Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Galley/archive1

Galley

Galley (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Featured article candidates/Galley/archive1

Nominator(s): Peter ^Isotalo 18:29, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

This is an article about one of the most long-lived and important ship types in history. It's not that well-known today but it dominated much of Mediterranean (and European) maritime history for over 2000 years.

I've been working on the article on and off for over a decade, been through a recent peer review and I believe it's actually ready to get a barnstar. Regarding the length of the article, I just want to acknowledge that it's been discussed to some degree. I recognize that there are differing views among Wikipedians on ideal length, but my view is that the article is within the confines of WP:SIZE, especially since it's a somewhat unique ship type viewed by historians as having a continuous and unbroken history that goes back to around 700 BC. Peter ^Isotalo 18:29, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Image review

• Avoid sandwiching text between images. You probably have a few too many images for the amount of text, particularly as the captions are generally quite long.

• Don't use fixed px size

• Suggest adding alt text

• Captions need editing for grammar

• File:Galley-knightshospitaller.jpg needs a tag for the original work. Ditto File:Kylix_Dionysus_on_a_ship_between_dolphins_530_BC,_Staatliche_Antikensammlungen_Munich_120637.jpg, File:Swedish_galley_(1715)-rambade.jpg, File:Dauphine-IMG_6926.jpg, File:Dauphine-IMG_6921.jpg, File:Venice_galley_rowing_alla_sensile1.jpg

• File:The_Charles_Galley-Willem_van_de_Velde_the_Younger-2.jpg needs a US tag. Ditto File:Valcour_canadianarchive_c013202k.jpg, File:Monuments_of_Niniveh_-_Plate_71_-_Heidelberg.jpg, File:Peregrinatio_in_terram_sanctam_MET_MM6974_crop_1.jpg, File:Vroom_Hendrick_Cornelisz_Battle_of_Haarlemmermeer.jpg, File:Peregrinatio_in_terram_sanctam_MET_MM4640_crop_1.jpg, File:Battle_of_Lepanto_1571.jpg, File:A_French_Ship_and_Barbary_Pirates_(c_1615)_by_Aert_Anthoniszoon.jpg, File:Vroom_Hendrick_Cornelisz_Dutch_Ships_Ramming_Spanish_Galleys_off_the_Flemish_Coast_in_October_1602.jpg, File:Vittore_Carpaccio_-_Sant'Orsola_polyptich_-_Ritorno_Degli_ambasciatori-detail.jpeg, File:Morisot-Nova_Triremis_quam_dicimus,_Galere-detail.jpeg, File:Byzantines_repel_the_Russian_attack_of_941.jpg, File:Gouache_of_17th_century_French_royal_galley-side.jpg

• File:058_Conrad_Cichorius,_Die_Reliefs_der_Traianssäule,_Tafel_LVIII.jpg needs a tag for the photo

• File:Sloane_3584_f.78v_Turkish_galleys_in_battle,_c.1636.PNG: source link is dead, needs a US tag

• File:Science_and_literature_in_the_Middle_Ages_and_the_Renaissance_-_figure_207.jpg needs a US tag and author date of death

• File:Fernando_Bertelli,_Die_Seeschlacht_von_Lepanto,_Venedig_1572,_Museo_Storico_Navale_(550x500).jpg: source link is dead

• File:AnthonyRoll-30_Galley_Subtle.jpg needs a US tag and has a malformed deletion request?

Oppose simply due to the volume of image issues. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:35, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Everything seems reasonably straightforward to fix, but I have some questions:

• I don't know what the practice is regarding image sandwiching. What's accepted and what's not? Can you point out examples of what's accepted and what's not accepted?
• What does "tag for original work" mean?
• Which US tag is required exactly? I'm just not up to date about which of the dozens of Commons templates that's expected.

Peter ^Isotalo 10:28, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

• The theory is explained at MOS:SANDWICH. In practice, Alexander Hamilton U.S. Custom House has quite a few images but largely avoids any issues, whereas Venice is of greater concern. (The tag at the top of Venice will help find more articles that someone has raised this concern about - unfortunately examples of articles with many images but done well are harder to find).
• There is currently a tag reflecting the copyright of the photographer, but the thing being photographed itself potentially warrants copyright protection - a tag should be added indicating its status (eg it's public domain due to its age).
• It's going to vary depending on the situation, and in particular the earliest date of publication. If you can demonstrate a publication (not just creation, see Wikipedia:Public_domain#Publication for definition) before 1928, {{PD-US}} will generally be most appropriate; if not there are many other possibilities. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Been trying to look at images that need US, original work and photo tags and I'm honestly at a loss as to which ones to use. I sense a pretty massive gap between what's accepted at Commons and what's required for an FA. Could you link examples recently approved FA images where I could simply swipe the formatting instead of trying to apply everything from scratch? Peter ^Isotalo 16:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

To clarify: images hosted on Commons are technically required to have tagging reflecting their status in both their country of origin and the US (when they are not originally US images). So US tags should be in addition to not instead of existing tags (eg File:Science_and_literature_in_the_Middle_Ages_and_the_Renaissance_-_figure_207.jpg will need fixing).

