Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Felix of Burgundy/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 11 January 2023 [1].

Felix of Burgundy

[edit]
Nominator(s): Amitchell125 (talk) 17:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the first bishop of the East Angles. Now largely forgotten, he was a key figure who introduced Christianity to the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of East Anglia. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review and image review

[edit]
  • Image licensing looks fine
  • The map is badly sandwiching the infobox
Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:57, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first paragraph of "Bishop of the East Angles" needs an inline citation
Now done. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Citations are not consistent. For example, " Bede, Book II, chapter 15." vs. "Bede 1999, p. 99." In the former citation it's not completely clear to me which modern edition is being cited.
Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:59, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Fryde et al., Handbook of British Chronology, p. 216." is an incomplete citation and not consistent with others in terms of formatting.
Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:54, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Queries Support by WereSpielChequers

[edit]

Presumably the beatification took place before the Catholic Orthodox divide as the infobox says he is a saint in the Anglican, RC and Orthodox churches. If records exist as to who beatified him and when it would be appropriate to cover that, if not perhaps the earliest record of him being listed as a saint?

All the sources I know of are silent about these details, and so I can only presume there is nothing to be found. I've added the ODNB's comment that his feast day was recorded by the Anglo-Saxons in 2 kalendars. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:31, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I hadn't realised that church records of that era were so sketchy. Might be worth adding a sentence to the effect that his beatification dates to before the church divide - so he is venerated in both the East and the West. ϢereSpielChequers 23:45, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Though the article says he made a church, and the images include two old churches dedicated to him, I'm fairly sure neither of these buildings were from anything like his era. Similarly there are two representations of him, but both are likely much later interpretations. Can I suggest some clarification at least in the captions as to this. E.G. the current St Felix church of X, parts of which were built in the 14th century. ϢereSpielChequers 15:28, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have amended three captions to clarify the dates of the structures. I have also taken out the Norwich Cathedral image, as (a) the statue is a modern replica of the original (b) it is by no means certain that the figure represents Felix (see here for the information I found about this). Amitchell125 (talk) 21:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I was wondering if the church could be described other than medieval? By some measures so was he, but that ruin was built when he was roughly as old as those ruins are now. I'm thinking how to convey that this story is about someone so ancient that little physical of his era survives to this day.
Tricky, but yes, it can be done. Amitchell125 (talk) 10:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely written and comprehensive. ϢereSpielChequers 23:45, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Unlimitedlead

[edit]
  • I don't think the disambiguation is necessary, seeing as "Felix" does not redirect to the article.
Neither do I, now removed. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please make sure the circa templates are formatted correctly. For example, c.630 should actually read c. 630. Look into the code of this sentence to see the proper formatting.
Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Normally, the first sentence would read: "Felix of Burgundy (died 8 March 647 or 648), also known as Felix of Dunwich, was a saint and..."
Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link saint in the first sentence to provide information for readers.
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Linked the latter but not the former (see MOS:OL).
  • "...founded by the Irish missionary Columbanus—the existence of a Bishop of Châlons with the same name may not be a coincidence." What does this mean? I'm sure this information is further explained in the article, but just from reading the lead, I am not grasping the meaning of this provided excerpt.
Text amended, hopefully this is now clearer. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • You say "where boys could be taught letters", but is this a quotation from someone? If so, who said this? Besides, the lead is meant to summarize key points of the article, so this might not be appropriate here. If I am taking the meaning of this quote correctly, you could simply say that the school taught reading and writing, or something of that nature.
I've cited the words, which is a quote from Bede. I'd like to keep Bede's words in if that's all right. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 09:46, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please explain who Columbanus is before habitually mentioning him.
Done.
  • "The connection between the Wuffingas ruling dynasty and the abbess Burgundofara at Faremoutiers Abbey was an example of the associations that existed at the time between the Church in the kingdom of East Anglia and religious establishments in Francia." Is there a source/citation for this, or is this handled by citation seven?
It looks like the text needs to be cited, Currently working on this. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:27, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you did link relics (as seen above), remove the existing link in "Felix was buried at Dommoc, but his relics were at a later date removed to Soham, according to the 12th century English historian William of Malmesbury" to avoid overlinking.
MOS:DL allows linking "the first occurrence after the lead". Amitchell125 (talk) 09:49, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Borsoka

