Talk:John Minsterworth/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about John Minsterworth. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Missing references

Latest comment: 6 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

There seem to be two sources missing from the citations:

Sherborne (1980)
Bell et al (2001)

Eric Corbett 16:51, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga and Serial Number 54129: The GA review would be the perfect time to fix this issue, which remains unsolved, as it is directly relevant the GA criteria on verifiability. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:59, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Eric Corbett and Finnusertop: The nominator clarified the issue on GA review, please check if that addresses your concern or not. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga and Serial Number 54129: a lot of the years still don't match:

Should Bell et al. and Bell et al. 2001 be Bell et al. 2011?
Should Harrison 1841 be Harrison 1832?
There are two Carr 2004 in the Bibliography section. Which one is cited?
Should Baker 1643 be Baker 1684?
Bloomfield 1807 missing altogether.
Should Hearne 1770 be Leland 1770 (ie. the author, not the editor)?
Plus a lot of the unambiguous short citation links don't work due to slight differences in formatting. I'll avail myself to fixing them once these ambiguities have been addressed. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:14, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: Good catches. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:17, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
@Serial Number 54129: Please have a look at the above comments. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:17, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Parentage, early life, and career, aside from history

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

"Nothing is known of his early life[.]"

There is not even an estimate of his birthdate in the article. He was knighted; when and by whom?

He owned some estates, centered around Bristol. "He seems to have felt himself to be the social superior of [Sir Robert] Knolles[.]" This suggests that there should be a record of his birth and family somewhere.

A few of the citations refer to Sumption's speculations, which does not seem entirely encyclopedic when the article lacks facts. Also, "He seems..." "...appears..." "Michael Prestwich has suggested..." etc. I hope that somewhere more facts about Minsterworth will be found and included. 162.89.0.47 (talk) 23:20, 10 December 2017 (UTC) Eric

GA Review

Latest comment: 6 years ago22 comments6 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Minsterworth/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 14:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll take this. Initial comment: Expand the lead, and add an infobox. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Indirect :)

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Comment: just a drive by, but with no images, it is difficult to pass to GA. There would need to be a very good reason that there was no image. I understand the difficulty with images with this one, as there are no images of him directly. Perhaps one of the images at Hanged, drawn and quartered? Or the painting at the top of Battle of Pontvallain. This second one was previously removed, but much of his life hinged on the fact that he fled from this battle, so I'm not sure why it should not be included (with the right caption). — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 18:47, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
- Uh-uh... the caption would have to be "Picture of a battle which Minsterworth wasn't at." I'm sorry you were keen its insertion; other images may well be available (I'm looking for a surviving charter atm) In any case, per the criteria, the presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement ^{(my emph)}. Thanks though. >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 19:16, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the lede was a bit of a give away wasn't it ;) I've banged one out for you. As for the IB; I think Ill leave that for a bit. Apart from a date of death, nationality, and his not fighting in a particular battle, I don't think it would have much to say. One of those silly ones with two lines in it! >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 01:37, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Lead and infobox;
- Mention the "United Kingdom" following Gloucestershire.
- Nothing is known of his early life or upbringing (even, it seems, to the extent of when he was knighted or by whom). but he first comes to prominence in the 1370 invasion of France -> Nothing much is known Minsterworth's life before 1370 invasion of France.
- many years' earlier; earlier to what?
- by ~~this~~ "that" time
- The war in France, although it continued under the command of the King's son, Edward the Black Prince, was going poorly -> The war in France was going poorly under the command of the King's son, Edward the Black Prince.
- Fernch army; fix the typo, and also link it
- to Brittany-narrowly avoiding -> to Brittany, narrowly avoiding
- Five years later "he" met ~~with~~ a rebel Welsh Lord
- specifivally; fix typo
- the kingdom; "k" capital
- Link "quartered and distributed" to Hanged, drawn and quartered
Section 1;
- born in the village from which he took his surname -> born in Minsterworth, which later became his last name.
- he also held estates in Usk; how is this line related to his birth?
- A career soldier -> As a career soldier
- 1370 expedition to France -> whose expedition, British expedition; mention clearly
- in which, it has been said; Please mention who said that to avoid NPOV issues.
- A comma after "how ransom and booty would be distributed"
- was ~~probably~~ Minsterworth
- Minsterworth had not been present -> Minsterworth was not present
Section 2;
- that point on
- Minsterworth at Milford Haven at "as" the head of an army
.% confidence, violation unlikely.
External links OK, no dabs found/.
Image OK

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:40, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Thanks for this. I've addressed most of the issues you raise (couple of sentence tweaks apart); but, in the course of doing so, I have now expanded the article by some 10,000 bytes. I'm not sure how that impacts on the review you've already done, or perhaps not. Cheers, >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 20:11, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: I'm good with the expansion, no issues. Please address the issues raised on the talk page about missing references before I give this a green flag. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:06, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: They were sorted. Bell at al is how the sfn formats multiple names (in this case, Bell, Chapman, Curry, King, Simpkin), and the reason Sherborne 1980 wasn't there... Was because I got the date wrong; it was 1994. Now corrected. Cheers, >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 11:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

That's not right, and the citations are still a mess. Eric Corbett 14:55, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Edit Special:Mypage/common.js and add importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js'); window.checkLinksToCitations = true; - you'll then get a bucketload of errors. It is "Harrison 1832" or "Harrison 1841"? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:50, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

What fun :) Is this four reviewers now?! Thanks for the catches, all above; ping User:Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, and a mention in dispatches for User:Ritchie333 for introducing me to that script, it's great and will make a world of difference in future. Cheers! >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 17:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

The more reviewers the better the article will be. But of course this is Krishna's review, and the final outcome is down to him. Eric Corbett 19:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Eric, of course you're right; I was only kidding, but as you say, the more the merrier. Reckon I've cracked the refs, by any chance? >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 19:19, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I believe you've cracked it, they look fine to me now, Eric Corbett 19:28, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

that's what's known as better late then never, I think ;) thanks for your help, here, it wouldn't have happened without you. >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 19:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Finnusertop: For final confirmation. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 06:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Everything looks okay. The HarvErrors script is what I use to spot these as well. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:12, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Cheers Finnuserstop, pinging User:Krishna Chaitanya Velaga. Thanks everyone. 10:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: have you abandoned ship on this? Sorry if it's all kicking off on the North-West Frontier, etc., but it's been two days now since you requested clarification; and you have that which you sought. >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 19:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: Hey, I was just stuck in some other work. Passing GAN. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)