Talk:Fortifications of Kingston upon Hull

Military history: Fortifications / British / European B‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

B

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Fortifications task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Fortifications of Kingston upon Hull is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-41081664 Blockhouse dig
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-47226039 Blockhouse dig
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-42414850 Blockhouse dig
https://maritimehull.co.uk/projects/south-blockhouse South Blockhouse Project

Incomplete notes

The article is imcomplete:

Pilgrimage of Grace - sources, including expectedly reliable ones contradict each other on this history. I have noted this briefly in a footnote (also noted by others), and have attempted to write based on what I would expect to be the most reliable sources - however the usually reliable Oxford University press "History of Hull" is so far off other modern works that there may still be issues here. This probably needs a history expert to sort out.
There is much more that can be easily written about the Castle and Citadel. http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1020426 is a good start, plus the sources given in literature. There have been numerous excavations and publications on this
"Legacy" - I haven't covered - there is the excavations at Beverley Gate which are an open air exhibit, the former "turret" once at "Khyber Pass", East Park, now in the Victoria Dock Village. Plus there is supposedly a lot of the foundations east of the river still underground. I think a gun was found in an excavation and is in the Hull archaeology museum..
The late outer defences of the city walls - "Hornwork" was added around the time of the civil war - this is shown in some maps, but not in maps currently illustrating. This is a must for an illustration.

I'm not a historian. So the article won't be getting any better under my steam. Thanks.Oranjblud (talk) 15:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence structure and wording.

"Pilgrimage of Grace" subsection.

In the third paragraph, second to last sentence, the wording; "...they were attacked whilst retreating {by} they were attacked from the town by a party led by the Mayor...", does not make sense. I initially assumed the word "by" should have been "but" except the rest of the sentence still would not make sense. Someone please fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Otr500 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]