# Talk:Muhammad al-Jawad

Ok I am a Shii Muslim and I think that it is most common if not the only way to refer to this Imam is Al-Jawad and not Al-Taki Brokenlove 19:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Both are titles, al-Jawad does seem more common, but not exclusive. --Enzuru 06:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Both are tiltes of Imam; in India(at least in Northern India, where I belong to) Imam is usually referred to as Mohammad-Taqi a.s..--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 05:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I believe among Arabs and possibly Iranians, al-Jawad is the more common title. Sometimes it seems the titles get split among ethnic groups for whatever reason. I originally chose al-Taqi because it was shorter to fit into the template. --Enzuru 06:36, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
One more apparent reason for use of At-Taqi is that it is phonetically similar to An-Naqi.--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 06:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
In  Dua'a E Tawassul  Imam is reffered by both titles, with Taqi first & then Jawad
Ya Aba Ja'farin Ya Mohammadabna ' Ali-yyin Ayyohat-Taqi-yool Javado Yabna Rasoolil-lahe
source Dua'a E Tawassul
--Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 05:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Imam Muhammad Al-Taqi, Al-Jawwad is the ninth Shia Imam, not fifth.
I changed it...,  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.23.46 (talk) 00:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC) 

Hi @Edward321. In the page occurred some edits which could enhance the quality of the page and clarify the life of this person. Please describe your reason about your reverting. In addition, Al-Ma'mun was the seventh Abbasid caliph who is named in the page, I don't know why you have reverted this name to a wrong name (Al-Ma'mum). If you check all historical references, you will find out "Al-Ma'mum" is completely incorrect which you insist on protecting. Mahda133 (talk) 08:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jeppiz. Will the sentence be okay, If it starts with "Ma'mun had asked al-Jawad to marry his daughter...."? Mahda133 (talk) 13:18, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Muhammad al-Jawad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120303023448/http://sufiblog.com/imam-muhammad-taqi.html to http://sufiblog.com/imam-muhammad-taqi.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

MohammadJavadSVG.svg
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:37, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Copy-edited the text and summarized the content when appropriate. Also removed the content from non-academic sources, which was mostly replaced with similar content from academic sources. (One exception was (most of the content in) the section "Views".) Restructured the article in a way that seems to minimize the overlap between various sections, e.g., the two sections "Imamate" and "Life".

"Majlesi and Ḥarrāni recorded him as an author of mawāʿeẓ wa ḥekam, a kind of pithy religio-ethical sayings" seems to be misinterpreting the source (Medoff, 2016). Albertatiran (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Albertatiran. Happy new year. Are you going to add new information from new sources to this article or we should ask Cplakidas to introduce us new sources? Ghazaalch (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Ghazaalch and Cplakidas! Happy new year to you both! Sure, I'll search for new sources. In the meantime, I agree that any input from Cplakidas would also be valuable to us. Albertatiran (talk) 14:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ghazaalch and Albertatiran, I'll gladly give some input. First of all, great work, the article is unrecognizable compared to its old state. One thing that immediately comes to attention is that the sources used, although of high quality, are somewhat mis-referenced: the EI2 articles are definitely not from 2022, for example, EI2 began publication in 1960! I recommend using the relevant templates (Template:Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition and Template:Encyclopaedia Iranica) for citing these works, with the appropriate volumes and page numbers. (Also, please put the sources in alphabetical order.) As far as additional sources are concerned, off the top of my head I would name Twelve Infallible Men. The Imams and the Making of Shi'ism as an interesting source.
Otherwise I don't think there is much missing: the sources used are already those I would recommend and use myself, and AFAIK al-Jawad was not the most prominent of imams, so his treatment in Western scholarly literature is somewhat underwhelming... I have only quickly looked at the article but it appears fairly comprehensive. I am quite prepared to take on a GA review and look into it in more detail, if you want. Constantine   ✍  18:37, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for the pointer, Cplakidas. I plan to check that book and also copy-edit the article in the coming days. Albertatiran (talk) 11:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi! @Ghazaalch: Please have a look at the new invisible comment(s) in the article. @Cplakidas: Thanks for the suggestions. The only one that I didn't implement is the one about using Template:Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition and Template:Encyclopaedia Iranica. I have now cited these sources following the guidelines in their online editions ("Cite this page as..."), which is much more convenient for me (compared to a time-consuming visit to the library to find out the page numbers of each entry in the print versions). If that's not an issue, then this article can be "submitted" for review as soon as Ghazaalch is also happy with it. Albertatiran (talk) 17:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Albertatiran. I addressed your comment. You could submit it if Cplakidas is OK with it. Ghazaalch (talk) 05:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Am fully OK with it. And I think I will also pick it up for review, if you don't mind. Constantine   ✍  16:23, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Muhammad al-Jawad/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Cplakidas (talk · contribs) 16:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Will gladly have a look over the following few days.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Overall a very well-written article with impeccable sourcing, I am really happy with the work done. Some comments follow below, mostly for prose style and context:

Lede
kept aloof from politics suggest linking to Political quietism in Islam
Suggest adding 'Shia' after Imamite and 'caliph' after Abbasid [al-Ma'mun]
Link Islamic law, Ali al-Rida, umm walad, suggest relinking Iraq to Lower Mesopotamia, link Kazimayn at the first mention
Born in Medina in 810-811, Muhammad al-Jawad was about six when the Abbasid al-Ma'mun (r. 813–833) summoned his father al-Rida to Khorasan and designated him as the heir apparent in 817, possibly to mitigate the frequent Shia revolts. reads odd. I suggest something like 'Born in Medina in 810-811, Muhammad al-Jawad was the son of the eighth Imam, Ali al-Rida. In 817, the Abbasid caliph al-Ma'mun summoned al-Rida to Khorasan and designated him as the heir apparent, possibly to mitigate the frequent Shia revolts.'
