Talk:Umbanda/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sawyer-mcdonell (talk · contribs) 19:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Midnightblueowl excited to review this! Fair warning, due to the size & breadth of the article, this review might be on the longer side, but I aim to be done with it by next weekend. It's a very interesting topic though, so I think it will be fun to review, and as a religion topic, it's up my alley. Thanks for your nomination! sawyer  * he/they *  talk  02:19, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I appreciate you taking this review on, Sawyer, thank you. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Assessment

 * Overall very well-written. I did some minor copyediting & added some wikilinks, but that's about it.
 * Overall very well-written. I did some minor copyediting & added some wikilinks, but that's about it.


 * There is a bare URL in paragraph 1 of the "definitions" section, after while others claim that it derive from Kimbundu language meaning “medicine” or “healing”.
 * That was added in the past few days by an unexperienced editor. The URL they added would not constitute a Reliable Source so I removed that addition altogether. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The sources themselves all look excellent. There is an unused source in the bibliography: Voeks 1997 (found via User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js) - this source could perhaps be moved to the "further reading" section, or cited inline.
 * Well spotted! I've removed the source for now, although I will probably check the book in future to see if it has relevant material in it that could be integrated into this article. I have already used it quite extensively while working on the Candomblé article. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't have access to the Brown 1986 source unfortunately, but I got my hands on most of the other major sources, and text-source spotchecking on random sfns throughout the article produced nothing of concern; it all matches up.
 * - these aren't necessarily violations of WP:OR per se, but I wasn't sure where else to put these comments.
 * In Umbanda, it is usual for a medium to determine the identity of a person's spirit patrons. This is different from Candomblé, where the identity is more often ascertained through forms of divination; divination in general plays much less of a role in Umbanda than in Candomblé. (from section "relationships with the orixás") - this is confusing to me; what is the difference between a medium determining the patrons versus using divination to determine them? could use clarification here.
 * In Umbanda, the medium identifies the patron directly, rather than using divinatory methods (as in Candomblé). Would using the wording "a medium to personally determine" clarify things here? Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think that would be helpful! sawyer  * he/they *  talk  20:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I have now made that change. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * As spirits, they are considered to be "highly evolved". (from section "Caboclos") - the section about Caboclos is in the "lesser evolved spirits" section; does "lesser evolved" in this context mean "evolved spirits that are lesser" or "spirits that are less evolved" ?
 * As I understand it, the caboclos are "lesser" than the orixás, but at the same time are "highly evolved" in contrast to the exús and pomba giras. I think it best if I just remove this sentence so that it doesn't cause confusion. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds good! sawyer  * he/they *  talk  20:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Earwig found a "violation possible" but I checked, and the only matching things are names of sources.
 * Sounds good! sawyer  * he/they *  talk  20:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Earwig found a "violation possible" but I checked, and the only matching things are names of sources.
 * Earwig found a "violation possible" but I checked, and the only matching things are names of sources.


 * with 8800 words, I think it'd be hard not to cover pretty much everything! Very comprehensive, from what I can tell.
 * and on the other hand, I found the writing to be engaging & not too detailed or confusing - there are a lot of non-English words used here, but that seems like it's a necessary part of covering this topic, where there aren't great English translations for the vast majority of the terms in use.
 * and on the other hand, I found the writing to be engaging & not too detailed or confusing - there are a lot of non-English words used here, but that seems like it's a necessary part of covering this topic, where there aren't great English translations for the vast majority of the terms in use.
 * and on the other hand, I found the writing to be engaging & not too detailed or confusing - there are a lot of non-English words used here, but that seems like it's a necessary part of covering this topic, where there aren't great English translations for the vast majority of the terms in use.


 * religion can be challenging to cover in an encyclopedic manner, but I've found nothing that stands out as UNDUE or non-neutral.


 * Glad to see we have so many good photos - they really help explain the topic.
 * Glad to see we have so many good photos - they really help explain the topic.
 * Glad to see we have so many good photos - they really help explain the topic.

Thanks, Sawyer-mcdonell. Did you have any other points that you wanted me to address? Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I plan on doing some spot-checking of sources & maybe add some more prose suggestions/questions as I find them. As I said before, the article is pretty big, so I can't do it all in one day haha. sawyer  * he/they *  talk  21:43, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * No rush! Take whatever time that you need. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Other comments

 * The social activities common among Brazil's Christian churches are largely absent from Umbandist centros. What kinds of social activities?
 * If I recall correctly (and I don't have the book immediately to hand), Brown was referring to church picnics, jumble sales, that sort of thing - events which bring the congregation together for socialisation (and maybe fundraising) rather than worship. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Makes sense - it might be good to add an example or two, just for clarity. sawyer  * he/they *  talk  22:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Done. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:40, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl I've completed my review, including source spotchecks, which all turned up well. Congrats! sawyer * he/they *  talk  19:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)