# Talk:Sinthgunt

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sinthgunt/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hi!  I will be reviewing this article for GA, and should have the full review up within a couple of hours. Dana boomer (talk) 20:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

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

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

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Another very nice article!  I can find no problems with it, so I am passing the article to GA status.  If you have any questions, drop me a note here or on my talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 20:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! I enjoyed writing it, and I am glad you enjoyed reading it. :} :bloodofox: (talk) 03:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello Dbachmann, this is in regard to recent changes to this article. So that it retains its status, please edit this article in accordance to Wikipedia:Good article criteria and please continue to use the referencing system already in place. As for the "abysmal weaseling", I don't know what you're referring to; "theories have been proposed" is perfectly acceptable when the source is a specialized encyclopedia. This isn't weaseling. Some of the older rewrites had less access to scholarship, but they generally all attempt to identify major modern currents in scholarship. This is unlike the German entires, which are usually far, far worse by any standard, and are frequently stuck in the hyper skepticism of the Bugge-Mogk vacuum. Thank you. :bloodofox: (talk) 17:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Sinhtgunt is mentioned along with Balder in the Second Merseburg Charm. So it would be natural for her to be his wife ie Nanna. 21 November 2012  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.186.133 (talk) 13:54, 21 November 2012 (UTC) 

This webpage is about the subject: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Asatru/message/2124?var=1 25 November 2012  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.186.133 (talk) 22:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Rather than scouring Norse texts for an equivalent, could I suggest she is actually the same as Eostre? This goddess seems to be West Germanic-only, and the dawn goddess would fit well with a name meaning "night-battler" and with being the sun's sister; which the Indo European dawn goddess usually is. Walshie79 (talk) 12:38, 23 October 2016 (UTC)