Wikipedia:Peer review/Christianization/archive1

Christianization

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I have hopes of taking it FA. I nominated it for GA and it failed, and every suggestion and concern made by that reviewer has been incorporated and addressed in an extensive total rewrite. It is both more concise and more focused now thanx to their suggestions. (It's on the talk page).

For now, I would really appreciate anyone willing to do a citation spot check, but honestly I will value any and all suggestions. I am confident citations are all correct, having rechecked them and rechecked them myself, but I am not perfect and may have missed something, and another set of eyes always helps. But anything really. I'll take any and all help with gratitude for it.

Thanks, Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:20, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720

Comments after a quick skim:

"L. C. Jane has translated Bede's text:" this quote should have an inline citation.
The end of the first paragraph of "Iberian Reconquista" needs a citation.
MOS:LAYOUT has the "See also" section before the Notes.
"Berkhofer, Robert F., Jr. (2014) and Magdoff, Harry; McDougall, Walter A. (2020) are listed in the Bibliography but are not used as inline citations.

I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 01:10, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I will fix each of these. Yes of course it's a help. I go through and think I've found everything, and someone else inevitably sees things I don't. I value that. I value volunteers that help others.

I keep editing out stuff and then find I have removed the only citation for some references. I have the bot that checks for that too. I will delete it.

I have been looking it all over again, and I'm thinking of redoing the first section. Perhaps you can throw in your two cents. In the lead I mention mission but don't really discuss it in the text. It's how the process works, so I am thinking it should be there. I have a source that discusses different approaches/methods to mission used throughout history. I'm thinking that should be right up front. What is your opinion? Jenhawk777 (talk) 07:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 These are

Done Again, thank you. More? Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:33, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The lede should be a summary of the article and should not include information that is not the article body. In a topic like this,the lede is going to be larger at about 3-4 paragraphs, and I think you have room to expand it a little bit. One option you have is to edit Conversion to Christianity and make that a good article/featured article first: once that is finished, you can use that article's lede as a template of what to put in that section of the Christianization article. Z1720 (talk) 21:41, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 I know you are right about the lead. I knew it when I did it, but I knew missions had to be in there somewhere. So now I have taken that quote out of the lead and created a new section on missions.

I am not really interested in taking on another article until I get this one sorted. I hope you understand that. I am not simply being uncooperative, I just want to finish one thing before beginning another. Jenhawk777 (talk) 15:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 Sorry to bother you again! I just wanted to let you know I did some more work, and I am more comfortable with the beginning now. I added missions and coercion. Missions was not really discussed at all and coercion not until the section on "a seismic moment" and the Late Middle Ages. Now they are both up front. That seems appropriate to me. Do you have an opinion? Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:39, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a big article with lots of components to it, as evidenced by the number of articles that have WP:SPINOFF from this article with hatnotes. While getting the big articles to FA is possible, it will take a lot of time and work, especially if the nominator is working on completing their first successful FAC. Also, this work is going to need to be completed anyways because this information needs to be a summary of sources about that topic, so if the work is being done you might as well improve another article in the process. Completing spinoff articles first allows editors to evaluate the sources of that topic, summarise the information into the lede of that article, and then bring that summarised lede to the main article (with some tweaks). This also gives you the experience of completing an FA on an "easier" article before attempting an FAC on a more difficult, comprehensive article. It's your choice, but this is only my advice.

As for this article, the lede looks fine to me. The "Confirmation" section needs to be expanded, as it is basically a quote right now. "Other sacred sites" is a bit long and should be split up into sections if possible, or summarised more effectively. In "Nations" the hatnotes concerning the Roman Empire should be below the "Roman Empire to Early Middle Ages (1 to 800)" heading. I also think the "Nations" section suffers from MOS:OVERSECTION and these should be combined together and summarised more effectively. I think there needs to be more information about the attempts of Christianisation in Asia: even though it was less successful than in other locales, the attempts should still be talked about. The China section is a good start, but other countries also need to be discussed. Hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 15:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 I have no doubt your advice is good advice. I will attempt to follow all suggestions about this article, and will even go look at the spinoffs and see if there is anything I can contribute there. I'll try. I suppose that means setting this one aside for awhile. Bummer for me right now, but maybe I'll be glad of it in the end. I struggle with a desire to be thorough instead of concise. I know it's a fault here. Sigh. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 So I went and looked at conversion, and I immediately found some problems, so I am going to go work on it awhile and leave this one to stew for a bit. We'll see if I can accomplish something worthwhile somewhere! :-) Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 I am about halfway through with Conversion to Christianity. You're right - shorter is easier.

Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:42, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]