Jump to content

Talk:Peter, Abbot of Vale Royal/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Eric Corbett (talk · contribs) 20:06, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
2c. it contains no original research.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment.

Detailed comments

[edit]

Bibliography

  • Midmer, R. (1979) doesn't appear to have been used as a source.
No, atm—but can we stand by on this for a bit, as I put it in last night (I think) and it was meant to have some relevance—so I've got to go through it again and find out what exactly I'd found!
Sure, there's no hurry. Eric Corbett 18:33, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Found it—describing the ledger. >SerialNumber54129...speculates 19:22, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Images

  • It's a bit of a slab of text at the moment. Why not include File:Vale royal abbey.jpg for instance, to break it up a bit?
    • Yeeas—totally agree about the wall of text; the only reason I haven't personally used that image in any of my Vale Royal articles is that—to my understanding—everything one sees in that view is "modern" (18th/19th C, I think, and def. not 15th!), and that although the building does contain medieval elements, they're all inside (the great hall, IIRC. See what i mean? On the other hand, I suppose a caption acknowledging this...?

Career

  • I'm not sure that Career is the best choice of name for this section. Perhaps Ecclesiastical career?
    • Agree; added.
  • "It may well have been he, around 1338, who authored—or at least began— the chronicle known as the Ledger of Vale Royal Abbey." Why is only Vale Royal Abbey in italics? Isn't the correct name The Ledger Book of Vale Royal Abbey anyway?
    • Good point. Although they mostly call it "The Ledger Book of Vale Royal," I think.
  • "Abbot Peter was also responsible for moving Vale Royal in 1330". He didn't actually physically move Vale Royal, or cause it to be physically moved did he? Were the then buildings dismantled and re-erected on some other site? Or were they abandoned and the building work began anew?
    • No, it was re-sited.
  • "The Abbot reported in 1336 that neither the vaults, the roof or the windows of the church had yet been finished ..." Neither refers to two things, not three as here.
    • Done.
  • "... which had been arisen during the abbacy of Peter's predecessor". Been arisen?
    • D'oh!
  • "Walter of Hereford had managed not only to get Edward II to confirm his father's grant to them". Does the them here refer to the abbey? If so, considering the abbey to be plural doesn't really work.
    • Agree, singularly singular.
  • "This may well be a reflection on the original grant ..." It's unclear what this actually refers to.
    • Clarified now?
  • "Abbot Peter was sued by a monk from Shrewsbury Abbey for the sum of 500 marks." It seems odd that he would be sued by a monk rather than the abbot.
    • Quite. On a closer reading of the source, the writ was delivered to AP by a monk; but as a messenger of course, rather than a claimant :)
  • "Theobald Walter had claimed that his ancestors had been granted it by King Richard I".Need to explain who Theobald Walter was.
  • "Theobald Butler, Walter's heir, continued to press the claim." The chronology is a little confusing. Why has Walter's heir been inserted into the story here?
    • Yes, bloody complicated this bit—I think it's clarified now though?
Cheers, Eric Corbett, see what you thikn with these changes. Cheers! >SerialNumber54129...speculates 12:52, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Feud with the villagers of Darnhall

  • "... as its the grants of land ..." Obviously something wrong with this.
    • lost "the."
  • "For example, the abbey's own Ledge-possibly the Abbot's own work ... Should this be Ledger? Is it really necessary to repeat that Abbot Peter may have been the author of the Ledger?
    • Yes, and nope, rm dup.
  • "... paying the abbot customs and services". Not sure what that means. Why lower-case abbot?
    • Added a note explaining what this meant in feudalism; Upped the abbot.

Death

  • "... and much of his harvest, were burnt down. You don't "burn down" a harvest. Similarly, you don't "burn down" livestock.
    • Thanks: done.
  • "De Cheyneston had already been a monk at the abbey". Strange choice of tense, not sure what it's trying to say.
    • ...not sure either; removed and tightened

See also

Oh, no reason at all :) Cheers! >SerialNumber54129...speculates 19:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

Outstanding issues

  • Even the Abbey's own chronicler," said historian Peter Coss "cast some doubt on the justice" of the grant. There's an ending quotation mark after chronicler, but where does the quotation start?
  • Although the Shrewsbury monk's clam was for eight years' rents ... Haven't we already established that it wasn't the monk making the claim?
  • Indeed, they appear to have been a perennial condition of penury ... Should that be in a perennial condition of penury? I'd prefer state to condition, but that's up to you.


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter,_Abbot_of_Vale_Royal/GA1&oldid=967082825"