Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Siege of Guînes (1352)

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history‎ | Assessment

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Vami IV (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 21:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Siege of Guînes (1352) edit

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Gog the Mild (talk)

Siege of Guînes (1352) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

Part of the incessant fighting between the French and English after the Truce of Calais was agreed in 1347 and the cause of full-scale war breaking out again. Fresh from GAN and hopefully up to ACR. Let me know. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:14, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image licensing looks ok (t · c) buidhe 18:39, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from Iazyges edit

  • The GAN review for this article was viciously stolen from me, so I'll have to review it here. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that I can't run and I can't hide.
Lede edit
  • after six years of uneasy and ill-kept truce suggest after six years of an uneasy and ill-kept truce
Done.
Background edit
  • After nine years of inconclusive but expensive warfare, suggest After nine years of inconclusive but expensive warfare across France,; perhaps mention some of the regions if it is conducive.
Er. What about English Channel naval campaign, 1338–1339 or the largest battle of the period, fought in Flanders, or the campaigning in the territory of the Holy Roman Empire?
  • The English turned to fight Philip's much larger army at the Battle of Crécy, perhaps change turned to manoeuvred
They didn't. They dug into a prepared position, let the French come at them and conspicuously didn't manoeuvre.
  • English possession would go a long way to securing Calais against more surprise assaults. suggest changing more to further
Done.
English attack edit
  • who was back in France suggest who had returned to France
Done.
  • He ordered the English occupants to hand Guînes back suggest He therefore ordered the English occupants to hand Guînes back
Done.
French attack edit
  • and positioned catapults and cannon there. while cannon can be an irregular plural, I think because the catapults directly before it is pluralized, using cannons might flow better.
Ok.

Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:47, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath edit
  • until recaptured by the French in 1558 suggest until it was recaptured by the French in 1558
Done.
Thanks Iazyges, helpful as ever. Responses above. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:56, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by AustralianRupert – pass edit

G'day, Gog, I trust you are well. I have a few minor comments by way of a source review, with one minor suggestion WRT the lead. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • in the lead, suggest mentioning the months that the siege took place and when Guines had been captured by the English
Good point. Done.
  • there are no duplicate links, or dab links (no action required)
  • Wagner, John A. (2006g) -- Wagner 2006f?
Whoops. Fixed.
  • there is a minor inconsistency in the hyphenation of the ISBN for Jaques (compare with Kaeuper)
Fixed.
Please see my comment below; I think you self reverted your changes. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(re-)Done.
  • publisher for Ayloffe? (Worldcat doesn't list one, unfortunately)
Added.
G'day, can you please check this again -- I still can't see a publisher listed. I think you self reverted your changes, here: [1] Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gah! old age is a terrible thing. If you get a choice, don't go for it. Fixed. Check it quick, before I have another fit of idiocy.
  • sources appear to be reliable based on author or publisher reputations and reviews (please note, I am limited to what I can find on Google only in a location that blocks some sites, so I may have missed something)
  • spotchecks not done (I was not able to access Kaeuper or Rogers from my connection, sorry)
  • ext links all appear to work (no action required)
Hi AR, Not so bad thanks. You still locked down where you are? Thanks for the review. Your comments responded to above. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:57, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Afternoon/morning AustralianRupert, how is this looking now? Gog the Mild (talk) 13:07, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
G'day, just a couple of follow-ups above. Sorry for the delay -- I do not have reliable or secure internet here always. Lockdowns continue at home, but at the moment I am away for work. No lockdowns here, but they have other concerns. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to harass you AustralianRupert, there is no rush. The two self-reverted edits, reinstated. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:08, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All good, no worries. Thanks for your efforts. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:36, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Zawed edit

Background

  • the French commander Geoffrey de Charny what was he the commander of?
Good point. An introductory sentence added.
  • In the background perhaps state explicitly that Raoul's ransom payment of Guînes did not proceed.
Done.

English attack

  • Perhaps seized the French-held town of Guînes. The text i have struck out seems unnecessary.
I have removed "French-held".

French attack

  • In the French attack section: Geoffrey de Charny was again put in charge of all French forces; the "again" implies there is antecedence for what de Charny was in command of. This may go towards my comment on de Charny in the background.
Yes. I think that the introduction of CHarny in the Background now allows a reader to make sense of this. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for me, this is in pretty good order. Zawed (talk) 09:03, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zawed and thanks for the review. Your comments all addressed. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, am happy to support. Zawed (talk) 01:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HF edit

Will review this over the weekend. Hog Farm Talk 20:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "When the French approached on New Year's Day 1350 they were routed by this smaller force, with significant losses and all their leaders captured or killed" - Was this when Charny was captured?
Well, he was one of the French leaders. Expanded to "and all their leaders captured or killed; Charny was among the captured."
  • "By coincidence, the English parliament was scheduled to meet" - would it be better to link directly to Parliament of England and also, I thought Parliament was generally capitalized?
Link changed. I am not sure that I agree, but capitalised.
  • Sourcing looks good, and image licensing looks fine

As these are only minor quibbles, I am supporting. Hog Farm Talk 19:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Hog Farm, tweaked per your suggestions. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note edit

Howdy, pards. Consensus has been reached to promote this article to A-Class, so it is now my pleasure to do so. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 21:06, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Siege_of_Guînes_(1352)&oldid=1050276770"