Jesuit Missions of Chiquitos has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 4, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
August 13, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
October 27, 2009	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Current status: Good article

South America: Bolivia Mid‑importance

	Latin America portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to South America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject South AmericaTemplate:WikiProject South AmericaSouth America articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Bolivia (assessed as Mid-importance).

World Heritage Sites (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject World Heritage Sites, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.World Heritage SitesWikipedia:WikiProject World Heritage SitesTemplate:WikiProject World Heritage SitesWorld Heritage Sites articles

Christianity: Catholicism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Catholic Church portal This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Low-importance).

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

There is a request, submitted by bamse (talk), for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.

The rationale behind the request is: "Important article about a World Heritage Site and interesting aspects of the colonial history of America".

Copy-Edit[edit]

Untitled[edit]

I will take a shot at it. Second language english is my favorite. However, it will take a while. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glubbdrubb (talk • contribs) 19:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time. If there is anything unclear in the text, leave a note here or on my talk page and I will try to clarify.bamse (talk) 20:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-Edit Part II[edit]

Bamse, I saw your request for copy-editing on the Guild's page, and I'm in the process of getting some of it done. I won't get it all done tonight because it's nearly 1am my time, but I'll try and get as much done as possible in the next few days. As I know little about the subject, I'm leaving the facts to other people and just tidying up around them. I have, however, removed a reference to the distance between the missions, because it was clumsy and I can't think of a better way of wording it off the top of my head. When I find a better way to word it, I'll put that back in.

puts copyediting hat on*

Faerie Queene (talk) 00:42, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that(real life interrupts),but I am back. How far did you get Faerie Queene ? --Glubbdrubb (talk) 13:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you are back Glubbdrubb! Looking at Faerie Queene's edits, I think he got to the second section in History->Arrival in the Viceroyalty of Peru (up to "in existing settlements such as La Paz, Potosí and La Plata (present day Sucre)." bamse (talk) 14:34, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will start on that soon... --Glubbdrubb (talk) 16:56, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working from the top down and the bottom up. Will meet in the middle soon. At this point I'm only tightening the prose. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifications Needed[edit]

(I need a better way to do this. Is some sort of wiki-markup I can use?)

Don't know of any wiki-markup. bamse (talk) 03:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From "Arrival in the Viceroyalty of Peru"

"In 1566, more than 30 years after the Franciscans, Dominicans, Augustinians and Mercedarians, a group of Jesuits travelled, with the permission of King Philip II of Spain, to..."

30 years after what? 30 years after the Franciscans, Dominicans, Augustinians and Mercedarians went to Peru? --Glubbdrubb (talk) 17:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes 30 years after the other orders had arrived in Peru, the Jesuits arrived. bamse (talk) 02:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From "The Jesuits in Chiquitanía"

I have changed:

"Compared to their neighbours in Paraguay, due to the remoteness and lack of transportation of the Chiquitos missions they were spared from large scale epidemics."

to:

"Compared to their neighbours in Paraguay, the Chiquitos missions were spared from large scale epidemics due to their remoteness and lack of easy transportation."

Is that what is meant in the first sentence? --Glubbdrubb (talk) 18:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~Yes, perfectly correct. bamse (talk) 02:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The first Jesuit reduction in the Chiquitanía was the mission of San Francisco Javier which was founded in 1691 by the Jesuit José de Arce and later moved."

and later moved? Who or what moved, and why is it mentioned?--Glubbdrubb (talk) 18:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The village was relocated to another place. Maybe this statement could be put into another sentence since it has nothing to do with the foundation of the original settlement. It is mentioned to express that the present settlement is not at the location of the original settlement. I started to create some tables here which also show the year of relocations together with the reason for relocation. It is still somewhat incomplete though and I am afraid that the article would get even longer than it already is. bamse (talk) 02:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is each mission in the area considered an individual World Heritage Site or are all of them together considered a World Heritage Site? --Glubbdrubb (talk) 17:04, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the area (Chiquitania) there used to be 11 Jesuit missions. One of them (San Ignacio de Zamucos) completely disappeared. Out of the 10 missions that still exist, 6 missions still have their original church (more or less restored, see the church table). These 6 missions together form the World Heritage Site Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos. In short: there is one WH-site which comprises six missions. bamse (talk) 06:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Settlement and Church table[edit]

I think including the table on the sandbox will work out. It is a good way to visualize the rather complicated time-line described in the article. Don't be concerned about making the article too long right now. --Glubbdrubb (talk) 10:59, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look at it as the table still needs some work. How about the church table? Is it useful in the main article or should the information rather go into the separate mission articles? bamse (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you place both tables at the end of the "History" section. They would be a good summary. --Glubbdrubb (talk) 16:44, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They'll be there probably some time next week. bamse (talk) 00:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here they are. I put them at the end of the history section. They turned out to be quite big. Maybe the non-World Heritage missions can be removed from the tables. What do you think. I am going to replace pictures that appear twice in the article (because of the church-table) now. bamse (talk) 06:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More clarification[edit]

Hello, I want to help with copy editing this article.

