Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of World Heritage Sites in Cyprus/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC).

List of World Heritage Sites in Cyprus

 * Nominator(s): Tone 09:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Cyprus has three WHSs and 11 sites on the tentative list. The style is standard. Looking at the tentative sites, those are mostly older nominations that may eventually be reevaluated as a single nomination (six items related to the same phenomenon), but at the moment we have what we have in the sources. One item has no description for some reason, so not much can be done here. Since Switzerland and Poland are getting good support I am adding Cyprus. Greece will be next, and that will be a substantially longer list. Tone 09:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Alexandra
 * Like in the previous WHS lists I have looked at, this has the weird alt text "List of World Heritage Sites in Cyprus is located in Cyprus". I have fixed this now, but would again recommend that you do this for any past/future lists that use.
 * Per MOS:FIRST, leads in lists should not contain self-references like "This is a list of X" (similarly to how our prose-based articles don't begin with "This is an article about X")
 * The villas were richly adorned with mosaic floors, the motives represent themes from mythology and from everyday life. - this does not seem to work grammatically. Alternatives might include "floors, whose motives represent..." or "floors, with motives representing..."
 * This site is also a part of the Troodos Ophiolite. - because the table is sortable, there is no guarantee that one of these "is also a part" items won't be the one a reader sees first. I would recommend rewording so that all notes work if they are the first one read.
 * The church was built in the 11th century over the ruins of a 5th-century basilica, additional chapels were added in the following centuries. - similarly to the "villas" bullet point above, the two clauses here aren't connected properly. I would suggest simply adding an "and" after the comma.
 * The area is important especialls - I assume this is meant to say "especially"?
 * from the Roman to the 20th century - am I reading this incorrectly, or are you missing a word here?
 * Otherwise this looks good. Ping me when you have addressed the above or if you have any questions!--AlexandraIDV 01:13, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Done! I removed "also" in those items, the Ophiolite should still be mentioned, if maybe not linked every time. I left the longer explanation where it appears first without sorting. I suppose that should work. Thanks! --Tone 09:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Excellent, I have confirmed the changes!--AlexandraIDV 14:11, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Support--AlexandraIDV 14:11, 31 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * "Cyprus was a place of worship of pre-Hellenic fertility deities since the Neolithic period (6th millennium BCE)" - until when? Presumably not 2021 :-)
 * "with motives representing" - I think you mean motifs, not motives
 * "upper mantle sequences are well exposed and where lower crustal and mantle processes can be studied and demonstrated" => "upper mantle sequences are well exposed and lower crustal and mantle processes can be studied and demonstrated"
 * "A five-domed church of St. Barnabas and St. Hilarion." - this isn't a complete sentence so doesn't need a full stop
 * Think that's it from me -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks! --Tone 21:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Support + comments from Gerald Waldo Luis
I'll support this as a fine list with OK prose in my lens, with some comments.
 * (Lead) Link Republic of Cyprus?
 * (World Heritage Sites) "Criteria i through vi are cultural, whereas vii through x are natural." Roman numbers are rare on Wikipedia, so a "i" might look like a typo in first glance. Perhaps linking it to Roman numerals?
 * {Painted Churches in the Troodos Region) "...during the time of the Byzantine Empire." Duplicate link.
 * Link murals?
 * (Choirokoitia) "The agricultural society was aceramic (without pottery)." Perhaps change "without pottery" to "not producing pottery".
 * Link flint and anthropomorphism?
 * "Fikardou is" felt vauge.
 * {Chandria) The article Chandria has various images. Maybe it's usable?
 * (Church of Panagia Aggeloktisti) Link chapel?
 * This article continuously switches "The [insert building type]" with "This site". Please have it consistent.
 * I archived references, however ref 8 is not yet archived.

