Talk:Jörmundur Ingi Hansen

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jörmundur Ingi Hansen/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 05:58, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Starts GA Review; the review will follow the same sections of the Article. --Whiteguru (talk) 05:58, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

 

---

Lead

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• Lead opens with an explanation of the name, which is Icelandic.
• The Lead gives an account of Jörmundur's life and works and role in the Icelandic neopagan organisation, Ásatrú Fellowship.

Early life and Education

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• An account of Jörmundur's early life and education is given with links to Icelandic Wikipedia for explanation of terms not directly translated.

Icelandic neopaganism

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• This section states that Jörmundur tried to practice Old Norse Religion from the age of 15 and among attempts was unable to find interested people.

Ásatrúarfélagið's first decades (1972–1993)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• This section gives the founding and growth of the Icelandic neopagan organization Ásatrúarfélagið. The founders are given and the works of Jörmundur in developing ritual, liturgy, clothing and media representation are given.
• The reference to Reykjavíkurgoðorð is unclear.
  • Tried to make it more clear and added an explanation of the term goðorð in a footnote. Ffranc (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
• Growth and splinter group are accounted for, along with a brief note about beliefs and personal theology.

Allsherjargoði (1994–2002)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• The growth of the organisation is given along with the development of the pagan burial ground. The participation in the World Congress of Ethnic Religions is given, and the subsequent results of being tainted by association are given. The central role of Jömundur is given along with the discomfort of the Board of director sand his replacement with a new Allsherjargoði is given.

After Ásatrúarfélagið (2004–)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• This is not well written. It is a confusing section because, firstly Reykjavíkurgoðorð is not explained, and nor is the relationship between Reykjavíkurgoðorð and Ásatrúarfélagið given anywhere.
  • Tried to clarify and added Jörmundur's comment on Ásatrúarfélagið from 2008. Ffranc (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Religious views

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• This section is a bit vague and presumes the reader has a theological understanding of Norse gods, the æsir—the and the (destructive) jötnar. The article linked to (Jötunn) does not give Jötunn nor jötnar as destructive. A full scope of Jörmundur's religious views remains vague. This is extraordinary bland and vague for someone who is a leader of a new religious movement in Iceland (with full rites to conduct legally binding ceremonies) that is growing its membership on his watch. Where is the description of the ritual and liturgy he developed and the religious explanation for same? Consider.
  • Clarified that it's Jörmundur's interpretation of the jötnar. Added a bit about rituals and his approach to them. Ffranc (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Professional career and other ventures

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• Noted.

See also

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• Noted

Notes

• Noted}

Citations

• Noted

Sources

• Noted

---

End Matter

Is it is Broad in its coverage?

1. Is it reasonably well written?

• A lot of references and links make reference to Heathens and Heathenry, and at some point there might be a clarification about how external sources use this term and how it is relevant (or related) to neopaganism and then, perhaps, include Modern Paganism. This would improve the article. This could be a note, this could be an insertion.
  • Added some things about Iceland's cultural history, and about Ásatrúarfélagið in relation to neopagan movements elsewhere. I've avoided distinctions between "heathenry" and "paganism", because that distinction doesn't exist in the Icelandic language (nor in other Scandinavian languages and German) and isn't really used in the sources. The main distinction I've made is between (modern) Icelandic and (Old) Norse, which I think is applied consistently. The article on Heathenry (new religious movement) is by necessity very US-centric, because that's what the sources are like for the overall topic, but it's not the case when the topic is more limited like it is here. Ffranc (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
• * Explanation accepted. Yes, usage of Heathenry is more common in the US, as you say --Whiteguru (talk) 22:08, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

More End Matter Stuff:

• Does it follow the neutral point of view policy?
• Reasonably so. One possibly acquainted with perturbations and perambulations of the Allsherjargoði in Iceland has portrayed all of this in a fair and balanced point of view. This certainly is the delivery of this article.

1. Is it stable?

• Yes, the article has a stable history; the guild of Copy Editors has also lent a helping hand to their credit.

1. Top editors are

   * Ffranc
   * Twofingered Typist
   * Haukurth 
  

1. It is illustrated by images ?

Yes, this is aptly illustrated by good images. Good work, here.

Overall

The article is well constructed and develops well, despite the Icelandic names of organisations and sacerdotal roles held by leaders, etc.

Issues have been raised about clarifying organisations, terms, and the section Religious Views has some issues raised, around the underpinnings of ritual and liturgy.

Conclusion

Attention to issues raised is desired. --Whiteguru (talk) 05:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

• Thank you very much for the review! I've now made changes based on your concerns. Please let me know if more needs to be done. Ffranc (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your work. --Whiteguru (talk) 22:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

 Passed