Talk:Matthew, Mark, Luke and John/GA1

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 22:18, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:18, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for taking this up so quickly. I look forward to it.--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:42, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Initial comments
On first pass, this looks quite strong--well written and sourced, and clearly just about ready for promotion. It's brief, but Google and Google Books searches show that there's not much out there. This appears to cover the available "main aspects" well. Again, thanks for your work on this.

I only have one initial note before moving onto the checklist:
 * " pioneering and controversial anthropologist Margaret Murray" -- this might be an unnecessarily loaded introduction to her name, especially since it lacks a source.
 * I added a reference that covers the controversy. I put this as an indication that readers perhaps should treat her statements with caution, but I am not wedded to it, if that doesn't work.--  SabreBD  (talk) 21:20, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. Tell you what, I made a slight rephrase to name the work as controversial; that way the slightly peacocky/questionable "pioneering" also disappears. It still conveys a note of caution, but moves away from more general assessment of Murray. Does that make sense to you, too? Feel free to revert me if you disagree; I by no means intend what I just wrote to be the final word on this if you're not happy with it. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:43, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think its a good change. More accurate, avoids the probably unnecessary bit and still coveys the meaning. Good call.--  SabreBD  (talk) 08:09, 27 March 2013 (UTC)