Talk:Medieval stained glass in Sweden/GA1

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.

---

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 04:05, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Opening statement

In reviews I conduct, I may make small copyedits. These will only be limited to spelling and punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. For replying to Reviewer comment, please use  Done,  Fixed,  Added,  Not done,  Doing..., or  Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. —♠Vami_IV†♠ 04:05, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Pre-emptive grab. I'm going to sleep, because it's late, and then review this. Can't wait. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 04:05, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Prose

• 15th and 16th century centuries

 Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• with stained glass during the entire Middle Ages Replace "during the entire" with "throughout".

 Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• survived until today Delete "until today".

 Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• did stained glass paintings paintings? Did you mean "windows"?

 Fixed Yes. Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• Andersson acknowledges the notnames of Roosval but uses them only sparingly; he also highlights the difficulties in determining the artistic influences different workshops may have had on each other, whether some works came from different workshops or from different artists within the same workshop, problems concerning determining a chronology between them and even whether it is possible to determine if there ever were any artistically independent glass workshops established on Gotland at all during the Middle Ages, especially given the lack of written sources. This is easily the longest sentence I have ever read on Wikipedia.

 Fixed Lol. I split it up. Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• problems concerning determining Remove "concerning"; it makes the sentence read weird and "determining", which is better for the job at hand, redundant.

 Removed Yakikaki (talk) 14:28, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• survive to this day in Sweden Axe "to this day".

 Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• "Circa" is for dates. Both times it is used in the article is for the measurement of space; "about" would be better.

 Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• the chapel at Ulriksdal Palace contains some medieval stained glass window panes of Swiss origin, bought by Charles XV of Sweden and subsequently installed in the chapel. Condense.

 Fixed I hope this works better? Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• It has been assumed that the windows surviving in these countryside churches were made by workshops operating in or mainly for Visby; however, all the medieval churches of Visby are today in ruins, with the exception of Visby Cathedral. Another long sentence.

 Fixed Changed it all a bit. Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• preserved in situ in Sweden Un-italicize "in situ".

 Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• The Byzantine influence, as seen e.g. in the representation of Christ Pantocrator, Seen where? At Dalhem?

 Fixed Yes. Clarified. Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• During the first half of the 14th century, a number of stylistically differentiated but clearly Gothic works survive on Gotland. Reword.

 Fixed That was incomprehensible even to me. Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• is that of Lye Church Link.

 Fixed Yakikaki (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

GA Progress

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

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.