Wikipedia:Peer review/Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos/archive1

Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to nominate it at WP:FAC. Therefore I am especially interested in comments and suggestions on what needs to be done to satisfy the Featured article criteria. Thanks, bamse (talk) 06:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Comments by Nev1 (talk · contribs)

• The images are good, I especially like the one in the infobox, however their layout will need a bit of juggling. From MOS:IMAGE, "Do not place left-aligned images directly below a subsection-level heading (=== or lower), as this sometimes disconnects the heading from the text that follows it. This can often be avoided by shifting left-aligned images down a paragraph or two". Also, MOS:IMAGE discourages using a size larger than 300px, and although I understand it's because the maps aren't legible at smaller resolutions, it may cause a problem at FAC.

MOS:IMAGE specifies a maximum of 400px width (not 300px). Currently none of the images is larger than that. Only one image, the topographic map, is 400px wide. All others are smaller. As for placing left-aligned images under subsection-level headings, I don't see a problem of disconnected text at the moment. Please let me know if and where text and headings are disconnected. bamse (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough about the image sizes, I must have misremembered the policy (I thought it was because any picture larger than 300px would take up more than half the screen on a 600px wide display). The placement of the images will be raised at FAC, even if the text isn't completely disassociated from the subheading. The problem is mainly in the World Heritage Missions section, although there are a couple of cases in architecture. For example, mission layout where the image is directly underneath the heading. Nev1 (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I juggled a bit. Done. bamse (talk) 08:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

• Recently, alt text became a requirement for FAs. It can be added to images by adding a "|alt=" field. Alt text is intended to give a description of what can be seen in an image for the visually impaired or users whose browser does not display images. More info can be found here.

I added alt-text to all images. Done. bamse (talk) 07:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• Was the purpose of the reductions to assist evangelism, or was its assistance in the process incidental? The phrase "...into static communities known as reductions which allowed the missionaries..." implies it was a by-product. If the main purpose was to assist evangelism, I suggest something like "...into static communities known as reductions to give missionaries an effective means to enforce Christianity".

Rewritten by Truthkeeper88: "The missionaries employed the strategy of gathering the often nomadic indigenous populations in larger communities called reductions in order to more effectively Christianize them." bamse (talk) 08:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

• The use of "enforce Christianity" sounds like it was imposed by force, if this is the case it would be useful to provide details, such as what happened to those who did not convert. If not, "enforce" is probably the wrong word to use.

Removed "enforce" and reworked the paragraph. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• There's a tense problem (comparing past and present) in the following statement from the article: "arrived in Santa Cruz de la Sierra which at that time was situated south of present-day San José de Chiquitos". Did San José de Chiquitos exist at the time?

No, San José de Chiquitos did not exist at the time. It was founded in 1698. bamse (talk) 08:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

How about something like "...arrived in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, south of the future location of José de Chiquitos"?Nev1 (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I followed your suggestion. bamse (talk) 15:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

• It's perhaps not relevant, but what was the reason for Santa Cruz de la Sierra being moved 250km?

It was moved because of conflicts with the Indians. Since Santa Cruz is not part of the Jesuit missions, I left out this information. If you think it is important I could add it to the article.bamse (talk) 15:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I think it would be worth mentioning briefly, something like "The city was moved 250 kilometres (160 mi) west in 1592 to its present location due to conflicts with the Indians". More detail should be unnecessary as Santa Cruz isn't part of the site. Nev1 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Mentioned the reason, following your suggestion. bamse (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• What is meant by the term "department"? A wikilink should be sufficient to explain the technical term.

Not sure which of the "department" you mean. The first occurence of department is wikilinked to Departments of Bolivia. Should I wikilink all "department"? bamse (talk) 08:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed the first wikilink to department. Nev1 (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

• "In 1682, Fr. Cipriano Barace founded the first Jesuit reduction in Loreto in Moxos": was it the first Jesuit reduction, or just the first in Loreto? At the moment, the meaning is slightly ambiguous.

