Talk:Sól (Germanic mythology)/GA1

GA Review
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):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * The section on the Merseburg Incantation is unreferenced. Or is this an autoreference, with the naming of the source implying the reference?
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * One reference, and it will pass. Arsenikk (talk)  12:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * One reference, and it will pass. Arsenikk (talk)  12:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * One reference, and it will pass. Arsenikk (talk)  12:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reviewing the article! I've put the reference in place and made a few adjustments per Lindow's translation. bloodofox: (talk) 17:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent. In which case I pass the article as Good. Congratulations! Arsenikk (talk)  17:59, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! bloodofox: (talk) 18:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)