 | Dagr has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Dangi Redirect
editCurrently, Dangi redirects to here. Is there a reason for this? - Beetle B. 00:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
- Not as far as I know. If you want to write something else at Dangi just go right ahead. Haukur 09:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
GA Review
edit- This review is transcluded from Talk:Dagr/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Not as good as the other two I reviewed today, due to some prose issues. though well within the bounds of GA. I've done a few copyedits to fix the major problems, and think it should be fine now, but I'd suggest a good copyedit.
As all criteria other than the minor prose issues met, I don't think it's necessary to relist them here. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Theories
editThe theories section is not very well written. The sentences are way too logn and convoluted and both sentences contain weasel phrasings "it has been theorised" etc. I would expect such problems to be taken care of during the GA review process.·Maunus·ƛ· 10:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- It's a dictionary entry, and as a result it's a general survey. Further information can be gained by consulting the sources provided. These theories are often not limited to a single person. :bloodofox: (talk) 10:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- They still need to be sourced, as it is now it could be anyones' theories. And I don't know what you mean with a dictionary entry - this is an encyclopedia wiktionary is elsewhere.·Maunus·ƛ· 10:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- It's sourced. The source of the theory is a dictionary. The theory is shared by Otto Höfler, and partially by F.R. Schröder, and presented by Rudolf Simek. :bloodofox: (talk) 10:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- They still need to be sourced, as it is now it could be anyones' theories. And I don't know what you mean with a dictionary entry - this is an encyclopedia wiktionary is elsewhere.·Maunus·ƛ· 10:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Gender
editThe very second sentence refers to Dagr as a 'she'; everywhere else throughout the article, the deity is referred to as a 'he,' a 'son,' or a 'brother.' Was there ambiguity as to Dagr's gender, or was Dagr definitely male? allixpeeke (talk) 08:03, 26 May 2020 (UTC)