turned to Ahmad ibn Musa al-Kazim for leadership 'turned to al-Jawad's uncle, Ahmad ibn Musa al-Kazim, for leadership'
the now-extinct Waqifites 'the rival Waqifite sect', whether they are extinct or not is not relevant in the lede as they are not the subject here; their relation to al-Jawad is.
The caliph summoned to Baghdad and married his daughter Umm Fadhl to al-Jawad in 830. 'In 830, al-Ma'mun summoned al-Jawad to Baghdad and ...' and recommend starting a new paragraph there as well.
about how he died 'about the manner of his death'
Kazimayn has since become an important center for pilgrimage. among Twelver Shi'ites or generally?
Titles
one his predecessors, Muhammad al-Baqir assume that the average reader knows nothing about the Twelve Imams, so something like 'his predecessor, the fifth imam, Muhammad al-Baqir'
Link Shia and Ali al-Rida as the first occurrence of the terms in the main article
Completely optional, but I would recommend adding the Arabic terms here.
Life
To avoid confusion, I suggest using only 'Muhammad al-Jawad' or plain 'al-Jawad' for the article subject
his grandfather, Musa al-Kazim (d. 799) as above, something like 'his grandfather, the seventh imam Musa al-Kazim (d. 799)'
he was born 195/810-811 clarify that the former is in the Hijri calendar by adding [[Anno Hegirae|AH]], and 'CE' after the Common Era date. Do so for all subsequent Hijri/CE pairings
mid-Ramadan provide a CE equivalent
10 Rajab (April 8) add CE year
italicize Ziyarat al-nahiya al-muqaddasa
Add Muhammad to Islamic prophet
his mother 'al-Jawad's mother'
link umm walad as the first occurrence of the term in the main article, and heir apparent to Wali al-Ahd
the Abbasid Caliph al-Ma'mun decapitalize 'caliph' as it is used descriptively here, and link to Abbasid Caliphate
reconciliation between the Abbasids and the Alids. The uninitiated won't know who the Alids were and why they were in rivalry with the Abbasids. I would suggest adding a brief explanation in the 'Birth' section. E.g. 'Al-Jawad was an Alid, a descendant of Ali ibn Abi Talib (d. 661) and Fatima (d. 632), who were the cousin and the daughter of the Islamic prophet, respectively. The Shia movement had always chosen their leaders ('imams') from this line, even though actual rule over the Muslim world was in the hands of different dynasties like the Umayyads and the Abbasids. Al-Jawad's father, Ali al-Rida, was recognized as the eighth imam by most Shia...'to say that there are Sunni historians that corroborate this, then rephrase accordingly.
among the Abbasids and Arab Sunni nationalists. clarify 'Abbasids' to 'members of the Abbasid dynasty', and 'nationalists' is clearly not the right term here. Especially or the latter, a brief explanation of the reason for their opposition is warranted.
These revolted and installed an anti-caliph in Baghdad, named Ibrahim ibn al-Mahdi 'These revolted and installed al-Ma'mun's uncle, Ibrahim ibn al-Mahdi, as an anti-caliph in Baghdad'
'vizier' does not need italics, as it is an English word. Do link it to Vizier (Abbasid Caliphate) though.
Western authors I suggest rather 'Modern scholars', as that is the decisive attribute, they are (presumably) non-partisan historians.
the Twelver al-Shaykh al-Mufid... Twelver Ibn Shahrashub...Twelver Muhammad H. Tabatabai... etc add their occupation as it is important to understand why they are relevant as a source, e.g. 'the Twelver theologian al-Shaykh al-Mufid'. Conversely, when they have been introduced, it is not necessary to repeat their affiliation (e.g. the Twelver al-Mufid).
 Shona F. Wardrop... Wilferd Madelung...Jassim M. Hussain... etc ditto, who are they? A simple description like 'modern historian' or 'German Islamicist' would be enough.
Yahya bin Aktam be consistent in using 'ibn' or 'bin', later on there is even a b..
but Bihar al-anwar 'but the 17th-century hadith collection Bihar al-anwar'
about the status of Abu Bakr and Umar who are they? e.g. 'companions of Muhammad and early caliphs' or something similar (otherwise 'the two caliphs' is unclear)
between al-Ma'mun and some Sunni scholars is described by Uyun al-akhbar al-Rida between al-Ma'mun or between al-Rida? And add that the book is from the 10th century.
The canonical Kitab al-Irshad  canonical according to whom?
 Qom, an important Shia center was Qom an important Shia center in the early 9th century? My impression is that this was the case towards the end of the century...
Yahya ibn Emran I guess this is the modern Persian form of the name (esp. since it comes from Iranica). Pretty sure the original Arabic form should be 'Yahya ibn Imran'.
