Dragoman of the Porte is currently a World history good article nominee. Nominated by Constantine ✍ at 12:19, 11 August 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Senior interpreter of the Ottoman government

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

Former countries: Ottoman Empire This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles This article is supported by WikiProject Ottoman Empire (assessed as Mid-importance). Greece Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dragoman of the Porte/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Cplakidas (talk · contribs) 12:19, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: UndercoverClassicist (talk · contribs) 12:57, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoyable as ever -- a few pointers on prose and content, then images and sources. Will get to spot checks once we've gone through this lot. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:57, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Consider adding a transliteration to the Greek in the lead, to aid pronunciation. Should the μέγας be moved a bit later, to where we talk about it sometimes being called the Grand Dragoman?
  • Good point, done. Constantine ✍ 08:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• From the position's inception in 1661 until the outbreak of the Greek Revolution in 1821, the office was occupied by Phanariotes,: I'm not sure this was quite true (the Ghica family don't sound like Phanariots?) and, at any rate, it is much stronger than the framing we have in the body, that almost all subsequent Grand Dragomans of the Porte were of Greek origin.
  • The phrasing is deliberately chosen in the lede, as the Phanariotes were not just Greeks. As you say, they included families like the Ghica, who were not ethnic Greeks, but were culturally Hellenized and intermarried with the Greek Phanariotes. These are included within the ranks of the Phanariotes as 'Hellenized Balkan Christians'. Constantine ✍ 08:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Can we have a citation somewhere to use the word "Greek" in connection with the Ghica? I trust your knowledge here, but can also imagine this being a magnet for the various flavours of nationalistic IP editors who like to flock to Balkan articles. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 09:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Have edited this somewhat, to hopefully also explain what the Phanariots were. Constantine ✍ 19:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• We never actually explain what "the Porte" was -- I think that would be helpful.
  • Good point, added. Constantine ✍ 08:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• In the same way, I think it would help to explain who the Phanariots were at some point, and perhaps a touch about their wider importance to the Ottoman Empire.
  • Have added a very brief overview in connection with the comment above. Constantine ✍ 19:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• proficient in the 'three languages': very optional for GA, but I think the MoS would prefer double quotes.
  • Not for glosses, per MOS:SIMPLEGLOSS. Have added the appropriate template for clarity. Constantine ✍ 08:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Under MOS:SIMPLEGLOSS, a gloss comes after the foreign-language word, but this is hardly a major issue at this level. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 09:31, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Rewrote this slightly. Constantine ✍ 19:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• a mere interpreter: mere might be a little harsh on interpreters, who are after all very skilled people.
  • Fair point, altered. Constantine ✍ 08:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• As such the post was the highest public office available to non-Muslims in the Ottoman Empire.: not really an as such: it doesn't follow from the Dragoman's wide responsibilities that there was no higher office available to non-Muslims. From what I remember, there was quite a delicate balance of power as to which ethno-religious groups held which high offices -- is there something to be said about that here?
• We haven't explained what a Grand Vizir was, and I think that's important.
  • Added a footnote. Constantine ✍ 19:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• The salary of the Dragoman of the Porte amounted to 47,000 kuruş annually: can we give an idea of how much that was?
• I'd suggest that a very brief biographical sketch of each dragoman might just qualify as a "major aspect" of the topic per the GACr.

By the nature of the beast, quite a lot of these.

• Could crop the image in Panagiotis Nikousios to get a portrait of him?
• John Mavrocordatos has a (not great) portrait in his article.
• I haven't looked too hard for images of the rest, but any that exist online should be fair game by reason of age.
• File:Louis-Dupre-Pacha.jpg, File:Ion Vodă Caragea.jpg, File:Alexander Hangerli.jpg, File:Alexandru Sutu.jpg, File:Konstantinos Ypsilantis.JPG, File:Alexandru Callimachi.jpg, File:Alexandros Mourouzis.jpg, File:Μαυροκορδάτος ο φιραρής.jpg, [:File:Constantin Moruzi.jpg]], File:Alexandru Ipsilanti.jpg, File:Gregoire Ghyka, hospodar de Moldavie.jpg, File:Ioan Callimachi.jpg, File:Матeі Гіка Вв în AnȢл 1753.JPG, File:Nikolaos Maurokordatos 1721.jpg, File:Alexandros Maurokordatos o ex aporiton.JPG,  : a formality, but all need a US PD tag. You can use the PD-Art-two template for this.
• File:Grigore II Ghica.jpg: need to use PD-Art here, as it's watermarked, so clearly this image itself wasn't published 100 years ago. Also needs a US PD tag.
• File:Dragoman, or Chief Interpreter.jpg: ditto.
• File:Scarlat Callimachi.jpg: this has almost no information as to its provenance (and no US PD tag). Can we get some idea of where it's from, who made it and when it was published?
• File:Le Prince de Moldavie - Choiseul-gouffier Gabriel Florent Auguste De - 1822.jpg: licence works, but the US PD expired template would be simpler.
• I'm not sure that File:Stamp of Moldova md412.jpg: here, we could use PD-because to explain that the copyright holder (the Moldovan government) has waived its rights?
• Some of the images have no sourcing for their author info (e.g. File:Μαυροκορδάτος ο φιραρής.jpg). For GA, I'm happy to take on trust when it's given, but you might consider tracking down something more authoritative than a Commons editor's word.
• File:Reisülküttab.jpg: we have this down as a 2013 publication. None of the source links work, but last I checked, that was long after the end of the Ottoman Empire, so we need to work out which, if any, licence we can use here.

Sourcing looks generally solid.

• An endash needed for the hyphen in Strauss 1995.
  • Done. Constantine ✍ 19:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Eliott 1900 is not a scholarly source and is very old -- it is only used twice; any way to swap that out?
• On Ottoman-Greek matters, my eternal question is whether Mark Mazower has written anything of relevance -- he has quite a lot to say about the Phanariots in general across his works (I remember reading a few for Kyriakos Pittakis)
  • He is indeed an excellent scholar, and thanks for reminding me; I will check his book on the Greek Revolution, it may have something relevant. Constantine ✍ 19:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Optional for GA, but I would put Hart et al in the bibliography -- I see the logic, but it's odd to treat only one source differently to the others.
  • This was added by another editor, which is why it is inconsistent both in format and in extent with the others in the list. I am waiting to see whether I can gather enough sources for the brief biographical sketches as you suggested above. May take a while. Constantine ✍ 19:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work -- I always enjoy reading your articles and learning something more about topics I thought I was getting a handle on. Spot checks to follow once the above is addressed.

Thanks, your reviews are always very well-considered and helpful. Constantine ✍ 19:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]