Talk:Suleiman the Magnificent

message: Referring to this old but justified comment written by , in 2013. This article is currently still, some three years after said user placed his remark, in a state that does not merit for its GA status, in my humble opinion. It lacks significant amount of depth and content quality, I have to say. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Really worth a GA status? - not really 

message: I'm removing the final paragraph of the "Legacy" section since it's nothing but an encapsulation of old and outdated stereotypes about Ottoman Decline. However it's very well attested that modern historians of the Ottoman Empire do not believe that the empire declined after the the death of Süleyman the Magnificent, and thus that paragraph needed to be removed. Chamboz (talk) 19:00, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legacy and Decline 

message: Hafsa Sultan wasn't the daughter of a Crimean Khan, this myth apparently originated from an uninformed sixteenth-century European writer but is disproven by archival evidence, as Alan Fisher notes in his essay on Suleiman's early life, which I have cited in the article. Chamboz (talk) 21:47, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suleiman's Mother 

message: Two sources which are used frequently throughout this article - Kinross' The Ottoman Centuries and Clot's Suleiman the Magnificent, are not reliable. Both of these authors were not professional historians, and even if they had been their books are now very much outdated. All citations of Kinross and Clot should be replaced with citations of modern academic historians, and the information in the article updated accordingly. Chamboz (talk) 00:40, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would contact A. Garnet, the editor who was responsible for originally nominating this as an FA, to see if they could make some improvements, but it seems that they ceased their involvement with Wikipedia in 2009. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This article has a decent foundation, but needs a lot of work and source verification to really be considered high quality. Chamboz (talk) 20:28, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article relies on some bad sources 

message: Adding to Chamboz's comment above, I think it pertinent to raise an obvious question: why is this still rated as a Featured Article? It achieved that status in 2007, at a time when Wikipedia's standards for promoting articles to FA were a great deal more lax than they are now. Frankly, if I were reviewing this article (in its current state) at GAN, I would probably fail it; it does not easily meet the criteria for a Good Article, let alone a Featured one. There are unreferenced statements throughout, and as Chamboz points out, even some of the sources used may not be ideal. There are multiple problems in the formatting of the citations, and some of the copyright explanations on many of the images could do with some work (with particular reference paid to Turkish copyright law). Perhaps it is time to think about sending this one off for a Featured Article reassessment. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would contact A. Garnet, the editor who was responsible for originally nominating this as an FA, to see if they could make some improvements, but it seems that they ceased their involvement with Wikipedia in 2009. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:26, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This article has a decent foundation, but needs a lot of work and source verification to really be considered high quality. Chamboz (talk) 20:28, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is this article still an FA?

message: In the following source, on Academia.edu new information about the wives of Suleiman is mentioned. Sultan Suleyman I. und seine Frauen by Salomé Woronzow-Daschkow Retrieverlove (talk) 5:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This is merely unpublished OR. You must stop using this kind of fringe sources on wikipedia and use reliable sources instead, for everyone' sake.--Phso2 (talk) 14:31, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: New information about Suleiman's wives

message: Despite the cultural significance of Harold Lamb's novels, my understanding is that it is a (good) historical fiction - as it is fiction I don't think it should be used as a source. It seems the unreferenced anecdote about Suleyman being "influenced" by Alexander the Great is also from the novel, so I would like to remove that also. There are much stronger sources for the claim that Suleyman admired Alexander the Great (Royal Historical Society) Seraphimsystem (talk) 09:30, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Harold Lamb

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Suleiman the Magnificent. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.byegm.gov.tr/yayinlarimiz/NEWSPOT/1999/JulyAug/N6.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090818015845/http://www.neopodia.mobi/20090519-histoire-renaissance-alliance-impie-francois-1er-ier-ottoman-soliman-suleyman-charles-quint-forces-en-presence to http://www.neopodia.mobi/20090519-histoire-renaissance-alliance-impie-francois-1er-ier-ottoman-soliman-suleyman-charles-quint-forces-en-presence
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:37, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Suleiman the Magnificent. 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/20081003071213/http://uk.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575054_2/Suleiman_I.html to http://uk.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575054_2/Suleiman_I.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Suleiman the Magnificent. 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/20060614160210/http://paradoxplace.com/Perspectives/Genl%20Images/Single%20Frames/Suleiman.htm to http://www.paradoxplace.com/Perspectives/Genl%20Images/Single%20Frames/Suleiman.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:26, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It says at the start of the article that a writer called him "appropriately named" even in his early 20s. It's not clear whether this refers to his name "Suleiman" (as would seem likely after such a short time in power) or the other moniker "The Magnificent". If it refers to "The Magnificant", it needs to make this clear. If it refers to Suleiman, we need a translation of "Suleiman" so we know why this is "appropriate" for him.
I also added a few words to the sentence about him adopting a slave as a friend and later advisor...this is all true, but he later had the same man strangled to death. I don't have a reference to add, but it clearly says this right on the page about the ex-slave. Not mentioning this part seems like someone is going out of their way to paint an overly-kind picture of a progressive and kind ruler. The fact that the man was his friend and advisor and he had him executed later is just as important as the fact that he adopted a slave as a friend and advisor in the first place.
70.105.242.162 (talk) 19:32, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does "Suleiman" mean? 

message: Suleiman the Magnificent
Sultan of my a hole
[[
]]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troyspears (talk • contribs) 16:20, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Vandalism appears to have been deleted. Next time, the Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit may be helpful. HLHJ (talk) 05:48, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  I was searching for Suleiman, and this slur appeared in instant answers 

message: Commons claims the guy on the painting would be Suleiman II and that it is not actually a Tizian but a copy. Someone should correct some of the conflicting statements somewhere, probably. Unfortunately, I don't know the subject well enough. --Ehitaja (talk) 17:59, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: most probably Suleiman I was regarded as Suleiman II by people at that time saw Süleyman Çelebi a legitimate sultan. There is no way that's Suleiman II, because the full portrait is painted alongside François. Beshogur (talk) 19:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't be very much surprised if the "II" would be just a product of later misidentification due to the portrait being only named "Suleiman" or "Suleiman the Sultan", if it really had any inscribed heading at all. The concept of strict, unchanged headings for paintings is rather modern. --Ehitaja (talk) 19:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The main pic 

message: There is no mention of the cause of death, at least not in the Section 'Death'.--79.100.144.23 (talk) 15:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What did he die of? 

message: "Suleiman" means "Solomon" in English. So please let's write his name as "Solomon the Magnificent". 81.215.233.216 (talk) 18:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name