Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Karanacs 20:12, 27 October 2009 [1].

---

Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos

Nominator(s): bamse (talk) 09:22, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

• Featured article candidates/Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos/archive1

I am nominating this for featured article because I believe it comprehensively covers the topic and meets all the requirements for FA. It is currently a GA and has received a review during which all major points have been addressed. bamse (talk) 09:22, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments by Redtigerxyz

References: Did not check non-English references, NOT all ref checked

• http://www.congresochiquitos.com/ (3) is dead

  Indeed, it appears dead. How do I deal with cases, where online references become dead. Do I need to remove the reference? bamse (talk) 15:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

• Ref 5 "Events that happened at that time" is marked as English ref, but is non-English

  Fixed. The link was pointing to the Spanish language version of the same text. bamse (talk) 15:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

• Ref 6, 11 miss page number

  Added a page number for ref 11 and asked User:Maunus to add a page number for ref 6 which he added. Unfortunately it seems that he is on a wikibreak right now and I don't know if he responds to messages on his talk page. Is there a place on wikipedia to find people with acces to books, etc? bamse (talk) 16:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

  Page number has been added. Done. bamse (talk) 18:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

• Consistency page numbering: Ref 12 has "p.203", 13 has "55-74" (no p, pp.)

  Not sure what to do about it. I used cite-templates which took care of the formatting. bamse (talk) 16:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

• Ref 7: Who is Geoffrey A. P. Groesbeck? How is the ref RS. Ref 18 from same site.

  Consultant at Diócesis de San Ignacio de Velasco, author of acadamic articles on the Chiquitos missions (published by U. of Illinois and U. of Pittsburgh press) and guide book author of the region. bamse (talk) 18:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

• Ref 9 is non-ENGlish. Specify language for all non-English links

  In fact, only the title (and an abstract) is in Spanish. The text is all English. bamse (talk) 15:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

• Ref 10 does not have publisher info (Company Magazine)

  Added publisher. bamse (talk) 10:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

• Add bullets in "Further reading"

  Done. bamse (talk) 15:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Images:

• Image licenses are good, most by the reviwer Bamse
• Images in "World Heritage Missions" do not have any captions. The building(s) displayed in the pic need to be named as a caption

  Should I really add "Church in ..." everywhere? bamse (talk) 10:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

  The section is meant to look like a table and looks better without image captions in my opinion. bamse (talk) 09:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

• The writing in "Peoples in Bolivia" pic is illegible

  I asked the Map workshop for help. bamse (talk) 10:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:35, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Support by User:Nev1

• During the peer review, the majority of my comments were addressed and improvement continued afterwards aimed at the outstanding issues. I now believe that the article is comprehensive and well written, conforming with the FA critaria and am happy to lend my support to it. Nev1 (talk) 15:41, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Comment. Alt text is present (thanks) but has a few problems:

• Please omit phrases listed in WP:ALT#Phrases to avoid, including "Color photograph of", "Color" (in "Color map"), "Color photograph showing", "Black-and-white".

  Removed "color" from the alt-texts. Done. bamse (talk) 18:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

  Thanks, but it wasn't just the word "color"; it was also the words "photograph" and "showing". Generally speaking, alt text should spend little time on the image-generation process; this is briefly discussed in WP:ALT#Phrases to avoid. While we're on the subject (this is a more-minor point) it's also better to avoid, if possible, phrases like "Map of" and "graph of" if it's obvious from the rest of the alt text that the image is a map or a graph. Eubulides (talk) 19:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

  Improved all alt text except for the 1705 map for which I want to make sure first what the areas depicted in the map represent. bamse (talk) 22:25, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

  I see. Will work on it. bamse (talk) 20:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

  All alt text improved and I tried to avoid the evil phrases. bamse (talk) 14:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

  Thanks, it looks good now. Eubulides (talk) 20:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

• Alt text for maps should briefly describe the useful info in the maps, rather than just say "map of X". For example, the alt text "Topographic map showing major towns and villages in the Chiquitanía and the Jesuit missions" says very little about the useful info the map gives you. It should say that the Jesuit missions are in the highlands north and south of the main rivers, in eastern Bolivia, close to the the Brazil border, etc. Similarly for the other maps, e.g., how was America split up in 1705? what useful information does File:Jesuit Province Paraguay 1732 map.png give? what, briefly, is the geographical layout of the peoples of Bolivia expressed in File:Pueblos originarios de Bolivia.png? For more guidance, please see WP:ALT#Maps.

  Hopefully done (see above). bamse (talk) 14:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

• The alt text for the graph should mention the steep and steady rise until 1767, the population (24,000) at that point, the size of the immediate decline (to 20,000), or the up-and-down afterwards.

