Talk:Hlín

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hlín/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi, thanks for contributing to this article. Unfortunately, despite of its merits (good referencing, proper format, stability, neutrality, etc.), I feel this article is simply too short to meet GA's criteria for broad coverage. At about 2000 characters, it's barely the minimum length for DYK, which is much less strict than GA.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Unfortunately, just too short; doesn't say very much about the subject. Also, the article currently doesn't provide much context; as someone unfamiliar with Norse mythology, I found it difficult to understand the stuff being described in the article.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. 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):

   I'm not sure how relevant the image is; it's an image of Frigg, with whom Hlin is associated, but as far as I can tell it doesn't show Hlin herself.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   What is in the article is, for the most part, good; there just isn't enough there. I hope this review doesn't discourage you from continuing to make quality contributions. Also, if you disagree with my assessment, you are welcome to contact other GAN reviewers for a second opinion.

Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 06:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Er, if you can point out some sort of length requirement for GA, I'd like to see it so that I don't waste my time. This article is as comprehensive as any you'll find out there about this goddess. Further, rather than outright failing the article, it would be helpful pointing out exactly what you're having trouble understanding. :bloodofox: (talk) 06:59, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

There is no explicit length requirement; just the breadth of coverage, which, as I said above, I don't think was met. For example, there's little discussion about what Hlín has done within the universe/canon of Norse mythology. Anyway, if this is all the information that exists on this goddess, my fear is that it's simply not notable enough to make GA no matter how much work you put into it; if there is more information to be added, though, you would have to go dig it up.

On my latest read-through of the article I haven't had as much trouble understanding it, although I still feel it is, in general, written somewhat in jargon and from an expert point of view, and not easily accessible to a lay reader.

Anyway, like I said, I know this was an unusually speedy closure, so if you disagree with my assessment you are welcome to request a second opinion at GAN or relist the article. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 07:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Those are all of the known attestations for this goddess outside of maybe some kennings out there somewhere (which wouldn't provide anymore information). :bloodofox: (talk) 07:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hlín/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   One small comment: "in the 13th century" (no hyphen) is correct. However, "the 13th-century poet" (hyphen) should be used, when it is being used as an adjective.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The point of the GA review is, in part, to allow articles that cover something notable, though where there is not sufficient to say about the subject to reach 'FA length', to have a quality control process. In my experience with North mythology, there are many very minor characters who there is very little to say anything about, yet they are notable and deserve an article. I am confident that Bloodofox has exhausted both the sources and the theories surrounding Hlín.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. 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):

   While the image is not of Hlín, there are theories suggesting that she is the same as Frigg. Therefore, an image of Frigg is expectable.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Passed, since it meets all the GA criteria. Arsenikk ^(talk) 12:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

These are indeed all of the sources and theories I could dig up about Hlín, and if I find anymore I will be sure to add them on to the article (and anyone else is welcome to also!). Thanks again for taking the time to check the article over! :bloodofox: (talk) 16:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Second sorrow?

Lindow (2001:177) is cited as believing the "second sorrow" of Hlín is the death of Baldr. I don't have access to Lindow at the moment, but I suspect there has been an error in transcription here. Not only does this seem counter-intuitive given Völuspá 53, but it is directly contradicted by Sigurdur Nordal (1980:103) in his edition of the text, where he notes that the death of Baldr is the "first sorrow", followed by the death of Odin as the "second". Clarification would be appreciated. --80.218.71.231 (talk) 10:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Good catch! :bloodofox: (talk) 15:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC)