Talk:Víðarr/GA1

GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The lead is a bit short. Maybe mention briefly the theories in the lead. (I know it isn't easy to balance things, but the lead was just a little short). In this sentence "Ægir invites the gods to come to his hall in numbers in Germanic paganism months." the syntax of "three" and "numbers in Germanic paganism" are the wrong way around in the link. One really picky thing (to closer perfect the article, and by far a GA requirement): when using a range in for instance a page citation, use the endash (–), not the hyphen (-). You can access the endash from the "insert" line under the text box when editing. Otherwise—as always—a well written, comprehensive and engaging text.

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.

   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:

   A few picky things to address before this "on hold" is changed to a "pass". Arsenikk ^(talk) 11:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello again Arsenikk, Thanks for the kind words! I believe the changes you've requested have been put in place? Odd that I missed the "numbers in Germanic paganism" issue! :bloodofox: (talk) 17:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Great! Passed. Arsenikk ^(talk) 17:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC)