Talk:Storming of Shelford House

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 20:13, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that 80% of the Royalist garrison were killed in the 1645 storming of Shelford House? Source: "By the time the order was rescinded, around 80 per cent of the defenders had been slain." from page 286 of: Appleby, David J. (30 April 2020). "Fleshing out a massacre: the storming of Shelford House and social forgetting in Restoration England". Historical Research. 93 (260): 286–308. doi:10.1093/hisres/htaa011. Retrieved 13 September 2021.
  • ALT1: ... that Sydnam Poyntz ordered that no mercy be shown to Royalists during the 1645 storming of Shelford House and 80% of the defenders were killed? Source: As ALT0 plus "Having gained the outer ramparts after a particularly costly assault, Poyntz suddenly ordered his bruised and bloodied men to show the 200-strong garrison no mercy" from the same page

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Dundee

Moved to mainspace by Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk). Nominated by Dumelow (talk) at 18:47, 6 December 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

ALT0 to T:DYK/P1

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Storming of Shelford House/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 09:11, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I will take this one, comments to follow over next few days. Zawed (talk) 09:11, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I made a few tweaks for minor clarity issues as I went through this, please check you are OK with my changes.

Lead

• link Colonel-General

•  Done

• The Royalist garrison, owned by Philip Stanhope, 1st Earl of Chesterfield...: the wording here suggests that he owned the garrison, i.e. the military force, rather than the estate (which I assume is what you meant).

•  Done

• were killed in the resulting sack, commanded by: Suggest "were killed in the resulting sack by the Parliamentarian attacking party, commanded by...". Also suggest linking sack (Looting)

•  Done with a minor tweak to phrasing

• With the Royalist garrison having lost 80 per cent of its men, mostly the Catholics, killed,: the placement of ",killed" seems really clumsy, consider rephrasing

•  Done - moved the word, does that work?

Background

• Shelford was situated in Nottinghamshire, nine miles east...: suggest using the conversion template to show distances in km as well.

•  Done

• As part of these plans Henderson...: no explicit context for "plans". Suggest "As part of his plans for fortifications Henderson..."

•  Done

• Duke of Gloucester's Regiment of cavalry: is there a unit that could be linked here, or maybe the Duke himself?

•  Done

• Sir Philip Stanhope. Stanhope...: suggest rephrasing to avoid the back-to-back usage of Stanhope.

•  Done

• was aware of Shelford's part played in Royalist attacks on his town: suggest "was aware of the role Shelford played as a staging post for Royalist attacks on his town"

•  Done

• link Colonel-General, Major, also Queen's Regiment of Horse (if a suitable link can be found)

•  Done

Siege

• Greatly outnumbered by the Royalist forces: can the number of Royalists be quantified? If so, maybe add to the previous paragraph referring to the remnants of King Charles's forces.

•  Done - have adjusted the wording too

Attack

• Fearing that delaying any more at Shelford: suggest "Fearing any further delay at Shelford"

•  Done

• with Hutchinson given direct command of it.: suggest "with Hutchinson given direct command of the attacking party."

•  Done

• Colonel Webb's force of Londoners...: this is first mention of Webb. Was he in command of the 1,000 cavalry from London (mentioned in first sentence of Siege section) - maybe mention him there, then drop the "Colonel" here.

• I expect Webb was the commander of the London brigade, but no source explicitly says so. I can't provide any background for him apart from his position in the attack, so I've removed mention of him.

• Hutchinson led...: this starts off a real long sentence, suggest breaking it up.

•  Done - also rephrased content a little

Significance

• Royalists or Parliamentarians during the Civil War to: Civil War is used earlier in the sentence, suggest replacing the quoted instance with "conflict"

•  Done

Other stuff

• Image tags check out OK
• Dupe links: only one (sic) and in the context I think it is fine.

That's it for me, sorry for the delay in getting to this. Zawed (talk) 09:13, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

@Zawed: Hi, thanks for picking this up and apologies that I too was delayed! I have responded to all your comments above. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

This looks good for GA as I believe the article meets the necessary criteria in coverage, sourcing, structure, readability and supporting materials. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 11:01, 18 December 2021 (UTC)