It was the first Jesuit reduction in Moxos and the first Jesuit reduction in what is now Bolivia. bamse (talk) 08:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Rewritten, but perhaps needs more clarification. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I rewrote it: "...founded the first of the Jesuit reductions in Moxos, which was located at Loreto." It should be clear now that it was the first reduction in Moxos. I have doubts about the beauty of this sentence though. bamse (talk) 13:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

That's good, those situations can sometimes be tricky to explain without clumsy phrasing. Nev1 (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

• The following sentence is slightly confusing: "However, many had to be rebuilt due to fires, floods, plagues, famines, attacks by hostile tribes or slave traders". If it refers to the buildings, why would famine and plague require structures to be rebuilt? If it refers to the people and the structure of the mission, "rebuilt" may be the wrong word as it implies buildings rather than people.

Rewritten to reflect missions were either relocated or rebuilt. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• "According to legend, José de Arce and Br. Antonio de Rivas set out in September 1691 to meet with seven other Jesuits at the Paraguay river to establish a connection between Paraguay and Chiquitos". What kind of connection, trading links? From the name section, I thought Chiquiots was the name of a group of people; it seems a bit odd to connect a geographical entity with a group of people.

Indeed, I changed Chiquitos to Chiquitanía. bamse (talk) 08:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

• "Due to bad weather from the beginning of the rainy season, Arce only made it to the first Chiquitos settlement": what about the other people he was with? Rivas seems to be missing from this story.

I added Rivas to the story. Probably he was dropped before being lower in "rank" (brother vs. priest). bamse (talk) 09:03, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes the story feel more complete. Nev1 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• "Only the ruins of a stone tower survive not far from the village San Juan de Taperas": I assume this sentence refers to San Juan Bautista, but it needs to be made clear.

Edited by Truthkeeper88. It now reads: "San Juan Bautista is not part of the World Heritage Site, and only the ruins of a stone tower survive near the village San Juan de Taperas." The meaning should be clear now. bamse (talk) 13:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

• "The War of the Spanish Succession from 1701 to 1714 resulted in a shortage of missionaries and instability in the reductions": were the missionaries recalled to Spain? Or did communication between Spain and her colonies suffer as a result of the war? Or was there a lack of funding? It's unclear how a war in Spain would affect religious activities in Bolivia.

One reason could be that many of the missionaries were Germans/Austrians/Swiss and therefore on the Habsburg side who lost the war. Am investigating this issue. Happy about hints concerning sources as I don't know anything about this war. bamse (talk) 21:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't help with sources, Spanish history is something I know very little about (before I read this article, I didn't even know there was a war of succession at the start of the 18th century, let alone its effects). Nev1 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• "By 1718 San Rafael was the largest of the Chiquitos missions with 2,615 inhabitants;[8] as a result, in 1721, Felipe Suárez and Francisco Hervás established the mission of San Miguel, as a split-off of the San Rafael mission": I don't see a causal link between the population of San Rafael (or the lack of missions built in this period that was mentioned earlier), so "as a result" seems out of place unless the reason is expanded.

The reason (which I agree needs expansion) was that San Rafael could not sustain such a large population. bamse(talk) 07:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I added "... and could not sustain the growing population." bamse (talk) 22:33, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

That's enough to make the reason clear. Nev1 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• For what purpose did the Jesuits want to "secure a more direct route to Asunción than the road via Tucuman and Tarija that was used at the time"? Were the Jesuits involved in trade?

I haven't found a reference discussing the reason for finding a more direct route yet. The Jesuits were selling some produce from the Chiquitos missions to Upper Peru. I can see several reasons for finding a shorter rout: 1) uniting the Jesuits in Paraguay with the Chiquitos missions more closely (i.e. shorter travel time) politically. 2) reducing transport times (and risks), securing a route to the atlantic coast and therefore Europe. 3) trade bamse (talk) 16:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Added: "...in order to link the Chiquitanía with the Jesuit missions in Paraguay." and a reference. bamse (talk) 10:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

• "The Jesuits were blamed for fomenting rebellion among the missions: is it meant that the missions were used to encourage rebellion or that rebellion took place within the mission? It's a bit unclear.