His arranged marriage in 215/830 to a daughter of al-Ma'mun, named Umm al-Fadl since the marriage has been extensively reported on previously, it does not need to be reintroduced here
Umm al-Fadl is also commonly held responsible in Shia sources for the death of al-Jawad in 220/835 by poisoning This is properly covered in the 'Death' section
Introduce  Dala'il al-imama to the reader
'harem' does not need italics, but you could relink to Abbasid harem
Will continue with the rest later. Constantine   ✍  11:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Imamate
The section depends very heavily on a single source (Wardrop). Questions of availability aside, why is her opinion/view to be relied on? I note that for a GA, this is not a problem as a PhD thesis (in a university with a reputation for excellence in Islamic studies) is definitely a WP:RS, but it will come up in a FA review.
Al-Jawad was contemporary with the Abbasid caliphs al-Ma'mun and his brother, al-Mu'tasim. He adopted a quiescent attitude and kept aloof from politics, similar to many of his predecessors. His political quietism would probably fit better at 'Role in Shia revolts'.
Link 'nass (Islam)', 'hujja', 'heresiographies', relink Bahrain to Eastern Arabia
al-Qiay'am'a is not an Arabic name, or at least horribly transliterated.
after Hasan (d. 670) and Husayn (d. 680) add that they were sons of Ali, and their numbering as imams.
naming Ahmad ibn Musa and Abd-Allah ibn Musa 'naming his uncles...' f his brother, Ahmad ibn Musa 'his uncle'
 related verse 19:12 'related Quranic verse 19:12'
Instead of the rather vague Islamic empire, better 'Abbasid empire'
their collected alms is this a reference to the khums?
Add {{transl|ar|}} around khums (uncapitalized), qadi, and ghulat, and provide a brief gloss for these terms on their first occurrence.
within the caliphate I assume this means 'within the Abbasid government'?
As above, Hossein ibn Abdullah Neishaburi, Hakem ibn Alia Asadi and Ja'far ibn Dawood Qomi are Persian forms of Arabic names. For consistency, use the latter.
 Yahya ibn Abi Imran is used in this section, and  Yahya ibn Emran in 'Shia revolts'. Standardize to the former.
The 'Role in Shia revolts' seems to replicate a lot of content already covered in the previous sections. Strongly recommend merging it there if it is missing, otherwise striking this section, or summarizing it briefly to convey the sense that although he is generally regarded as a quietist figure, Shia revolts broke out in Qom during his time, but his exact role in them is unclear.
about the occultation which occultation? what is an occultation?
Gloss keramat and tay al-ard
Works
Would suggest renaming the section to 'Legacy' as most of his work is known through others
Decapitalize Khums and Zakat, and use the transliteration templates.
Link al-Qa'im to Qa'im Al Muhammad
References
Add ISBNs, ISSNs or OCLCs as relevant for Baghestani, Bayhom-Daou, Donaldson, and any other work missing such
'Kohlberg, E. (2022).' and 'Kohlberg, E. (2012).' are the same article in the same work. Suggest standardizing to 'Kohlberg, E. (2012).' since that is the correct date ('First published online: 2012'). Ditto for Lewis, B. (2022)/Lewis, B. (2012).
Kennedy 2015 is the Third Edition of that work, Tabatai 1975 is the Second Edition.
Find the actual author and chapter reference for 'Holt, Lambton & Lewis 1970'
Note that Wardrop is a PhD Thesis, as other types of thesis are not permissible as reference.
@Ghazaalch and Albertatiran: That's it for a first pass. Once these issues are addressed, I will do another pass. Constantine   ✍  15:56, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Constantine, thanks very much for the comments. This is valuable feedback for us. I'll go over them soon. Albertatiran (talk) 17:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)


### Response
Hi, Constantine! Here is the point-by-point response that Ghazaalch and I have prepared. Looking forward to your feedback. Thanks again. Albertatiran (talk) 09:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Constantine, thanks for the additional feedback. Our second set of responses has been added below and we have also revised the article accordingly. Looking forward to your suggestions. Albertatiran (talk) 09:36, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Lede
kept aloof from politics suggest linking to Political quietism in Islam
Done!
Suggest adding 'Shia' after Imamite and 'caliph' after Abbasid [al-Ma'mun]
Done!
Link Islamic law, Ali al-Rida, umm walad, suggest relinking Iraq to Lower Mesopotamia, link Kazimayn at the first mention
Done! (Ali al-Rida was already linked.)
Born in Medina in 810-811, Muhammad al-Jawad was about six when the Abbasid al-Ma'mun (r. 813–833) summoned his father al-Rida to Khorasan and designated him as the heir apparent in 817, possibly to mitigate the frequent Shia revolts. reads odd. I suggest something like 'Born in Medina in 810-811, Muhammad al-Jawad was the son of the eighth Imam, Ali al-Rida. In 817, the Abbasid caliph al-Ma'mun summoned al-Rida to Khorasan and designated him as the heir apparent, possibly to mitigate the frequent Shia revolts.'
