Talk:Vä Church/GA1

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

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 19:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Happy to review the article—I'm not Swedish but I'll still be able to manage as i can get all the sources translated. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

General comments

 * church appears 70 times in the text. The prose could be improved if this number were reduced, e.g. by replacing church with ‘it’ or ‘’the building’.
 * I've tried to find alternatives and reduce the instances of "church" in the text. Yakikaki (talk) 14:18, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it's a definite improvement. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Lead section / infobox

 * A minor point, but the image could be enlarged to fit the width of the infobox.
 * Good point, enlarged it.
 * Corrections: …province Scania… - ‘province of Scania’; …still display… - ‘still displays’.
 * Fixed.
 * …and most monumental sets… - this doesn’t make sense to me.
 * I removed this and shortened the sentence.
 * …not known from any other church... - 'not found elsewhere’.
 * Changed to "not found elsewhere among medieval murals in Sweden", does that work? Yakikaki (talk) 14:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's clearer now. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Location and surroundings

 * Correction: ...the town Vä… - ‘the town of Vä’.
 * Fixed. Yakikaki (talk) 14:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

History

 * Unlink church bells (common term).
 * Unlinked.
 * Link archaeological.
 * Linked.
 * The church was originally dedicated to Saint Mary. - it still is dedicated to her, but this sentence needs to be amended, as it sound as if it no longer is.
 * It's still sometimes called "Saint Mary's Church" or variations thereof, but it's actually not dedicated to any saint as it is part of the Church of Sweden, a Protestant church which does not venerate saints. Perhaps I can add something in the lead about it still being called "Saint Mary's Church"?
 * Please do, as I might not the only one who thinks churches always have a patronal saint as in the UK. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Added to the lead.
 * ...the name of Queen Sofia… - I would amend this to ‘her name’.
 * Changed. Yakikaki (talk) 14:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The church thus clearly belonged to the Danish royal family prior to the donation, but… - sounds like an editorial comment and should be removed (MOS:OPED).
 * Is the concern here that there is no support for the claim that the church belonged to the Danish royal family prior to the donation? I can see how that would seem so, and have added a reference after the comma to Graebe who on p. 45 explicitly writes that the church belonged to the king and queen but was donated to the monastery. In fact, much of the debate has been about what king and queen founded the church, but that it originally was owned by the royal family is not doubted among any of the sources. Thank you for bringing my attention to this vagueness in the text here. Yakikaki (talk) 14:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The amendment works well. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ...its precise age has been the matter of some discussion. - precise and some are redundant.
 * Removed precise and some.
 * immured is the wrong word (see here). I would suggest 'concealed'.
 * Thank you, changed to concealed. Yakikaki (talk) 15:16, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It has been assumed… - by whom?
 * Changed to "Archaeologists have assumed" since Monica Rydbeck and Mattias Karlsson, who Laust Krambs refer to, are/were archaeologists. I experimented with putting their names there but I'm afraid the sentence could become a bit cumbersome then. Is this OK? Otherwise I'll try to think of some other solution. Yakikaki (talk) 15:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It's now OK. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * inauguration is incorrect – I would replacing it with 'dedicated'.
 * Changed.
 * ...as mentioning close relatives to the queen. - I am unsure what this means.
 * Sorry about that, it certainly isn't very clear. I changed it to: "There is also a faint inscription in runes in the chancel. Although difficult to interpret, it may contain the names of some close relatives to the queen." How is that?
 * Definitely better! Amitchell125 (talk) 06:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ... it is today… - I would avoid today (see MOS:RELTIME).
 * I removed today.
 * I would replace ...but in any case… with ‘and’.
 * Looks a lot better, changed.
 * From then on served as the church of their monastery. . The church simultaneously functioned... - improve the prose here by amending to 'It then served as the church monastery and…’.
 * Fixed.
 * ...and already then the monks moved away… - does this mean that by the time of the fire they had moved away, or that they moved away after the fire?
 * They moved after the fire, apparently - had to double check what I wrote. I've clarified it in the text.
 * presently visible is redundant here and should be removed.
 * Done.
 * ...nave. At the same time the… - replace with ‘nave, and…’.
 * Done.
 * ... but not executed. - is redundant.
 * Removed.
 * Simplify At some point the entire interior had been… to ‘The interior was…’.
 * Done.

