Talk:Pier Gerlofs Donia

Older comments

I moved the article about Pier Donia from "Greate Pier" to his real name. His nickname is what he is commonly referred by, but it has several variants. "Grutte Pier" (his local nickname) is what he is best known by (if anyone thinks his nickname should be the main article), this is also the subscript on his statue in Kimswerd. All common nicknames now redirect here. JeroenHoek 12:56, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

A great article, about Grutte Pier, the leader of the Arumer Black Heap! -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 16:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Grammatical makeover

Hi. At the request of a regular contributor to this article, I have gone through the existing (as of timestamp below) content, making sure that the English usage is correct and befitting of an article of this kind. However, may I please register my opinion, namely that hard, properly directed references are needed, rather than the loose collection of external links which are shown at the moment. I do not feel qualified to do the source directing, given my lack of knowledge of subject, so would be grateful if this could be attended to. Thus the reference tag on the article I'm afraid. Best wishes and good luck. Ref ^(chew)(do) 22:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, you have my permission to improve whatever you want to improve, Refwordslee! -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 13:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

You do not need to give or receive "permission" to edit articles. Please see WP:OWN. --Geniac 15:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Galama

What is the evidence that Grutte Pier is descended from the Galama family? Now that Galema family is deleted, I can see the conmnection from there! Since this is controversial I would like to attach a genealogical note for this too. GB 23:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Galama - Gerlofs connection

Pier GERLOFS is the cousin of Ygo Gales Galama 3 times removed. Use the relationship calculator on langenberg-laagland.com to see family tree. Use Pier Gerlofs and Ygo Gales Galama names in calculator. Pier is not as far as I am aware descended from the Galama family, just cousins. Ezza61 14:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, according to the Langenberg-laagland website, which you've mentioned above, you are completely right. -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 15:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

GA Suggestions

• In the Fiveval section there is a block of Frisian language. It is not clear what is the translation of this - is it the text above or below?
• Also someone should make the inline citations, to satisfy the complaint embedded in the article, otherwise I think that others will fail the GA. GB 01:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of June 9, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Not well-written: weak prose.

2. Factually accurate?: Not even close: no references, no footnotes, lots of original research.

3. Broad in coverage?: Doesn't look like it.

4. Neutral point of view?: No. Article uses an obviously biased tone.

5. Article stability? Yes.

6. Images?: OK.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you for your work so far. —Anas ^talk? 10:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Checklist

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

—Anas ^talk? 10:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

GA status comment

Hi. For what it's worth, and honestly not being hyper-critical (as I have contributed English grammar and spelling checks to this article myself), it is still a long way from qualifying as a "Good Article".

The main failings, in plain English, are:

• that one editor has such a vested interest, through ancestry, that the article will never equalise on neutrality unless it is let loose to someone, or perhaps a group of people, who will NPOV it without interruption (Graeme, you are doing a great job by the way);

• that a promised formatting of referencing by an admin has not materialised. The Printed references and the Internet references need separating, and the method of displaying the references needs to be altered for consistency.

I feel that interested editors need to refrain from putting this article up again at GA until the above major points have been addressed. Thanks, and good luck with it. Ref ^(chew)(do) 16:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

About the most points; you're right.

But what about the biased tone?

I think, I don't really understand that. After all, this man was a legendray warrior, often considered the world greatest (mainly in Frisia, where he's folk hero nr. 1 ;). So explain yourself. For the rest of it; I sure ain't critising it! -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 19:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Who likes to lits this one, again, as GA-nominee? I think that with the completion of the last translation, it might fit the Good Article-status. 84.87.138.105 10:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Its still not ready yet. What is Fiveval or Vifeval? There should be a citation for this author, and a single spelling. It still needs to have the references tidied. Also in-line citations would help out. The biased tone becomes more apparent when you look at the what links here. And I must also admit that my ancestry is not entirely free of relatives to the subject of this article, but it is still possible to be neutral. Also even though I typed in the translation, this is not the last hurdle to GA. (And by the way I cannot read Frisian). GB 13:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

What are you telling me, GB? That you have ancestors related to the great Pier Gerlofs Donia? Thats great! Are you a very big strongman aswell? Well, anyway, I hope you know what can be done about that so called "biased tone". Because I think the article is kinda neutral. Can you pick up some phrases which need special attention, in matters of tone and style? 84.87.138.105 18:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi 84.87.138.105, should I still be calling you H-O? Anyway my first specific request for you is to sort out how that Fiveval is really spelled? Can you get a reference for the name, as it seems to be absent from the internet - it may well be spelled wrongly! I have also put a cn tag on a part that needs a reference to support it.