I have a question about the introductory section. Are you trying to say that the Chiquitos are noted for their originality, architecture, AND their hard to reach location? Or are you simply giving a geographical description? Slapazoid (talk) 04:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great, looking forward to your copy-edits Slapazoid! The missions are noted for their originality and architecture (basically a mix of European and Indian styles). They are NOT noted for their location as far as I know. bamse (talk) 04:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So the originality describes the architecture? How does this sound: "The missions, noted for their unique and richly expressive architecture, lie east and north..." Slapazoid (talk) 04:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not only. Though architecture is most apparent, there are also music/instruments, believes/religion (not easy to assess) and so on. Basically it boils down to this European/Indian mix which is expressed in various artforms: architecture, music, sculpture,... That's what is meant by "originality", so I would not want to remove it completely. bamse (talk) 05:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see. How about this: "the missions, noted for their unique fusion of European and Indian (cultural?) influences, lie east and north..." Slapazoid (talk) 05:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. bamse (talk) 05:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Helping to finish[edit]

Bamse, I've made some tweaks, hope they are okay. I'm into the modern period now, and it is still unclear to me what the reduction system is. I've inserted a confusing tag into the text where you start to talk about it, but don't explain it. It's not a term I'm familiar with....? So before I proceed, will you try to clarify that?--Auntieruth55 (talk) 22:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I only noticed your question now. Are you referring to the line: "By the mid-19th century, the reduction system of the missions had disappeared." ? This should express that

Indians and Mestizos/Spanish were not living separated anymore as they used to under the Jesuits
The quasi-autonomous status of the settlements had gone
Converting Indians to Christianity and to make good Europeans out of them (assimilate culture) was not the main activity in the settlements anymore

Does that answer your questions? bamse (talk) 01:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

I will be reviewing the article over the next week at Talk:Jesuit_Missions_of_the_Chiquitos/GA1. Currently it is on hold as there are a few obvious problems to be fixed - they should be relatively easy to handle though. During the next days I will conduct a thorough review. ·Maunus·ƛ· 01:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New articles[edit]

All the WH site towns have been given crappy little stubs, all infobox & maps & nothing else. The info here should be copied to these, plus commonscat etc. Johnbod (talk) 17:39, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New article / Correct Title[edit]

Hello all. I am in the process now of amplifying the stubs Johnbod refers to immediately above this post. This will take some time as I have other pressing commitments, but it will be done.

For the record, the stubs to be emended are as follows: San Xavier (also referred to as "San Javier", although the original - and preferred - spelling is "San Xavier"); Concepción; Santa Ana de Velasco; San Rafael de Velasco; San Miguel de Velasco; and San José de Chiquitos. These six comprise those former Jesuit missions that were inscribed on UNESCO's World Heritage Sites List in 1990.

In addition, there are other ex-mission towns in the Chiquitania that are not included in the above UNESCO WHS List. These are San Ignacio de Velasco; San Juan Bautista; Santiago de Chiquitos; and Santo Corazón. As the article is about the Jesuit missions of Chiquitos (whether they are UNESCO-listed or not), I'll also write these articles. I may also add one for San Ignacio de Zamucos, a little-known former mission but nonetheless one of the original Jesuit foundations in the Chiquitania. On a related note, I'll make some minor corrections to the wiki lists for the founding of the settlements and churches in Chiquitos as well, as in one or two cases the range of dates can be narrowed thanks to recent research.

I'll also amplify the stub "Chiquitania". Please see my comments regarding the proper spelling of its name, which is "Chiquitania" (without an accented final "i".) I realise changing it will require work on other entries, but this is its universally accepted spelling; anything to the contrary is simply incorrect.

A final comment on spelling....

The article in question here ("Jesuit Missions of Chiquitos") is properly spelled as it appears in the parenthesis. I have made this change throughout the article. The definite article "the" is not used by subject matter experts, as the phrase "Chiquitos" does not require it (in the same way that one never writes "the India" or "the Italy"). The fact that UNESCO has the English version of the inscription title ("Misiones jesuíticas de Chiquitos" in Spanish, again, without the definite article) as "Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos" is unfortunate. I have contacted the individuals in charge of this listing at UNESCO's Paris office (Penelope Keenan and Nuria Sanz). They are aware of the error, but on 15 December 2011 stated that they would not address it. Notwithstanding, the phrase found in all literature on the region is invariably "Jesuit Missions of Chiquitos". Here again, as with the correction required to "Chiquitania", I realise that this too will require changes across multiple entries, but I offer this suggestion in the interest of making these articles factually correct in every regard.

I also wish to thank Bamse/Lilleskut and especially Erich Loser for their help and support in getting me up to speed on this project. It is much appreciated. --Geoffrey Groesbeck (talk) 06:42, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking forward to your expansions. Keep up the good work. Not sure how I deserve the compliments though. bamse (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Jesuit Missions of Chiquitos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081012192415/http://www.eldeber.com.bo:80/2006/20060304/editorial.html to http://www.eldeber.com.bo/2006/20060304/editorial.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:06, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Jesuit Missions of Chiquitos/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Could make a credible pass a GA. -- Secisek (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Substituted at 04:44, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Jesuit Missions of Chiquitos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:58, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jesuit Missions of Chiquitos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:28, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]