Talk:Bifröst/GA1

GA Review

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

I will begin reviewing this article and make straightforward changes as I go (explanations in edit summaries). Please revert any changes I make where I inadvertently change the meaning. I will post queries below. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any other commentary about the discrepancy in the name between the two eddas? A typo etc.?

I always thought it was supposed to be the rainbow, but this is not clarified in the text (?)

Regarding both comments: I haven't encountered much discussion about this outside of what you see there. The bridge is only called a rainbow in Snorri's Prose Edda. There does seem to be some question about which of the two is the original spelling and it appears that the "milky way" debate probably hinges on calling into question Snorri's account in the Prose Edda. I don't currently have access to that debate (which Simek calls into doubt without giving a reason typically enough), unfortunately, and as a result I've just covered what the dictionaries say about it. :bloodofox: (talk) 04:39, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys.

Icelandic speaking and Norse mythology enthusiast. Just wanted to help with the etymology of the word Bifröst.

The word bif- is the verb: AÐ BIFA (e. to move something, lift, some displacement).

And the word röst- (e. FLOW. Or circular motion of a flow, like a waterfall or vortex)

Most of the words from the texts are really simple but only if we can find the original word. Which is hard, even in Iceland. But this website is great for finding origin of these beautiful words.

https://ordanet.arnastofnun.is/

Hope this helps. 89.160.210.232 (talk) 06:28, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, hauling out the criteria again....

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Images need WP:ALT text.

Overall:

Pass or Fail:

I have buffed the prose a little and constructed a lead - it could benefit from more massaging but is fine for GA now. I think this is pretty comprehensive for GA. My quandary is about these meagre topics - there does seem to be a lack of (for lack of a better term) secondary-source discussion, but then again we cannot stray into OR and I figure if there were any then you'd be one who knows about it, so pass :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work and for looking the article over. Over time, I'll add more discussion regarding the bridge as I find it. The same goes for all of my articles. Right now only so much is available to me (a lot of this stuff can be hard to track down) but in time I'm sure that will change. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:37, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]