Talk:Desilo

Illyria Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illyria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illyria and Illyrians 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.IllyriaWikipedia:WikiProject IllyriaTemplate:WikiProject IllyriaIllyria articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bosnia and Herzegovina Mid‑importance

	Bosnia and Herzegovina portal Desilo is part of the WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Bosnia and HerzegovinaWikipedia:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaTemplate:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaBosnia and Herzegovina articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 February 2019 and 3 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Slaurensk.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Desilo. 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: 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) 11:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article content and organization

Hi! I am in a Professional and Technical Editing course and will be working on editing this article over the next couple of weeks. I noticed that the content of this article is primarily from this ScienceDaily source directly, so my plan is to reorganize and rewrite some of the article in order to better facilitate a neutral, encyclopedic style and Wikipedia's copyright policy. For reorganizing, I was thinking after the lead it might be helpful to split up the information into a Findings section and then an Interpretations of the Findings section. I'll start working on the article in my sandbox, and it would be great to hear any suggestions or feedback from the community. I'm also interested in discovering if anybody has any more recent information about this discovery and research. Thanks! Slaurensk (talk) 21:49, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article reorganization

Hi! I have reorganized the existing content of the article and wanted to be able to go into more detail about it than I would have been able to do on my edit summary. I removed the "Neretva's hidden treasure" heading because the article is about Desilo, not the river, and because it was not in a neutral point of view. The way I have tried to organize the article is by the 2007 Professor Vasilij discovery/pirate theory interpretation, and the 2008 discovery with Prusac and Lindhagen/interpretation that Desilo is a trading center (and the paragraphs are split up into what they found that made them think it's a trading center: the location, structure, lots of boats, pottery, and an Illyrian settlement nearby). Then I have significance of the findings, and then remaining unanswered questions, which includes the content about what these questions mean for the 2 different interpretations. I made the "Ardiaei or Narensii" and "Daorsi" major headings because they stand on their own and don't go with any of the other sections. However, I am currently still unclear about how these two sections are fully relevant to the article, but I wanted to keep all the article's content for now.

I don't necessarily think this organizational structure is a final one - As I begin my next step of working on editing and rephrasing the article's content, it might change slightly. It would be great to hear any comments or suggestions from the community. Slaurensk (talk) 03:06, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After visiting with my professor in office hours and spending more time with the article and subject, I have decided that I want to work on my reorganization a bit more. I'm going to be working on this on my sandbox before implementing any changes here. Slaurensk (talk) 16:52, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted my most recent organizational changes. The location of content may be tweaked slightly as I work on rephrasing the article's content, but I think that this structure helps the article flow and have more of an encyclopedic style. I'm going to begin working on rephrasing the article's content in my sandbox as per WP:Plagiarism and WP:WBA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slaurensk (talk • contribs) 16:55, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rephrasing content and other questions

Hi Wikipedians, I have transferred my changes to the article's lead and history section from my sandbox to the article. I reordered and rephrased a lot of the information. I also tried to condense some of the information that could be easily condensed to help with flow and readability. For example, the article had a list of three other names for the river Neretva, and the first one seemed to be the most verifiable based on the sources provided, and the second one (Narona) seemed to be the colony rather than the name for the river, so I moved it to a different sentence. I also put a lot of the previously-existing lead content into the history section, and worked to make the lead more of an executive summary of the article.

I am working on rephrasing the content for the other sections in my sandbox, and I was wondering if anybody has access to the book The Illyrians by John Wilkes? The last part of the amphorae section uses it as a source (specifically it appears to be either page 120 or page 158), but the content itself seems as though it's the personal drawing of a conclusion rather than just the facts. I am wondering if the source has maybe just the facts about the Illyrian Wars, but don't have access to this book. I am hesitant to remove this content because it is cited, and was wondering if anybody might have access to this book and could verify this for me.

Lastly, in my next few edits, I am currently thinking I might remove the "Ardiaei or Narensii" section in the article and the picture in that section. Aside from the fact that the Ardiaei/Narensii were Illyrian tribes, which I have made sure to mention in other parts of the article, the information does not have much to do with Desilo. Additionally, the picture is the same image that is found at the beginning of the article, so I don't think it needs to be seen twice. The caption on the second image is more detailed than the earlier one so I might try to transfer the caption over. I am also considering trying to move the first image out of the info box and placing it later in the article (like where the Ardiaei or Narensii one is located). What do you guys think about that? Slaurensk (talk) 15:28, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted my changes to the "archaeological excavations and findings" paragraphs as well as the "sunken boats" and "amphorae" subsections. I deleted the part in the amphorae section about how the findings could have supported one of the archaeologist's interpretations because it seemed like an individual's opinion/conclusion. However, I made sure to save it on my private word document that I've been using and am still open to discussion about that section. While I mainly rephrased and condensed some of the content to help with readability and follow WP:POV, I also deleted some information that didn't seem to belong in the article, such as the sentence about the Gauls trading slaves for amphorae in the Roman Empire. Slaurensk (talk) 18:22, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the Ardiaei or Narensii section from this article; I looked into integrating it into the Ardiaei article, but all of the information was already in that article. I also moved the image of the map of prehistoric cultures to the significance section because that section talks about the cultural groups in the Balkans, and it helps space out the images on the page more evenly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slaurensk (talk • contribs) 20:04, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]