To address your comment, this was changed to "Born in Medina in 810-811, Muhammad al-Jawad was the son of Ali al-Rida, the eighth of the Twelve Imams. In 817, the Abbasid caliph al-Ma'mun (r. 813–833) summoned al-Rida to Khorasan and designated him as the heir apparent, possibly to mitigate the frequent Shia revolts."
turned to Ahmad ibn Musa al-Kazim for leadership 'turned to al-Jawad's uncle, Ahmad ibn Musa al-Kazim, for leadership'
This was changed to "...some instead turned for leadership to al-Jawada's uncle, Ahmad ibn Musa al-Kazim,..."
the now-extinct Waqifites 'the rival Waqifite sect', whether they are extinct or not is not relevant in the lede as they are not the subject here; their relation to al-Jawad is.
This makes sense. We have changed it to simply "the Waqifites."
The caliph summoned to Baghdad and married his daughter Umm Fadhl to al-Jawad in 830. 'In 830, al-Ma'mun summoned al-Jawad to Baghdad and ...' and recommend starting a new paragraph there as well.
"In 830, al-Ma'mun summoned al-Jawad to Baghdad and married his daughter Umm Fadhl to him" is a bit awkward, so we changed it to, "In 830, al-Jawad was summoned to Baghdad by al-Ma'mun, who married his daughter Umm Fadhl to the Imam."
Slightly pedantic, but when not discussing his role as an imam of the Twelver community, it is better to not call him that, but by his name (or sobriquet). The WP:Voice of Wikipedia must not take position on him being the Imam. Constantine   ✍  19:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
We've changed that to, "In 830, al-Jawad was summoned to Baghdad by al-Ma'mun, who married his daughter Umm Fadhl to the former." That he was a Shia imam is agreed upon and safe to use, I think. Albertatiran (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
That is fine. Constantine   ✍  13:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
about how he died 'about the manner of his death'
Done!
Kazimayn has since become an important center for pilgrimage. among Twelver Shi'ites or generally?
The source (Kohlberg's EI article) is silent about that.
Titles
one his predecessors, Muhammad al-Baqir assume that the average reader knows nothing about the Twelve Imams, so something like 'his predecessor, the fifth imam, Muhammad al-Baqir'
Makes sense. We changed it to, "...reserved for his predecessor, Muhammad al-Baqir (d. 732), the fifth of the Twelve Imams."
Link Shia and Ali al-Rida as the first occurrence of the terms in the main article
Done!
Completely optional, but I would recommend adding the Arabic terms here.
We already have the Arabic term for Muhammad al-Jawad, but mentioning the Arabic term for every name make the article very unreadable(due to the frequency of Arabic names). I think lit meaning and the blue links to their relevant pages is good enough.Ghazaalch (talk) 03:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
As I said, optional. But I did not mean adding the Arabic names everywhere, only in this section, as it deals with, well, his names... Constantine   ✍  19:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
We have now added the Arabic names to this section as requested. Albertatiran (talk) 09:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Life
To avoid confusion, I suggest using only 'Muhammad al-Jawad' or plain 'al-Jawad' for the article subject
We have now tried to remove any source of confusion here but we have some reservations about using the same name everywhere. For one, it might be a bit awkward to start a sentence with "Al-Jawad." As much as possible, we have also tried to use "Muhammad" during his childhood years because his honorific titles were surely given to him later. To address your comment, the revised article never refers to the Imam as "al-Jawad" during his childhood years and never refers to him as "Muhammad" during his adult years. That said, we are open to other suggestions too.
I appreciate the difficulty, and think you have found a nice balance. Constantine   ✍  19:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
his grandfather, Musa al-Kazim (d. 799) as above, something like 'his grandfather, the seventh imam Musa al-Kazim (d. 799)'
To address your point, both such instances (one in the lede, one in the main article) were changed to "his grandfather, Musa al-Kazim, the seventh of the Twelve Imams."
he was born 195/810-811 clarify that the former is in the Hijri calendar by adding [[Anno Hegirae|AH]], and 'CE' after the Common Era date. Do so for all subsequent Hijri/CE pairings
Done!
mid-Ramadan provide a CE equivalent
Unfortunately, the source doesn't give the equivalent CE date.
There is a tool here that convert the dates. June 15 is the equivalent date. Ghazaalch (talk) 03:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
10 Rajab (April 8) add CE year
Again, the source doesn't provide that. It's 10 Rajab 195 AH but we don't know the CE equivalent.
This was fixed, but to clarify why I insisted on the year: Islamic years usually fall in two CE years, and the average reader probably won't know the Islamic calendar to guess when Rajab is... Constantine   ✍  19:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Noted, thanks. Albertatiran (talk) 09:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
italicize Ziyarat al-nahiya al-muqaddasa
Done!
Add Muhammad to Islamic prophet
Done!
his mother 'al-Jawad's mother'
This was changed to, "Most records agree that the mother of Muhammad al-Jawad," see above.
link umm walad as the first occurrence of the term in the main article, and heir apparent to Wali al-Ahd
Done!
the Abbasid Caliph al-Ma'mun decapitalize 'caliph' as it is used descriptively here, and link to Abbasid Caliphate
Thanks. This is addressed now.
reconciliation between the Abbasids and the Alids. The uninitiated won't know who the Alids were and why they were in rivalry with the Abbasids. I would suggest adding a brief explanation in the 'Birth' section. E.g. 'Al-Jawad was an Alid, a descendant of Ali ibn Abi Talib (d. 661) and Fatima (d. 632), who were the cousin and the daughter of the Islamic prophet, respectively. The Shia movement had always chosen their leaders ('imams') from this line, even though actual rule over the Muslim world was in the hands of different dynasties like the Umayyads and the Abbasids. Al-Jawad's father, Ali al-Rida, was recognized as the eighth imam by most Shia...'to say that there are Sunni historians that corroborate this, then rephrase accordingly.
