Talk:Black Prince's chevauchée of 1356

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Black Prince's chevauchée of 1356/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 14:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Will review soon. Hog Farm _Talk 14:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: - Would you like me to hold off this one's eventual promotion until after 1/1 for WikiCup reasons? (I will not be participating in that this year, based on the FAC coordination concerns from last year) Hog Farm _Talk 17:05, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Hog Farm, that is very thoughtful of you, but I am not participating this year either. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:10, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

• Recommend linking Black Prince's chevauchée of 1355 somewhere in the lead

Oops, and I created that one. Shame on me. Done.

• " duty levied by the English Crown on wine from Gascony, was more than all other English customs duties combined" - this may be another example of us having different schools of thought about commas, but are you sure that comma is needed there?

I am happy to excise it (pun intended); gone.

• "Edward set out on 5 October on a chevauchée, which was a large-scale mounted raid" - mounted raid here links to chevauchée. Wouldn't it make a bit more sense to have the link on the word chevauchée itself here

Done.

• "Some time around 20 August he offered the garrison of Breteuil free passage to the Cotentin, a huge bribe, and permission to take their valuables and goods, to persuade them to vacate the town" - did this work?

The "to persuade them to vacate the town" is supposed to indicate that, but I see your point. Changed to "which persuaded them to vacate the town". Does that work

• "but the French initiated a resumption of hostilities in 1369 and recaptured most of the territory lost." from the lead. The "and recaptured most of the territory lost" detail should be added to the body, as well.

Done.

• "Madden, Mollie Marie (2014). The Black Prince at War: The Anatomy of a Chevauchée (PDF) (PhD thesis). Minnesota: University of Minnesota." - I have a feeling that I've asked this before at a prior review, but don't remember the answer or where even to find the review where I asked this - is it possible to provide a more specific publishing location than Minnesota?

I don't recall that, but no - see [1].

• As odd as this is gonna sound, I think the bridge image is gonna need a tag for the underlying work that the architect has been dead for at least 70 years (which ought to be a safe assumption, if it's from the 19th century), if I'm reading Commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/France correctly. No freedom of panorama in France.

Ha, nice one. As it was constructed in 1849 I think we can indeed assume that the architect has been dead for over 70 years. So tagged.

Source reliability looks fine, as do the other image licensing. Good work here; placing on hold. Hog Farm _Talk 21:35, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Hog Farm, that was speedy. Your points addressed above. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:30, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 04:24, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Black Prince's chevauchée of 1356 was the most important campaign of the Hundred Years' War? Source: Rogers, Clifford (2014) [2000]. War Cruel and Sharp: English Strategy under Edward III, 1327–1360. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. ISBN 978-0-85115-804-4. P. 348.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mike Gapes

Improved to Good Article status by Gog the Mild (talk). Self-nominated at 22:06, 30 December 2021 (UTC).

• Hi Gog the Mild, another excellent 100YW article! Review follows: article promoted to GA on 28 December; article is very well written and cited inline throughout to impeccable sources; I only checked a very small minority of sources that I could access but found no issue with overly close paraphrasing; A QPQ has been carried out; hook fact is interesting and mentioned in the article, though is there a reason you present it as the opinion of Clifford J. Rogers in the article but as a plain statement of fact here? - Dumelow (talk) 08:21, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dumelow and thanks for the rapid review. Re Rogers, yes: in the fine tradition of DYKs it is a minor teaser in order to make it hookier. It seems harmless to me - "most successful" is inherently a matter of opinion, so I don't see the proposed hook getting anything beyond a wry smile from a reader. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Gog the Mild, fair enough - Dumelow (talk) 12:33, 31 December 2021 (UTC)