Talk:Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage

Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage has been listed as one of the Art and architecture 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: September 4, 2021. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 March 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that the Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage has a 16th-century manuscript (pictured) showing Alexander the Great praying at the Kaaba? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Articles for creation This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles This article was accepted from this draft on 18 February 2021 by reviewer Bkissin (talk · contribs). Islam Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles 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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Visual arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

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 Mx. Granger (talk) 19:17, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Alexander the Great at the Kaaba

• ... the Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage has a 16th century manuscript (pictured) showing Alexander the Great praying at the Kaaba? Source: Webb, Peter (2013). "The Hajj before Muhammad: Journeys to Mecca in Muslim Narratives of Pre-Islamic History". In Porter, Venetia; Saif, Liana (eds.). The Hajj: collected essays. London: The British Museum. p. 12. See also the official catalogue entry.

• Reviewed: Antoinette Dinga Dzondo

Moved to mainspace by MartinPoulter (talk). Self-nominated at 11:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC).[reply]

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: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: High Earwig estimates for copyvio reflect quotes, titles, names, and common phrasings, all of which are fine. Terrific article, really interesting. Just needs a couple more sources. Would love to see the collections. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 19:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Mary Mark Ockerbloom: for a careful and considered review! I'd adapted some text from the Hajj article without checking and copying the relevant cites, but that should be fixed now. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is now good to go. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 16:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some redirects/additions/clarifications needed round here. Fortunate you have the expertise available! Johnbod (talk) 23:02, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: Hi John, hope you're well. Thanks for taking a look at the article. Could you say a bit more about what changes you're recommending? kiswah and mahmal are introduced with sentence definitions in this article and I'm working on a draft explaining more fully what a Mahmal is. I seem to remember linking the concept of Amir al-hajj in an article, but that term doesn't seem to be in this article, unless I'm missing something. Can you give an example of where you'd like a clarification? MartinPoulter (talk) 13:53, 22 February 2021 (UTC) If the comment is about variant transliterations, I agree it's confusing to have both kiswa and kiswah etc. I'm just aiming for consistency with the sources I'm using, which might mean I use spellings that differ from wikilinked articles. Different legitimate sources differ in how they render the original words. MartinPoulter (talk) 15:17, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Redtigerxyz (talk · contribs) 13:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. 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).	A citation needed tag is added. Addressed. Redtigerxyz Talk 15:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	The collections site has "© 2020 Khalili Collections. All rights reserved". The https://www.nasserdkhalili.com/ - Author profile has CC-BY-SA 3.0 license only. Please clarify. Addressed.Redtigerxyz Talk 15:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Removed some borderline peacock terms.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Many of images are from the collection's site and are backed by a permission mail. File:Khalili Collection Hajj Kabah curtain.jpg and File:Khalili Collection Hajj Mahmal cover.jpg do not have the said permission verified by a VRT member. Addressed.Redtigerxyz Talk 15:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	GA PASS.Redtigerxyz Talk 15:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:Redtigerxyz for this quick and helpful review. The document which has been used as a source for those two images and for the list of exhibitions has a CC-BY-SA 3.0 declaration at the foot. You're correct that the site as a whole is copyright by default, but this particular page has its own CC declaration. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you mention the "author profile". MartinPoulter (talk) 15:16, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I was referring to the same declaration. By author profile (I understand it is confusing description), I meant Khalili's personal site [1]. For images, the lower resolution images on Khalili's personal site may be CC 3.0; the higher resolution on collections site are used in the article (which are "All rights reserved") - they should go by the VRT route, like the other images. I am okay to pass the article is without these 2 articles.

Please clarify what "text from a free content work" is incorporated. Please also address the citation tag.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The bullet-point list of exhibitions is taken from the source work. Here's an Earwig comparison of the documents. I've resolved the citation issue by bringing the text closer in line with the citation. The two images now have the correct OTRS template. I was remiss in uploading higher resolution versions without updating the licence statement, so thanks for drawing my attention to that. MartinPoulter (talk) 10:39, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again User:Redtigerxyz. You've clearly been very careful and it's much appreciated. MartinPoulter (talk) 18:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]