Also the suggestion that be was a monarch by including the monarch infobox, and the box at the bottom suggesting that there was a sequence of rulers of Friesland is part of the non neutral point of view. Pier was only a self proclaimed monarch, not recognized by many others. Graeme Bartlett 12:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Names

I think this article looks like it has been written only for Frisian and Dutch readers. I suggest, in order to improve it, the Dutch and Frisian names should be set to the English words for them. For example; I changed Arumer Zwarte Hoop to Arumer Black Heap. -The Bold Guy- 10:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it is fair enough for all the languages involved to be included in the article, even if only as a foot note as it allows alternate names to be used for further research. Frisian is so similar to English that it is a challenge to make sense of it, although you may have better luck by listening to the spoken form. If the article on Arumer Black Heap returns then it could be translated there. Graeme Bartlett 12:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Was there an article on the Arumer Black Heap? What did it say? Who deleted it, and when? Do you know, perhaps, I am deeply interested in this Pier, and all the related articles. -The Bold Guy- 12:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Administrator User:Neil deleted the article due to its creation by a sockpuppet User:Haggawaga - Oegawagga, who actually contributed several useful if biased articles. If you can find a source you can write it. Graeme Bartlett 22:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for answering me, GraemeBartlett; that'le help me. I ahve a new suggestion, of adding Lord Donia to the List of undefeated military commanders, since he was never to be defeated; does that sound as a good thing to you? -The Bold Guy- 11:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

That sounds fairly harmless to me, although a list like that does not sound very useful. I took a copy of Arumer Black Heap before it disappeared altogether, are you interested in this? I could put it in my sandbox. Graeme Bartlett 12:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, yes, sorry for my answer being this late, but I really appreciate you re-adding the Arumer Black Heap-article; I'm pretty interested; was it a good article, or was it really just unreferenced crap? -The Bold Guy- 13:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Did you look in my sandbox? It lost references, but I would not call it crap, just biased! Graeme Bartlett 15:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality

I greatly dispute this articles neutrality. Since the tone is rather biased, I think large parts of the text need to be re-written yet again. It tone thus, needs to be changed dramaticly, or else. Thafadi Adahabou 09:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you know what you're talking about, you being such a disruptive troll as you are! You hven't even done a single good, valid edit, or you allready start complaining about the works of others, you ! -The Bold Guy- 13:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Pier's height

I've found some sources claiming his height between 6,5 and 7,5ft, and his weight around 500lbs. -The Bold Guy- 12:11, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

500 pounds sounds too much! Was the pound back then different to what it is now? Did you attach the reference to the article? Graeme Bartlett 21:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Concerned about including height and weight - A height difference of 6,5 to 7,5 is a pretty big range, almost makes it a nonscence to include it. Perhaps just acknowledging he was a big guy is sufficient unless you have a genuine text reference. Also goes for the weight, 500 pounds (230 kilograms), that would make him the size of a sumo wrestler, I am not sure he would be traveling from one side of the country to another fighting battles at that weight. Is there a genuine text reference. This article has a history of being derailed with exaggerations, it now seems to be on the way to correcting that with inline references and deletion of misinformation, please do not let it slip back again. Concerned reader. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.170.186 (talk) 01:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, the reference actually said he weighed around 400 lbs, and that would make him 100lbs lighter. Also, when we look at his lenght, we see there are many people of about his heigt who are really strong. People such as Giant Silva, The Great Kali, and of course André the Giant. They were all heavier than him, and they couldn't behead people, nor did they work on the land for all there lives. His size was most likely to be enormous, and this way, the Giant of Kimswerd died young aged 40. -The Bold Guy- 13:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I have no doubts that he was 'big' but to give specifics without a true original source/reference is still just a guess. In which case it is probably better just to acknowledge that he was big and leave it at that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.95.40.4 (talk) 04:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think not. I've read some sources saying him being that big, so I added the height. And when I visited the Fries Museum museum, I saw his sword. That thing was real big, and when looking more closely at the shaft of the blade, you could see that whoever wielded the blade, must have had a couple of enormous hands. He must have had gigantism, or some other major growth deceases, and that might also explain him dieng young. -The Bold Guy- 17:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Lets be serious here. We know he was big but you just can't make up a height and weight to fit what you think he might have been. Please quote an original reference that gives the specifics you are talking about. I have not seen any. Gigantism!!! Please.. It was not unusual to die at what we would call an early age in the 1500s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.160.65 (talk) 11:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, Pier himself was a decendant of Frisian warlord and chieftain Haring Harinxma, who lived hundred years earlier. That man also lived trough a though life, be he died at age of 81! And in the 1400s, the conditions of living were even worse than in the 1500s! So when looking at his ancestry, and genetics, he should have been able to reach a way higher age (he must have been rich after the sacking of many villages and the taking of over 50 ships). But he didn't get old, because he was ill. He must have had gigantism, when looking at these facts. Or some other decease which made him bigger! Because he was able to reach a much higher age than he did reach. -The Bold Guy- 11:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Back then they didn't have all the weights and equipment we have today so it shouldve been nearly impossible to get that strong. I think that he lacked the gene for the myostatin protein which would also explain his early death. Claidheamohmor 21:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Weights get you stronger, yeah, but did warriors train that days? No, they didn't! And still, I bet they were stronger and in better health than most people nowadays. How come? Because they cut of heads, wielded big weapons, ran towards and away enemies, rode horses (Grutte Pier didn't, I think...), and that way got loads of muscles due to their lifestyle. And you net this man was allways on the run for and after enemies, most of the time followed by an army of over 4000 soldiers of his own. So you bet he was damn strong; he did not need weights for gaining an enormous muscular body; he used to be a farmer and after that a warrior, so for all the time, he worked physically, and this must have made him enormously strong. -The Bold Guy- 14:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Wijerd Gerlofs Donia

