Talk:Arundel Castle

---

Untitled

Okay, what's the problem? Zvesoulis put a {{cleanup}} tag on the article, but I've read the thing through several times and don't see a problem warranting the tag. Moreover, this is the very first entry in the talk page which strikes me as meaning we have a ways to go before we start throwing tags around. I removed the tag and made a couple of other edits. If anyone has any thoughts on what needs to be cleaned up please say something here and/or let me know. Thanks. Duckecho (Talk) 7 July 2005 19:52 (UTC)

The history section states that the castle was first built in 1068 and that it was built during Edward the Confessor's reign. Which is correct?

Ghosts

What about the 4 ghosts living in the castle? there should be some reference —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.17.252.156 (talk) 00:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Automated peer review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

•  Done Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
•  Not done Per Wikipedia:What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.^[?]
• NA You may wish to consider adding an appropriate infobox for this article, if one exists relating to the topic of the article. ^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
•  Done As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of (if such appeared in the article) using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
•  Done Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
•  Not done Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • “In the year [of] 1138”
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, MortimerCat (talk) 00:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Arundel Castle/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

I think that this article should apply for an official GA status but the following comments will need to be considered first: Apart from the IOE reference, the article lacks any citations. There should be a least one per paragraph. see WP:CITE I suggest merging the important events section into the relevant history sections, otherwise the section may attract trivia. see WP:TRIVIA The red link for Mary FitzAlan needs investigating. Is there a Mary FitzAlan article under a different heading? Should a stub be created for Mary FitzAlan? Should Mary FitzAlan be wikilinked? The external links need to be reviewed. One is the local radio, not connected with the castle. Another seems to require a login and password. It is recommended not to specify thumbnail picture sizes as this overrides the user defined option. A defined size for the lead picture is accepted, but the remainder should go to default. see Wikipedia:MOS#Image_size See the automated peer review for some more Manual of style comments. MortimerCat (talk) 00:48, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 00:48, 14 April 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 08:22, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arundel Castle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100329161358/http://www.arundelcastle.org:80/_pages/02_gardens.htm to http://www.arundelcastle.org/_pages/02_gardens.htm/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:33, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Confusing lead

The second paragraph of the lead opens with "From the 11th century, the castle has served as a home and has been in the ownership of the family of the Duke of Norfolk for over 400 years." Obviously this needs to be reworded.

The article details that with a few reversions to the crown followed by restorations to the family, the castle has remained in the same family since 1135 - the 12th century, not the 11th. It did not actually come into Norfolk hands until 1580 when the title of Earl of Arundel was inherited by Philipp Howard from his maternal grandfather. Philipp was the son of the 4th Duke of Norfolk and great-grandfather to the 5th duke (the title was in abeyance from 1572-1660). It would be correct to say the castle has served as a home of the ancestors of the Dukes of Norfolk, though it did not actually belong to the Howard family until 1580 and was not the home of a Duke of Norfolk until 1660 when the title was restored.

So... how should we reword this? History Lunatic (talk) 16:49, 13 January 2019 (UTC)History Lunatic

Earls of Arundel

The numbering for the Earls of Arundel here and elsewhere seems to be completely screwed up. The page John Fitzalan, 7th Earl of Arundel I think is correct that the 7th Earl was born in 1408. But you've started numbering from someone much earlier making the one who died in 1272 also 7th Earl.

The book "The Fitzalans" by Michael Burtscher, ISBN9787904396949 says Richard I Fitzalan, born 1267, was the first to be styled Earl of Arundel. -Hunting dog (talk) 14:32, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Possible seige of 1102

The castle appears to have been beseiged during the events we cover here:

https://www.gatehouse-gazetteer.info/English%20sites/3579.html

Trying to nail down a more solid source.

©Geni (talk) 11:06, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Brief mention in the castle studies group which seems to pass RS:

http://www.castlestudiesgroup.org.uk/Arundel.PDF

©Geni (talk) 11:23, 15 June 2023 (UTC)