Here's an example of a properly tagged image from a recent FA. It is a photo of a 3D object (coin), so we need to be concerned with the copyright of the object itself as well as the photograph. So we have the PD-UKGov tag which covers the copyright of the coin. Then we have the CC tag covering the copyright of the photo. By comparison, File:Swedish_galley_(1715)-rambade.jpg has the CC tagging covering the copyright of the photo, but lacks tagging covering the copyright of the model itself.

Here's another example. This image is from the UK and uses a combined tag, PD-old-70-expired. This encompasses a life+70 claim covering UK status, supported by an author death date provided in the author field, and also a pre-1928 publication claim for US status, supported by a source indicating the image's inclusion in an 1836 book. By comparison, File:Byzantines_repel_the_Russian_attack_of_941.jpg has the life+70 component for country of origin but is missing the US component.

I'd suggest starting by identifying the earliest known publication for each of these works, and then using the Hirtle chart to match that to appropriate US tags. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:20, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Still confused about one thing here. Why is it okay for File:1820 two pounds obverse.jpg to not have a US tag? Peter ^Isotalo 09:35, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Both of the tags (PD-UKGov and CC) are indicated to apply worldwide, and therefore cover both UK and US status. In contrast, the life+70 tag explicitly indicates that an additional US tag is needed. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:28, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Ah. Thanks for all the helpful clarifications. I believe I've addressed all the specified issues. I couldn't find any info on the model in the lead pic photo. I'm quite sure the model is old enough to be out of copyright, but I just can't verify it.

I've only added alt text to a few images because I'm not sure if I've gotten them quite right. Please have a look and see if you have any concerns. If not, I'll just run through the rest. Peter ^Isotalo 14:50, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

It's not generally necessary to include "image of", "photo of", etc, unless there is some significance to the specific medium. Otherwise good start on alts. Still some sandwiching going on. On licensing (outdent):

• File:Valcour_canadianarchive_c013202k.jpg needs a Canadian tag

• File:Monuments_of_Niniveh_-_Plate_71_-_Heidelberg.jpg needs a US tag

• File:D473-birème_romaine-Liv2-ch10.png: it doesn't make sense to say the original was unpublished when copies were published pre-1928. Ditto File:058_Conrad_Cichorius,_Die_Reliefs_der_Traianssäule,_Tafel_LVIII.jpg

• File:Wells_egyptian_ship_red_sea.png: what is the author's date of death?

• File:Gouache_of_17th_century_French_royal_galley-side.jpg: when and where is this believed to have been published? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:38, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  The gouache is only given as being from the 17th century. BnF specifies the creator as anonymous. So "late 17th century" is as precise as we're gonna get right now.

  The Egyptian ship is apparently drawn by J.F. Horrabin who died in 1962. It's a line drawing of an ancient relief, though. Would this generate new copyright?

  Regarding the photos of the reliefs, do I have to use a separate tag for the photos or not? Peter ^Isotalo 08:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

  Whenever you're reproducing a 3D work, that garners a new copyright, so the answer to both questions is yes. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:15, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

  I switched out the Horrabin drawing to a similar one that's slightly older. Same design of ships, though.

  I believe all tags and alt texts should also be fixed now. Peter ^Isotalo 09:12, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Oppose from Harrias

• Foreign-language words should use {{lang}}, not just italics mark-up.
• "Throughout history, there has been wide variety of terms.." – This is both missing a word, and has a mismatch of singular/plural terminology.
• "..but which is also capable to use sails when necessary.." – Redundant prose, just write "..but which can use sails when necessary.."
• "It was only from the Late Middle Ages that.." – When was the Late Middle Ages? Either provide a wikilink or an inline date range estimate.
• In the terminology section, I might be misreading, but "row" seems to be used both as a synonym to "bank", and to "line". But I might have just lost track, as it gets quite dense.
• "..that are considered to prototypes for later galleys.." – Doesn't sound right to me: perhaps replace "to" with "as"?
• "..little detailed evidence have been found concerning.." – Another mismatch of singular/plural terminology.
• "..which depict crescent-shape vessels.." – This should be "crescent-shaped".

At this point I'm going to oppose based on the quality of the prose. There are lots of little language issues that should have been resolved before a FA nomination. I take it the nominator isn't a native English speaker, and I would recommend withdrawing the nomination, getting GOCE to give it a once over, and then renominating. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 13:58, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for highlighting the language snafus. I've tweaked them according to your pointers. I'm not sure what to clarify regarding oar systems, though. Can you expand on that?

  If I'm not mistaken, "there has been a wide variety of terms" is perfectly correct. The agreement is arguably with "variety", not "terms", but it looks like one of those examples where both would work fine.