Wijard Gerlofs Donia, nephew to Pier, just got himself an article and I made it. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 16:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Vaderlandsch woordenboek

I noticed the following source: Vaderlandsch Woordenboek By Jacobus Kok, Published 1791 J. Allart. The problem is that this is an encyclopaedia with 35 volumes. It's not clear which volume is cited. Baldrick90 (talk) 01:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool article

Thiz really is one hell of a great article! And Grutte Pier was a real cool guy. But why is this article then B-class and not GA? Angela from the Blue (talk) 14:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

If you want to, you can allways just go and nominate the article for GA. But at the moment, I think the article is not ready yet. There must be done some things, like the spelling and typos who need to be fixed first. Make sure these minor corrections are made. That's all. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 10:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Sexuality

The Vaderlandsch Woordenboek P-R makes no mention of Greate Pier being gay or bisexual or anything similar. The 'sexuality' comments are mischevious nonsense and should be removed. Angela from the Blue has a history of Vandalism on pages and should truly make a 'new start'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.206.60 (talk) 10:30, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Can anybody else confrim the addition of the sexuality section? it seems a bit extreme personally. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

It can be read from the writings of Peter Thaborita, who was the man's biographer. Angela from the Blue (talk) 15:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I dont personally have any of his works to independantly verify. Do you know somebody else who can independantly verfiy? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

No, not at the moment. These works of Thaborita are rare. They are in the Frisian national archieve partly, and the other part belongs to the private collection of someone who I know. So right now, there is nothing I can show you. Angela from the Blue (talk) 15:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

In that case, I am inclined to remve the sections. They are very very bold assertions and if it cannot be re-verified i have to question it. I think the anon who started this threads concerns were valid. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

And why is that, then? Because it is based on sources not everyone has access to? Well in that case I gladly invite you to Wonseradeel, Fryslan, where the collection of works by Thaborita is kept. Angela from the Blue (talk) 15:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Something does not add up about the section. Give me a day or two, i am doing some independat research trying to corrobrate it. Something about the wording of the quote and some other things just dont seem right. Ill let ya know what I figure out but as of now i am pretty suspicious. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

If you can read old-Frisian, you might want to check it... I can also aks whether I may take digital pictures of the exact page mentioning Donia's sexuality and upload it as soon as possible. Angela from the Blue (talk) 15:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

if you take a picture of the page and upload it, that would be helpful. please male sure it is legible and leave me a note on my userpage when you do. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I will phone the owner of the text tomorrow and ask him whether I am allowed to take photo's. I'm not sure if it is legible, but when I upload it in a high revolution, you can allways zoom in! ;) Angela from the Blue (talk) 16:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, this info should be removed. If Donia were gay, there would be reliable sources to point it out. Since the only reference seems to be in a privately held archive, it fails WP:NOR - specifically Wikipedia:No original research#Neutral point of view (NPOV). I'm removing the info until and unless a significant source can be found. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Nearly all information on him is based on the biography Thaborita wrote on him. It is one of the oldest still-excisting written sources about Donia. It has been used many times. Many other books use the information written in it. It is a reliable source and can be used fairly. So the section on Donia's sexuality should be kept. And if he weren't gay, you could replace it with one claiming how straight he was. But I bet you cannot find any source claiming he was a good husband, a womaniser nor anything on his contacts with women... Think about it! Angela from the Blue (talk) 17:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

