Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 06:34, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Starts GA Review; the review will follow the same sections of the Article. --Whiteguru (talk) 06:34, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I look forward to working with you. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:04, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• My sense is that one of the important contributions (skills) of Dwarves was the making of mail of linked rings.

Good point, added.  Done

• You mention Dain Ironfoot at the age of 32. Why not include his great feat at that age?

Added.  Done

• You mention three of the clans and the Petty Dwarves. Is it appropriate to mention the clans from the East?

Added.  Done

• Rateliff is claiming the Hebrew Bible portrays Jews as warlike? How is this citation presented and defended?

Attributed the claim directly to Rateliff: he is a reliable source and this is his stated opinion. The matter is however not in doubt; among dozens of possible examples, Exodus 17:13 "And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword."

this is his stated opinion As you make it clear it is his stated opinion, and we are not getting into Biblical exegesis here, I'll leave this.  Done

• Please supply further evidence of the Dwarf Calendar resembling the Jewish Calendar.

Added citation for parallel with Rosh Hashanah. We now have two reliable sources for this parallel.  Done

• Ending with Brackmann's excerpts from Mythlore is fair and balanced. However, I am concerned about the first paragraph in this section and its validity.

Thank you. John Rateliff, Marjorie Burns, and Bradford Lee Eden are all major Tolkien scholars with many respected publications between them, so the claims in the paragraph are robust. It is supported, too, by the quotations from Tolkien's letters in the second paragraph.  Done

• The resources/research on Philology and Letters is good work.

Thank you. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

May we consider the reflections above?       Whiteguru (talk) 06:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Issues resolved, article passes GA Review.

 Passed