhāran coinage well into the Turk Shahi period, by which time both features had disappeared.
Both the regular Śrī Ṣahī and Sakra issues would have ceased ca. 667, when the Turk Shahis replaced the Nezak. The Sakra issues provide a compelling piece of evidence to this end. NumH 253 is the prototype of 2.2.1 (see Chapter 2), which introduces a new localized “trident” tamgha derived from a standard Turk Shahi royal tamgha. With the inclusion of this “trident” tamgha, the lunar bull tamgha disappears from the native Sakra coinage. It is logical to assume that the Turk Shahi derivative tamgha would have been introduced in the Sakra mints soon after Turk Shahi ascendancy, at the same time in which the prototypical Turk Shahi tamgha (S61, in Chapter 2) was introduced across Turk Shahi regular coinage in the Kabul Valley, Gandhāra, and Zabul.
What is the usual order - alphabetical? TrangaBellam (talk) 12:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
How does this image aid an average reader? Anyone who is not acquainted with the field will doubt the equivalence of the inscribed legend with the proposed reading because absent any other information, the matching of characters appears to be wildly speculative. Further, I don't want the section pre-spammed with images because I plan to add high-res images of a few Nezak Phase I mints. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
How do we know that there was sufficient lighting adjustment etc. to confer sufficient originality past Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.?TrangaBellam (talk) 07:17, 5 October 2022 (UTC)ReplyHowever, scans of coins are mere mechanical reproductions and are allowed [..]
A silver rhyton from Afghanistan held in the Cleveland Museum of Art and its historical context TrangaBellam (talk) 06:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
The deva in the religion section presumably refers to Deva (Hinduism). The current wording is unclear and kind of implies Brahmins were some kind of deity being worshipped in the polity. It seems the source is using the word "Brahminism" to refer to Hinduism, i.e. worship of Devas generally, without giving any indication that the worshippers were themselves Brahmins. The infobox also has Zoroastrianism in the religion field without any corresponding information in the religion section. 59.90.60.94 (talk) 13:03, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
|
Reviewing |
|
Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 03:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
Article has been sitting at GAN for an unconscionable time ;), will take it up. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
Toolbox |
---|
GA Criteria |
---|
GA Criteria:
|
Please note that almost all of these are suggestions, and can be implemented or ignored at your discretion. Any changes I deem necessary for the article to pass GA standards I will bold.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.