If it's been used as a source many times, can you point to another book, article, webpage, whatever that uses it as a source to state Donia's sexuality? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I strongly agree with Satyr's removal. I was going to remove it in a day or to but wanted to assume good faith. However being bold was probably the most approproiate course of action. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

After taking a quick perusing through Angela's contribs, i see the assertion of pier's homosexuality has been tied into a plethora of other articles. I am removing them as I find them. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Headers on talk page

I changed the headers for a couple reasons. First, {{talkheader}} is only supposed to be used on controversial pages - says so right on the description page. Second, until and unless there's a reliable source that Donia was in fact homosexual or bisexual, there's no reason for this article to be a part of WP:LGBT. Third, I like {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} better than {{WikiProjectBanners}}. That's just my 2 cents, though :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay. But the page is controversial. The man is considered a freedom fighting folk hero by many, but also considered a murderous thug by just as many others. He is portrayed heroically in books, and portrayed as a villain in tv series and films. Overall, you could call the man a rather controversial figure. So at least the talkheader should be re-added. Do you agree? Angela from the Blue (talk) 11:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

While there may be some controversy surrounding the man, he hasn't caused much of a stir on Wikipedia. Before a month ago, this talk page had less than 20K on it. And the article has been around since 2004. Take a look at the talk page of a controversial article where the tag applies - George W. Bush, for instance - 57 archived talk pages. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with satyr here. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Gay\Straight

Grutte Pier is either gay or straight. Nothing else to it. No hard feelings. He just is. There is much notable sources backing up this claim. So why not add it to the article? Is there no source you people know claiming him to be queer? Then perhaps another source can be found stating just how manly he was and how much of a womanizer. But it must be either one of the two. A section must be made concerning his sexuality! When he's straight, then put that to the article. Angela from the Blue (talk) 14:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

AftB, find a source that states he's gay. Then we can talk. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Is there any source claiming he is straight? The answer is simple: there is none. Then why not include that on the article? Another point: after the death of his wife, why didn't he remarry? Maybe because he prefered not it having to live with a woman! There is no source in which his attraction to any sex is mentioned. Not at all. Maybe he was asexual. Angela from the Blue (talk) 19:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, no, there's no source claiming he's straight that I've seen. That's why there's nothing in the article. And there's no need to add a "Sexuality" section (whatever his sexuality was) unless it's somehow relevant to why he's notable. Why are you so interested in adding something about sexuality? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That is because old writings of Peter Thaborita have caught my eye. These belonged to a friend of mines personal collection. You see, I am related to Thaborita via a bastard son of his (he was a monk, you see), and that is why this caughts my interests. In the original biography Thaborita wrote on Donia, there are some mentionings in which he states "Donia feels little or no affection to women around him" and there is a chapter in which is spoken about Donia's interests in boy servant of his. That is why. Angela from the Blue (talk) 19:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That's kewl :) It's neat to find out you're related to famous people!

I'm afraid, however, the comments about his sexuality are going to have to remain "family history" - tales you can tell your children/nieces/other relations. Unless we have a reliable source, though, wikipedia isn't the place for that info. Thanks for clarifying for me! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Can Angela scan in and publish the writings of Peter Thaborita in the internet somewhere? Then others can read what he has to say and either confirm or reject the controversial statements. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, indeed the tale is known in our family. But not more then on a rather local scale. I told my daughter this once - she told it at school and got laughed at by her teacher. So I was like: "why don't we try getting it on wikipedia?" So I tried. No I see I was going a bit to far; wikipedia needs sources and since I am unable to give them, I'll except the fact this will never be known to a wide audience. So be it. Thanks for your help and understanding, yours sincerely, Angela from the Blue (talk) 19:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Pier's Sword

Regarding the sword of Pier Gerlofs: A curator at the Fries museum told me in 1998 that the sword on display was never actually meant to be wielded as one would a normal sword. It's type was specifically designed to be wielded swinging above one's head when defending battlements, thus attempting to behead anyone who tried to scale the walls. As such, it could be wielded by anyone with sufficient strength and extraordinary height of the wielder would have been a handicap because any part of a man's body protruding above the battlements was a vulnerability.

