Talk:In Praise of Polytheism/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The Most Comfortable Chair (talk · contribs) 05:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid linking "German" twice.
First line of the second paragraph is too long. Consider splitting it into two or three sentences.
"what it calls" — It seems unclear to me what "it" would indicate here.
I would also recommend splitting the second sentence into two sentences.
The third paragraph can be written differently. As of now, it emphasizes on three individuals instead of giving a summary of reception in a general manner. There is an argument to mention Taubes' bit since he wrote a response to the essay a few years after it was published. However, mentioning the other two people, presumably not as notable, gives undue focus to them as individuals instead of general comments pertaining to reception of the essay.

"addressed concerns about meaning in the contemporary world" → "addressed concerns about the meaning of life in the contemporary world".
Unlink — "sociologist" per MOS:OL
"had written that the lived modern world" — Perhaps you intended to write something else instead of "lived" here?

Unlink — "world history".
"Marquard believes when people recognise that myths are stories, it becomes possible to identify modern polymythical thinking, which exists, for example, in the scientific study of history and in novels." — A little too many punctuations for a good flow. Maybe rewrite it like "Marquard believes when people recognise that myths are stories, it becomes possible to identify modern polymythical thinking, which exists in fields like the scientific study of history and in novels."

"According to the religious studies scholar Burkhard Gladigow" — It is redundant to mention "the religious studies scholar" as it is already in the first line of his article.
"In 2016, the literary scholar Stefanie von Schnurbein" → "In 2016, Stefanie von Schnurbein"
"apostasy" could be linked.
"Alois Halbmayr wrote his doctoral dissertation" — Mention the year.
In the image, mention positions of the people. As in, "from left to right" or something like that.
"or if Marquard had been drunk when he conceived it." — this should either be in quotes or written more formally. A way for the latter would be to write it as "or if Marquard had been inebriated when he conceived it".

A few of them are missing the language parameter.
A few of them do not require page numbers, such as "Marquard, Odo (1989). "In Praise of Polytheism...", as that is covered in "Citations" above.

This has been an intriguing read and it should pass. Thank you for your diligent work. — The Most Comfortable Chair 14:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Most Comfortable Chair: Thank you very much for the review! I have done my best to address everything above. Please let me know if I missed something, or if something needs further work. Ffranc (talk) 08:19, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
It is a detailed article that covers a variety of topics in a concise and informative manner. It is an engaging read and meets the criteria. Thank you for your work. — The Most Comfortable Chair 08:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]