Talk:Sól (Germanic mythology)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
The section on the Merseburg Incantation is unreferenced. Or is this an autoreference, with the naming of the source implying the reference?
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, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
One reference, and it will pass. Arsenikk ^(talk) 12:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing the article! I've put the reference in place and made a few adjustments per Lindow's translation. :bloodofox: (talk) 17:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. In which case I pass the article as Good. Congratulations! Arsenikk ^(talk) 17:59, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! :bloodofox: (talk) 18:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]