Pier's stature can therefore not be measured by the size of this sword nor is it very likely that he was actually it's owner. It makes good folklore, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.27.16.7 (talk) 10:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd say Donia was big as certain feats of strenght would suggest. His features might even suggest Acromelagy or Gigantism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.172.170.26 (talk) 10:40, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of June 9, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Not well-written: weak prose.

2. Factually accurate?: Not even close: no references, no footnotes, lots of original research.

3. Broad in coverage?: Doesn't look like it.

4. Neutral point of view?: No. Article uses an obviously biased tone.

5. Article stability? Yes.

6. Images?: OK.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you for your work so far. —Anas ^talk? 10:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Checklist

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

—Anas ^talk? 10:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status and should have the full review up within a couple of hours. Dana boomer (talk) 19:00, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • I think you have a duplicated external link (the Brad and Kathy one), as the first link appears to be the same as the sixth one.
   • All websites that are not in English need to be marked as such (most are, but some aren't).
   • The See Also section goes before the references section
   • I have not done a complete check of the prose, due to the referencing concerns I have.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • Wikianswers (current ref 24) is not a reliable source, and needs to be replaced.
   • There a several places that need references:

   • The last half-sentence of the Early life and family section
   • The last two paragraphs of the Reasons for going to battle section
   • The first two paragraphs of the Band of warriors section
   • The sentence in the Band of Warriors section attributing the "Better dead than slave" slogan to him.
   • The last two sentences of the Superhuman strength and size section
   • The Fiveval, Television, and Sport subsections of the In popular culture section.

   • All of your references should be formatted the same way - either use templates for all of them or for none. (I'd prefer that you use templates, but the decision is up to you).
   • Web references must have publishers and access dates.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

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

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

There are some serious issues with the referencing of this article that must be rectified before the article can be passed to GA status. As I have stated above, I have not done a complete check of the prose, due to the referencing concerns I have, and so once I see that work is being done on the issues noted above, I will begin a check of the prose. I am putting the article on hold for seven days to allow time to address these concerns. Let me know here on the review page or on my talk page if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 19:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

In response to a question on my talk page, I still have serious concerns about the referencing of this article. Locations that need references include the last two paragraphs of the Reasons for Going to Battle section, the last half of the second paragraph of the Band of warriors section, the slogan in the same section, the entire Fiveval section, and the entire sport section - almost all the same spots I pointed out in my review above. The Wikianswers reference is unreliable and must be replaced, as is the new IMDB ref (not to mention it doesn't back up what is being said in the paragraph it is supposedly referencing, and instead only backs up the fact that he was present in a Dutch TV series during the 70s). Non-English references need to be listed as such, and you've still got a duplicated link. Please closely read my comments above and try to correct all of them. If I were to make a decision on the current version of the article, it would fail GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 12:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

There has been much editing done since then. I think it will pass now, Dan Boomer, I really do. You see, it just is very good. The prose has been improved by the Rambling man, Greame Bartlett and the Bold Guy have referenced it and User talk:Jimbo Wales has proof read it. I am pretty sure you'll pass this to GA now, won't you? Last king of Frisia (talk) 09:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

This is just a quick comment, as I need to run off to class, but all of your new web references need to be properly formatted. They need titles (which should be the link to the website, rather than having a bare link), as well as publishers and access dates. Another thing is that there are still a couple of spots that need references (or to be removed, if they cannot be verified). Basically, look through the article, and any time a paragraph doesn't have a reference at the end, it needs one. Direct quotes (such as the block quote in the Fiveval section) need a ref directly after them, as well. References in languages other than English need to have a note saying that. I see you've put this on some of them, but not all. I will take a full run through the article later today and post any more comments that I have, as well as passing the article if I feel that it has reached that point. Dana boomer (talk) 13:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

And following up: The above comments are pretty much all that needs to be done. Once I see the refs formatted and the final couple of spots referenced, I think this article should be good to go. I will be working on a copyedit of the article today, as there are a couple of prose things that I saw on a quick read-through, but I didn't see anything major. Dana boomer (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

