Talk:Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Catlemur (talk · contribs) 16:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I will start the review shortly.--Catlemur (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

• "John's eldest son (the dauphin), Charles," - Charles' article is linked twice in this passage.

Stupid of me. Fixed.

• "The Norman nobles who had not been arrested sent to Navarre for reinforcements." - How did the nobles travel to the other side of France for reinforcements? Was it because of Charles II of Navarre?

They didn't, they "sent" for the reinforcements. I assume that their messangers travelled by sea, but I can't find a source to confirm that.

Yes, should I explain that?

Please do.--Catlemur (talk) 20:49, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Done.

• The article refers to the king of Navarre as Charles II of Navarre in the lede and Charles of Navarre in the rest of the article.

It is usual to introduce a person fully at first mention and more briefly thereafter. He would be "Charles", but he needs a disambiguator from the dauphin, also Charles. And it is how he is usually referred to in RSs. (I assume for much the same reason.)

• "was moving south from Pont-Audemer John followed" → "was moving south from Pont-Audemer, John followed"

Done.

• Move the Rouen wikilink to the Outward section from Return.

Done.

• "Some French cavalry were trailing Lancaster and he may have believed they were the van of John's entire army[65] as on the 10th"→"Some French cavalry were trailing Lancaster and he may have believed they were the van of John's entire army,[65] as on the 10th"

Done.

• "English had travelled 330 miles"→ Convert miles to km.

Done.

• Is Godfrey d'Harcourt the same person as Geoffroy de Harcourt?

He is. Thank you. Linked.

• "acknowledged Edward III as king of France"→"acknowledged Edward III as King of France"

Done.

• Note 3 - Remove ironically.

Done.

• Refs 43 and 51 use p. for multiple non continuous pages cited, while ref 11, 24, 25 etc use pp.

Refs 43 and 51 are not to "multiple non continuous pages cited". They are to text in the body of a page and to a footnote on the same page. Hence "p.".

• Some sources use the city + province of publication, while others only refer to city. This needs to uniform.

No it doesn't. It is usual to add sufficient additional detail to the more obscure locations where the place referred to is not obvious. So neither New York nor Minnesota are likely to confuse a reader, while Woodbridge could be any of these.

--Catlemur (talk) 19:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Catlemur, I appreciate that. Your comments all addressed above. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:06, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

@Catlemur: Done. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:11, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• Can you ad a source to the Commons page for Carte Normandie Historique.png to support its accuracy?--Catlemur (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

  Catlemur, I can. Good spot. Done. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: --Catlemur (talk) 14:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)