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.
It’s usual (but not compulsory) to include an infobox for notable people (see Template:Infobox person).
Amitchell125, I don't know why it is needed there. We don't have any images of them. We do not know their years of birth or even the exact years of death. It is not known whether they had surnames at all. I don't know whether they were subjects of the Ottoman Empire or Iran. Even the years of activity cannot be precisely calculated. It seems to me that the template is unnecessary here. With respect, Smpad (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with an infobox not being included. It would be good to find a relevant image of some sort to go at the top of the article, and I'll look to see if there is anything suitable, but if nothing can be found, that's OK. Amitchell125 (talk) 21:56, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would replace servants (tax-farmers) with ‘tax-farmers’ (linked).
Consider amending Khwaja Petik had at least two brothers, one of whom was Khwaja Sanos to something like ‘Petik and Sanos had at least one other brother'.
Amitchell125, initially in Armenian the town was called Jugha. Julfa is the anglicized Persian name (جلفا). In the literature about Armenians and especially Armenian merchants, the name Old Julfa (as opposed to New Julfa) dominates significantly ([2]). Just Julfa does not convey the original Armenian flavor for the uninitiated reader. With respect, Smpad (talk) 21:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Julfa (now in Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan) is better without brackets, i.e. ‘ Julfa, now in Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan'.
My apologies for not being clearer. As an example, "|thumb|right|240px|" should be "|thumb|" only, as under normal circumstances, images are not enlarged. See WP:IMAGESIZE for the best advice here. Amitchell125 (talk) 22:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
providing them with the supply of raw silk and distribution of manufactured goods from Europe in exchange – needs to be copy edited so that it makes better sense.
Amitchell125, the source (Sanjian 1965, pp. 48–49) reads: "He and his brother Khocha Sanos operated a vast network of commercial establishments in Anatolia, Persia, and India, supplying raw silk and in exchange distributing European manufactured goods." I had a hard time rephrasing it any other way. With respect, Smpad (talk) 15:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Consider amending was made up of commercial establishments in Anatolia, Persia and India, providing them with the supply of raw silk and distribution of manufactured goods from Europe in exchange to something like 'in Anatolia, Persia and India, was connected with the raw silk trade and the distribution of manufactured goods from Europe'. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the chief of customs of all Ottoman Syria – a small point, but the references that follow this text should really be in numerical order. The same goes with the Dutch consul in Aleppo.
Yes, I suggest amending With such social position, Khwaja Petik also maintained close contacts to something like 'Using his social position, Khwaja Petik maintained close contacts'. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Smpad: More comments to follow. However, this review at this stage is turning out to be an exercise in copy editing, and its looks as if there will be many other comments to come. One option is that I fail the article and you submit it to be copy edited by another editor before you re-nominate it, but I'd rather not do that. I'd prefer instead to help you to get the article promoted.
Thank you very much, colleague! I have addressed some comments, the remaining ones I will address in the coming days. Thank you again. With respect, Smpad (talk) 00:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
but under unknown circumstances, already in 1614, he was briefly supplanted by the Musa ibn Ishaq,[i] but Sanos tried to unseat him again this year.The rivalry between the brothers and Musa was outlined since they sought to unseat one other – needs to be copy edited to improve the prose.
Amitchell125, is this variant better "At first he bought this post in Aleppo in 1612 for nine years. But under unknown circumstances, already in 1614, he was briefly supplanted by the Musa ibn Ishaq, with Sanos tried to unseat him again this year."? With respect, Smpad (talk) 15:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
regained his position in 1616, what was stimulated, according to Masters, by establishment of direct contact - ‘regained his position in 1616 by establishing direct contact’.
According to…; As Hagop Barsoumian describes, As Masters points out – as the people being mentioned are reliable historians, there’s not need to keep saying According to, etc., or even mentioning them by name.
Amitchell125, I removed two "According to"s. But I think it is important to preserve the attribution of sources of Masters/Semerdjian and Barsoumian, since according to the first two Petik was beheaded in 1627, while the latter writes that in 1638 he was still alive. They contradict each other. With respect, Smpad (talk) 14:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amitchell125, Barsoumian just writes "... the two brothers were instrumental in organizing the ransoming (and rescue) from slavery of over a thousand Armenians who were taken as booty by the Tartar army fighting along with the Ottomans against the Persians in the war of 1638" without giving a clue what "Tartar" means. It is not clear whether he means the Crimean Tatars or the Transcaucasian/Azerbaijani Tatars. Apparently, the sources he used also do not clarify this. With respect, Smpad (talk) 23:05, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. You could perhaps amend "Tartar army" to 'what Barsoumian describes as as a "Tartar army"...', to help readers understand what you have explained to me, Amitchell125 (talk) 07:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
on the order of Sultan Murad IV;[10][52] according to de Groot — on the order of - ‘the order of Murad IV,[10][52] but according to de Groot, on the order of’.
The exact year of his death remains a matter of dispute. Sanjian, Kévonian and Sebouh Aslanian [de] date it to 1632, Acharian — to 1634. Masters names 1627 year. Semerdjian, based on the Ottoman archives, also names the year 1627 and believes that by 1639 (in the story of al-Ghazzi) Petik was already dead. However, according to Barsoumian, in 1638 he was still alive. - consider simplifying to something like 'The year of Petik's execution is given by various authors as being 1627 (Masters; Semerdjian), 1632 (Sanjian; Kévonian; Sebouh Aslanian [de]), 1634 (Acharian), or sometime after 1639 (Barsoumian)'.
Only two centuries later, the Armenians will regain their dominant role in the customs affairs of the city. - I would remove this as being “off-topic”.
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.