At the moment, it appears that two of the main editors of this article have been indef blocked for sock puppetry. However, other users have since been working on this article. Are any of you willing to take over prepping this article for GA? There is not much left to do, simply some reference formatting and gathering references for a couple of sections. Drop me a note here if you wish to take over the article. I'll leave this open for a day or so, and if no-one responds, I will have to fail the review. Dana boomer (talk) 12:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I am going to have to fail this article's nomination for GA status. The references at the moment are the main problem preventing this article from passing. Besides a couple of places missing citations, and some reference formatting needs, there is also the matter of reference reliability. I cannot read Dutch, and so I cannot confirm that all of the newly added Dutch references are reliable. From the look of some of the websites, I have my doubts, but since I cannot understand the language, I do not have proof. I would ask any editor that picks this article up in the future to look closely at the Dutch references to make sure that they meet Wikipedia's verifiability guidelines. Dana boomer (talk) 22:27, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Quality

This article is most utterly well written and is of a great and high set quality. It's prose is almost brilliant, it's sources clearly stated, it is of a well to read length and it is well illustrated. It should at least be a Good Article judges by the standards required, and when you would ask me personally I would say it almost fits Featured Article requirements. For weeks, several editors have be working on it and I think their dedication to the subject must be rewarded by having the article pass GA. Cheers for all who have worked on it so well! 86.89.146.118 (talk) 18:21, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Dutch References

May I make a suggestion? I am responsible for many (not all) of the Dutch text references. These are genuine texts and the associated ‘facts/extracts’ (translated to English) and quoted in the wiki Grote Pier article are genuine. In most cases I quoted the reference and page numbers to assist those interested. All the texts I used are currently available, many electronically. Unfortunately there are very few English texts on Grote Pier and virtually zero that discuss GP in any detail hence the lack of quotable English language references. This is a shame as GP is of significant historical importance to the people of Friesland and is certainly worthy of mention in the English Wiki. May I suggest that an English speaking editor from the Dutch language Wiki be approached to act as an editor for the English Wiki article on GP as he may confirm for those non-Dutch speaking doubters the authenticity of the Dutch references. I believe that if individuals are going to critique a wiki article that quotes non-English references then they should be prepared to put in some genuine effort themselves, or find some one that can, to authenticate sources rather than make unqualified comments such as those made by Dana boomer i.e. doubting the reliability of references” when they have obviously not carried out any investigation at all.

Additional info re: GP In an interesting twist the Landsknecht Black Band responsible for the pillaging of Pier’s village, Kimswerd, were to later literally change sides and left the employ of the Duke of Saxony (who failed to renumerate them) to join their ‘enemy’ Charles Duke of Guelders. It was through this association that for a short time the Black Band fought alongside Grote Pier. It was Grote Pier and the Arumer Zwarte Hoop who would transport by sea the Landsknecht Black Band to Medemblik where a ferocious attack on the town occurred.

…Yes, when I make the addition to the GP article I will quote a reference, unfortunately it will most likely be a Dutch reference.

Ezza61 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezza61 (talk • contribs) 10:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I could not agree with you more! Maybe you could renominate the article for Good Article class and ask another user from en:wikipedia to review it: I am completely sure it'll pass then, for it meets all the requirements and the only reason it was not passed was due to the references being in Dutch and Frisian which I think is no valid reason to fail any article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.172.170.26 (talk) 10:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

About the Rebellion section

In the Rebellion section of the article, it says "The Black Band were notorious as a violent military force; when their pay was insufficient or lacking, would exact payments from local villagers and on 29 January 1515, the Black Hand plundered Donia's village, allegedly raped and killed his wife, Rintze Syrtsema, and burnt to the ground both the village church and Donia's estate." I'm responsible for translating this article to Portuguese and I had two doubts when reading this: first, couldn't it be better to state that "The Black Band (...) they would extract payments..."; and was it really the Black Hand who invaded Kimswerd, not the Black Band again? Black Hand's article says that they were founded in the 20th century, although Donia's article doesn't link to them (maybe that's a reason), could I get an explanation on this?

Thanks in advance, Daimore ^msg 17:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

'Black Hand'....What the!!