The missions were used to encourage rebellion. I agree, the sentence could be confusing and should be made clearer. bamse (talk) 07:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Rewritten by Truthkeeper88: "Because the Jesuits sympathized with the Indians, in Europe they were accused of "supporting the rebellion" which was problematic where the Society of Jesus was already under attack." bamse (talk) 11:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

• What is meant by "temporal affairs"?

"temporal"= economy, politics and so on. Should another word be used instead or do you think that the phrase needs more explanation?bamse (talk) 07:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I think a different word would be useful as I wasn't sure what was meant and I'm sure other people might not. If you just say "economic and political affairs" that should be enough. Nev1 (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I rewrote the sentence: "... where one took care of the spiritual needs while the other was in charge of all other  – political and economical – affairs of the mission administration." bamse (talk) 11:21, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

• "Low quality" priests is a judgement and perhaps needs to be explained. Does the source describe them as such? If so, what led to the comment, and if not it shouldn't be included.

The source describes them as "poor quality". I added some information to explain what is meant by this statement: "In practice, the shortage of clergy and the low quality of those appointed – who often did not speak the language of the Indians and in cases had not been ordained – led to general decline of the missions. The priests broke ethical and religious codes, appropriated the major part of the missions' and encouraged contraband trade with the Portuguese." (text added in italics) bamse (talk) 08:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

• The article needs a brief explanation of who Bernd Fischermann is and why his opinion is relevant.

I added: "..., an anthropologist who studied the Chiquitos Indians,..." bamse (talk) 11:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

• I suggest adding the year of birth and death after Hans Roth's name so that the phrase "spent the remainder of his life until 1999" isn't used.

I think that this information (that Roth worked until his death on the restoration project) is interesting and I would like to keep it somehow in the article. If I understand you correctly it would get removed with your proposal. Maybe the phrase could be rewritten somehow!? bamse (talk) 09:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

The problem isn't so much mentioning that Roth worked on the project until his death (which I agree is interesting and should be included) but the way it's phrased. "The remainder of his life until 1999" doesn't sound right. How about "...who worked on the restoration with a few colleagues and many locals until his death in 1999"?

Rewritten as: "... who worked on the restoration with a few colleagues and many local people until his death in 1999. The restoration works continued into the beginning of the 21st century." bamse (talk) 19:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• I recommend using "internal layout" rather than "spatial distribution" as spacial distribution could mean the relative positions of the missions to each other, but the suggested phrasing is clearer that it's the actual missions.

Agreed, I changed "spatial distribution" to "internal layout". bamse (talk) 08:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• What is a "modular structure"?

In my understanding, "modular structure" here refers to the basic building blocks that make up the settlement: plaza, church complex, houses. These parts are similar in all the settlements but were combined in various ways (different orientation of the church for instance) to produce distinct settlements. Does this make sense? Do you think the term needs more explanation? bamse (talk) 16:01, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I think some explanation of the term as used in the article would be useful. Nev1 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Since the explanation was already present somehow in the lines following "modular structure", I decided to explain the term in a footnote: "Modular structure here refers to the basic building blocks that make up the settlement: plaza, church complex, houses. These parts are similar in all the settlements but were combined in various ways to produce distinct settlements." bamse (talk) 20:34, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• The external link in the plaza section needs to be converted into a reference, and the statement it supports has the ring of original research; who says that's what the palms represent? A third party reliable source needs to be found for the statement.

The external link has been converted to a reference. I added a reference to the statement. bamse (talk) 08:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• "Out of the ten missions only in Santa Ana can the colonial vestige of the plaza be appreciated": this reads like a point of view and might need to be rephrased.

I rewrote: "Out of the ten missions only the plaza in Santa Ana was spared major changes and still resembles that of colonial times." bamse (talk) 16:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Rewritten again to explain "resemble": "Out of the ten missions only the plaza in Santa Ana did not experience major changes consisting as in colonial times of nothing more than an open space covered by grass." bamse (talk) 09:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• The external link in the church section also needs to be converted into a reference.