Other than that, this is in good shape.  Gerald WL  16:53, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks! I prefer not linking the Roman numerals since it is pretty clear that this is what the article is using (there's even a link in the table). Linking chapel seems a bit too much as well. For aceramic, I went with the archeological meaning, as "not producing pottery" could mean something else. The problem with the Chandria images is that none of them depicts what the nomination is about, which are tectonic features. In any case, if Cyprus is going ahead with these nominations, they will likely merge them all into a single one at some point in furure. --Tone 09:25, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments A few issues that need to be resolved before I can support. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!&#33;!&#33;) 18:52, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I can't help but stare at that 126-word lead and think it's too short for featured material. I think we're going to need to try hard to expand that.
 * I tried to expand.
 * We're 2021 now, so could update the "as of" year in the lead.
 * Dates need to be properly formatted, e.g. ref 5 has "Aug" which should be "August".
 * "considered by UNESCO" not really, UNESCO said "The mosaics of Nea Paphos are extremely rare and are considered amongst the finest specimens in the world" so UNESCO are just reporting that someone unknown "considers" them such.
 * Sortable tables, link linked items each time, e.g. Byzantine Empire, Troodos Ophiolite etc etc.
 * "showing the development of styles under international influences" what does that actually mean?
 * That should mean that these are the examples of the style. Rewritten.
 * Aren't the painted churches 351bis?
 * Isn't it (ii)(iii)(iv) instead of (ii)(iii)(vi)?
 * Yes, fixed.
 * Choirokoitia ref is +bis.
 * Any reason why the tentative lists don't have the reference numbers?
 * They never do in lists here. I guess we decided that at some point, as the tentative sites often get updates when the number changes as well. On the other hand, the WHS numbers are "official", eventually getting a bis or ter suffix if the site is extended.
 * "Church of Panayia Chrysokourdaliotissa" is (ii)(iii)(iv) instead of (ii)(iii)(vi).
 * "the site Painted Churches in the Troodos Region" -> "the Painted Churches in the Troodos Region site"
 * Shouldn't "Year listed" really be "Year submitted" for the tentative list?
 * This is the style we are using. They were probably submitted earlier and listed (put on the list on the website) in the year mentioned.
 * "ii, iii,, iv, v" something missing here.
 * Ref 11 is the wrong URL.
 * Location (District) only ever has one entry, and none of them are linked in the second table.
 * "In Mt. Olympus," Mount.
 * Why (for instance) is Malounta Bridge listed as Limassol when that's not mentioned in the ref and it was submitted by folks in Nicosia? Suspect this is not the only one...
 * Correct! This one and the next are in Nicosia. Not sure where I got it wrong. Funny enough, the coordinates in the ref point to the middle of the Caspian Sea. Clearly wrong :P
 * "St. Barnabas and St. Hilarion" not mentioned in the UNESCO ref.
 * This is pretty much the translation of the names Varnavas and Ilarion to those we use on English wiki. I didn't want to leave the field blank.
 * Done. Some comments above. Thanks, I see I missed quite some thing this time around... --Tone 18:51, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Source review – Pass
All retrieval dates, titles & publishers are formatted correctly and consistently.
 * Formatting


 * Reliabillity
 * The only source (UNESCO) is doubtlessly reliable


 * Verifiability
 * Archive links are included so dead links not an issue
 * checked refs 10, 20, 4 & 2, found no issues Aza24 (talk) 09:32, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

 * " World Heritage Sites are places of importance to cultural or natural heritage" This is too vague. There are countless sites of importance which do not qualify for WH status. Also you cite a summary of the Convention which does not specify the criteria, not the Convention itself at . The definition should be expanded and should quote "of outstanding universal value".
 * "built in the Troodos Mountains during the time of the Byzantine Empire". Were they all built in the period of Byzantine rule which ended in 1191? Also, it would be helpful to give the timespan of 11th to 16 centuries.
 * Choirokoitia. No change needed, but I find the dating puzzling. The summary of the citation says 7th to 4th millennium, below 7th to 5th. It seems very late for an aceramic culture as the Pottery Neolithic started in the mid-7th millennium in the Fertile Crescent. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:11, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Good points! As for the intro, I modified it as you suggested and added the other source. If that's ok, I'll go ahead and change the intros in other WHS FLs. Churches, fixed. I guess it is easier to state the centuries than go into the Byzantine/post-Byzantine details. As for the third one, I don't know ... maybe they were on the conservative side of the spectrum and were late with the adoption of pottery ... several thousands of years late. But that's what the source says. Curious indeed. --Tone 17:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think a summary of articles 1 and 2 of the Convention on the criteria for cultural and natural sites would be helpful for readers, especially as the lead is so short. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I am playing with the intro. What about now? --Tone 15:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * How about "The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designates World Heritage Sites of outstanding universal value to cultural or natural heritage which have been nominated by countries which are signatories to the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, established in 1972. Cultural heritage consists of monuments (such as architectural works, monumental sculptures, or inscriptions), groups of buildings, and sites (including archeaological sites). Natural features (consisting of physical and biological formations), geological and physiographical formations (including habitats of threatened species of animals and plants), and natural sites which are important from the point of view of science, conservation or natural beauty, are defined as natural heritage." Dudley Miles (talk) 16:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Perfect! --Tone 17:42, 4 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Support. Looks fine now. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Promoting. -- Pres N  03:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.