Talk:Boljoon Church

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boljoon Church. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141014235755/http://www.ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article.php?igm=2&i=201 to http://www.ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article.php?igm=2&i=201

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 14:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Boljoon Church. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150102161744/http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/news/view/20070126-45779/Restoration_work_on_Boljoon_church_to_start_soon to http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/news/view/20070126-45779/Restoration_work_on_Boljoon_church_to_start_soon
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150102140016/http://nhcp.gov.ph/files/NHI_res_1_1999.pdf to http://nhcp.gov.ph/files/NHI_res_1_1999.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140512223346/http://ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article.php?subcat=13&i=17 to http://ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article.php?subcat=13&i=17
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150102161713/http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/news/view/20080608-141449/Boljoon-excavation-shows-gold-jewelry--China-trade to http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/news/view/20080608-141449/Boljoon-excavation-shows-gold-jewelry--China-trade

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 03:36, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Boljoon Church/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: KJP1 (talk · contribs) 09:53, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Shall pick up this GAR. KJP1 (talk) 09:53, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment

1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

   • 

2. The article contains copyright violations – see Wikipedia:Copyright violations.

   • 

3. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

   • 

4. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.

   • 

5. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

   • 

6. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

   • 

The immediate issue is the need to clarify the copyright status of the text. Earwig [1] is showing:

• 93.8% match with the "I Love Cebu" Facebook page;
• 63.9% match with a SlideShare "Colonial Churches of the Philippines" page;
• 59.5% with a TripAdvisor page.

I appreciate that it is possible these sites have taken the text from Wikipedia, but would need this to be clarified before continuing with the main review. I shall also seek advice from an expert. KJP1 (talk) 10:07, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

User: Diannaa has helpfully confirmed that Facebook et. al. have lifted from here, so we're over the Quick Check hurdle and I'll move on to the main review. KJP1 (talk) 06:06, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Main review

1. It is reasonably well written.

a (prose):

There's a bit of work to do on the prose. Some suggestions below.

Lead

• It's a little short. The lead should summarise the article's content and you've nothing on the history/architecture. I'd make your two para.s into one, and then have a second on these topics.

*Working on it

*Think we need a bit more here.

Church history

• "a small Christian settlement named Nabulho" - don't think we need italics here.

Done

• "It became a visita of Carcar in 1599" - why not chapel of ease in En:Wiki?

It is more common to refer it as a visita after Spanish religion customs that have been practiced in the Philippines. But fixed it as visita (also chapel of ease)

• "a small chapel was placed under the Patronage of the Blessed Virgin Mary." - perhaps "with the small chapel being dedicated to the Virgin Mary."? I don't think we'd capitalise Patronage, nor refer to the "Blessed" Virgin Mary. She's not "Blessed" in her article.

Done

• "based on the decision of Father Francisco de Zamora" - "by Father Francisco...."

Done

• "As early as 1732, the Augustinians proposed to leave Boljoon, owing to a shortage of priests" - perhaps, "By 1732 the Augustinians proposed to leave Boljoon owing to a shortage of priests"?

Done

• "The Augustinians returned to Boljoon in 1747 in exchange for Liloan, Cotcot and Maraling from the Jesuits." - no quite clear to me. Perhaps, "The Augustinians regained Boljoon in 1747, under an arrangement by which they ceded the settlements of Liloan, Cotcot and Maraling to the Jesuits."?

Done

Architectural history

• "The present church of Boljoon was built" - suggest delete "of Boljoon".

Done

Historical and cultural designations

• I'd probably make these two, short, para.s into one.

Done

Church features

• "It originally served as a watchtower for possible Moro raids" - what was "possible" about them? I'd suggest "against Moro raids"?

Done

• "original terra cotta roof tiles" - why not "original terracotta roof tiles"?

Done

• "predominantly on its choir screen and pulpit" - not getting this.

Please check if it makes sense now: seen predominantly on its choir screen and pulpit.

• "from 1802 to 1808 under the auspices of Father Bermejo" - the same Father Bermejo who was still working in 1841? Possible.

I fixed the statement saying Father Bermejo finished it in 1841. Based on this site, there is no exact date that he was able to finish the church.

Altar

• "Retablo" - I'd suggest retable or reredos on the En:Wiki.