Done. bamse (talk) 08:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• At FAC, people will wonder why the first paragraph of the church section and the last half of the second paragraph from the same section are unreferenced (the same can be said for the location section).

I added the missing references. bamse (talk) 10:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

• In the following sentence: "The walls were structured with cornices, moldings, pilasters and at times blind arcades" would decorated be a better word than structured?

Replaced "structured" with "decorated." Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• Schmid's letter from San Rafael in 1744 needs a source.

I added the missing reference. bamse (talk) 07:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• "Realizing the exceptional musical capacities of the Indians": this sounds a bit peacocky.

Removed "exceptional". bamse (talk) 09:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• "The Jesuits used the musical lessons as a first step to the Christianization of the natives": I'm not quite sure how this follows, how was it intended to indoctrinate people? Were they taught hymns?

Music (by its beauty) helped to attract potential converts to change their life completely and to join the reduction and eventually become Christians. ([1]). This is also a major theme in the film The Mission. Later, after the Indian had lived some time in the reduction, also the singing and playing of religious music (i.e. the content of the lyrics) could have played a role in the Christianization. bamse (talk) 09:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Nicely explained, could something to that effect be put in the article? Nev1 (talk) 17:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed that in the 1744 letter (see article) Schmid wrote: "We teach these people all these mundane things so they may get rid of their rude customs and resemble civilized persons, predisposed to accept Christianity." ("mundane things" refers to singing and playing musical instruments). Do you still think, that more explanation is needed? bamse (talk) 09:51, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

• "The population in most of the mission towns has increased considerably over the past few years": could you be a bit more specific than "the past few years"?

I replaced this sentence with: " Between 1992 and 2009 the population of San Javier and Concepción has tripled and more than doubled in San Ignacio. In the other mission towns the population also increased albeit on a smaller scale." bamse (talk) 16:01, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• What's the "Jesuit missions circuit" and its purpose?

I was wondering the same. Off the top of my head I would say it is a label used to promote tourism in the area. Will investigate further. bamse (talk) 08:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Added "... – a marketing label to promote tourism –..." and as a footnote "Apart from the six World Heritage Missions, the mission of San Ignacio de Velasco is part of the circuit." to explain what the circuit is. Also capitalized "Jesuit Mission Circuit" bamse (talk) 07:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

• Who is responsible for the maintenance and preservation of the World Heritage Site? This sort of information could go in the today section.
• Are there any details about the proposal for listing as a WHS by UNNESCO? Such as who backed it. It would also be worth stating under what criteria the property is listed and when it was inscribed on the list.

I added some information on the criteria to the last section in the history section. The inscription year was already mentioned.bamse (talk) 06:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I like the depth and context given in the article, for example "Compared to their neighbours in Paraguay, the Chiquitos missions were spared from large-scale epidemics due to their remoteness and lack of transport infrastructure". I think the content is of FA quality and would be happy to see this at FAC. The prose perhaps could do with a bit of polish. I've copy edited what I can, but someone should take a look at it to make sure I haven't changed any meanings. I've tried to explain in the edit summaries why I've done something, but if there are any questions please ask. I'm not the best at copy editing, so more comments about prose may crop up in an FAC, but I think generally it's pretty good. There were a couple of idiosyncratic sentence structures and a little repetition, but that is mostly what I changed in my edits. Good luck when you take this to FAC, I'll have the page on my watchlist. This may seem like a lot to deal with, but if dealt deal I think it will help with the intended FAC. Nev1 (talk) 23:01, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your copy-editing (which did not change any meaning) and comments. Great job! I will go through the list and try to fix/add to the article accordingly. bamse (talk) 07:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I added some questions and comments above (is this the correct way to reply?); probably more will follow. bamse (talk) 08:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Replying like this is fine, it allows me to see which points have been addressed. Nev1 (talk) 23:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)