Talk:Volimidia

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Nominator: UndercoverClassicist (talk · contribs) 08:42, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 06:34, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

I am reading, will take a few days. Some first comments for now:

• Lead needs some wikilinks (Late Helladic, Messenia)
  • "Messenia" was linked already, but I linked LH I. I didn't link LH III for now, since they currently both point to the same place, and the chances of us having a good article on each of them are slim. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• Is ancient Messenia identical to the modern one? Possibly worth clarifying.
  • More or less -- most geographical/administrative boundaries have shifted over time, but this is no less accurate than talking about (say) "Germany" in 1914 or "the United States" in 1848 -- we wouldn't normally put a note on those references to say that the borders were not quite the same as those today, unless it was specifically relevant in context. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• From the end of the Middle Bronze Age (c. 1700 – c. 1600 BCE), it was used as a cemetery, and was the site of a Mycenaean settlement from – Does this mean that the cemetery was not Mycenaean, as you mention "Mycenaean" only for the settlement?
  • Yeah, that wasn't ideal -- I've slightly reworked. Not sure it's a perfect solution. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• The chamber tombs at Volimidia are morphologically unusual, with rounded chambers and domed roofs rather than the more usual square and sloped constructions – maybe this could be formulated more concisely, without repetition of "chamber", and maybe "morphologically" is an unnecessary technical term? Maybe "The tombs at Volimidia are unusual because of their rounded chambers and domed roofs rather than …"?
  • I think "chamber tombs" is needed (not all of the tombs at Volimidia are chamber tombs), and I'd prefer to keep "morphologically" for precision -- yes, it's a bit technical, but even if readers interpret it as "the tombs are blah-blah unusual due to...", they haven't lost anything. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• The site is not publicly accessible I assume, as that's not mentioned?
  • Like most archaeological sites in Greece, there's not a real distinction between the archaeological site and the place around it -- "Volimidia" is the name of an area/hamlet that happens to also be the location of a bunch of tombs. This also answers your question below -- the name long predates the formal archaeological study of the tombs, though it's interesting that people living there clearly knew there was something odd about it (cf. the hundreds of Greek villages known as Palaikastro ("ancient fortress") etc). UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• Its name comes from the Greek word βουλιάζω (vouliazo; 'I sink') – a reference to the tendency of the ground to collapse because of the dug-out chambers of Mycenaean chamber tombs in the area. – So is that a name chosen by the archaeologists or is it a local name for the area?
  • As above, though I'm not sure I'll find a source that explicitly says that the village was already called Volimidia when Marinatos turned up. 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• It may originally have been covered with a tumulus – I suggest to add a translation of the term in brackets ("burial mound").
  • Absolutely: done (in reverse). UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• tholos tombs: Marinatos, in contrast – Shouldn't the colon be a dot?
  • I think either works, but it's generally good practice to take the opportunity to use a full stop when it arises, so changed. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• Image caption: Schematic diagram of a typical chamber tomb, showing division into dromos, stomion and thalamos (chamber) – I would repeat that in text too, along with an explanation what these terms mean. Dromos is the entry I assume, but what precisely is stomion? The door between entry and chamber? Right now, you have "dromoi" in the main text but it is neither linked nor explained, just relying on that figure. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 06:34, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
  • Not sure about this one. Is there a guideline that image captions (as opposed to images themselves) aren't an appropriate place to explain an idea? As for the stomion, you are absolutely right: it's the intermediate passageway and facade (often very minimal indeed). I'm not sure it would improve the article to simply duplicate what can be seen in the image and caption in the body text -- after all, what would be the point of having the image if we did? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
    • Just to explain where I'm coming from: A text-only distribution of Wikipedia is unlikely to display the image captions (as they are usually quite useless without the images). I think the image caption is part of the image, not the text. But I wouldn't push this even at FAC. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:59, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for taking this on, Jens. I'll come back in a bit with replies and fixes. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 08:55, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

OK, a first batch above -- looking forward to more when you have it. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• Burials were generally made in an extended position – I guess "extended" means that the bones were not placed in a jar? The word "position" also confuses me; "posture" would be clearer? Anyways, I think it is pretty hard to understand for the general reader, especially in the lead where context is lacking.
  • It means that the bodies were stretched out as if lying on their backs, (generally) as opposed to being buried in a crouched or seated position. "Position" is the normal word for this in the field, but of course we're a generalist publication: now that you know the context, do you have any further thoughts on the best way to phrase it? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
    • Ah, so it seems to refer to extension (anatomy) (extended = streched out; flexed = crouched). --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:59, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