Retablo is more commonly or a familiar term in this context.

• "pseudo-baroque rococo" - I appreciate that's what the source says, but I'm not sure I understand it. It's also a, slightly too, close paraphrase of the source?

I'm not sure how we could still paraphrase this sentence

Convent

• "liturgical objects such as record books" - are record books an element of the liturgy? I'd also probably amalgamate these, single-sentence, sections.

Transferred until Church Complex section

Church plaza

• "It is believed/It was concluded" - you use a few of these phrases - they prompt the query, "by whom", and are probably redundant.

Its local history and the source does not clearly state by whom.

Blockhouse

• "tile-covered parapet" - I'm not seeing a parapet from the photo - just a tile-covered roof.

Mentioned on this site.

• "Today it serves as a bell tower" - so what does the bell tower do?

Can you please rephrase your question here?

Sure - if this now acts as the bell tower, what purpose does the bell tower serve? Or, another way, why are they using this strucuture as a bell tower, when they already have one?

b (MoS)

Not my strongest suit, but it looks ok to me.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

a (references)

Appropriately cited.

b (citations to reliable sources):

I have a few concerns regarding some of the sources as follows:

• Source 1 - This doesn't look particularly reliable, or neutral to me. It seems to have been written by a non-specialist and the tone is rather odd. For example; "The people's piety has not waned even with the passage of time and grows as freshly as in the past"; "The faith and devotion of the people of Boljo-on have very frequently been rewarded with great favors from heaven"; "Faced with this hopeless prospect, the people would always resort to the wellsprings of their faith, trusting in the goodness and mercy of God and in the protection offered by the Blessed Virgin". To me it reads more like the writings of a devoted member of the congregation, than a dispassionate scholar. Do we know who Warren P. Angliongto is?

He is a local historian part of the Boljoon Heritage Foundation, Inc and has written other articles on local newspapers.

Umm. His writing doesn't come across as that of a professional historian. Is there any other source?

• Source 3 - Same concerns as 1. Is it a blog rather than a history? Some of the text doesn't seem to make sense, e.g. "True, they were home not only assured in the truth of the events but had their petitions answered". What does that mean?

This is the official site of Boljoon Heritage Foundation.

• Source 6 - this doesn't work for me, is it broken? And the author's second name is misspelt "Angliongio".

Fixed with an archive URL. It might be a typo error but that's the name found on the site.

• Source 13 - same concern as 3. And there's an unnecessary "s" on "Foundation".

Fixed on the extra s

• Sources 18/19 - same concerns as 3.

Same as above

c (OR):

No evidence of OR.

d (No evidence of plagiarism or copyright violations):

With help from Dianaa, CV checks out.

3. It is broad in its scope

a (major aspects)

Covers all the major aspects.

b (focused):

Appropriately focussed.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy

Neutral.

5. It is stable

And stable.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):

Images are fine.

b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

I personally wouldn't repeat "Boljoon Church" and "Boljoon" in the captions. It's pretty obvious they relate to the subject of the article.

Fixed

7. Overall: Pass/Fail:

That's it from me, and apologies for the delay. It's an interesting article, on an attractive building. My main concern, apart from the prose issues, are a couple of the sources. I appreciate it can be hard to find reliable sources on less-significant buildings - loads of my articles on lesser buildings in Monmouthshire are based on one or two key texts. Does the Philippines Government have any arrangement similar to the Listed building framework we have in the UK? These can be useful sources. I'll put it On Hold for now. Get back to me here if you have any queries. All the best, and thanks for your work. KJP1 (talk) 12:34, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@KJP1: Please check my comments above. Thank you! carlojoseph14 (talk) 12:02, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Couple of outstanding queries. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 18:11, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi - are we able to make progress on this? I shall need to wrap it up if we can't. KJP1 (talk) 05:54, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Reluctant close. KJP1 (talk) 12:53, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

English

Boljoon 175.176.69.222 (talk) 10:50, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Blockhouse size wrong

I see it is also wrong in the source, maybe they meant the whole courtyard but the blockhouse is nowhere near 120x80 meters. Maybe 12x8 meters but I have not measured it. There is no structure on the whole property of that size, not even the church itself. 109.90.26.197 (talk) 14:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)