Talk:Palmyra/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 13:13, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• Hi, I'll take this one, may take some time fr me to finish the review thogh, will add a little as I read along. Some initial observations below: FunkMonk (talk)

Thanks

• Very well illustrated, but I'd consider enlarging the infobox picture, it is very hard to see it at this size.

I picked it because it give a preview of the whole site. Changed now--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 15:11, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• The intro seems overly long and detailed, should probably cut down to almost half. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Length

Done

• "saw Palmyra's turning into a prosperous settlement" We talked about lack of genitive s during the Mari, Syria review, here it's the other way around, one too many!

Fixed, well that was embarrassing, I will master the genitive s soon--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 15:11, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• "when an amateur video was posted, which shows Syrian soldiers carrying funerary stones" Was there any indication that they were looting, and not just saving the artifacts? Why should they steal from a museum belonging to their own government?

The article doesn't say that the soldiers were looting, just that they were carrying artifacts which raised fears from looting. A second point, back then the site wasn't in danger and the museum of Palmyra is still intact with no artifacts being taken to safety in Damascus, so there wasn't any justification for playing with those artifacts. To keep it neutral, I wrote that this video doesnt confirm that it is a looting operation, just as the source say in its end France 24 report in English --Attar-Aram syria (talk) 15:11, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Alright, by the way, very nice that you're documenting all these historical sites of Syria, before it is all ground to dust... FunkMonk (talk) 15:45, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, I try to keep my mind away from thinking that this will happen, I'm already dying inside to hear that ISIS is getting close to Palmyra after they took control of Al-Sukhnah.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 15:49, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

• Why are there three points in the locator map?

The current site is strictly historic and abandoned just like Mari, Syria, its an archaeological site while the modern city is outside the historic one.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 15:11, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Could it be clarified in the caption somehow? FunkMonk (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok.

• I'm currently sick, and therefore not so active here at the moment, but will be back for the rest of the review soon. FunkMonk (talk) 21:02, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok, get well :) --Attar-Aram syria (talk) 21:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks! This image[1] could need a description template, there is no info now. FunkMonk (talk) 14:25, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Done

• "Archaeological sounding in the Tell beneath" What is meant by sounding?

They use sound waves to determine the depth and levels of the site, Archaeoacoustics. I linked it.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Ah, ok, could you "unhide" the link, as most readers may not click on it? FunkMonk (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Done

• "n 217 BC, a Palmyrene force led by a Sheikh named Zabdibel" Was the term sheikh used at the time?

It is written in the sources though 1 2, so he is identified as a Sheikh but the sources dont tell if he was titled a sheikh during his lifetime.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 17:34, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

• "was found 75 kilometres to the northwest of" Why italics?

No reason ! I cant remember why did I wrote it in italic, fixed.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 17:34, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

• "establishing colonies in many of the important trading surrounding cities." Not sure what is meant here.

maybe I should have wrote : surrounding important trade centers, fixed.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 17:50, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

• Still some "s" issues, but I'll take care of it as I go along.

Thanks, I'll try to catch them as well.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:46, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

• "The city also included a Jewish minority" When?

during the pre-Roman destruction period, I removed the sentence to the first paragraph which talk about the period before Aurelian conquest.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 07:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

• "for by the second century, any notion of a clan lost its importance and disappeared in the third century" Not sure which century is meant here.

During the second century, clans were still mentioned but had not importance. During the third century only the four tribes were mentioned and clans disappeared. I changed the sentence into this : disappeared in the following third century.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 07:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

• "and Pliny account over Palmyra's political situation is dismissed by modern scholarly" Pliny needs genitive s, and "scholarly" should be "scholars".

Done

• " (Polis).[210] The concept of citizenship (Demos) appears in an inscription dated to 10 AD, describing the Palmyrenes as a community.[211] In 74 AD, another inscription mentions the Boule (senate) of the city.[210] The military units of Palmyra were headed by the Strategoi (generals),[212] while the Boule managed the civic responsibilities,[213] and appointed two Archons (lords) annually." Are there reasons for why the Greek terms here (and in the rest of the Government section) are capitalised?

Since they are not in English I treated them like we treat names. Is it better for them to lose he capitalization ?, anyway I fixed them.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 09:14, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Foreign words are sometimes italicized, but capitals should probably only be used if they are in the original language. But since the Greek alphabet is completely different, it would be kind of pointless. FunkMonk (talk) 11:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

• "the Syrian Astarte, Baal-hamon, Baalshamin" What is meant by Syrian?

Just like the Egyptian or Mesopotamian gods, they are Syrian deities from the Levant and concentrated there. See this where Bel is described as Syrian, normal 123--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 14:43, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I mean it seems Palmyrene gods are mentioned as different from Syrian gods, I guess that is because Palmyra was considered a distinct entity at the time, or how? FunkMonk (talk) 14:57, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, it was seen as Syrian, but since it had its own deities (the three ones, malakbel, aglibol and yarhabol), we need to write Syrian to indicate the deities that were general in the whole of Syria region. For example, the levantine general deities of Ebla are Syrians but Ebla also had Kura and Nidakul worshipped just in the city. A big indication that Palmyra is also just part of normal Syria is that the main deity Bel was a levantine, its just the Baal of the city like all the Baals of other Syrian cities, but had its name changed to Bel because of a Mesopotamian influence due to trade while keeping the characters of the other Syrian baals.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 15:06, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps we should add "wider Syrian deities" or some such then? FunkMonk (talk) 15:17, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Done

• Terms like Jinn, Ginnaye, and Genius should probably not be capitalised. They are not names.

Done

• "approximately 1000 hectares of irrigable land" As above.

Done

• "goes back as early as Hadrian reign." Missing s.

Done

• "and Rome to name a few" Seems a bit too informal, perhaps "among others" is better.

Done

• "who paid the entire cost of emperor Hadrian visit in 129" Again s.

Done

• "however, from the information gathered, it is impossible to determine whether pillaging was taking place" Why italics?

Because this is a direct qoute from the source, is there another protocol when Im using the exact same words ?4 Anyway, I edited it and wrote that it is according to France 24, then the quote in italic.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

The normal way would be to use quotation marks, "it is impossible to determine whether pillaging was taking place". Also, attribute the source in the text when directly quoting. FunkMonk (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Done

• "the Diocletian's era rebuilt walls surrounded only the northern bank" Not sure what is meant here.

The walls built during the reign of Diocletian encompassed only the parts of the city north of the wadi, while the walls of Palmyra of Zenobia encompassed parts northern and southern of the wadi, I clarified the sentence--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

• "n 1751, an expedition led by Wood and Dawkins" Why not full names?

Fixed--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

• "city of disputed etymology" Is this really necessary in the intro, when it isn't really informative after all? Should be the last issue. FunkMonk (talk) 12:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Its gone now, I didnt want to write it on the first place but I was afraid that a reviewer will say that the intro should summarize every single section of the article, and since I wrote an etymology section, I wrote the disputed etymology in the intro.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 13:25, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, then all looks good, passed! Keep up the good work! FunkMonk (talk) 14:10, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 14:25, 6 April 2015 (UTC)