Talk:Jan de Vries (philologist)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 05:25, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Due this being a substantial article, the GA review shall be broken into the same sections of the Article, in order to make matters manageable.

Lead

1. Is it reasonably well written?
   1. The Lead opens with de Vries as a polyglot and gives account of his languages mastered.
   2. The opening takes into account appointment as a Chair in Ancient Germanic Linguistics and Philology and subsequent works on Germanic paganism and Old Norse literature.
   3. Collaboration with the Nazi's and the consequences he experienced are adumbrated in the Lead.
   4. The lead concludes with his employ as a High School teacher, and writings on Celtic religion, Old Norse and Dutch etymology which became standard texts.

---

Here endeth the review in part, the part being Lead; the next section of the review shall be Early Life.

This is a work in progress, not complete. --Whiteguru (talk) 05:37, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Early Life

1. Is it reasonably well written?
   1. Early life notes de Vries' prowess with languages, including his work on Faroese Literature.
   2. Early writings on experiences in World War I and other books are noted in passing, along with acquaintance with Scandinavian and Finnish languages.
   3. A simple introduction, de Vries is working as a High School teacher.

 

Career at the University of Leiden

1. Is it reasonably well written?
   1. Appreciation and reconstruction of early Germanic culture is introduced.
   2. Philological skills and finesse at writing are highlighted by his time as editor of the 5th edition of Algemene Encyclopedie.
   3. His time as an authority on German Paganism leads to compiling Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte after which an opposition to Nordicism (racism) along with doubts about the continuity of Germanic culture lead to being at odds with the dominant Nazi ideology at this time. This is a good inclusion.
   4. The Folklore captivity and the sense that Fairy Tales could be an extension of myths somewhat places de Vries in the same league as Tolkien and Inklings. A relevant inclusion, given the times.

 

World War II

1. Is it reasonably well written?
   1. It is noted that The Netherlands were an occupation country during World War II, important for understanding de Vries' role in cultural collaboration with the Nazis.
   2. Publication and writing articles on runes and Germanic paganism with Nazi publishers continues during the War. This is presented in a neutral point of view.
   3. It was noted that in the light of collaboration, his scholarly works do not display any features of Nazi ideology somewhat placing him at risk with doubts about his loyalty. This is followed by his refusal to join the National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands. This is a good roundup of activity during the occupation.
   4. There is reference to writing for the Ahnenerbe, Himmler's think tank which comprised scholars and scientists from a broad range of academic disciplines. It is interesting to observe that de Vries did not actively participate in this organisation, given its research and exploration of myth and legend, and creation of ritual and structure for a new racially pure and biologically superior group.
   5. There is reference to de Vries becoming a "sympathising member" of the Germanic SS. The article does not mention "One of the most notorious groups was in the Netherlands where the Germanic SS was employed to round-up Jews." A neutral point of view prevails. Good work.

 

Post-war career

1. Is it reasonably well written?
   1. Dismissal from academic appointments and memberships began. Internment followed, which was resolved by the finding of "intellectual collaboration" with the Nazi.
   2. With no income, de Vries was allowed resume working as a secondary school teacher in Dutch literature, although there was criticism of this appointment.
   3. Retirement from teaching in 1955 lead to more writing, including a revised edition on the work of Germanic paganism, Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte, which has constituted the standard work on Germanic paganism up to the present day.
   4. de Vries published the standard work on Old Norse literature up to the present day.

 

End Matter

1. It is Broad in its coverage?
   1. Selected works illustrates the range of his work, including Vikings in the Low Country, The Problem of Loki, Edda, The Science of Folklore, The Gods of the Germans, Celts and Germans, Etymological Dictionary, Celtic Religion, Religious History in Bird's Eye Review, all of which are works worthy of translation to English.
   2. See also is a useful link to other philologists in in illustration of the range of works; English, Danish, Belgian, German and Austrian philologists/linguists are scoped.
   3. Further Reading:~ the following are noteworthy further reading:
      1. The Internationale Germanistenlexikon 1800–1950
      2. Amsterdam Contributions to Older German Studies (abbreviated: ABäG) is a Dutch specialist journal for German Medieval Studies .
      3. Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon is noted
      4. Preface to the reprint of Jan de Vries: Altnordische Literaturgeschichte is given.

Conclude Review

1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
   1. Notes are succinct and appropriate.
   2. References: all examined. Robust.
2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
   1. Given that de Vries collaborated with the Nazi's in World War II, this article (and the World War II section) is remarkably balanced and neutral in tone toward de Vries.
3. Is it stable?
   1. Page is created on 4 December 2005. It has received a total of 107 edits from 57 editors, and there are 34 links to this page. There is no evidence of edit warring, and of late, there have been 272 page views in the last month. Historical page views seem to be less.
4. It is illustrated by images and the image displayed is appropriate for a university don.
5. Overall:
   1. Pass Y