Talk:Matsya/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 22:54, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Starts GA Review. The review will follow the same sections of the Article. Thank you --Whiteguru (talk) 22:54, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Whiteguru. Will await your comments.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:25, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully I will get around to this in the next day or so.

Observations

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

   HTML document size: 210 kB
   Prose size (including all HTML code): 37 kB
   References (including all HTML code): 63 kB
   Wiki text: 43 kB
   Prose size (text only): 21 kB (3747 words) "readable prose size"
   References (text only): 8374 B

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

Lead is well scribed, a good introduction.
We have Saviour in the headings and savior in the text. Can we settle on one spelling?

Standardized to Indian English.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 18:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see the reference to Monier-Williams!
'law of the fishes' and dharmic protection: a good line. A good capture in reference 21.
fish-Agni is a good statement as Agni is the oldest and first deity to be worshipped in vedic rituals.
Hayagriva, yes. Hayagsiras is not a term I have come across before. What's the source?

* Generally an epithet of Hayagriva, but in Narada Purana used for the asura. Cross-checked the ref again. It says that Matsya killed Hayasiras who stole the Vedas. Also, Hayagriva killed Madhu and Kaitabha, who did the same thing.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 18:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

I'd like to see a distinction (possibly in the form of a note) between the 'laws of the Man' and the Laws of Manu - as Manu is frequently mentioned in this section. This is to ensure your reader is not confused.

it was "law of the fishes", changed by someone to "laws of the Man". Crosschecked the ref.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 18:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):

The article follows an appropriate order: Vedic origins, saviour of Manu, Saviour of the Vedas, Avatar lists, other scriptural references, Iconography, Evolution, Symbolism and Worship. In this wise, there is a good flow in this article.
There is a sharp, succinct summary of the various flood myths. Well handled.
cosmogonic myth: evolution to involution to evolution again in a new manvantara. A good summary of the underlying connectivity and divinity of Matsya narratives.
Interesting reference to the Meena community. Was not aware of this connection.

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:

Yes, NPOV is preserved in this article.
There is a balance between exegesis of the mythology and relevance of the mythology to Vedic culture.

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:

Page created 7 October 2002
Page has 765 edits by 309 editors
90 day page views = 42,019 views with a daily average of 462 views
Page is stable, ClueBot NG, AnomieBOT, IA Bot and Citation bot have all been on the page.
Majority of edits on page occurred during 2020.

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):

10 Images on page.
Images are appropriately licensed and tagged.

Overall:

For one who is familiar with Hindu mythology and the Dasavatars, this is brilliant and fast read; you don't trip up anywhere reading this.
The presentation of the multiple sources for Matsya is well laid out with explanation and background.
Good work on the references.
Some minor matters and questions that we might clean up? Thank you. --Whiteguru (talk) 08:38, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Whiteguru for the review. Hopefully addressed all your concerns.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 18:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your corrections @Redtigerxyz:. --Whiteguru (talk) 20:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Whiteguru for the detailed review and pass.Redtigerxyz ^Talk 14:13, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Passed