Wikipedia:Peer review/Borobudur/archive1

Borobudur

I have made some major modifications, adding citations, regrouping of this magnificent monument. Now, it's time to have outside reviews. Please take a look and I will be very glad to receive critics, comments and/or suggestions. — Indon (reply) — 11:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My 2 cents:

"...platforms—on top are three circular platforms while the rest are square—and decorated..." You may want to rethink your usage of these dashes. Although it is reasonably correct, one should link the two ideas with a colon or parathenseses (Chicago Manual of Style.) I suggest that you break them up into different sentences.
"...decorated with 2,672 relief panels and 504 Buddha." I don't understand, 504 Buddha what? If you're trying to say 504 Buddha panels, then you would say, "...decorated with 504 Buddha and 2,672 relief panels."
"...2,672 relief panels and 504 Buddha." You may want to cite a source here.
"A main dome is located in the middle of the top platform surrounded by 72 perforated stupas, each containing one sitting Buddha statue." This is a run-on, seperate it into: "A main dome is located at the center of the top platform. It is surrounded by 72 perforated stupas, each containing one sitting Buddha statue."
"...starts at the base..." To keep flow, I suggest you say "...begins at the base..."
"...circumambulating the monument while ascending to the top in three levels of Buddhist cosmology: Kamadhatu (the world of desire), Rupadhatu (the world of forms) and Arupadhatu (the world of formless)." Clause-induced run-on. Say "The pilgrims follow a path circumambulating the structure." Note: I didn't understand where you were going with the last clause, so fix that up as best as you can.
"Evidence suggests Borobudur was abandoned following the fourteenth century decline of Buddhist and Hindu kingdoms in Java..." Citation please.
"It was re-discovered" No hyphen here.
"Indonesian government" Link this to Government of Indonesia.
"Since 1991, Borobudur has been listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Borobudur is still used for pilgrimage and is also a major tourist attraction." Cite sources for both. The UNESCO one shouldn't be difficult to find, the "major tourist attraction" on pushes on WP:PEACOCK.
"temples are known as candi" Get IPA for this, or do you know how many students are going to say they're called "cayn-dee," which they aren't. Look, although Wikipedia isn't responsible for that, it would be encyclopedically correct to have a pronouncing thing there.
"The origins of the name Borobudur are unclear, although this is not uncommon as the original name of most candi is no longer known. Furthermore, often even the local people did not know of the existence of a candi." Get a citation for each line. That is, the "Boroburdur's name unclear," the " candi name unclear," and the "villagers unaware" one.
"Raffles wrote about the existence..." You just used his name, and Wikipedia, as de facto policy, has avoided addressing people by their last names. So say "He wrote about the existence..."
Get a citation for the last hypothesis in Etymology.
There's a lot of red links. I'm not sure what one should do with them.

Drop a line when you're ready for more.Evan^{(Salad dressing is the milk of the infidel!)} 12:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply, thank you Evan, for your very thorough review. I was a bit skeptic that WP:PR has a good review like this. Some of your suggestions have been updated, particularly the citation requests. For the red links, I'll try to create stubs about them. About Wikipedia has a de facto policy to avoid addressing people by their last names. I didn't know about that. Could you please point to me the policy? Thanks. — Indon (reply) — 19:45, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Response, Actually, sorting through Wikipedia policy, it appears that you are correct. I just thought that your usage of the last name broke up flow. That's for me, and Wikipedia house rules actually support the fact that one should use last names. Evan^{(Salad dressing is the milk of the infidel!)} 21:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment.

I've only read bits of it so far, but it looks like a great article. Will read in full later.
There are some references to the monument originally being covered with white plaster over the rocks and then painted - see [1], [2], & this book [3]. Worth including, if it isn't a myth.
I wonder if there are some historical photos available somewhere (out of copyright or otherwise) showing Borobudur in a shambles before it was restored? This would be a great comparison against the modern photos.

(Caniago 16:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 15:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

Would be worthwhile mentioning the ochre problem caused by the archaeologist from Leiden University, since it remains one of the main unsolved conservation problems today - see [4]. The yellow color is prominent on many stones.
There is an overhead image here which seems like it might be out of copyright: [5]
Worth mentioning King Samaratunga, since he seems to be the ruler during the time of construction.

(Caniago 19:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Reply to Caniago, thanks for your valuable inputs. I've noted that, will add some info later. The image seems outdated, but I can't find when it was taken. It seems it is part of ANU research project, which perhaps much less than 100 years ago. I'll find other outdated images later. — Indon (reply) — 14:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the images on the site were taken by Van Erp, and this page here [6] implies they may be out of copyright. Wikipedia mentions "almost all works published prior to 1923 are public domain because their copyright term expired.". Probably would need to contact the webmasters listed here [7] to be sure. (Caniago 15:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Yeah, the best way is to contact the webmaster. Thanks. — Indon (reply) — 17:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Review by DVD R W

I just upped this article to {{GA}} and am leaving my comments here since this pr is going. I think the text looks good, with lots of facts, and credit to authors on this subject and so on, but what I find slightly lacking is the quality of the images. The detail photos are pretty good but the article really needs an overview, something orthographic like a plan or axonometric drawing - the two overviews in the article, [8] and [9] are lackluster. Indon, since you drew the renovation detail could you also draw a plan, and elevation, and section through the whole building? Maybe that would be too much to ask for now, but it would be a great improvement on the way towards A and FA. It would be good to show the access as well, this one [10] at flickr is uploadable (though slightly tilted) as is this one [11] which shows some of the verdure of the park below. I like this article so far and best of luck, dvd rw 04:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - DVD RW, thank you for your valuable comments. You're reading my mind. ;-) Right now, I'm drawing the ground plan and the cross section images for the article, and also details of the location, which will make the article more interesting to read. The content of the article is, I think, already enough to describe the monument, so I put first in GA which usually runs for weeks. But thanks to you for reviewing this article for GA. I'll let you know later when the drawing is finished. — Indon (reply) — 09:21, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]