Talk:Éomer/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 06:39, 4 August 2020 (UTC) Herein begins the review for Good Article nomination. GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * 2) The Lead is a concise summary of the article as a whole and points made in the article.
 * 3) The Fictional Account is a very concise account of the participation of Éomer in several battles and his eventual role as King of the Mark.
 * 4) The Interpretations cites point of view of Tolkien scholar Tom Shippley on the character of Éomer (compulsively truculent) and how the setting and helmets indicate that Tolkien has an Anglo Saxon background / muthos for Éomer and the Rohan.
 * 5) The Adaptations cites etymological evidence is referencing the relevance of Old English names and influences from oral narrative. Use of the Sutton Hoo helmet in Jackson's film adaptation shows the strength of the Anglo-Saxon influence. It is a concise section.
 * 6) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * 7) Notes are succinct and appropriate.
 * 8) References: all The Two Towers and The Return of the King.
 * 9) Secondary references were examined, verified and well laid out. However one reference to Google Books brings the reader to a blank page.
 * 10) It is Broad in its coverage.
 * 11) Broad, appropriate and not too detailed.
 * 12) There is a marked focus on the background to Éomer and the Rohan having supposed Gothic and Anglo-Saxon origins, by way of names, helmets, etc.
 * 13) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * 14) Coverage is considered neutral; there is no bias nor leaning toward one side in the characterisation of Éomer, nor the other. History is often written from the point of view of the loser. Here, there is simply a concise summary of the role of Éomer in the narrative.
 * 15) Is it stable?
 * 16) For an article which commenced life in 2002, it has undergone changes, with insertion of family trees, removal of images, removal of encyclopaedic narrative, and correction of errors as to where battles occurred. I don't see edit-warring, rather, clean up of sources, in a knowledgeable and helpful fashion.  Tolkien is popular and frequently taken up by young readers, account the film adaptations. We can expect that this article will largely retain its current form with oversight from knowledgeable and experienced editors.
 * 17) It is illustrated by images and the images are appropriate and infomative (Sutton Hoo helmet).
 * 18) The talk page notes modification of external links, so useful, helpful stuff.
 * 19) Overall:
 * 20) Pass ✅
 * 1) Pass ✅