• Nigel Spencer has suggested that the earlier tombs of Volimidia belonged to a local elite group distinct from that at Ano Englianos (and that the same was true of the contemporary tombs at Koryfasio, Voidokilia, Tragana, Koukounara and Myrsinochori, all large cemeteries in the broad vicinity of Pylos), which remained independent of Pylian authority until the Late Helladic IIIA period (c. 1400 – c. 1300 BCE);[26] John Bennet suggests that the lack of a tholos tomb at Volimidia, when tombs of this type began to be built at Pylos and other sites in the Late Helladic I, indicates that the site was already under Pylian control. – That's a super long runaway sentence.
  • Yes, it is. For now I've stuck a comma where the semicolon was. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• At the end of the Late Bronze Age, Volimidia was in the territory controlled by the Mycenaean – not sure if it really makes sense to link "Late Bronze Age" here when this is the title of the previous section?
  • It doesn't really: we use the term adjectivally above, so linked there. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• Evidence for tomb cult at Volimidia dramatically increases following Messenia's independence from Sparta;[43] Alcock writes that Messenia has "pride of place" for the activity in post-classical Greece, furnishing a total of eight sites with clear evidence for it. – I suggest to split this into two sentences.
  • Agreed and done. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• A total of four funerary pyres were made in the tomb numbered as Angelopoulos 2 (two in the dromos and two in the burial chamber):[8] one pyre in the dromos is dated to c. 300 BCE on the basis of associated cooking wares, while one in the chamber included a third-century BCE coin of Argos as well as evidence of a pig sacrifice; there were also extensive remains of pottery, metal, glass and other finds which Alcock determines to be, at least in part, votive offering – again a very long sentence, I found this hard to read
  • Split and slightly reworked: any better now? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• Surface finds of Roman potsherds are extremely common at the site. – Is the "extremely" really necessary here? As a reader, I do not know how many sherds "common" refers to anyways.
  • I think it has some value: the source text we're rendering here is the entire area of Volimídhia is thickly scattered with Roman sherds. Happy to take a steer on a better way to do it, but I'm not sure "finds are common at the site" really gets that across. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• In the dromos of Angelopoulos 6,[46] the largest tomb at Volimidia,[47] a post-Mycenaean burial was made: – This confused me; it sounds as if this was the only post-Mycenaen burial, but another one was already mentioned the previous paragraph. Reformulating the sentence including the word "also" might help.
  • Done (slightly differently). UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:34, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

• Marinatos considered it to be Hellenistic in date. – but shortly after you say Marinatos interpreted these as Mycenaean burials, that seems contradictory.
  • We're talking about different burials: he thought the one in the dromos was Hellenistic, while hte two in the chamber were Mycenaean burials later disturbed for reasns of cult. I've slightly rephrased to make it (hopefully) clearer. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:34, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

• You speak of one post-Mycenaean burial at Angelopoulos 6, but then suddenly it's about multiple (two, if I understand correctly) such burials at that tomb.
  • There's three burial pits (one in the dromos, two in the chamber): the first is generally considered post-Mycenaean (if on pretty tenuous grounds), while the other two are dubious: they were definitely disturbed in the post-Mycenaean period, but it's not clear if that's when they were made. See above. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:34, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

• Spyridon Marinatos, an ephor of the Greek Archaeological Service, – a bit unfortunate that he is only introduced after he was mentioned multiple times in the previous section.
  • He got a little introduction back there as well: I figured the biographical detail was better left until the more explicitly historical section. But we could move his title up to first mention. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• feild – should this be "field" or is it an unexplained term?
  • Some kind editor has already got to this: it was a typo. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• and a lower level, without walls: the latter deposit included a dense – again, best to split the sentence here.
  • Done. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

• Sourcing looks good; I checked Zikidi 2025, and was just slightly irritated by "Zikidi 2025, pp. 369–370", as there is nothing on page 369 that seems to support any of the text (everything seems to be on page 370). --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:07, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
  • I think it's needed (or at least helpful) for "the previous practice of burial inside large jars known as pithoi". UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks again, Jens -- some replies above; I need to have a more serious look at the outstanding items, but the ones I've replied to are ready for a response if needed. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

And now all replied to, I think. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:34, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, great work! Two replies above, but I can already promote this now. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:59, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:22, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that people entered the Bronze Age tombs at Volimidia centuries later in the Iron Age to leave offerings to the dead?

• Source: Antonaccio, Carla (1994). An Archaeology of Ancestors: Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Early Greece. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 70, 94–95. ISBN 0-8476-7941-1.

• • ALT1: ... that the Mycenaean chamber tombs of Volimidia show design features normally found only in monumental tholos tombs? Source: Antonaccio, Carla (1994). An Archaeology of Ancestors: Tomb Cult and Hero Cult in Early Greece. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 95. ISBN 0-8476-7941-1.
  • ALT2: ... that the Mycenaean cemetery of Volimidia may have been an important site for the worship of the goddess Potnia? Source: Multiple: note 32 in article.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Perron of Liège; Template:Did you know nominations/Mark Aldridge

Improved to Good Article status by UndercoverClassicist (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 39 past nominations.

UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 11:56, 19 October 2025 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: I think the best hook here is ALT2. @UndercoverClassicist: What do you think? I just need your second opinion if this is good to you? JeBonSer (talk) 17:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi JeBonSer: thanks for taking this on. Obviously I'm not a neutral party, but I'd have no problem with ALT2 being promoted. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 17:19, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

In other case its good to go now for ALT2.

A question

@UndercoverClassicist: The article uses both “Kephalovryso” cluster and “Kephalovrysos” cluster. Could you please explain the difference? It will help me better understand the article. Thank you. MSincccc (talk) 18:15, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

"Kephalovrysos" was a mistake, now corrected. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 19:57, 20 October 2025 (UTC)