  Improved the alt-text of the graph. Will work on the other texts. bamse (talk) 18:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

  Thanks, I struck the part about the graph, since that's done. Eubulides (talk) 19:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Eubulides (talk) 18:41, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

• Image copyright review: No issues. NW (Talk) 18:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
• Comment a rather good article overall, but it does dance around the colonialism a bit in the history and life section. A few examples:
  • "Although reductions elsewhere were a means to impose European cultural norms and values, the Jesuit reductions differed. They allowed mission inhabitants to retain pre-colonial cultural practices." It's a bit of a fallacy to claim that retention of some pre-colonial practices means that European cultural norms and values weren't imposed. The process of mixing pre-Christian practices with Christian is common to most examples of Christianization.

    The critical paragraph has been completely rewritten and references provided. bamse (talk) 18:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

  • "The brothers of the orders believed they had to guide the natives and protect them from sin." It's a matter of opinion whether they actually believed this. The article would do better to document more thoroughly what was said and done, and not to pass of speculation about matters of belief as neutral facts.

    As above, paragraph has been rewritten. bamse (talk) 18:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

  • "Because the Jesuits sympathized with the Indians [...]". Once again, speculation about motives and beliefs confused with fact.
    • Recast the sentence as per the source. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
  • "In the reductions, the Indians were free men." Only a few paragraphs earlier, the article admits that the situation is more controversial and debated. I think it would be better to be concrete and specific about the rights that were and were not had, both in theory and practice, rather than dropping such broad statements.
  • "For the Jesuits the goal was to create cities in the complete harmony of the paradise in which they had encountered the Indians." Do you mean the stated goal? It seems a bit naive, given the obvious motivation for conversion and the proximate economic/trade route motivations mentioned elsewhere in the article.
  • "Following a law obtained by Bartolomé de las Casas for the Indian people [sic] in 1515, no white or black man besides the Jesuits and authorities was allowed to live in the missions" Sic is used but there are no quotation marks.

    Added quotation marks. bamse (talk) 11:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

    • Recast sentence and added quotation w/in quotation. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
  • "The Jesuits did not rely on donations, because by right the priests received a fixed income from the community to support their work." My concern is that "by right" obscures the exact manner in which the priests obtained and collected funds for their own income, which I believe is not mentioned and certainly not made clear.

    I don't know if there was a fixed manner for fund collection. Probably it would depend on the place and priest. All this sentence is meant to say is, that by (Spanish) law, the priests were entitled to an income (tax?). From what I understand this is similar to the tithe in medieval Europe but unlike the practise of other orders which relied on donations only. bamse (talk) 16:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

  • The linguistic consequences of the colonization are also neglected. Here is one source that focuses on that subject. There are several others. The article briefly states the emergence of a lingua franca without mentioning the complicated and rather astounding process that led to that.

    I added: "Starting in 1770, three years after the expulsion of the Jesuits, the Spanish authorities introduced a policy of forced "castilianization" causing a decline of the number of speakers of native languages." and a reference. There is some information about language also in the "Today" section of the article. I am not sure what more to add concerning the process itself. Could you let me know a chapter or page number of the book you linked to which deals with the process leading to the emergence of a lingua franca? bamse (talk) 10:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

There are also many, many uncited sentences in the history section (which I focused on, probably in the rest of the article) and a few uncited paragraphs. It is possible this is because the same reference is used for multiple sentences. For the purpose of clarity, I recommend that <ref name> be used if this is the case. A sentence without a reference should be the exception to the rule. This makes it easier for readers to trace the source and also makes it easier for editors to identify uncited material (including material edited or added at a later date). There is an easy technological fix for using the same reference in multiple places. Savidan 04:15, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify, are you asking for every single sentence to be followed by a reference? Nev1 (talk) 19:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

That should be the default, unless it is obvious why there should not be one (e.g. the sentence is a simple summary of several cited facts that follow in later sentences). However, I am suggesting that the mere use of the same source for a few consecutive sentences (which I suspect to be the case here) is not a good enough reason not to cite. That makes it hard for the reader to determine whether the source is the preceding or following reference, or whether the sentence is uncited. In addition, things become complicated as other add to the article in the future (e.g. it becomes impossible to distinguish a sentence of original research added at a later date from a sentence simply not in-line cited by the original contributor). Savidan 00:59, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

• Comments -
• Uncited opinion:
  • "Chiquitos has since been used both to denote people of the largest ethnic group in the area (also called Chiquitano), and collectively to denote the more than 40 ethnic groups with different languages and cultures living in the region known as Chiquitanía."

