Talk:Beonna of East Anglia

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Amitchell125 in topic Merger proposal
Good articleBeonna of East Anglia has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 11, 2013Good article nomineeListed

Assessment

edit

To continue improving I would suggest an infobox, graphics of somesort, and a switch to footnotes to allow for verifying the info. With all that this could be nominated at WP:GAC. Aboutmovies 06:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC) Please add some citations of sources using in line references.Wilfridselsey (talk) 11:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Beonna of East Anglia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 16:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Looks like an interesting topic. Review to follow. J Milburn (talk) 16:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Second part - Runic alphabet is linked in the template, did you mean more than this? Hel-hama (talk) 06:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC) Done. Hel-hama (talk) 19:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, I meant it may be worth linking to our article on Wynn, the specific rune you mention. J Milburn (talk) 14:34, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

A strong article. Technical in places, but that's obviously unavoidable for a topic like this. I'll hopefully have a delve into some sources at some point too. J Milburn (talk) 17:07, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

A couple of follow-up points-

  • "A third source is a regnal list in the Chronicon ex chronicis, which placed Beonna after Ælfwald and before Æthelred, states that "Regnante autem Merciorum rege Offa, Beonna regnavit in East-Anglia, et post illum Æthelredus" ('During the reign of Offa, king of the Mercians, Beonna reigned in East-Anglia, and after him Æthelred ...')." This doesn't make sense. Sorted out. Hel-hama (talk) 18:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • "The coins made after Werferth are by Efe" How about something like "Produced later than Werferth's coins are those by Efe"? Done. Hel-hama (talk) 18:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Once these are fixed, I'll be happy to promote. J Milburn (talk) 20:45, 10 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

And I've promoted the article- great work! J Milburn (talk) 18:53, 11 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Merger proposal

edit
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge the articles. Hel-hama (talk) 07:50, 10 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

I propose that Hun of East Anglia be merged into Beonna of East Anglia. I think that the content in the Hun article can easily be explained in the context of Beonna, and the Beonna of East Anglia article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Hun of East Anglia will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Hel-hama (talk) 10:03, 22 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

  • Support - The discussion about whether Hun actually existed, and theories to explain the phrase cujus regnum Hunbeanna et Albertus inter se diviserunt, the only reference that exists for Hun, would easily fit within the Beonna article. Conveniently, the Hun of East Anglia sources are already used in the Beonna article. Hel-hama (talk) 10:33, 22 February 2013 (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.