Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of medieval churches on Gotland/archive1

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

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 29 October 2020 (UTC) [1].

---

List of medieval churches on Gotland

List of medieval churches on Gotland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/List of medieval churches on Gotland/archive1

Nominator(s): Yakikaki (talk) 09:30, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it meets the criteria and would be an interesting addition; there are some featured lists about churches, but mostly in the UK. I should also briefly explain the background to the article. I started a List of churches on Gotland back in 2014. Recently, I put in a lot of efforts on my sandbox2 to increase the quality. Noting how the medieval churches are almost always treated apart from the other churches on Gotland I figured it would sense to put them in their own, clearly defined list. Hence the list looks completely new. Yakikaki (talk) 09:30, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ~ HAL333 22:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

;Comments What was the inclusion criteria for the list? Shouldn't it be a list of all medieval churches on Gotland, not just ones which are well preserved? There are 92 medieval churches on Gotland, so that's the inclusion criteria. They're all well-preserved, unusually. So there's no discrepancy here, sorry if it looks that way. Tried adding an "and" in In no other part of Sweden are there so many and so well-preserved medieval parish churches in the Background section to clarify this a bit, hope it helps? I was wondering about mildly-preserved or poorly-preserved medieval parish churches, but I just noticed the link to the FL in the See Also section. That makes more sense now. ~ HAL333 04:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Why are there no notes for the Slite Church? Oops, my bad! Slite Church should not be in the list at all since it's from the 20th century, I managed to mix it up with Silte Church when I made the list. Fixed now. The presently visible church was however built during the early 13th century; the tower was added at the end of the same century. This sentence seems a little awkward. Thanks, changed the wording. Hope it's smoother now. The interior of the church was substantially altered in 1839–1840. You should clarify the time at the end of that sentence. Was it around that period (circa) or was it altered from 1839 to 1840. etc Gotcha, changed to between 1839 and 1840. I noticed some others areas for improvement in the prose. I just don't have the time to disect it all right now. I'll be back. Nice job overall though. ~ HAL333 17:52, 8 July 2020 (UTC) Thanks HAL333! I've addressed the issues above for now, I think. I'll be happy to address any further issues. Yakikaki (talk) 18:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC) Sorry I couldn't get back quicker - I've been working 14-hour shifts outside (i.e. without A.C. in Texas) the last few days and it's physically and mentally exhausting. This is everything else I could notice: The first paragraph of the Background section seems slightly repetitive after reading the lede. The only information which is not present in the lede is the church concentration compared to the rest of Europe, which could easily be moved to the lede. Removed, fixed the lede accordingly. On Gotland, Norse religion was gradually abandoned and Christianity was more firmly adopted during the 11th century. This sentence is a little confusing. Did the Norse Religion already receding when Christianity cemented itself in the 11th century or did it only decline in the 11th? Tried to clarify and fix the wording of this. The most well-preserved remains are those of Hemse stave church, where timber had been re-used as floor boards in a later stone church. Maybe replace "where" with "whose" or rework it some other way. Replaced with whose. The captions for the second and third images are both complete sentences and require periods. Fixed. You should wikilink "apses" in the first paragraph of the "architecture" section. Fixed. In the second paragraph of the architecture section The architecture is clearly influenced by architecture... seems somewhat repetitive. Replaced with "Influences came from" which is also more straightforward. At the end of this period, Gotland entered a period... also seems repetitive. Changed to "At the middle of the 14th century, Gotland entered a period of economic decline and a loss in trade from which it would never recover." The brevity of the next sentence The Black Death struck Gotland in 1350. makes it feel kind of choppy. Could you combine this with the previous sentence? Was the plague the beginning of the end? Reworked the structure and sequence of sentences here, I think it makes more sense now. At the same time, the island entered an economic decline and a loss in trade from which it would never