Ok, the paragraph you refer to could be written better but no it was not the 'Black Hand' it was the 'Black Band'. The 'Black Band' was a Landsknecht mercenary regiment formed in the 16th century just like the wikipedia article says. If the 'Black Hand' was formed in 20th century then I think you have answered your own question. Ezza61 (talk) 09:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Yea, it could have been the name of another minor organization back in the 1500s, only who wrote that knows. :P

Anyway thanks for answering, I'll add that to the Portuguese article and I have edited the part I referred to before, no objections it seems. Also saw that Graeme Bartlett (talk · contribs) changed 'Black Hand' to 'Black Band', with another minor adjustment. Thanks again! Daimore ^msg 12:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, Daimore, I noticed the work you have recently been doing on a Portugese version of this article on Donia. I must say I am impressed with the work you've done on that translation: many of the sentences here (especially quotes) must be hard to translate. If you need any help, maybe I could help you in some way, at least I could explain which sources are in West-Frisian, which are in Dutch and which are in English (although the last one will work out I bet!). The article here contains very little factual errors or spelling errors and I hope the last few like the one on Black Hand and things like that will be corrected while you and other translaters are closely watching and reading everything. You might notice mistakes editors here forget about! 217.121.99.44 (talk) 12:38, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Nominated for Good Article

The article was failed quite some time ago by its reviewer and still the tag saying it is a current nominee has not been removed. Is this common procedure or should it have been removed by now? 217.121.96.159 (talk) 18:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

No it's not normal. I'll change it. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 18:47, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Oh, btw, since it has been failed, it has been greatly improved. Looking at this well-referenced article you see here today, would you think it would pass when renominated? 217.121.96.159 (talk) 18:50, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe this is interesting to you: I was just asking on the talk page of the Main Page whether or not this article could be re-nominated now... I was asking whether or not the current reviewers would pass or fail it. If is up to me, I would just renominate it right away, but I would want to here some more opinions of long-time members first. It seems to me, the article would have easily been passed a year ago in its current state, but I bet the reviewers have become more strict since. J.B. (talk) 14:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

We need to finish off implementing the suggestions from the previous failure, otherwise there will be an easy and fast failure excuse again! Not all refs have lang tags yet. Are there an Frisian language refs? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I do not know. I hope there are, otherwise someone has to make those. Jouke Bersma _{Contributions} 08:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

His wife

Is his wife notable enough to make her a small article? Oh, and does anyone have some more images of Pier Gerlofs Donia, for example one of his helmet in Sneek or his sword (or even a replica in Fries museum)... anyone? Jouke Bersma _{Contributions} 09:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

No she is not, she is only getting a mention here because of association with a legendary guy. Are you yourself able to visit Sneek for a photo? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I live nearby - when I find time I will ask if I could make a photo. If not, there are some photos of Grutte Pier's helmet and sword online (at least from replica's there must be). Jouke Bersma _{Contributions} 08:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Pier's helmet is in the Sneek Stadhuis. When I saw it in 2007 it was not on public display and I had to make an appointment to see it. I have a photo I took at the time of it and Pier's supposed 'treasure box', I will upload it asap. There are some old newspaper articles with images of his sword electronically available - they were taken when his Kimswerd Statue was unveiled, I am not sure of the copyright on the newspaper photos though.Ezza61 (talk) 13:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

The chances are that those newspaper photos are not available for Wikipedia due to copyright. But your picture would be great. With all the huge interest in the Grutte Pier, it seems as if Wikipedia should have an illustrator drawing or painting his exploits! Perhaps a reconstruction of someone lifting a plough, or a horse would make a big photo opportunity. Even a picture of Sneek Stadhuis could be useful. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:37, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a artwork or reconstruction would be great - the interest in the subject has been huge indeed. It would be a good thing - great suggestion. Do you, by any chance, know someone who could make such an artwork - or could you yourself make one? Any artistic contributors here? 193.172.170.26 (talk) 12:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Appearance

how much is known about grutte piers appearence, i mean: his weight? how much did he weigh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.121.99.139 (talk) 18:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I would love to hear from an expert on the subject. 193.172.170.26 (talk) 11:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I would guess that back then, people did not weigh themselves. You are going to have to do some original research, find some forensic evidence such as a skeleton, footprint, sword impact mark on a bone or wood, find some DNA and clone the man. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