Architecture

 * Duplicated link – whitewashed.
 * Fixed.
 * Amend the link to 'chancel arch' so that only chancel is linked.
 * Fixed.
 * Unlink round arched (common term).
 * Fixed.
 * Link Mass (I believe there is no capital needed).
 * Fixed.
 * ...The extension from 1598… - I could not find the 1598 date – but Graebe p. 69 appears to say 1593.
 * You're right, it should be 1593. Fixed it.
 * ...however later... - however is redundant. Also was in fact.
 * Fixed, and changed "was in fact" to just "was".
 * ...the eastern part... - amend to '...the eastern end...' to avoid saying part twice.
 * Fixed.
 * ...originally probably a gallery which could be used by... - sounds better amended to '...which could have been a gallery once used by...'.
 * Fixed.
 * From the gallery, they... - I would say 'From there they...'.
 * Fixed.

Murals

 * Unlink Eastern Europe; pigments (common terms).
 * Done.
 * The gallery images look too large, and do not help explain the text in the article, as they are in the wrong place. I would consider experimenting with putting them within the text (see here for an example of what I mean).
 * Thank you for taking the time to do this, but I found it got a bit crammed in the article. In the end I removed one of the pictures; the ceiling is visible also from the general view of the chancel so maybe that's enough. If someone wants to study them more in detail, there are more in the commons category after all. What do you think?
 * It does look OK, but you now have a bit of 'sandwiching' MOS:SANDWICH, where the images face each other. I believe this is only a problem past the GA level, but it's something I've learnt to avoid.
 * Yes, it's a bit difficult to fit everything in there, but by moving the picture of the nave to the left I did get some more space to include the pictures in the way you originally suggested. I think it's hard to get it better than this? Perhaps the very last picture of the old altarpiece could be skipped altogether, if you think it looks too crowded.
 * ...the oldest, possibly the very oldest, still extant church murals… - consider amending to ‘...the oldest—possibly the very oldest—church murals…’.
 * Changed.
 * The murals in Vä Church have… - ‘They have…’.
 * Fixed.
 * The murals are stylistically particularly closely related those… - 3 words all ending in -ly sounds strange. Maybe better written ‘In style they are closely related to those…’.
 * Fixed.
 * somehow, at the time, in this case, partially, also, rather are all redundant words.
 * Removed.
 * Christ is surrounded… - ‘He is surrounded…’.
 * Fixed.
 * This representation of Christ in Majesty in the apse of the church is typical… - ‘This representation is typical…’.
 * Fixed.
 * The barrel vault of the chancel is decorated with a subject not known from any other church in Sweden. - I would simply say ‘The barrel vault of the chancel is unique.’.
 * I was once advised against using the word "unique" on Wikipedia, but I agree with you. So unique it is.
 * It's good advice, but as we're talking about a type of decoration on a roof of a small building in a small village, I think we're OK with unique just this once. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:33, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Heaven has a small h.
 * Fixed.
 * ...have been covered with whitewash at an unknown time. - ‘...were once whitewashed.’.
 * Fixed.
 * ...work began to uncover and carefully restore all of the murals. The work was led by restorer Våga Andersson-Lindell. The work took three years to finish. - ‘...work was begun to restore the murals. The three-year-long project led by Våga Andersson-Lindell.’.
 * Changed.

Furnishings

 * Unlink Stockholm (MOS:OL); coat of arms (as a similar link is present in the same sentence).
 * Done.

Use and heritage status

 * The link to ecclesiastical monument does not take you where you expect to go.
 * I couldn’t verify the number 21300000006868 using the citation given.
 * I simplified all of this to "It is a listed building." which however makes the whole section very short. Let me know what you think of it. Perhaps it can be moved. Yakikaki (talk) 13:45, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I would expand on its use, with the help of the parish website: it holds regular services; it is one of five churches in the Vä-Skepparslöv group of churches; and under normal circumstances it has an active church life and is open to visitors. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you, excellent suggestion! I've added something along that line.

On hold
Yakikaki, thanks for doing such a good job with this article, the references I checked were excellent. What a fascinating building! I'm placing it on hold for a week until 20 October to allow time for my comments to be addressed. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:34, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Amitchell125 for the careful review, and apologies for bursting in on it before you were finished. I will try to fix the remaining points as quickly as possible. Yakikaki (talk) 12:07, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm always happy for people to 'burst in' as you did. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 12:09, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I think I've addressed all of the points above now, let me know what you think about it. Also, a big thank you for taking the time and effort to improve the quality of the photos, they look a lot better now! I appreciate all your work with this very much, it has made the article much better in so many ways. Yakikaki (talk) 13:49, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Passing
Passing now, well done. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:09, 15 October 2020 (UTC)