# Talk:Ohuede

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ohuede/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Vanderwaalforces (talk · contribs) 13:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Reverosie (talk · contribs) 16:14, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

!!! If you're reading this after pressing "Start Review": A review has been started; the nominees haven't updated. ChristieBot has been down for a while now thanks to some sort of issue, and as far as I know, it will be fixed tonight !!! 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 16:20, 5 June 2025 (UTC)
Hello! I'll be your GA reviewer again. Same drill as last time. I'll begin reading through for my initial review now, and then I'll do the spot check. I'm not sure if ChristieBot will update this since it's been down for a while, so hopefully it works 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 16:14, 5 June 2025 (UTC)
Initial review:
Initial Review:

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
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): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  (I need to do a more in-depth reading of the article before scoring this)

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

I will begin the spot-check as soon as I can
I'll begin the spot-check now. Sorry for the wait! 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 12:29, 6 June 2025 (UTC)


### Spot Check
#### Spot #1
Since source #2 (Parks 2023) is the same as last time, I don't need to check it; I already know that this is a pass.


#### Spot #2
I'll check source 7
Page 85: The article says: Trade also declined due to taxation imposed by local rulers and instability in North African trade caused by conflict and banditry. the source says: Ogiso Ohuede's weakness also affected the economy. He did nothing to revive external trade." Easy pass for the spot check, as expected. I'll move to the in-depth review now 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 12:49, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

@Reverosie I think you should not use the same heading level for “Spot Check” as the “GA review” above. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:43, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
You're aboslutely right about that. Fixed 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 13:48, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
I'll begin the in-depth review now, using the same format for paragraphs and sentences.


### Background and ascension
Lead: I'll point it out now: While the lead is short, I think it's sufficient. The article is short as it is, and Ohuede was only Ogiso for two years.
P1S2: He was the okaegbe ("family head") of Oriagba's lineage and a distant relative of Ehenneden. It should be specified that Oriagba and Ehenneden are previous Ogisos.
P1S3: He had reached the Edionevbo age grade but had not yet attained the rank of Odionwere. While I know these terms from reviewing Oduwa's article (and doing a bit more research on the topic, as I found it quite interesting), most readers wouldn't, and they should be defined. This is especially because the terms aren't defined in the lead like they were in Oduwa's article
P1S4: His father, Oboite, was the younger sibling of Ogiso Odoligie and a descendant of Ogiso Oriagba. Since you mentioned that Ohuede was the okaegbe of Oriagba's lineage earlier, I'd recommend a bit of restructuring to make this less redundant. Perhaps some sort of sentence merger would do.
P1S5 ...traced the lineage... I'd suggest saying "traced his lineage" instead for clarification
General question: P1S5: ...traced the lineage back to Oboite and selected Ohuede as the next ruler. This isn't a suggestion, I just have a question about the topic because I find it very interesting. Do we know what Ohuede's birth name was? We know that Oduwa's birth name was Idugioduwa, but I don't see Ohuede's birth name anywhere.
Not that I know of.
Thanks so much! I'm continuing with the review now 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 19:08, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
P2S2: His age and noble status contributed to his selection... The article previously states that Ohuede was picked after lineage was traced back to him, and nothing else. I'd recommend expansion of these parts to avoid confusion and sentences that sound like they contradict each other when they don't
P2S3: Rather than aligning with the Oriagba dynasty, he sought to establish his own ruling lineage, later recognised as the Ohuede dynasty... Context here would be nice, primarily why Ohuede didn't want to align with the Oriagba dynasty
Strongly encouraged suggestion: The Ughoron: For the formatting here, I'd suggest putting the English translation next to the original in Edo instead of below it.I'm not sure if GA reviewers are allowed to make edits to an article while they review it, but to make things easier for you (and to make sure this doesn't consume too much of your time), I've written two versions of how this could look for you to paste from the source editor into the article (they use two different templates, so you can pick the one you like best):
Format #1:

Format #2:

Now, for another clarifying question while we're here: Would you be alright with me opening more than one of your GA nominations at a time? Or do you prefer doing just one at a time? I really enjoy reading about and reviewing this topic, so I was wondering if that would be possible.

@Reverosie: That would be alright with me. I am happy you enjoying reviewing this topic as it is indeed a very interesting one. --Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:43, 7 June 2025 (UTC)


### Image
Before I continue, I'd like to address that this article does not have an image. I won't be requiring you to add one, as your good articles about various earlier Ogisos do not have an image either. Back to the review 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 19:13, 7 June 2025 (UTC)


### Reign and Government
P1S3: This aimed to reduce reliance on farming and encourage specialisation in trades It should be specified that this reliance on farming is economic reliance here
Suggestion: P2S3: ...allowing Enigie ("regional rulers") to exercise greater autonomy In Oduwa's article, the Enigie are described as being dukes, whereas they're described as regional rulers here. I'd suggest changing one for consistency.
P2S3: ...allowing Enigie ("regional rulers") to exercise greater autonomy a specific example of this would be nice
P2S4: Trade also declined due to taxation imposed by local rulers and instability in North African trade caused by conflict and banditry Same thing as before. Perhaps saying where trade declined with and how this impacted Igodomigodo as a whole.
P3S1: ...the extension of primogeniture laws to allow female succession in the absence of a male heir Context here would be nice. Ohuede clearly had a male heir himself (That being Oduwa), so what was his logic behind this?


### Death and succession
As a whole, this paragraph has a lot of citation overkill. Source 11 doesn't need to be plastered at the end of every sentence; since it applies to the paragraph as a whole, you only need to put it at the end.
Suggestion: S2 + S3: I'd recommend rearranging these sentences a bit, first mentioning that Oduwa was the eldest surviving heir, then that his succession went on without dispute, then that there were superstitions


### Legacy
Throughout this entire section, it should be specified that historians debate this, and names of specific historians should be used alongside their claims.


### Overall
@Vanderwaalforces: just like last time, if all of these problems are resolved within ~3-4 days, the article will be quick passed. If not, I'll place it on hold for these issues to be resolved :) 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 23:33, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

@Reverosie Thank you so much, I attended to them. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:53, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
@Vanderwaalforces Thank you so much! I'll do one more reading of the article, and then I'll most likely pass it! 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 12:33, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
The article is passed! Sorry that took so long, I had to do something quickly in real life while doing my final reading 🌷Reverosie🌷★talk★ 13:28, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
@Reverosie Thank you so much for the review! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:48, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

This is the second reference (cf Oduwa) I have recently seen that suggests tobacco smoking in Igodomigodo in the 12th century.  The statement that Ohuede "engag[ed] in pastimes like smoking his long pipe" is the sort of anachronism that suggests an account recorded centuries later that assumed current practices prevailed in the past.  The article on Oduwa explicitly mentions tobacco, which could not have reached Africa much before 1500. Libaki (talk) 01:49, 19 July 2025 (UTC)