Wikipedia:Peer review/Law school of Berytus/archive2

Law school of Berytus

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I did not get any help the first time. I'm not a native English speaker and it took me a lot of time to get the article where it is now but it flunked the FAC review. I need help with my prose in order to make through FAC review.

Thanks, Eli+ 12:43, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

 Reviewing... Will post comments soon. Parutakupiu (talk) 18:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Comments:

• "The Law school of Beirut..." — lowercase "Law" since it's not a proper noun.

indeed, fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• It's stating the obvious, but you should say that it "was a center for the study of Roman law in classical antiquity located in Beirut."

okay, makes sense. Fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• Sometimes you have "seventeenth century" and sometimes you have "19th century";

I think that was the last one. -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• According to Collinet's book, Ménage also supported Emperor Alexander Severus (not Septimius) as the school foundation promoter.

Indeed I had to re-read the passage for myself :S -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Parmi les anciens, Haserappelle et réfute les opinions de Scipion Gentilis qui en attribuait la fondation à Auguste, d'autres écrivains qui mettaient ses débuts sous Hadrien, de Ménage qui en plaçait le commencement sous Alexandre Sévère. Pour lui, l'École aurait été créée peu après la victoire d'Actium, opinion qui ne repose sur aucun argument solide

— Paul Collinet, Histoire de l'école de droit de Beyrouth

.

• "... based on the reference in Gregory." — I suppose you're referring to Thaumaturgus? Better use the surname instead.

Okay, fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• What is the purpose of ref 11? To source the author? I don't see a point in that.

No purpose at all :(, removed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "This function is first recorded for 196 CE..." — for or in?

Okay, fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "From 425 CE onward..."

Okay, fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "30,000 people lost their lives..." — Don't begin a sentence with a figure in numerical format. Either spell it out or rephrase so you can put words before it.

"In the aftermath, thirty thousand people lost their lives, including many students from abroad" does this sound better? -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "... and did not cover the local laws of the province of Phoenica." — typo: Phoenica→Phoenicia

Phoenica→Phoenicia, thanks -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "... fixed the duration of the legal course in the schools of Beirut and Constantinople at 5 five years."

Okay, fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• ... but Justinian changed the name of the first-year students from the frivolous dupondii, which means "two-pennies". First-year students were henceforth designated to Iustiniani novi; and fifth-year students were dubbed Prolytae; while the other names remained unchanged."

I went by your suggestion, so much smoother -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• According to the source, the Prota part of the Digest encompasses books 1 to 4, not 1 to 5.

Typo, my bad :( fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• Who is Theophilus?

a law teacher and lawyer from constantinople, info added with ref -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "Julian left Beirut and settled in Constantinople..." — Julianus

well ok :S if it makes things clearer -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "... it is presumed that Beirut and Constantinople's schools had 4 four teachers each."

Okay, fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "While most of the law school's students names..." — students→student

okay... -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "The first mention of the school's premises dates to 350 AD CE..."

all instances changed to CE -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "A degree in law became highly sought after following an edict issued in 460 CE by Emperor Leo I." — remove after or following

Okay, fixed -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• "... the Christian faith was consolidated as an integral element of the jursitic training." — typo: jursitic→juristic

thank you -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

After you address these, I may do some copyediting myself to try and finetune prose issues. Parutakupiu (talk) 00:46, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for this very, very thourough review. -Eli+ 10:12, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

More comments:

• Is Julianus Antecessor the same Julianus in "Three school professors who were contemporary to Justinian I are Dorotheus, Anatolius and Julianus."?

yes buddy, he's one and the same, Antecessor was a title or epithet given to law professors, I removed it since some sources mention it and others don't and to avoid confusion. -Eli+ 21:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• I linked the names of the remaining Ecumenical Masters, even though they're red links. Do you intend on creating pages for them? If not, it's up to you to have them red-linked or not linked at all.

It's ok, I will get to them sometime in the future -Eli+ 21:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• The "periods" infobox parameter should probably list Late Antiquity, while the "cultures" parameters should list Roman and Byzantine. Parutakupiu (talk) 20:17, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

agree -Eli+ 21:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

• I've taken another look at the "Legacy" section, and I feel that the next-to-last paragraph plus the one before it focus more on the Corpus Iuris Civilis and its impact in the legal systems of the Western world, than on the law school itself (as all the other paragraphs). Okay, it was a work assembled by Beirut law teachers, but that link was already mentioned before, and it seems enough to me concerning the school's legacy. No need to go over the work's legacy itself. Can you see where I'm going? Parutakupiu (talk) 22:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more!!! In previous versions i only implied this relationship but reviewer Quadell asked me to elaborate on this point in the FAC nomination. I was reluctant because i didn't want to engage in unnecessary detail and I had to chop thousands of years of history into tiny bits to fit into a paragraph. If you go the article's FAC nom and search for this passage : "The "Legacy" section implies that work done at Beirut helped shape the legal systems that would become Byzantine law and later Western law in general." you'll know what I'm talking about. I don;'t know if there's a way around this dilemma, i'm not convinced with that level of detail either. -Eli+ 11:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

and sorry for the really late reply but I'm having a terribly busy day :( -Eli+ 12:00, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

(No worries.) If I were to decide, I'd chop away those paragraphs. I suggest you raise that specific issue in the FAC nomination page, to create more awareness to potential reviewers. Parutakupiu (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I'll do that buddy, thanks -Eli+ 18:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)