  Yes, I think you're right on this, I blame the missing "a" for throwing me off. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 21:06, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

  I don't see any complaint serious enough to merit an objection or withdrawal. I see that you've done far more extensive comments in other FACs so I'd appreciate if you could provide more actionable pointers. Peter ^Isotalo 16:33, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

  In my opinion, the density of minor language issues mean the article falls well short of the "professional standard" required by Criterion 1a, and I'm unwilling to essentially copy-edit this article; that is not the purpose of FAC. If another reviewer is willing to do that, I'm more than happy to come back and review the article content once it is in a good enough state, but at the moment, I stand by my oppose. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 21:06, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

  I've been through a few FACs. I've never had someone imply I can't be trusted to fix minor language errors without a copyediting chaperone. I'm kindly asking you to provide more than a handful of examples and to explain what you mean regarding the row/line/bank comment. Peter ^Isotalo 21:50, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

  See WP:FIXLOOP. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Source review

• Sources appear to be high quality and reliable.
  • Glete, Guilmartin, and Pryor, are all go-to experts on this subject (fwiw I studied under Guilmartin years ago).
  • The only question I have is Higgins - we generally don't cite master's theses - per WP:THESIS, "Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence."
• I've always applied title case to books, even if the publisher didn't (for example, I look over at my bookshelf and see Pryor's book uncapitalized, but I'd still cite it as "Geography, Technology, and War" - there are cases where we apply house style regardless of what the author and/or publisher chose to do).
• There are those who will request that all ISBNs use a standardized format (i.e., either all 10 or 13 digits) - not a hill I'd die on, myself, but something worth considering
• Liddel & Scott and Mooney both need an identifier - typically for pre-ISBN books, an OCLC number will do
• Footnotes all appear to be formatted uniformly. Parsecboy (talk) 15:58, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

  • Higgins only supports the image itself and the caption describing it. Do you still consider it a problem to keep it?
  • Do we have a guideline on how to render source titles?

  Peter ^Isotalo 15:42, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Comments by Cplakidas

Reserving a spot here, this topic is of interest to me. Constantine ✍ 17:32, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Lede

• Early 16th century galleys 'Early-16th-century galleys'?
• Occasionally, much larger polyremes I would strike the occasionally here, the quinquereme was the main warship from the 3rd century BC until after Actium, for example.
• The rowing setup was also simplified and eventually developed into a system called alla sensile add a date here (century would suffice)
• This was suitable for skilled, professional rowers. This does not apply to the alla sensile only, but generally to systems where one man was placed per oar. I recommend moving this up, adding here that this was the reason why historically, most galley rowers were freeborn men and even citizens, contrary to the common perception of galleys using slaves (it is mentioned further down).
• This was further simplified to the a scaloccio method... as before, add a date
• Optional: mention that we have almost no remains of ancient galleys, whence a lot of our knowledge is speculative.

Terminology

• later galleys with more than one row of oars would suggest to stick to 'bank' instead of 'row' here for consistency
• galea sottila I think it is 'galea sottile'? And I would redlink it with links to the articles in the Italian and French wikis.
• Link Viking ships

Early history

• the two-level galley as above, for consistency, 'two-banked'
• Link ancient Egypt, Old Kingdom, Red Sea, Hatshepsut, naval ram, Carthaginian, Sicily
• in a distinct split in the design of warships not entirely sure what is meant here
• and set trade vessels apart clarify that this was because trade vessels did not have rams
• The Phoenicians used galleys for transports that were less elongated The 'that' appears to refer to the transports here
• Carthaginian galley wrecks found off Sicily that date to the 3rd or 2nd century BC had a length to breadth ratio of 6:1, proportions that fell between the 4:1 of sailing merchant ships and the 8:1 or 10:1 of war galleys. This implies that these wrecks were not war galleys? I would make it explicit: 'Carthaginian trade galley wrecks'
• The first true Mediterranean galleys when did these appear?
• Not long after they appeared but the triaconters and penteconters were monoremes, so the appearance of the bireme is sprung over here. I would move the Shipbuilders, probably Phoenician, ... diērēs, or bireme here (as it is not directly followed up), and add a date.
• penteconters disappeared altogether this is incorrect: penteconters fought at Salamis, and the smaller vessels of the Hellenistic era like the liburnians are arguably their successors.
• In general, this section is a bit confusing: it appears to follow a division by civilization, but is not strict in doing so (e.g. Egypt, Phoenicians, then Minoans, back to Egypt, then Carthaginians and Greeks). I would argue that a chronological sequence makes more sense.

Trade and travel

• Perhaps the paragraph Until at least the late 2nd century BC...safely and quickly as possible. should be the intro paragraph here.
• Link fall of the Western Roman Empire, city-states of Italy to Maritime republics, redlink great galley to it:Galea grossa
• fall of the Western Roman Empire in the early centuries AD this chronology is wrong
• merchant galleys were similar dromons similar to dromons?
• They had tower-like superstructure They had tower-like superstructures?
• upswing in Western European pilgrims either 'upswing in the number of Western European pilgrims' or 'upswing in Western European pilgrim voyages'
• merchant galleys continued to be used from the High and Late Middle Ages is 'from' correct here?

Will pause here, will do the rest later. Constantine ✍ 10:03, 8 October 2023 (UTC)