recover. Was this a separate phenomenon or was a direct result of the plague and invasion? Moved some of this as well. Many churches were left unfinished, and the abrupt stop is often still clearly visible, "as if the stone masons had left the construction site for the day and never returned" as archaeologist Anders Andrén has phrased it. strikes me as somewhat awkward, particularly the latter half. It might be the repetition of "as". as archaeologist Anders Andrén has phrased it. could also be simplified (maybe "according to archeologist Anders André"). Changed and reworked to: Many churches were left unfinished, and the abrupt halt in construction is often still visible in the buildings. Archaeologist Anders Andrén writes that is is "as if the stone masons had left the construction site for the day and never returned" ...a systematic examination of them started only during the 19th century, and especially art historian Johnny Roosval presented a systematic study in Die Kirchen Gotlands ("The churches of Gotland"), published in German in 1911. I think you're missing a few words around the "and especially" part. Changed all of it to: "While the churches on Gotland have attracted interest since at least the 17th century, a more scientific approach to them started only during the 19th century. Art historian Johnny Roosval presented a first systematic study in Die Kirchen Gotlands ("The churches of Gotland"), published in German in 1911." Roosval dated the different churches on Gotland mainly on stylistic grounds. The timeline he established has subsequently been revised in individual cases, also by Roosval himself. could use clarification. Did Roosval make all of the individual revisions himself or only some? Changed to "both by Roosval and by others". A lot of those aren't even really necessary and feel free to ignore some of the more stylistic ones. Sorry I couldn't look over the rest, but I'll check the table section tomorrow. ~ HAL333 04:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Thanks a lot for these excellent comments! I'll try to address them all today, if I can. Please don't exhaust yourself with this if you're having a hectic time off-line, it's really no rush with anything on my account. I've been wanting to fix this since 2014, so I can wait a bit more... Yakikaki (talk) 13:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC) OK, I think I've addressed all of these now, and hope I didn't make matter worse! Take a look when you have time. Stay safe in the heat! Yakikaki (talk) 15:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Ok, this should be my final round: Just clarify The nave and chancel of Alva Church are in a late Romanesque style, from the early 13th century. Are the nave and chancel from the 13th century, or is it that the style is from that period, or both? Changed to "The nave and chancel of Alva Church are in a late Romanesque style, built in the early 13th century." I would wikilink "Madonna" in the notes for Ardre Church. Wikilined to Madonna (art). I would rewrite The Gutasaga mentions a church in Atlingbo and probably there was a wooden church here as early as the 11th century., particularly the "and probably there was a..." part. I would also replace "here" with "there" or "site", etc. Changed to "The Gutasaga mentions a church in Atlingbo. A first, wooden church was probably constructed in the 11th century." Simplify was destroyed in a storm in 1857 to "was destroyed in a 1857 storm". To keep the same tense in that sentence, insert "was" before built in a new tower built between 1867 and 1892. Done The large tower, with supported by unusually shaped buttresses, dates from the middle of the same century Should be "with support from" or "supported by". Changed to "supported by". made in memory of seal hunters who had became isolated on drifting ice sheets but who were ultimately saved. I'm not sure if the second "who" is necessary. Removed. It was replaced by a stone church during the late 12th century, of with the nave is still preserved. Was "of with" meant to be "of which" - I'm confused. Yes, changed to "of which". In the notes for Rone Church, "indicate" is misspelled. Fixed. Could you wikilink the battle described in the notes of "Östergarn Church", if possible. Fixed Throughout the article you repeated "presently visible" a decent amount. You could diversify the text a little bit by sprinkling in "extant". You also used "built" over 130 times vs less than ten for "constructed" and "erected". You could also replace some of the "took place"s with "occurred". Lol, that is a bit repetetive. I've tried changing some as you suggest. Do you think it's OK like this? That's about it. Looking good! ~ HAL333 01:33, 11 July 2020 (UTC) Thank you so much, again, for your hard work with this and all these excellent comments and suggestions, I think the article has gained a lot from it. For now, I think I've addressed all issues. Yakikaki (talk) 18:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