Here is how we have attempted to address your comment by adding a new sentence to the beginning of this section and modifying the next sentence: "Ali al-Rida was a prominent Alid, a descendant of Ali ibn Abi Talib, cousin and son-in-law of Muhammad. Alids were viewed as rivals for the caliphate by the Abbasids, who were the descendants of Abbas, paternal uncle of Muhammad. The appointment of the Alid al-Rida by the Abbasid caliph thus invoked strong opposition, particularly among the members of the Abbasid dynasty."
among the Abbasids and Arab Sunni nationalists. clarify 'Abbasids' to 'members of the Abbasid dynasty', and 'nationalists' is clearly not the right term here. Especially or the latter, a brief explanation of the reason for their opposition is warranted.
We followed the source here (Bobrick). Arab (Sunni) nationalism here is perhaps meant as a euphemism for racism against non-Arabs because, at the time, the appointment of al-Rida was apparently thought to have been masterminded by the Persian vizier of al-Ma'mun. To address your comment, we have removed this source and kept only Madelung, who only mentions the Abbasid opposition to the appointment.
Fine. Not opposed to re-adding the removed part, as long as it is explained and avoids anachronisms. Constantine   ✍  19:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Please see the discussion below about Sourdel for our response to this. Albertatiran (talk) 09:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
These revolted and installed an anti-caliph in Baghdad, named Ibrahim ibn al-Mahdi 'These revolted and installed al-Ma'mun's uncle, Ibrahim ibn al-Mahdi, as an anti-caliph in Baghdad'
Done!
'vizier' does not need italics, as it is an English word. Do link it to Vizier (Abbasid Caliphate) though.
Done!
Western authors I suggest rather 'Modern scholars', as that is the decisive attribute, they are (presumably) non-partisan historians.
Done!
the Twelver al-Shaykh al-Mufid... Twelver Ibn Shahrashub...Twelver Muhammad H. Tabatabai... etc add their occupation as it is important to understand why they are relevant as a source, e.g. 'the Twelver theologian al-Shaykh al-Mufid'. Conversely, when they have been introduced, it is not necessary to repeat their affiliation (e.g. the Twelver al-Mufid).
This and all similar instances in the article were updated. We used descriptions like historian, theologian, scholar, and traditionist.
 Shona F. Wardrop... Wilferd Madelung...Jassim M. Hussain... etc ditto, who are they? A simple description like 'modern historian' or 'German Islamicist' would be enough.
This and all similar instances in the article were updated. We used descriptions like scholar, Islamicist, postdoctoral Islamicist, and historian.
Yahya bin Aktam be consistent in using 'ibn' or 'bin', later on there is even a b..
We have changed all such instances to 'ibn'.
but Bihar al-anwar 'but the 17th-century hadith collection Bihar al-anwar'
We changed this to "but the seventeenth-century hadith collection..."
about the status of Abu Bakr and Umar who are they? e.g. 'companions of Muhammad and early caliphs' or something similar (otherwise 'the two caliphs' is unclear)
We changed this to, "about the status of the early caliphs Abu Bakr (r. 632–634) and Umar (r. 634–644)."
between al-Ma'mun and some Sunni scholars is described by Uyun al-akhbar al-Rida between al-Ma'mun or between al-Rida? And add that the book is from the 10th century.
It's a conversation between the caliph and some scholars, according to the source. We also added the book's period, "the tenth-century hadith collection Uyun al-akhbar al-Rida."
The canonical Kitab al-Irshad  canonical according to whom?
Good point. I've seen that in the past somewhere but can't find the source. It's now removed.
 Qom, an important Shia center was Qom an important Shia center in the early 9th century? My impression is that this was the case towards the end of the century...
We followed the source here (Momen's book). The landmark historical moment seems to have been the burial of Fatima al-Ma'suma, sister of al-Rida. The Iranica article suggests that Qom was already an important Shia center by the mid-ninth century but doesn't say anything concrete about around the time of this rebellion (825). To be safe, we have changed that part to, "Qom, a rising Shia center," and also cited the Iranica article.
Yahya ibn Emran I guess this is the modern Persian form of the name (esp. since it comes from Iranica). Pretty sure the original Arabic form should be 'Yahya ibn Imran'.
This makes sense. We've corrected that.
His arranged marriage in 215/830 to a daughter of al-Ma'mun, named Umm al-Fadl since the marriage has been extensively reported on previously, it does not need to be reintroduced here
We changed that to, "His arranged marriage in 215 AH (830 CE) to a daughter of al-Ma'mun did not result in any children. There are other indications that this marriage to Umm al-Fadl was not particularly felicitous, including reports that she complained to al-Ma'mun about her marriage, which the latter rejected."
Suggest simplifying further to 'His marriage to Umm al-Fadl did not result in any children. There are other indications that this marriage was not particularly felicitous...'
Done!