[edit]
  • Could we rather describe Bede as church historian/historian? In the context, this could be more relevant.
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is possible that Felix was associated with Irish missionary activity in Francia, which was centred in Burgundy and was particularly associated with Columbanus and Luxeuil Abbey. Could this assumption be attributed to a scholar? Could the scholar's argumentation be shortly mentioned?
Text amended slightly by adding the historian's name. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider shortening the paragraph about Columbanus into a short sentence. Columbanus is not the subject of the article and he may have not any connection with Felix.
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider shortening the paragraph about the Wuffingas, Burgundofara and Columbanus into one or two short sentences.
I considered doung that but on the whole feel i would like to retain it. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Wuffingas dynasty" > "Wuffingas dynasty of East England"; "the abbess Burgundofara" > "the Frankish abbess Bugundofara"
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:46, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is possible that Felix may have become a political fugitive as a result of losing his see at Châlons following the death of Chlothar II in 629. I understand there are two assumptions: 1. Bishop Felix and Felix of Burgundy are identical. 2. Bishop Felix/Felix of Burgundy left his see for political reasons. Could these assumptions be differentiated and attributed to scholars?
Text hopefully clarified now. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:02, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider mentioning that Felix was consecrated bishop in Burgundy in section "Background and early life".
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Felix is mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a collection of annals that was compiled in the late 9th century. The annal for 633 in "Manuscript A" of the Chronicle states that Felix "preached the faith of Christ to the East Angles". Consider rephrasing. Perhaps: "Felix is first mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle—a collection of annals compiled in the late 9th century—under the year 633. "Manuscript A" of the Chronicle states that Felix "preached the faith of Christ to the East Angles".
Done, thanks. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bede wrote how the exertions of Sigeberht, king of the East Angles,... I think a verb is missing.
Word replaced, hopefully it now makes better sense. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is the second quote from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle separated from the introductory text? If you want to separate the texts, consider using a template.
@Borsoka: Sorry, I'm unclear what you mean here. Please could you specify which texts, and what template, you are referring to? Amitchell125 (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Summarize Bede's text based on a secondary source as per WP:SOURCE.
It looked alrady sorted, except for a citation, which I have added, and the words of Bede, which now look separated from the rest of the paragraph. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Later sources tend to differ from the version of events described by Bede and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Is this sentence verified by a reliable source?
It's not cited, and seems to be been written to introduce the next sentence, so I've amended the text. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Liber Eliensis, an English chronicle and history written at Ely Abbey in the 12th century, states that Felix came with Sigeberht from Francia, and was then made Bishop of East Anglia. I understand this sentence is verified only by a reference to the primary source (Liber Eliensis).
Change of heart, The LE source is considered unreliable by some experts, mentioning it adds little to the article, and finding a good enough citation is tricky—so text deleted. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to another version of the story... Whose version?
Text amended to say that it an East Anglian tradition that Felix arrived at Babingley. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Felix's arrival in East Anglia seems to have coincided with the start of a new period of order established by Sigeberht, following the assassination of Eorpwald and the three years of apostasy that occurred after Eorpwald's murder. Is the phrase "seems to have" necessary? If it is necessary, please attribute this assumption to a scholar.
Attribution added. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider summarizing the historical events now mentioned in the last paragraph of section "Arrival in the kingdom of the East Angles". These events explain why Felix was dispatched to East Anglia.
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • His accession may have been decisive in bringing Felix to East Anglia. Whose PoV is this?
Sentence amended to mention Marios Costambeys. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • ... Felix went to East Anglia because of Honorius at Canterbury ... I do not understand the sentence.
Text amended to clarify that, according to Blair's reading of Bede, Honorius prompted Felix to travel to East Anglia. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could the known facts and scholarly interpretations about the location of Felix's see be differentiated? For instance, "Soon after his arrival at Sigeberht's court, Felix established a church at Dommoc, his episcopal see, on the Suffolk coast. Domnoc is widely taken to mean Dunwich, a thriving town in the Middle Ages that has since been almost totally destroyed by the effects of coastal erosion. Alternatively, Felix's see may have been located at Walton where there was once a castra (Roman fort), Walton Castle, since washed away by the sea."
Text amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:27, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • A church and priory were dedicated to him there by Roger Bigod, 1st Earl of Norfolk, soon after 1106. Where?
Clarified. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:00, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bede related that Felix started a school, "where boys could be taught letters", to provide Sigeberht with teachers. The statement is only verified by a referenct to a primary source.
Source added.Amitchell125 (talk) 08:14, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...maintained by later sources... Maintained?
Sentence amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bede praised Felix for delivering "all the province of East Anglia from long-standing unrighteousness and unhappiness". The statement is only verified by a referenct to a primary source.
Source replaced. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Introduce Fursey.
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps "Fenman" instead of "fenman" (like Highlander, Marsher lord....).
Done, almost looks right... Amitchell125 (talk) 16:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mention Soham Abbey instead of Soham, and link it.
Link moved. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link "canonized".
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • He was canonised early enough to be is venerated in both the East and the West. I assume the sentence says that he was canonised before the Schism of 1054.
Correct, sentence amended to clarify this point. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to the mediaeval Custumal of Bury St Edmunds, known as the Liber Albus, Felix is said to have visited Babingley and 'maden... ... the halige kirke' – "built the holy church". Perhaps this info should be mentioned rather in the previous section ("Bishop of the East Angles").
Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will comment on the lead later. Thank you for this interesting article. Borsoka (talk) 02:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All my concerns were addressed above. I still have one question: when was Felix consecrated bishop before or after his arrival to East Anglia? Now the text suggests that he was consecrated bishop twice which is impossible as far as I know. Borsoka (talk) 02:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for spotting that, Borsoka. He was a bishop already, and as such was given the see at Dummoc. Text now clarified to avoid it sounding as if he was consecrated twice. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:10, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Borsoka, how is it now? Gog the Mild (talk) 11:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your patience. Now I support the promotion of the article. Borsoka (talk) 11:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

