![]() | Blood rain was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
April 1, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a
rain of blood in Germany foreshadowed the coming of the
Black Death? |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If the lead does not summarize the article adequately (which in this case should be 2-3 paragraphs), then the GAN could be quick failed. This problem needs to be rectified quickly, and once done, would likely earn the article at least C class. For examples, check out the rain and thunderstorm articles, which were deemed GA quality. Thegreatdr ( talk) 03:15, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer: ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 06:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC) Review begun. Will get back to you tomorrow. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 06:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
To start with, the first sentence of the lede "Blood rain is a phenomenon where blood appears to fall from the sky in the form of rain." I think needs to be reworked a bit. Because we all know it the natural phenomena isn't blood, yet as a literary device it may be, so something like "Blood rain is a phenomenon where a substance which is perceived to be blood falls from the sky in the form of rain. In literature, blood rain may refer to actual blood raining from the sky."
Regarding the organization of information in the article, this article is a mixture of scientific explanation, history, and literary imaginings, and those things need to be well separated. I would recommend the article's sections be organized like this:
Your references need to be standardized as well, not in two different styles of referencing (referring to McCafferty). That's a start. Hope this helps. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 23:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Regarding the organisation of the article, I'm not convinced that restructuring is necessary. There is some overlap between the two main sections, but that is because the history of the phenomenon and its explanation are linked. The explanation details the developing understanding of blood rain, from literal interpretations that it was blood – perhaps caused by gods – through to the modern interpretation that there are several causes, ie: dust and microscopic organisms. The history and use in literature section explains how the phenomenon has been recorded, how it has occurred, and how this has changed over time. To fully explain this, it has been necessary to introduce some of the explanations which are better explained later. Otherwise the change from medieval mysticism to a modern scientific approach is unexplained. Separating the literary from the historic instances is nigh on impossible, hence they are dealt together. For instance, many of the early rains may have been invented by authors to give a sense of impending doom, foreshadowing events, however who is to say that blood coloured rain didn't actually fall and that with hindsight chroniclers interpreted it as a sign? It seems likely that both historic and literary rains went hand in hand early on, and it is only with a modern understanding of the phenomenon that it falls out of use as an omen in literature. For the most part, the sources discussing blood rain have hesitated to draw black and white distinctions between the two.
As for a characteristics section, I like the idea, but don't think there's enough information to justify one. Basically, it boils down to three main characteristics: it's red, usually covers a small area, although the time is lasts is variable. This is covered in the explanation section, but I've included more details in the lead to make it more prominent. Nev1 ( talk) 22:40, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
No improvements since April 12. Nom states unable to make improvements.
... in this reference on page 380. Thegreatdr ( talk) 22:56, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
In the second sentence: "Cases have been recorded since Homer's Iliad, composed ca eighth century BC, and are widespread." Does anybody know what this ca is for, or is it vandalism?
Thanks, WIERDGREENMAN, Thane of Cawdor THE CAKE IS A LIE ( talk) 21:07, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Note 15 is said to be page 98, but the article is only between pp 85 and 95. Calle Widmann ( talk) 06:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
current affiliation: Buckingham Centre for Astrobiology (BCAB) 9.1.2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.89.117.154 ( talk) 15:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Blood rain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:30, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
The symbol meaning of man and the release of the twelve races from perdition. This event marks the Intercession and rains in a whole new family. The ten races are base ten and the second two are Cyclops and Pygmy and can be seen on the keyboard _ (underscore and mushroom eyes:Pygmy) and += (Cylops eye and mouth for equals sign).