Talk:Clement of Alexandria/GA1

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Cerebellum in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Cerebellum (talk · contribs) 03:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I will be reviewing this article. --Cerebellum (talk) 03:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Review

edit

Prose

edit

The article is very well written, I made a couple of trivial copy edits but it is highly readable and does a good job of balancing accuracy with accessibility to a general audience. It would be good if you could explain the term "estoreticism" or provide a wiktionary link, I have never heard it before. Also, is it common to enclose Greek in brackets? For other languages, at least, I usually use parentheses.

References

edit

I love how consistent the referencing style is in this article. You do a good job of drawing together lots of sources to support your points, and the citation density is usually just right. The last paragraph in the Legacy section, though, does not have any references. Could you add some?

Scope of coverage

edit

This is probably the area where you have the most room for improvement. One suggestion would be to add a "theology" section after the biography section to summarize Clement's views and show the interaction between his ideas and those of other Christian thinkers (although you do the second part fairly well in the legacy section). You describe Clement's theology in detail in the "Works" sections, but a brief summary, and possibly also a paragraph in the lead, would help readers to quickly find the salient points. Also, I feel like some of the material in the sections on the individual books should be in the articles on those books, with main article links, in accordance with summary style. In the last sentence of the article, you talk about recent scholarship on "the relationship between his thought and non-Christian philosophy and his influence on Origen." Could you summarize this recent scholarship?

Probably the most helpful part of the article for me was the summary of Photius' refutation of Clement. Just as we can best understand Arminianism by comparing it to Calvinism, I think more on how Clement's views differed from orthodoxy would help us to understand him better. Maybe add a "Controversies" section?

Neutral/Stable

edit

Certainly, I don't detect any bias or edit warring,.

Images

edit

Yes, the images are good. The meadow image isn't directly related to the article, but I think it should be kept because it makes the article look nicer.

Overall

edit

This is a very well done article, and I am happy to pass as GA. The comments above are suggestions for further improvement, but it easily meets the GA criteria. Good work! --Cerebellum (talk) 16:14, 12 March 2012 (UTC)Reply