That would have limitations, though - before we can accept data based on clones, you would need to show that the clone's weight is a genetic attribute, rather than environmental. Perhaps a clone of Grutte Piers would be inclined to lead a more sedentary lifestyle. :) - Bilby (talk) 11:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Interesting thoughts - a Grutte Pier clone, wouldn't that be quite a sight? He must have been quite a imposing figure. 193.172.170.26 (talk) 12:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

artwork

could someone please make an artwork depicting pier gerlofs donia and upload it here that would truly be great we need such an artwork i mean especially with the great interest there is in this hugely interesting figure and the legends surrounding him. could anyone here who sees this request please respond? i mean, if you do not know what to do here then please ask someone else to make it - i mean, there has to be someone who is artistic here. maybe some one who has been contributing to the article is able to make a beautiful and educative drawing or painting or anything similar. a photograph of the exact location of donia's farm would be great, or of the location on which a big battle took place (such as near Hindeloopen were he fought and defeated 300 enemies all by himself), or near the coast of Hoorn were he sank 28 ships - that would be great. at the moment there are just three images and there should be 5 or six that would be fine. then there might be someone who could expand the article some way - it can always get longer (about 30% more text would be fine when there are also more images, that looks more professional and easy to read aswel). More images would make the article better to read and better to look at - some minor spelling mistakes could be taken out. i am especially interested in the suggestion of someone making an artwork depicting donia that would be the best option that was a great suggestion graeme bartlett made i hope this will actually happen and that this is not just empty talk. 193.172.170.26 (talk) 13:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

So you are offering the bounty, is that Jouke Bersma? are are you some other anonymous lobbyist? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Good question... I mean... Who is Jouke Bersma???--Kiyarrlls-talk 23:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Grote Pier - Greate Pier ???

Shouldn't Grote Pier be translated as Big Pier (or tall or long or something)? Dutch groot can mean great allright. However, in the article it says right in the first sentence that groot refers to Piers' size. Zoppp (talk) 23:02, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to add, Zoppp. Trotse Roma (talk) 12:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Two things

I have two things to ask:

1. Can the image of Medemblik Castle and the Helmet from http://langenberg-laagland.com/histories/greatepierhistory.pdf be used in the article? Are they free to use?

Well the castle picture certainly looks old, but you need to find the original source, before you can upload it to commons. langenberg-laagland does not relese the material on a free copyright, so assume nothing about the helmet. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:55, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

1. The sword of Donia: according to the Friese Encyclopedie it could have belonged to Wijerd Jelckama (grutte wierd) instead of to GP.

If that is true you can put it in Wijerd Jelckama's article. Perhaps the sword went to GP's successor. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:55, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Trotse Roma (talk) 10:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The Arumer Zwarte Hoop and the Black Band

In an old history published in 1835 on the history of the Netherlands by Heinrich Leo, Halle 1835, (Zwölf Bücher niederländischer Geschichten, p283f) I found a reference where the burning of Medemblick, Alkmaar and Asperen was attributed to the Black Band - after its return from French service, chiefly at Marignano - to the Duke of Gueldern. Some research showed that Johann Samuel Ersch, in his Encylopedia, repeated the same story in his entry for "Egmont, p253f" (http://gdz.sub.uni-goettingen.de/dms/load/toc/?PPN=PPN345284054&IDDOC=141451). He even tells the story that the population of Asperen was slaughtered because the Bands had some 1500 casualties during their assault. They may have used the same original source, though. Given the background of Pier Donia, I find it hard to believe that he would have fought in any way alongside the Black Band. Can it be that the atrocities on Dutch towns are wrongly attributed to the Arumer Zwarte Hoop? Alternatively, that this unit is actually just another name for the Black Band in the service of Gueldern? Is there any information available in Dutch that explains in detail the contribution of the Black Band from 1515 onwards? ASchudak (talk) 22:35, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

From above: Additional info re: GP In an interesting twist the Landsknecht Black Band responsible for the pillaging of Pier’s village, Kimswerd, were to later literally change sides and left the employ of the Duke of Saxony (who failed to renumerate them) to join their ‘enemy’ Charles Duke of Guelders. It was through this association that for a short time the Black Band fought alongside Grote Pier. It was Grote Pier and the Arumer Zwarte Hoop who would transport by sea the Landsknecht Black Band to Medemblik where a ferocious attack on the town occurred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.37.171.196 (talk) 02:25, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Pier Gerlofs Donia/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

B-Class-1=yes. B-Class-2=yes. B-Class-3=yes. B-Class-4=yes. B-Class-5=yes. It deserves to be more than just start-class. It fits B-class.

Last edited at 03:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 02:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pier Gerlofs Donia. 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/20090310235534/http://www.bertsgeschiedenissite.nl/middeleeuwen/eeuw15/grotepier.htm to http://www.bertsgeschiedenissite.nl/middeleeuwen/eeuw15/grotepier.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090112090746/http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/greatepier/?primary=theclub&secondary=history to http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/greatepier/?primary=theclub&secondary=history

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) 20:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)