• Support All of my comments were addressed - nice work. If you have the time, I would really appreciate if you could check one of my FLCs (here or there). Thanks! ~ HAL333 22:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Comment from Shearonink

• Found a small typo - The church was pillaged by Russian tropps in 1717. should be The church was pillaged by Russian troops in 1717. Shearonink (talk) 18:07, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you, fixed it! Yakikaki (talk) 18:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Yakikaki Just an aside to the FLC...these ancient churches look very similar to Lutheran churches that I've seen in Minnesota and North Dakota...it was eerie to me to see these ca1300-1500 churches looking like close architectural cousins to churches built 1870-1920 in the US. Shearonink (talk) 02:43, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Shearonink That's interesting, I think a lot of Swedish people emigrated at least to Minnesota, and many people emigrated from Gotland. Perhaps they brought with them some memories, who knows? Thank you for letting me know. This kind of things always fascinate me. Yakikaki (talk) 07:18, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Source review - Pass

Doing now. Aza24 (talk) 22:10, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
refs

• Looking at the article from an overview, I think I will come back to this separately for some comments on the prose and such
• Ref 1 needs a "|language=Swedish"
• Ref 39 should be ISBN 13 (use the converter)
• ref 116 missing "Church of Sweden" link

works cited

• Andersson need an ISBN or OCLC (looking it up on Worldcat might help)
• Augustsson, Jacobsson, Jonsson, Karlsson, Lagerlöf should all be ISBN 13s Aza24 (talk) 22:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
• The further reading entry could also do with an OCLC Aza24 (talk) 22:24, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for these comments! I have fixed what I could so far, but I would need some guidance regarding the ISBN-question (which certainly isn't my area of expertise). With ISBN 13s, I assume you mean ISBN-numbers beginning with 13? I could not find any such numbers for any of the books you mentioned, neither in WorldCat nor the catalogue of the Swedish national library libris.kb.se, and could not produce them by using the converter you linked to. Could you please point me in the direction where I should go with this, what am I missing or doing wrong here? Many thanks, Yakikaki (talk) 12:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Yakikaki, ISBN 13s are the "newer" ISBNS as opposed to the "older" ISBN 10s which some of your ISBNs are at the moment. If the ISBN number begins with 978 it is an ISBN 13, otherwise it's an ISBN 10 – Wikipedia requires all ISBNs to be ISBN 13 (The number 13 itself has nothing to do with the actual ISBN) All you have to do is take any ISBNs that don't begin with 978 (since that would mean they are not ISBN 13s) and put them in the converter and then replace the ISBN 10 with what you get. Let me know if you have further questions on this. BTW I plan to come back to read through the prose. Aza24 (talk) 06:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Aza24 for taking the time to explain this to me, I've learned something new and useful and will change the ISBN:s accordingly, and keep this in mind for the future as well. I'll try to fix this during the day and get back here when I'm done. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 08:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Fixed it! Yakikaki (talk) 11:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Good work, pass for source review Aza24 (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments:

• Not doing a full review; wanted to comment first to import the discussion here confirming that there is no issue with how much prose is in this list in regards to FLC. In addition to that, however, I wanted to briefly comment on the table being split up into chunks- it should not be, as that breaks sortability (not to mention the breaks are arbitrary beyond how many churches start with a given letter). They should be combined into one table. --PresN 19:24, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you PesN for the comment and also for the point about the list being split into chunks. I've changed it into a single, long list. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Resolved comments from ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