Umm al-Fadl is also commonly held responsible in Shia sources for the death of al-Jawad in 220/835 by poisoning This is properly covered in the 'Death' section
True. But this time it's presented as additional evidence that the marriage was probably problematic.
Introduce  Dala'il al-imama to the reader
We introduced that as, "the biographical source Dala'il al-imama..."
'harem' does not need italics, but you could relink to Abbasid harem
Done!
Will continue with the rest later. Constantine   ✍  11:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Imamate
The section depends very heavily on a single source (Wardrop). Questions of availability aside, why is her opinion/view to be relied on? I note that for a GA, this is not a problem as a PhD thesis (in a university with a reputation for excellence in Islamic studies) is definitely a WP:RS, but it will come up in a FA review.
We agree that this is not ideal, but her opinion as a postdoctoral Islamicist is perhaps relevant, considering how scarcity of sources about Muhammad al-Jawad.
Fine for now, GA is not that high a bar regarding sourcing. But be aware of it if you want to take the article further. Constantine   ✍  20:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Noted, thanks.
Al-Jawad was contemporary with the Abbasid caliphs al-Ma'mun and his brother, al-Mu'tasim. He adopted a quiescent attitude and kept aloof from politics, similar to many of his predecessors. His political quietism would probably fit better at 'Role in Shia revolts'.
Good point. We removed that lone sentence in the beginning of 'Imamate' and changed the opening of 'Role in Shia revolts' to, "Muhammad al-Jawad adopted a quiescent attitude and kept aloof from politics, similar to many of his predecessors. Nevertheless, while Imamite sources are silent about any military involvement of his underground organization, Hussain links the 210 AH (825 CE) uprising in Qom to the political activities of al-Jawad's agents."
Link 'nass (Islam)', 'hujja', 'heresiographies', relink Bahrain to Eastern Arabia
Done!
al-Qiay'am'a is not an Arabic name, or at least horribly transliterated.
We have followed the source here. A Google search doesn't return any information about this person.
Had a look myself, and it is actually al-Qiyāmā (simplified al-Qiyama). Constantine   ✍  20:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. We have corrected that in the article.
after Hasan (d. 670) and Husayn (d. 680) add that they were sons of Ali, and their numbering as imams.
Done! We changed it to, "...after Hasan ibn Ali (d. 670) and Husayn ibn Ali (d. 680), the second and third of the Twelves Imams."
naming Ahmad ibn Musa and Abd-Allah ibn Musa 'naming his uncles...' f his brother, Ahmad ibn Musa 'his uncle'
To address your comment, this was changed to, "...naming his uncles, Ahmad ibn Musa and Abd-Allah ibn Musa or a Hasanid by this latter name."
Hmmm, if I understand correctly, Abdallah may not be his uncle? Then something like '...and Abdallah ibn Musa (through the latter may not have been his uncle, but a related Hasanid)' or similar... Constantine   ✍  20:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
I can now see how this can create confusion. Here is our new attempt: "...naming his uncles, Ahmad ibn Musa and Abd-Allah ibn Musa, and also a Hasanid relative with this latter name." Albertatiran (talk) 10:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 related verse 19:12 'related Quranic verse 19:12'
Done!
Instead of the rather vague Islamic empire, better 'Abbasid empire'
Done!
their collected alms is this a reference to the khums?
The source (Wardrop) does not specify that (and it's hard to say with certainty).
Add {{transl|ar|}} around khums (uncapitalized), qadi, and ghulat, and provide a brief gloss for these terms on their first occurrence.
This was done for qadi.  For the other two, our justification is that both are proper names, i.e., Khums refers here to the famous alms rather than its literal translation 'one-fifth'.
They are still technical terms that are not loanwords into English, hence should be italicized per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC. And Ghulat especially merits a brief gloss ('extremists' or 'the extremist Ghulat sects' would suffice).
We have added the following description for Ghulat: "The Imam distanced himself from the Ghulat (lit. 'exaggerators') who believed in the divinity of Imams. Among them were Abu l-Khattab, Abu al-Samhari, and Ibn Abi Zarqa, who are said to have defamed Shia by forging traditions and attributing them to the Imams and introducing themselves as their representatives." Also, thanks for the link. I wasn't aware of it. However, there I found, "A proper name is usually not italicized, but it may be italicized when the name itself is being referred to, for example, in the lead when the foreign name is included in parentheses after the English name; e.g.: Nuremberg (German: Nürnberg)." Therefore, if we agree that Khums and Ghulat are proper names, then we can leave them without italics. The case of Khums is discussed more in its next appearance below.
Only marginally related, but my personal opinion is that translating Ghulat as 'extremists' is both incorrect and misleading. They have/had little in common (if anything at all) with what we normally attribute to Islamic extremists today. Albertatiran (talk) 09:36, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
You are correct as to the danger of confusing with modern-day extremism. The literal translation is sufficient, IMO. Constantine   ✍  13:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
within the caliphate I assume this means 'within the Abbasid government'?
Correct. We have made this change.
As above, Hossein ibn Abdullah Neishaburi, Hakem ibn Alia Asadi and Ja'far ibn Dawood Qomi are Persian forms of Arabic names. For consistency, use the latter.
We changed them to Husayn ibn Abd-Allah al-Neishaburi, Hakam ibn Alia' al-Asadi , and Ja'far ibn Dawud al-Qomi. Are they correct?
