Talk:Battle of Calais

Battle of Calais is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 1, 2020.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 18, 2018	Good article nominee	Listed
July 31, 2019	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
October 29, 2019	Featured article candidate	Promoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 13, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that King Edward III of England ordered stars effaced from the coat of arms of Sir Amery of Pavy for trying to sell Calais, a seaport of which he was the governor, to the French?
Current status: Featured article

Military history: British / European / French / Medieval

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	French military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

European history Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 21 February 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. This appears to have resolved to altering the qualifier by one year. One reason for the discrepancy in reliable sources is probably the fact that the Gregorian calendar that we use today began usage in France in the latter part of the 16th century, and France was one of the first countries to convert. So in the 14th century, Europe was steeped in the Julian calendar, which means both that there were several days difference (11 days) and that the New Year actually began on March 25th instead of January 1st. See also Old Style and New Style dates. Happy Publishing! (closed by page mover) Paine Ellsworth ^put'r there 03:59, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Calais (1348) → Siege of Calais (1349) – I am proposing to move this page because it happened on New Year's Eve 1350. Check this [1]. If you don't understand French, it means that Geoffroi de Charny attempted to capture Calais on 31 December 1349 (see page 2). Furthermore, the corresponding French article is written as : fr:Siège de Calais (1349-1350). And at last, in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, it is written that : « Towards the end of 1349 Edward was informed by the governor of Calais that the French hoped to gain possession of the town by paying him a sum of money on 1 Jan. » (Edward III's biography). 2A01:CB04:76:B700:5884:CB59:D6A5:21CA (talk) 14:47, 21 February 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. –Ammarpad (talk) 10:51, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, sources differ. The Chronicles of England, France, and Spain says "This business was finished under the walls of Calais, the last day of December, towards morning, in the year of grace 1348." The French Wikipedia article was created just this month, so it hasn't really been vetted, and the IP user 2A01:CB04:76:B700:48E6... who created it there altered the pages there that previously referred to 1348. Dekimasuよ! 10:11, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The date of 1348 given in this old edition of Froissart is erroneous : some manuscripts give 1348 but the more trustful ones give 1349 and this is corroborated by the chronicles of other authors. (cf note 1, note 1, note 2, p.241, [2] etc) Note that some versions also use the date as "the first day of January 1349" : as the year began not in January in the Middle Age, this correspond to our January 1st 1350.--Phso2 (talk) 08:46, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At any rate, no particular objection. Dekimasuよ! 20:25, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
After my own research, support. Srnec (talk) 14:00, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This looks ready for processing, but I'd rather not do it myself since I commented; undoing relist for the time being. Dekimasuよ! 22:27, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposed name change

I am proposing to change the name of this article to "Battle of Calais (1349)", as no source has been referenced as calling it a siege, having consulted several I can't find anyone calling it that, and it seems ridiculous to refer to an incident which was quite literally over before breakfast as a siege.

I am flagging this up here for a day or two to see if anyone objects, in which case I will file a Requested Move; but it seems entirely uncontroversial to me. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:03, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy pings to the editors involved in the previous name change: Ammarpad, Dekimasu, Paine Ellsworth, Phso2, Srnec. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:13, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No objection. Srnec (talk) 00:22, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Newm30 (talk) 03:53, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seems sound.--Phso2 (talk) 18:42, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ Ammarpad, Dekimasu, Paine Ellsworth, Phso2, Srnec. And done. Thank you all. Now would anyone like to assess it for GA?

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

is this our way of saying "happy new year"? :)

yikes. is this thing going to stay on the front page during the whole new year's day? this whole warlike story of medieval warfare? can we maybe find another way to start this auspicious decade? maybe a picture of some kittens? come on, you guys!! please? --Sm8900 (talk) 01:24, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]