| Revision as of 16:00, 20 August 2013 editPyrotec (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,908 edits will review | Revision as of 13:35, 25 August 2013 edit undoJohn Carter (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users176,670 edits →GA Review: commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| <!-- Please add all review comments below this comment, and do not alter what is above. So that the review can be kept within a single section, please do not use level 2 headers (==...==) below to break up the review. Use level 3 (===...===), level 4 and so on.--> | <!-- Please add all review comments below this comment, and do not alter what is above. So that the review can be kept within a single section, please do not use level 2 headers (==...==) below to break up the review. Use level 3 (===...===), level 4 and so on.--> | ||
| :I will review. ] (]) 16:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC) | :I will review. ] (]) 16:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC) | ||
| ::I see myself multiple problems with the article, as it compares to other encyclopedic reference sources regarding this topic, and to my eyes they are sufficient for the article not receiving GA status at this time. A comparison to the rather substantial entry in the ''Anchor Bible Dictionary'' is I think relevant. Their article on this topic indicates from the first sentence that there were ''multiple'' sources, at least two, which have been referred to by this title. This specifically includes the work Jerome called the Gospel of the Hebrews, which has been, more or less, generally linked to the Gospel of the Nazoreans by modern scholarship, despite the lack of any real sourcing to support that. On the basis of its apparent failure to give what seems required weight to the Gospel of the Hebrews Jerome used, which he did call by that title, and which so far as I can tell most of the existing scholarship on Jerome uses, to some degree, in discussing his material on it, and the substantial discussion of the mild "controversy" on the topic in the ABD, I would have to say that the article strikes me as unbalanced and in no way giving remotely sufficient weight to a substantial area of discussion regarding it, the nature of the Jerome material. ] (]) 13:35, 25 August 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:35, 25 August 2013
GA Review
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 16:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 16:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
- I see myself multiple problems with the article, as it compares to other encyclopedic reference sources regarding this topic, and to my eyes they are sufficient for the article not receiving GA status at this time. A comparison to the rather substantial entry in the Anchor Bible Dictionary is I think relevant. Their article on this topic indicates from the first sentence that there were multiple sources, at least two, which have been referred to by this title. This specifically includes the work Jerome called the Gospel of the Hebrews, which has been, more or less, generally linked to the Gospel of the Nazoreans by modern scholarship, despite the lack of any real sourcing to support that. On the basis of its apparent failure to give what seems required weight to the Gospel of the Hebrews Jerome used, which he did call by that title, and which so far as I can tell most of the existing scholarship on Jerome uses, to some degree, in discussing his material on it, and the substantial discussion of the mild "controversy" on the topic in the ABD, I would have to say that the article strikes me as unbalanced and in no way giving remotely sufficient weight to a substantial area of discussion regarding it, the nature of the Jerome material. John Carter (talk) 13:35, 25 August 2013 (UTC)