# Talk:Ich hatte viel Bekümmernis, BWV 21

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ich hatte viel Bekümmernis, BWV 21/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 11:47, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

I should have this complete later today JAGUAR  11:47, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


### Initial comments
"He probably composed it in Weimar" - I've been comparing this to O heilges Geist- und Wasserbad, BWV 165 and it doesn't say that he probably composed it in that article. Is there an uncertainty if he composed it in this case?
reworded ---GA
Right, will drop, location seems certain, only the exact time not so, --GA
lead reorganized ---GA
The third paragraph in the lead is rather short and might benefit from being merged into the second paragraph for organisational reasons, what do you think? --GA
" The so-called Weimar version, his first composition" - why so-called?
The source says that this version is called Weimar version, while the earlier ones were also composed in Weimar. - Better term? -->
Sorry, I wasn't aware! I think "so-called" should be fine JAGUAR  14:11, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
More to come. I'll finish the review once you're done with writing the music section! JAGUAR  18:52, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for looking and spotting, more to come, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Added some, ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:17, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
"John Eliot Gardiner, who conducted all Bach's church cantatas" - all of Bach's?
taken ----GA
"and inspired of Bachs vocal works" - missing apostrophe
taken ----GA
"The music has too contrasting sections" - two?
(sure, - how late was it?) ----GA
"In Part II the mood changes: through the trust of sinners" - the opening of a new sub-section might sound better as The second part [or Part II] begins with a transition of mood or something similar?
partly taken, but there's no transition, instead a sudden change
"A list of recordings is provided " - are provided?
if it is "A list are provided" yes, - English is not my first language ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:43, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


#### References
No dead links


### On hold
I admit I'm not well versed on the subject as I had to compare this with its FA equivalent for reference! Overall this article is in good shape, it is well researched, broad and well written. I could only find a few minor prose issues that stand in the way of this of this becoming GA, but once they're out of the way then I'm sure this will have no problem passing. Great work on the article by the way! JAGUAR  14:24, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, - the other FAs are BWV 172 and BWV 22, and this is supposed to grow into one some day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


### Close - promoted
Thank you for the fixes, Gerda Arendt! The article now meets the GA criteria. With all that out of the way, it is well written, researched and broad. This looks like FA material too given that the others appear similar to this one. Speaking of FA, I'm going to begin a peer review for Bentworth in the next couple of days, so I'm trying to aim for my first FA!  JAGUAR  17:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Great news, both! Will watch your article, no ping needed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:22, 19 June 2015 (UTC)