 Yahya ibn Abi Imran is used in this section, and  Yahya ibn Emran in 'Shia revolts'. Standardize to the former.
Done!
The 'Role in Shia revolts' seems to replicate a lot of content already covered in the previous sections. Strongly recommend merging it there if it is missing, otherwise striking this section, or summarizing it briefly to convey the sense that although he is generally regarded as a quietist figure, Shia revolts broke out in Qom during his time, but his exact role in them is unclear.
This is a good point. We merged the earlier subsection 'Shia revolts' with this one but kept it here, under 'Imamate', where it seems more appropriate. For convenience, here is the new paragraph: "Muhammad al-Jawad adopted a quiescent attitude and kept aloof from politics, similar to many of his predecessors. Nevertheless, Hussain links the 210 AH (825 CE) uprising in Qom to the political activities of al-Jawad's agents, even though the Imamite sources are silent about any military involvement of his underground organization. Prior to this revolt, residents of Qom, an important Shia center, had called on al-Ma'mun to lower their taxes as he had done for the city of Rayy. The caliph rejected their appeal, then suppressed their subsequent revolt, and substantially raised their taxes. This is detailed by the Twelver traditionist Ibn Shahrashub (d. 1192), who writes that the Abbasid army demolished the wall surrounding the city, killed many, and nearly quadrupled the taxes. Among those killed was a prominent participant in the uprising, named Yahya ibn Imran, who might have been a representative (wakil) of Muhammad al-Jawad. The attitude of al-Jawad towards this uprising, however, remains unclear, as the Imamite sources are silent about this uprising and its connection to al-Jawad or lack thereof. Probably connecting al-Jawad to Shia rebellions, al-Ma'mun summoned the former from Medina to Baghdad in 215 AH (830 CE) and married his daughter Umm Fazl to him. This marriage, however, did not win al-Ma'mun the Shia support, nor did it stop the uprisings in Qom. Indeed, some reports by al-Tabari and Ibn al-Athir add that among the rebel leaders who had been exiled to Egypt, Ja'far ibn Dawud al-Qomi later escaped and rose again in Qom, defeating the Abbasid army in 216 AH. The Shia uprisings continued even after his execution in 217 AH by the Abbasids. After succeeding al-Ma'mun, al-Mu'tasim summoned al-Jawad to Baghdad in 220 AH (835 CE) and held him under close surveillance, probably to ascertain his role in the Shia uprisings."
Good solution, very happy with it. Constantine   ✍  20:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
about the occultation which occultation? what is an occultation?
Good point. We changed this to, "...and wrote two books, namely, Kitab al-Malahim and Kitab al-Qa'im, about occultation, which is the the eschatological belief that Mahdi, a descendant of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, has already been born and subsequently concealed from the public."
Gloss keramat and tay al-ard
For keramat, we changed that to, "In Shia sources, al-Jawad is credited with some karamat (sg. karamah), that is, supernatural acts or miracles sometimes attributed to saints in Islam. These include..."
tay al-ard (teleportation in Islamic mysticism)
Works
Would suggest renaming the section to 'Legacy' as most of his work is known through others
Done!
Decapitalize Khums and Zakat, and use the transliteration templates.
As earlier, our justification is that, say, Zakat is a proper noun (a specific type of alms) rather than the generic Arabic word.
Agree re Zakat, as it is likely to be familiar to readers and is a term that appears to have entered English. Not sure at all whether this can be said of Khums. Constantine   ✍  20:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Our reasoning for keeping Khums (without italics) is that it's a proper name, so it should be capitalized and without italics, even though it's not an English word or commonly used by English speakers. This seems to agree with the stylistic guidelines you shared with us MOS:FOREIGNITALIC. That said, I'm not confident about this and we'll probably capitulate if you insist! :) Albertatiran (talk) 09:36, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
I won't insist as it is a detail. But it may well come up by others in future reviews. Constantine   ✍  13:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Link al-Qa'im to Qa'im Al Muhammad
Done!
References
Add ISBNs, ISSNs or OCLCs as relevant for Baghestani, Bayhom-Daou, Donaldson, and any other work missing such.
Iranica articles are apparently cited without any ISBN. More on this can be found here. We have done so elsewhere when applicable.
Iranica has its recommendations, but we are not obliged to follow them to the letter. For GA, that is not required, but it is generally good practice to provide this sort of identification. I note Iranica most certainly has ISBNs for its individual volumes, and like all publications, also has an ISSN for the online version: [1]. Constantine   ✍  11:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointer. We have added this ISSN to all Iranica articles for consistency (rather than ISBNs which are missing for the web-only articles). Albertatiran (talk) 18:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
'Kohlberg, E. (2022).' and 'Kohlberg, E. (2012).' are the same article in the same work. Suggest standardizing to 'Kohlberg, E. (2012).' since that is the correct date ('First published online: 2012'). Ditto for Lewis, B. (2022)/Lewis, B. (2012).
Good catch! We have now fixed that.
I strongly recommend using the {{EI2}} template for citing EI2 articles (and generally using templates where they are available). Not just for uniformity, but should something change or need to be corrected, doing it in a central place is much easier than editing all the individual references. Constantine   ✍  11:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
I agree with you and see your point, but the benefits still don't outweigh the inconvenience for me. :) There can also be a good case for using the suggested citation information on their website, as we're doing currently in the article. Albertatiran (talk) 09:36, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Fine by me. The only requirement is consistency within an article, and you have covered that. Constantine   ✍  13:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Kennedy 2015 is the Third Edition of that work, Tabatai 1975 is the Second Edition.