;Comments Lead Apologies for missing this one prior to now. I will review this in chunks..... No problem at all, I'm happy for the comments. "and unusual also compared with other parts of Europe" => "and also unusual compared with other parts of Europe" Fixed "between the early 12th century to the middle of the 14th century" => "between the early 12th century and the middle of the 14th century" Fixed "The churches were often decorated with paintings of walls and vaults" => "The churches were often decorated with paintings on walls and vaults" (I presume they aren't paintings of walls) Fixed "Workshops specialised in the production" => "Workshops specialising in the production" Fixed More to come....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Background No issues with this section -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Architecture "with a straight east walls" - "a walls"? Removed "a" BTW, what do you actually mean by "straight east walls"? This isn't really a valid English expression. Do you mean "walls facing to the east"? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC) Yeah, that was what I meant, sorry for the messy sentence. Changed it. "Workshops specialised in making" - as above Fixed "and supplied not only the churches on Gotland with decorated fonts, but also exported fonts to entire Baltic region" => "and not only supplied the churches on Gotland with decorated fonts, but also exported fonts to the entire Baltic region" Fixed "this decoration often consisted in" => "this decoration often consisted of" Fixed "often depicting religious of mythological scenes" - presume this is meant to say "often depicting religious or mythological scenes" Yes, changed of to or "At the middle of the 14th century" => "In the middle of the 14th century" Changed "into the 15th and 16th century" => "into the 15th and 16th centuries" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC) Fixed "Archaeological examinations in connections with" => "Archaeological examinations in connection with" Fixed Table A-G "The oldest part of the now visible church" => "The oldest part of the now-visible church" (in a couple of places) Fixed "The presently visible church" => "The presently-visible church" (in a couple of places) Fixed "a church were persons accused of having committed crimes were entitled" => "a church where persons accused of having committed crimes were entitled" Fixed "the church door still bears marks after crossbow bolts" => "the church door still bears marks from crossbow bolts" Fixed "unusually shaped buttresses" => "unusually-shaped buttresses" Fixed "how the surroundings of many of the churches on Gotland may originally have looked like" => "how the surroundings of many of the churches on Gotland may originally have looked" Fixed "one of the oldest still working church bells" => "one of the oldest still-working church bells" Fixed "preserved in the currently visible church" => "preserved in the currently-visible church" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC) Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 12:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC) Table H-Ö "Hall Church built in the early 13th century" => "Hall Church was built in the early 13th century" Fixed "The rood cross is a from the 16th century" => "The rood cross is from the 16th century" Fixed "The sandstone altarpiece is from 1684 and made in Burgsvik" => "The sandstone altarpiece is from 1684 and was made in Burgsvik" Fixed "Sculpted reliefs from this church has been" => "Sculpted reliefs from this church have been" Fixed "erectedat the early 13th century" - missing space between the first two words, but it should actually be "erected in" (not at) Fixed "and the nave during first half of the 14th century" => "and the nave during the first half of the 14th century" Fixed "in the first half the 12th century" => "in the first half of the 12th century" Fixed "The atarpiece bears the date 1521" - typo in second word Fixed "The chancel and apse had were rebuilt" => "The chancel and apse were rebuilt" Fixed I presume it's standard practice to have entries beginning with Ö appear at the end of an alphabetical list in Swedish? Yes, in Swedish Ö is considered a letter of its own (unlike in German) and appears at the end of the alphabet, after the possibly even quaniter å and ä. Think that's it from me. This is an excellent list and I definitely enjoyed reading it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2020 (UTC) Thank you for the thorough review, it has done a lot for the quality of the article! And thanks for your kind words! Yakikaki (talk) 17:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments Support from Aza24

Ok well I'm sure what this one is still waiting on but some (minor) comments below:

• "and also" seems redundant in "and also unusual compared..."

• Removed "also".

• "date from a period between the early..." – "date from between the early..." may be more to the point

• Fixed.

• Could "still preserved" be something clearer like "fully preserved" to contrast with the fragmented ones better?

• Changed to "substantially preserved" since completely preserved medieval churches hardly exist anywhere. I hope it works?

• Yes, good call

• I would add a language template to Swedish words {{lang|sv|''kontragotik''}} to that the system doesn't detect them as typos

• Thanks for the suggestion, I've done it.

• "and with decorative sculptures..." may work better as "as well as decorative sculptures..." to avoid the triple "and"

• Changed.

• you link Western Europe in the lead but not the first mention in the text (same with middle ages)

• Fixed.

• link parish churches

• Fixed.

• not required but I would recommend linking baptismal fonts in the image caption – I read the caption and saw the word before I got to it in the text

• Added link.

• assuming rod should link like rood crosses not "rood crosses"?

• Yes, fixed.

• High Gothic has a link, as does Early Gothic architecture

• Added wikilinks.

• The invasion of Gotland by Valdemar IV of Denmark and the Battle of Visby this sounds like two separate events, but isn't the Battle of Visby the invasion of Denmark?

• One could absolutely argue that it's more or less the same thing, however my reasoning was that the battle is stricly speaking a consequence of the invasion (he first had to land his troops somewhere and then fight, so to speak) but mostly I added it because I wanted to give some context. Just mentioning the battle could be a bit confusing to the reader who doesn't know why there was a battle there, I was thinking. But I can remove it if you think it doesn't add anything. Let me know.

• I think your reasoning makes sense – fine with me how it is

• You may want to consider switching your two links to Baroque to Baroque architecture instead, which is likely more helpful to the reader

• I intentionally made the link to Baroque since I was writing about the furnishings of the churches, not the buildings per se. But perhaps it misses the mark - I can change if you think it's better?

• Ah yes I seem to have missed that. Good how it is then.

• I glanced through the text in the table and found no major issues. Overall well written and a very fascinating read! Aza24 (talk) 00:37, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot Aza24! Your comments and suggestions were very helpful, I'm grateful for the review! Yakikaki (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Happy to help and I'm happy to support this nomination. Aza24 (talk) 07:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Promoting. --PresN 22:30, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

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