    Added two references. bamse (talk) 09:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

  • "The two central areas for their activities were Moxos, situated in the department of Beni, and Chiquitanía in the department of Santa Cruz de la Sierra."

    Added a reference. bamse (talk) 09:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

  • "Initially the main commercial products included honey, yerba mate, salt, tamarind, cotton, shoes, and leather. Later, artisans exported musical instruments, rosaries, and silverware produced by the artisans." (it's the "main" part that makes it opinion)

    Added a reference. bamse (talk) 09:44, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

  • "Since the launch of the Jesuit Mission Circuit – a marketing label to promote tourism – at the end of the 20th century, craftsmanship and tourism have been closely related."
  • There are other spots that are uncited (and would not hurt for cites) but they are mainly the recitation of facts, and are not required to be cited unless challenged.
• Current ref 14 (Barbara Anne Ganson) needs a page number and author should be listed at Ganson, Barbara Anne to match the rest of the references

  Added page number and listed the author as Ganson, Barbara Anne. bamse (talk) 21:52, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• Current ref 4 (Provincia...) lacks a publisher

  Added. bamse (talk) 21:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• Current refs 30 and 32 are to the same book as current ref 6, correct? Let's standardize between 30 and 32 so it's clearer they are the same.

  I joined references 30 and 32. bamse (talk) 21:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• Current ref 34 has the publisher run into the title of the link. Also, what makes http://world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?x=&men=gcis&lng=en&des=wg&geo=-38&srt=npan&col=adhoq&msz=1500&pt=c&va=x&geo=-734 a reliable source?

  Fixed the publisher. As for reliability, there is a discussion here. I am not sure if there has been an agreement though... bamse (talk) 21:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• I'll leave this out for other reviewers to decide for themselves. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:22, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

• Current ref 36 (Festivales...) lacks a publisher. Also needs to note it's in Spanish.

  Added. bamse (talk) 21:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• Current ref 37 (Busque...) what makes this a reliable source? Lacks a publisher also

  I added the publisher. Only the pictures from that site (basically Chiquitos Indians with musical instruments) and not the text were meant as supporting source. If it is questioned that the pictures are of Chiquitos Indians or if the source is otherwise considered unreliable, it could well be removed as the statement it references is supported by other sources. bamse (talk) 21:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• I'll leave this out for other reviewers to decide for themselves. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:22, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

• Current ref 39 (Sistema..) lacks a publisher

  Added. bamse (talk) 21:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• Current ref 44 (Molina...) lacks a publisher

  Publisher (RIMISP) was already present. bamse (talk) 21:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• Current ref 45 (El turismo..) needs to note it's in Spanish.

  Done. bamse (talk) 21:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:54, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Oppose. Not well written. Examples of why are below. The whole text is at issue.

• Great pic, and generously sized for once. But I ask you what this infobox adds. It confuses me; why not just get rid of it and have the pic in the lead? What is "State Party"? Seems to be at odds with the title. "Reference" for what? Infoboxes are increasingly stretched beyond their original purpose: this one is just clunky and even looks poorly formatted.

  If it is really confusing, I could get rid of the infobox or make it smaller. Not sure what you mean by "poorly formatted". Expressions like "State Party" or "Reference" (for the inscription as a World Heritage Site) are automatically added by the template, so I cannot change them. Other featured articles like Quiriguá, Surtsey or Yosemite National Park use the same template, so it should not be a problem. bamse (talk) 20:06, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Lead:

• Missions ... the site. Comes as a perplexing surprise that "they" is now rather singular.
• Link to "Christianity" is far too vague. Can you find a section-link or a daughter article?
• Enough commas already, so "the area and founded".
• Awkward sentence themes: "The Jesuits", "They", "The Jesuits". And I noticed "the" was dropped in the first para.
• "used music in converting"; not "to convert", but during the process of converting, yes?
• What does "virtual" mean in this context? "and were largely independent of"?
• "triggered by events in Europe and America"—does "America" mean "the US" here?
• Three countries linked: can they be to the "Religion" section of those articles? Or the "History" daughter articles? Please dig around to find focused link targets throughout the article.
• "In the second half of the 20th century, a large restoration project of the missionary churches began." Awkward. Reverse the clauses and bin the comma.
• Year or decade(s) of tourism establishment? And is the "growing popularity" a reference to tourism? It's unclear. Tony (talk) 12:02, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

PS I can't make out a single thing except "Brasil" in that map. It's a size and resolution problem. Tony (talk) 12:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Which map? bamse (talk) 07:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.