[edit]

I had my say, such as it was, at PR, where there was precious little I could find to carp about. On two further rereadings now I can't find any more quibbles, except to ask if I am wrong in taking the spelling "Aquataine" on the excellent and helpful map to be a typo. (Incidentally, a pleasure to see Ekwall among your sources: it sits on the shelf nearest my desk alongside Fowler and Gowers and is a constant delight.) I am happy to support the elevation of this article to FA status. It seems to me to meet all the FA criteria. Tim riley talk 17:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Schrocat

[edit]

Very nicely written and meets the FA criteria as far as I can see. I made one slight tweak to the spelling ("traveling" to "travelling" - the double ll version is used elsewhere in the article). I have no subject knowledge here, so I do not pass comment on the completeness of sources used, etc, but simply the standard of prose and adherence to the MOS in relation to FA criteria. - SchroCat (talk) 10:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from Ian

[edit]

Recusing coord duties to review, I lightly copyedited as usual so let me know if I misunderstood anything. At this moment I'd have to oppose owing to oddities in the prose, a bit surprising at this stage of the review; I'm sure these can be resolved though...

  • Sigeberht was the first English ruler to receive baptism before becoming king. Probably a son of Rædwald (ruled 599 to 624) and the brother of Rædwald's successor, Eorpwald. he was forced into exile during Rædwald's rule, after which he became a devout Christian and a man of learning. When Eorpwald was killed by Ricberht in about 627, who then rule the East Angles for three years. Sigeberht became king of the East Angles after Richberht's death in 630. -- Is the full stop after "Eorpwald" supposed to be a comma? Is the full stop after "three years" supposed to be a comma? And "who then rule..."? Something is up with the passage as it stands...
Now sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Felix established a church at Dommoc, his episcopal see, which is widely taken to mean Dunwich -- To clarify, does this mean that a place called "Dommac" in the source(s) is widely taken to mean Dunwich?
That's correct, I've tweaked the text to hopefully help make that clearer. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:57, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Felix started a school, "where boys could be taught letters", to provide Sigeberht with teachers. -- Perhaps I missed something but it seems unusual to start a school to provide a king with teachers; aren't the boys the ones being taught?
The text is correct as it stands—the school would have a training ground to enable young priests to spread Christianity and learning throughout East Anglia (and beyond). Amitchell125 (talk) 08:11, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So can we elaborate the article text with that? Is it sourced? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Text amended. However, as one historian puts it, Bede generates as many questions as he does answers—I think this part of the article is a case in point. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some time later, "the body of the saint was looked for and found, and buried at Ramsey Abbey" -- To whom can this quote be attributed? William of Malmesbury?
Quote now attributed to William in the article. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • an apparent attempt to out-compete their rivals from the abbey at Ely -- I'm not sure "out-compete" is necessary in an encyclopedia, do we just mean "beat" or some such?
Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:46, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • He was canonized before the Schism of 1054, early enough to be is venerated in both the East and the West. -- "to be is"?
Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to the mediaeval Custumal of Bury St Edmunds, known as the Liber Albus, Felix is said to have visited Babingley and 'maden... ... the halige kirke' – "built the holy church" -- This statement is duplicated in succeeding sections, Bishop of the East Angles and Death and veneration; once should be enough surely...? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see both instances are gone now -- you don't need it anywhere now? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's in the Arrival section. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:18, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ian Rose: Duplication removed, above issues now addressed. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:57, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tks for prompt attention AM, I'll re-read when I get a chance and come back to you. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:28, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aside from the two queries above, pretty happy with those responses/actions, but pls check a few more copyedits I've made. Couple of other things arising from my re-read:
  • although his name prevents historians from conclusively identifying his nationality -- To clarify, is this simply because Felix was a common name in Europe, or what? I think some elaboration would be helpful if Blair or Costambeys provide such detail.
It was a common name, dating from Roman times (see here), and came from the Latin felix ('happy'). Neither Blair or Costambeys discuss the history of the name Felix though. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Other historians, such as Richard Hoggett -- This is cited to Hoggett alone, so does he mention other historians sharing his view?
No, so text tweaked to remove Other historians. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:20, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your attention to these points, AM -- taking Buidhe's source and image reviews as read, happy to support. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 18:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Felix_of_Burgundy/archive1&oldid=1132943799"