Talk:Truce of Calais

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 03:52, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Criteria

GA Criteria
GA Criteria: 1 1.a Y 1.b Y 2 2.a Y 2.b Y 2.c Y 2.d Y 3 3.a Y 3.b Y 4 4.a Y 5 5.a Y 6 6.a Y 6.b Y

• No DAB links Y
• No dead links Y
• No missing citations Y

Discussion

• Not a huge thing, more curiosity, is there a particular reason the notes use "Sumption 1990, p. 578, Ormrod 1990, p. 17" citations instead of SFNs? -- Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:44, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

No. Good spot. I have converted them both to "proper" footnotes. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:52, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Prose Suggestions

Please note that almost all of these are suggestions, and can be implemented or ignored at your discretion. Any changes I deem necessary for the article to pass GA standards I will bold.

Many thanks for them and for your copy editing.

Lede

• and in 1346 Edward had landed with an army in northern France. suggest and escalated in 1346 when Edward landed with an army in northern France. to clarify that some action took place in between these dates.

Happy in principle to rephrase, but your suggeation giives the impression that the 1346 landing was the first major action of the war. It wasn't; Edward had campaigned in northern France before and in 1340 the Battle of Sluys (in Flanders, had killed 20,000 Frenchmen.

• You'll be happy to know that this article, in particular, made my Grammarly go so schizophrenic I had to switch it to British English to make it not furious.

Good. Grammerly is an invention of the Devil and gives users a false sense that English has set rules and that only one applies in a given situation.

• This was signed on 27 September to run to 7 July 1348 suggest changing to 7 July 1348 to until 7 July 1348

Done.

• whether the truce, which had been signed on his behalf, then lapsed suggest whether the truce would lapse, as it had been signed on his behalf.

Rephrased.

• When English adventurers seized the strategically located town of Guînes in January 1352 I think "mercenaries" might work better as a layman's term, even if "adventurers" is the more technically correct term.

We hve a debate around this every time it comes up (eg, see the FAC for Treaty of Guînes). They were emphatically not mercenaries, by the definition of the time, of today, or of any period in between. I don't insist on "adventurers", but "mercenaries" wilfully misleads a reader.

Background

• England regarding the status of these lands culminated on 24 May 1337 in the council of the French king suggest changing council to Great Council for standardization with other articles (and because I enjoy it).

I'm not sure that France had a "Great Council", at least not in 1337. That's why I linked to Conseil du Roi. A (very) quick skim of my sources doesn't turn this phrase up. Do you have some that do?

Siege of Calais

• Philip vacillated: on the day the siege of Calais began he disbanded most of his army, to save money and convinced that Edward had finished his raid and would proceed to Flanders and ship his army home suggest Philip vacillated: on the day the siege of Calais began he disbanded most of his army to save money, convinced that Edward had finished his raid and would proceed to Flanders and ship his army home

Nice. Done.

• The entire French population was expelled. Edward repopulated the town with English, and a few Flemings suggest The entire French population was expelled, and Edward repopulated the town with Englishmen, and a few Flemings

Why go all sexist? Families emigrated. It is clear that quite a few English (and Flemish) women also rellocated.

• There are some strange usages of no-wicki's in here, to separate a link to trebuchet from its pluralizing "s", which looks strange as the s is black to the links blue, and two other such cases. I've rolled them back in the assumption that they are holdovers, but feel free to rollback the edit.

I have no idea why they were there. Thanks for sorting.

Philip VI

• and confirmed them in possession of all of their territorial conquests in France and Scotland suggest and confirmed their possession of all of their territorial conquests in France and Scotland

Means something a little different and slightly inaccurate, but I can see how it is more accessible, so done. I assume you are happy with "their" twice in six words?

John II

• whether the truce, which had been signed on his behalf, then lapsed suggest whether the truce would lapse, as it had been signed on his behalf.

Rephrased

Treaty of Guînes

• in some quarters at almost any price suggest in some quarters willing to achieve this at almost any price.

That's not grammatical. I don't mind changing this - althoufgh I don't see anything wrong with it - so do you have an alternate suggestion?

• The date of the formal ceremony in Avignon was suspended. suggest The formal ceremony in Avignon was suspended.

Yeah. I struggled with this. Rephrased.

Notes

• This is separate from the 747 vessels involved in shipping the army to Normandy in July 1346. suggest This figure is separate from the 747 vessels involved in shipping the army to Normandy in July 1346.

Done.

• @Gog the Mild: That is all of my suggestions, passing now. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:14, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Iazyges and thanks for the review, the copy edit, the pass and your thoughtful sugestions above. The latter all responded to. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:57, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

27 September

The date of 27 September in the infobox and lead is nowhere sourced and contradicted by 28 September in the body. Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Wehwalt, an embarrassing typo which somehow has never been picked up. Until you brought your eagle eyes to bear. Corrected. Thank you. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:58, 2 July 2022 (UTC)