Talk:Scottish Reformation

Scottish Reformation

This is an attempt to start the Scottish Reformation article requested by the WikiProject Scotland. Any help gratefully received! Slackbuie 08:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC) User Talk: Slackbuie

Started at last!

This article is now underway- comments of all kinds welcome. --Slackbuie 01:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Getting there slowly...

Because I also live in the real world this article will take a long time. But I'd like any feedback anyone would care to give on the article so far. Slackbuie 21:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

If no-one else is doing this, I'm willing to work on it over the next few days. I've made a start with the opening.--Sandy Scott 02:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Well done Sandy Scott for your work on this article! Slackbuie 20:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but I think I've still a bit more to do yet.--Sandy Scott 15:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, here goes --Sandy Scott 17:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

GA Nomination

Issues:

1) The prose is not "compelling" as we say in GA circles. The lead needs to be bigger, the paragraphs shouldn't be so short, and there are problems that could use a good copyedit. Additionally, there are a few too many quotes. A few might be useful, but it feels like a bunch of quotes sewn together in places. There are also a few too many places where all the contradictions spin readers heads around confused, like "However, Parliament's declarations had been mainly negative in 1560, the was no question of any Act of Uniformity as in England. Thus, the shape the Church initially took was dependent on local Protestant patrons. However, even before 1560, reformed congregations had already been organising themselves under the influence of Knox."

2) The article needs to be broad in coverage. I can't say that it is or isn't, but the article doesn't read as itself. You need an outline, somthing like, "Pre-reformation church, early reformation influences, reformation crises themselves, post-reformation". Cover those and it'll be broad in coverage.

Other than this, it's fine, but it needs some substantial edits before it is GA quality, so I'm failing this this time. Make sure the article reads comprehensivly, get a few copyeditors, and then renominate. Thanatosimii 02:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

footnote 3

However, this attempt was largely unsuccessful.[3]
1- This note doesn't cite any book or article. 2- And of course may be wrong, since banning Lutheran writings and the fact that the Sottish Reformation was Calvinist may be related.Nitpyck (talk) 06:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Name

I've moved this back to "Scottish Reformation" it is what it is usually known as (see also Scottish Enlightenment). There's no pressing need to be consistent with other reformation articles.--Scott Mac 13:50, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

John Knox may have been flexible on alternatives, he called his book The First Booke of the Reformatioun of Religioun within the Realme of Scotland, but seriously, I agree. Political institutions like a monarchy, judiciary or state religion in different countries do not map exactly onto each other, and so some levels of insistence on standardised nomenclature can appear perhaps naive.Unoquha (talk) 17:29, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I mean, that "Scottish Reformation" seems more conceptually useful than "Reformation in Scotland," perhaps having broader "scope." An example: "The siege of Leith was part of the Scottish Reformation" sounds fine, but "The siege of Leith was part of the Reformation in Scotland" seems less good, bringing in the idea that a generally quite secular event was "Reforming" of religion in its own nature.Unoquha (talk) 17:48, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

OTD

This article will be making its first appearance on Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/August 17. Could someone please check the entry for accuracy and rewrite as needed? Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 19:30, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Looks good to me. It provides and accurate summary, rather than the usual myth.--SabreBD (talk) 20:24, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Scottish Reformation/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

I must repeat Thanatosimiis comments: 1) The prose is not "compelling" as we say in GA circles. The lead needs to be bigger, the paragraphs shouldn't be so short, and there are problems that could use a good copyedit. Additionally, there are a few too many quotes. A few might be useful, but it feels like a bunch of quotes sewn together in places. There are also a few too many places where all the contradictions spin readers heads around confused, like "However, Parliament's declarations had been mainly negative in 1560, the was no question of any Act of Uniformity as in England. Thus, the shape the Church initially took was dependent on local Protestant patrons. However, even before 1560, reformed congregations had already been organising themselves under the influence of Knox." 2) The article needs to be broad in coverage. I can't say that it is or isn't, but the article doesn't read as itself. You need an outline, somthing like, "Pre-reformation church, early reformation influences, reformation crises themselves, post-reformation". Cover those and it'll be broad in coverage. Other than this, it's fine, but it needs some substantial edits before it is GA quality, so I'm failing this this time. Make sure the article reads comprehensivly, get a few copyeditors, and then renominate. Blood red sandman 17:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 17:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 05:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)