We added the edition number to both entries. For Tabatabai, the updated link points to the first edition (which is the one used in the article).
Find the actual author and chapter reference for 'Holt, Lambton & Lewis 1970'
We should have done that. This is now fixed.
Note that Wardrop is a PhD Thesis, as other types of thesis are not permissible as reference.
Done! Albertatiran (talk) 09:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
@Albertatiran and Ghazaalch: I've responded to some outstanding issues above. Some of them are suggestions regarding prose, you are free to ignore them. I will now do a source review for coverage and copyvio, and after the remaining issues are addressed, I will pass the article. Constantine   ✍  11:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Cplakidas, thanks very much for the swift feedback. I'll work on these in the next few days. Albertatiran (talk) 12:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Source spotchecks

Earwig's tool shows some slight overlap with the Iranica article.
This just shows my unfamiliarity with this tool but should we be worried about this result? It says, 'Violation Unlikely'. Albertatiran (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Hulmes 2008 	Y
Sourdel 1970:
Can't find anything in p. 121 about The Imam is cited in the Shia hadith literature as Abu Ja'far al-Thani (lit. 'Abu Ja'far, the second')
Thanks. We removed that citation. Albertatiran (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Sourdel gives another reason for al-Ma'mun's matrimonial alliance with the Alids, namely his Mu'tazilism and the notion of the "imamate as depending entirely on personal merit". Should be added for completeness.
This is subtle but it seems that the source is justifying the decision to designate al-Rida as the heir-apparent in light of the Mu'tazilite influence on al-Ma'mun. Then the author adds that he supplemented/strengthened that decision by giving his daughter to al-Rida and promising another one to his son. That is, the Mu'tazilite views of the caliph are given as a reason for the designation of al-Rida rather than his arranged marriage. Various authors have justified this designation differently and a better place to survey their views is Ali_al-Rida#Motives. In the present article, we simply say, "To form a political alliance [with his new heir-apparent], the caliph also married one of his daughters..." This statement is intentionally silent about the motives of al-Ma'mun for designating al-Rida as his heir-apparent, which is perhaps outside of the scope of this article. Albertatiran (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Fine by me, you are the authors :) Constantine   ✍  13:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
p.121 also supplies the information necessary to re-introduce the removed part about Sunni 'nationalists'.
You are right. We could add, ", and the Iraqi supporters of Abbasid legitimism, who may have thought that this appointment was masterminded by the Persian vizier of al-Ma'mun and thus perceived it as a step towards Persian domination of the empire." But I have only added, "and the Iraqi supporters of Abbasid legitimise," to avoid any in-depth discussion that would be a better fit for Ali al-Rida. Albertatiran (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Both are fine by me, but the former may be a bit too much for the present article (it does not directly concern al-Jawad). Constantine   ✍  13:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
al-Rida's death and al-Jawad's stay at the caliphal court are also not in p. 121, but p. 122 for the former, and I cannot find anything for the latter. Indeed, Sourdel's chapter does not seem to mention al-Jawad, except in passing.
Thanks for spotting this. The correct source for the death of al-Rida after a short illness is the EI2 article by Bayhom-Daou. The revised article also does not cite Sourdel anymore for al-Jawad's summon to Baghdad. Albertatiran (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Madelung 2012
Some others had opportunistically backed the imamate of al-Rida after his appointment as the heir apparent and now returned to their Sunni or Zaydi communities is extremely close to the original source and constitutes a clear example of WP:Close paraphrasing. Please attribute it in-text to Madelung, at the very least.
This sentence is now attributed to Madelung in the article. Albertatiran (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
[Umm al-Fadl] complained to al-Ma'mun about her marriage according to Madelung, she complained specifically about al-Jawad's preference for his concubines over her, which is a) understandable, b) gives an explanation about why the marriage remained childless and c) shows her in a slightly better light than is otherwise conveyed. I strongly recommend adding this to the text.
From Pierce's book, I've revised that sentence as, "There are other indications that this marriage was not particularly felicitous, including reports that she complained to al-Ma'mun about her marriage, specifically about her husband taking a concubine, which the latter rejected."
I will also look into Wardrop 1988 given its heavy use in the article, but it will take me a few days. Constantine   ✍  12:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
@Albertatiran and Ghazaalch: Did a fairly extensive spotcheck (and some minor fixes) about the usage of Wardrop in the 'Imamate' section. I am satisfied about there not being any close paraphrasing there. I am also satisfied with the responses to the troublespots above, and am convinced that they were inadvertent errors. As such, I am signing off on the sourcing and copyvio requirements, and thus also passing the article for GA at this time. Congratulations to you both, the article is really good and a major achievement! Constantine   ✍  13:12, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! :) Your feedback and, perhaps just as importantly, availability and commitment made a lot of difference. Albertatiran (talk) 13:18, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Also a big thanks to Ghazaalch! Albertatiran (talk) 13:24, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your good work @Cplakidas and Albertatiran:. God bless you both.Ghazaalch (talk) 07:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)